Go Back   > > >
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Aug 31, 10, 7:47 pm   #31
  
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by exbayern View Post
Serious question for you: As you yourself acknowledge, and as I have often experienced, the wait for a female screener is not comparable to the wait for a male screener.

With WBI increasing overall wait times, and with opt outs requiring pat downs, I can foresee that the need for screenings will increase (both male and female) Has your agency done anything to address the inequality of wait times for females, which was already an issue pre-WBI?
It is an issue I deal with every single day. My airport has multiple screening locations, and I frequently balance the available female staff across the different areas of the airport. We expend a lot of effort on scheduling to ensure that an adequate number of female screeners is available all times of the day and night. I push my supervisors to have officers prioritize screening passengers rather than property.

When we hire, we are allowed to fill positions by gender. So we often will bring on classes composed of more females than males. However our female officers have a far higher rate of attrition than the males, and they use more sick leave. We have tried a lot approaches including flexibility with hours, but we had difficulty staffing the more unpopular shifts when we gave officers more choices.

We are prohibited by law from paying women more than men. But we have tried just about everything else. Woman as a group, find shift work more distasteful than men do. It is a problem that doesn't go away. The economy has lessened the problem because it is much easier to hire and keep employees. And we are more equitably staffed now than ever before. However the female experience both as a passenger and as a screener is worse than the male one.

castor
castrobenes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 31, 10, 7:51 pm   #32
  
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 6,797
Quote:
Originally Posted by castrobenes View Post
However the female experience both as a passenger and as a screener is worse than the male one.

castor
Thank you for your candor and for acknowledging what we both know to be true. Add to that the fact that some female attire is apparently a reason for an automatic secondary (according to some TSOs here, and based on real life experiences at certain US airports), and it only compounds the problem.

I agree with WillR that a physical screening should be (and can be) non-sexual, but I don't believe that the response to male TSOs performing physical screenings of female passengers in America would be positive.
exbayern is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 31, 10, 8:06 pm   #33
  
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by mozgytog View Post
If you're not my doctor but your hands are in my crotch, it's already sexual. The fact that it's completely unwelcome is what makes it assault and battery. There is absolutely no reason for any TSO's hands to be anywhere near my crotch. You have absolutely no reasonable suspicion that I have committed any crime, let alone probable cause, simply because I have a boarding pass in my hand.

Having a boarding pass is a common, every day, legal activity that millions of people engage in every year. That would be like asserting that having a driver's license creates reasonable suspicion that one is an axe murderer.
The reason that your crotch is searched is that bad guys can hide things in the crotch area. Security is a balancing act. Every increase in security is also an increase in intrusiveness. Your elected representatives hired TSA senior leaders who decided that pat downs of the crotch area were an acceptable increase in intrusiveness to deal with the threat.

If you disagree with this decision, your primary option is to elect different representatives who will hire TSA leaders who they can direct to come to a different decision or your new representatives can eliminate the TSA. Alternatively you can lobby your current representatives, or run yourself.

Another option is to develop a test case to determine the constitutionality of TSA administrative searches. I would suggest that a good test case is to refuse the pat down so that you are denied entry into the sterile area, and then argue before the court that it was impermissible for TSA to deny your right to fly because you refused an intrusive search. I would be very interested to hear what the court had to say on this issue.

I am not persuaded that you are assaulted and battered after you voluntarily submit to a search. If you feel strongly about this, take the moral high ground and refuse the screening process.

castro
castrobenes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 31, 10, 8:14 pm   #34
  
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Australia
Programs: QF Platinum (OWE)
Posts: 377
Quote:
Originally Posted by castrobenes View Post
The reason that your crotch is searched is that bad guys can hide things in the crotch area. Security is a balancing act. Every increase in security is also an increase in intrusiveness. Your elected representatives hired TSA senior leaders who decided that pat downs of the crotch area were an acceptable increase in intrusiveness to deal with the threat.
True. But I think it's a poor balance that has been reached. Most small weapons that can be smuggled externally can be smuggled internally, and I hope that the TSA isn't considering examining for that!

Therefore, the marginal improvement in security is minimal but the marginal increase in intrusiveness is significant.

Quote:
Originally Posted by castrobenes View Post

I am not persuaded that you are assaulted and battered after you voluntarily submit to a search. If you feel strongly about this, take the moral high ground and refuse the screening process.
Indeed. Consent is a defense to assault. However, what if one is half-way through screening, and is asked to submit to a frisking which is refused? My understanding is that you can't leave the screening point at that time. Therefore, with consent being withdrawn, any attempt to frisk would be a battery. What then?
WillR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 31, 10, 8:24 pm   #35
FlyerTalk Evangelist
  
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: DFW
Posts: 11,910
Quote:
Originally Posted by thegeneral View Post
It's likely for legal liability reasons. There's a reason why people (especially women) feel more comfortable going to a doctor of the same sex. There's a reason why bathrooms are segregated by sex in this country as well.

I certainly understand your point and it's nice to see people not hung up on gender, but it's rather impossible to tell someone's sexual orientation and indeed some people are attracted to both sexes.

Having someone patted down by someone of the same sex greatly reduces the likely hood of any sort of issue caused by a complaint by the TSA officer or the person being search.

In terms of people's comments on sexual arousal, I was patted down last week. It's not invasive and unless the TSA starts hiring supermodels, there's not much stimulation to it.

In terms of the gender neutrality, I think they do this in Europe as well from what I recall. They're not nearly as crazy and repressed about sex as people are in the United States.



If the rules violated the constitution then someone would sue and the rather conservative court would overturn the rules. Nobody has been able to prove that anything you're talking about is against the constitution. You sort of forgot to mention that in your argument so I thought I'd help out.



They likely do. Why don't you ask next time.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_...s_Constitution

Quote:
Originally Posted by castrobenes View Post
The reason that your crotch is searched is that bad guys can hide things in the crotch area. Security is a balancing act. Every increase in security is also an increase in intrusiveness. Your elected representatives hired TSA senior leaders who decided that pat downs of the crotch area were an acceptable increase in intrusiveness to deal with the threat.

If you disagree with this decision, your primary option is to elect different representatives who will hire TSA leaders who they can direct to come to a different decision or your new representatives can eliminate the TSA. Alternatively you can lobby your current representatives, or run yourself.

Another option is to develop a test case to determine the constitutionality of TSA administrative searches. I would suggest that a good test case is to refuse the pat down so that you are denied entry into the sterile area, and then argue before the court that it was impermissible for TSA to deny your right to fly because you refused an intrusive search. I would be very interested to hear what the court had to say on this issue.

I am not persuaded that you are assaulted and battered after you voluntarily submit to a search. If you feel strongly about this, take the moral high ground and refuse the screening process.

castro
When new federal regulations are created by various agencies it is the norm for a public comment period to discuss the proposed action.

TSA seems to side step this process making up any rules as it likes while keeping the public in the dark.

That is not how a representative government works.

Being assaulted by a government employee is not acceptable.

TSA is not acceptable!

TSA is the worst thing to ever happen to this country and I hope its employees receive their just rewards.

Quote:
Originally Posted by castrobenes View Post
The reason that your crotch is searched is that bad guys can hide things in the crotch area. Security is a balancing act. Every increase in security is also an increase in intrusiveness. Your elected representatives hired TSA senior leaders who decided that pat downs of the crotch area were an acceptable increase in intrusiveness to deal with the threat.

If you disagree with this decision, your primary option is to elect different representatives who will hire TSA leaders who they can direct to come to a different decision or your new representatives can eliminate the TSA. Alternatively you can lobby your current representatives, or run yourself.

Another option is to develop a test case to determine the constitutionality of TSA administrative searches. I would suggest that a good test case is to refuse the pat down so that you are denied entry into the sterile area, and then argue before the court that it was impermissible for TSA to deny your right to fly because you refused an intrusive search. I would be very interested to hear what the court had to say on this issue.

Quote:
I am not persuaded that you are assaulted and battered after you voluntarily submit to a search. If you feel strongly about this, take the moral high ground and refuse the screening process.


castro
Exactly where can I find the exact details of the search procedure I am voluntarily submitting to?

If I find out I will be subject to a pat down can I withdraw at that point?

Without that information consent has not been given.

Last edited by Kiwi Flyer; Sep 1, 10 at 6:45 pm Reason: merge consecutive posts
Boggie Dog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 31, 10, 8:36 pm   #36
  
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Australia
Programs: QF Platinum (OWE)
Posts: 377
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boggie Dog View Post

TSA is the worst thing to ever happen to this country and I hope its employees receive their just rewards.
Please try to keep the discussion civil
WillR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 31, 10, 8:41 pm   #37
  
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 145
Quote:
Originally Posted by WillR View Post
True. But I think it's a poor balance that has been reached. Most small weapons that can be smuggled externally can be smuggled internally, and I hope that the TSA isn't considering examining for that!

Therefore, the marginal improvement in security is minimal but the marginal increase in intrusiveness is significant.



Indeed. Consent is a defense to assault. However, what if one is half-way through screening, and is asked to submit to a frisking which is refused? My understanding is that you can't leave the screening point at that time. Therefore, with consent being withdrawn, any attempt to frisk would be a battery. What then?

I didn't say that the balance that the TSA came up with was universally accepted. But someone has to come up with that balance. In our current system elected representatives hired TSA leaders to make those decisions. You have remedies which i already discussed.

In terms of refusing screening in the middle of the process, once you object TSA procedure is to stop the screening process and call a LEO. I think that you are absolutely correct that it would be assault and against TSA policy if the pat down continued after you said stop.

castro

Quote:
Originally Posted by Boggie Dog View Post

TSA is the worst thing to ever happen to this country and I hope its employees receive their just rewards.
Our education system used to be the envy of the world...

castro

Last edited by Kiwi Flyer; Sep 1, 10 at 6:45 pm Reason: merge consecutive posts
castrobenes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 31, 10, 8:46 pm   #38
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Original Poster
  
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Newport Beach, California, USA
Programs: Premier Gold on UA
Posts: 35,771
Quote:
Originally Posted by WIRunner View Post
As a gay male I am uncomfortable having a hetrosexual male touch me. So if I question this would I be able to get a female to do the rubdown?
I want to be clear -- I'm not uncomfortable with a male screening me because I'm afraid he might be gay. The sexual orientation of the screener makes no difference to me, whatsoever (and is none of my business anyway). I don't care if it is a gay man or a straight man groping me -- I'm more comfortable if a woman does it, and I don't care whether she is gay or straight, either.

Quote:
Originally Posted by thegeneral View Post
It's likely for legal liability reasons. There's a reason why people (especially women) feel more comfortable going to a doctor of the same sex. There's a reason why bathrooms are segregated by sex in this country as well.

I certainly understand your point and it's nice to see people not hung up on gender, but it's rather impossible to tell someone's sexual orientation and indeed some people are attracted to both sexes.
Wow. This has absolutely nothing to do with sexual orientation or, at least, nothing to do with the sexual orientation of the screener. As I said, none of my business and I couldn't care less. It only has to do with my comfort level which is dictated by my sexual orientation. Because of my sexual orientation, my preference is that my private parts be touched only someone of the opposite gender. If a man does it, I'm not uncomfortable because I think he's getting off, but because I'm not comfortable with men touching my private parts.

Really, this isn't a gay vs. straight thing. It's a personal comfort level thing.


Quote:
Having someone patted down by someone of the same sex greatly reduces the likely hood of any sort of issue caused by a complaint by the TSA officer or the person being search.
That's where you're mistaken. If someone gives me a honk in the course of a pat down, I'm calling a LEO and pressing charges. "The TSA made me do it," is not a defense to a state sexual battery charge.

Last edited by Kiwi Flyer; Sep 1, 10 at 6:44 pm Reason: merge consecutive posts
PTravel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 31, 10, 8:58 pm   #39
  
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Programs: DL, US Air, AA, HH Diamond
Posts: 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boggie Dog View Post
Exactly where can I find the exact details of the search procedure I am voluntarily submitting to?

If I find out I will be subject to a pat down can I withdraw at that point?

Without that information consent has not been given.
Thank you!

I've spent the last little bit searching the TSA website for a public announcement on the new "enhanced pat downs", and the closest I could find was the following:

Q. If a passenger does not wish to be screened using advanced imaging technology, do they have options?

A. This technology is optional to passengers in the U.S. Passengers who opt out of imaging technology screening will go through alternative screening, including same-gender pat downs. Passengers flying to the U.S. from international destinations should check with the country from which they are flying regarding that nationís policies. For more information on use of advanced imaging technology in the U.S., visit www.tsa.gov.


Nowhere does TSA admit on their website, that pat downs will now involve the groping of a passenger's genital area. Nor have I seen signage or public announcements at airports detailing what a passenger can expect during an "enhanced pat down".

Even if the TSA agents were to inform passengers in very plain language that they would be squeezing their naughty bits, it still doesn't imply consent, unless the passenger openly says that the TSA agent may continue with their search.
TNGALINFLORIDA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 31, 10, 8:59 pm   #40
FlyerTalk Evangelist
  
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: DFW
Posts: 11,910
Quote:
Originally Posted by castrobenes View Post
Our education system used to be the envy of the world...

castro
I may not be the most educated person around but at least I know right from wrong, something that is completely missing at TSA, mate!
Boggie Dog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 31, 10, 9:02 pm   #41
  
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 549
Quote:
Originally Posted by castrobenes View Post
I didn't say that the balance that the TSA came up with was universally accepted. But someone has to come up with that balance. In our current system elected representatives hired TSA leaders to make those decisions. You have remedies which i already discussed.

In terms of refusing screening in the middle of the process, once you object TSA procedure is to stop the screening process and call a LEO. I think that you are absolutely correct that it would be assault and against TSA policy if the pat down continued after you said stop.

castro

Lack of consent is also covered by coercion. If you put someone in a position where they are unable to earn a living without submitting to reprehensible demands, you've effectively coerced them. So to if you force them to give what you term consent under threat that they will be arrested if they do not comply.

As for 'the bad guys' hiding things in their crotch, in order for actual law enforcement to be sticking a hand in there they have to have a reasonable and articulable suspicion that a crime has been committed or is about to be committed, or that the person has a weapon.

The purchase of an airline ticket is a lawful activity that in no way provides a reasonable, articulable suspicion of a crime or the presence of a weapon. This is evident by the overwhelming number of people who, in the history of commercial aviation, have purchased plane tickets and were not conspiring to commit a crime on board the airplane, inside the sterile area of the airport, and were not concealing weapons of any kind.

The idea that it is acceptable to subject people to bodily searches or strip searches when they have done nothing at all to warrant any kind of suspicion is repugnant.
mozgytog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 31, 10, 9:04 pm   #42
  
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Programs: DL, US Air, AA, HH Diamond
Posts: 79
Quote:
Originally Posted by PTravel View Post
.
That's where you're mistaken. If someone gives me a honk in the course of a pat down, I'm calling a LEO and pressing charges. "The TSA made me do it," is not a defense to a state sexual battery charge.
I just called my father tonight to warn him of these new measures, both the WBI and the groping, as we are flying together to IND in a few weeks, and I wanted to prepare him.

My father has been an LEO for 36 years and counting. The first words out of his mouth upon hearing this news were, "The first SOB that tries to grab my balls is getting decked, and I'll sue the .... of them." And you know what - I don't put it past him.

If it does happen, I'll be sure to update everyone and let them know what the LEO's at the IND airport had to say about the assault of TSA on my father, and my father on the TSA agent. I may need to take extra cash that weekend with me for bail money.
TNGALINFLORIDA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 31, 10, 9:09 pm   #43
FlyerTalk Evangelist
  
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: DFW
Posts: 11,910
I wonder just what jeopardy, if any, if a person who felt the TSA screening was an assault made a citizens arrest.

As I understand it the police would be compelled to file the complaint.
Boggie Dog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 31, 10, 9:30 pm   #44
  
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Next to a salty lake in Utah
Programs: Delta, United
Posts: 3,590
I find the whole WBI vs enhanced pat downs and who does them interesting. When doing the WBI some unknown person(s) gets to see grandma's naughty bits. That person(s) could be male/female straight, lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender (aka LGBT). Because they are unknown there does not seem to be an issue. Now when they are known and have the opportunity for direct contact it is an issue at least for some.

For me personally, I really do not care about the screener's sexual orientation. What I care about is how they conduct themselves. For instance, the screener should first explain what they need to do, next if it involves directly touching someone they should ask for permission (sans permission it is assault). When getting to grampa's junk they need to inform him that they are going screen their crotch area.

One rhetorical comment - these are administrative searches and are voluntary. As such, though I believe they unreasonable, I do not believe they fall under the "unreasonable search" as defined by the constitution. However, I do believe that there is a fuzzy area as the TSA is federal agency. And contrary to what otherwise was well put by castrobeans I do not believe that those in charge of the TSA are following any guidance by of any of the three branches of our government, congress, judiciary, or administrative. Especially, the later as both the former and current administrations have failed.

For instance, the House passed a bill prohibiting WBI for primary screening. In the Senate a bill was introduced to make the WBI primary screening. (Both bills were from Utah). In the meantime TSA said WBI would be used only for secondary screenings yet they have become defacto primary and now we have enhanced pat downs. With all of it no explanation let alone opportunity for public comment.

Last edited by FlyingUnderTheRadar; Aug 31, 10 at 9:36 pm
FlyingUnderTheRadar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Aug 31, 10, 11:22 pm   #45
  
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 315
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boggie Dog View Post
Well my comfort zone will be compromised if a TSA screener grasps my genitals after I Opt Out of WBI Porno Viewer Screening and in my opinion that will constitute sexual assault.
Good luck with that...

TB
TerminalBliss is offline   Reply With Quote
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Thread Tools
Search Thread
Go to Top
Forum Jump
Contact Us - FlyerTalk - Archive - Top