Man sues the TSA and B6

[Ari]

$240,000 goes to Jarrar. Here is what I want to know:

WHO PAYS HOW MUCH?

JetBlue?
TSA (you and I)?
Inspector Harris?
The other Inspector sued individually?

[studentff]

http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/01/07/jet...ent/index.html

ACLU attorney Fine said Jarrar did not sue TSA directly because of "legal considerations." "It's much more difficult to sue a government agency than it is to sue the direct government employee that committed the unconstitutional act," he said.

I thought that TSA employees would have been virtually immune to lawsuits for screwups committed in the line of duty, but apparently not. Quite heartening IMO.

I hope that this settlement gives great pause to the bad-apple TSOs out there who like to do this sort of thing (and we all know they are there). Even if each of the two TSOs only paid $60K, assuming B6 paid half of the settlement, that is still a lot of $ for an individual. And I doubt one's homeowner's insurance would cover such liability.

One would hope that even a relatively small settlement of $60K per screener would be enough to act as an effective deterrent to this sort of behavior.

[FliesWay2Much]

Originally Posted by studentff

http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/01/07/jet...ent/index.html



I thought that TSA employees would have been virtually immune to lawsuits for screwups committed in the line of duty, but apparently not. Quite heartening IMO.

I hope that this settlement gives great pause to the bad-apple TSOs out there who like to do this sort of thing (and we all know they are there). Even if each of the two TSOs only paid $60K, assuming B6 paid half of the settlement, that is still a lot of $ for an individual. And I doubt one's homeowner's insurance would cover such liability.

One would hope that even a relatively small settlement of $60K per screener would be enough to act as an effective deterrent to this sort of behavior.

Several years ago, I was running a shop in the Department of Defense that issued decisions to U.S. companies concerning what they could export and what they couldn't. Our folks (and me) were making decisions that affected potentially hundreds of millions of dollars of revenue. We all were encouraged to purchase personal liability insurance. The DoD made it clear that we could be sued as individual government employees. I recall that the government paid 50% of the premium up to a dollar limit.

I'm happy that these two screeners were made examples of because it serves notice that there is a line beyond which a screener cannot cross.

[doober]

Originally Posted by studentff

http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/01/07/jet...ent/index.html

"It's very difficult to bring these kinds of cases and to prevail on these kinds of cases, especially in a post 9/11 world in which airline officials and government officials have been given an extreme amount of latitude," Fine said.

We have to work to rein in that latitude and set more reasonable boundaries.

[Superguy]

Originally Posted by studentff

http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/01/07/jet...ent/index.html



I thought that TSA employees would have been virtually immune to lawsuits for screwups committed in the line of duty, but apparently not. Quite heartening IMO.

I hope that this settlement gives great pause to the bad-apple TSOs out there who like to do this sort of thing (and we all know they are there). Even if each of the two TSOs only paid $60K, assuming B6 paid half of the settlement, that is still a lot of $ for an individual. And I doubt one's homeowner's insurance would cover such liability.

One would hope that even a relatively small settlement of $60K per screener would be enough to act as an effective deterrent to this sort of behavior.

I haven't read the judgment or settlement, but I'd be curious as to how the judge assigned liability. If the judge made them jointly and severally liable, it's quite possible that B6 could end up paying the entire thing if the other TSO's don't have a way to pay any of it.

I remember studying a court case in a cyberlaw class (no, I'm not a lawyer, but it was a required course in my master's program - fascinating class) where Disneyland was sued for an accident on their go cart type ride. Because it was someone else that actually hit the person and the ride was entirely under their control and the plaintiff's, the judge assigned fault at something like 80% to the person that hit the plaintiff, 19% for the plaintiff being stopped when he shouldn't have been, and 1% to Disney. The judge also held the that Disney and the other person were held jointly and severally liable. The other person, of course, couldn't pay the settlement, so even though Disney was pretty much not at fault, they got stuck paying the bill.

I'll see if I can dig up the citation when I get home.

I would hope that the judge actually assigned the liability in such a way that the TSO's involved would have to pay something substantial as a deterrent to others.

[jennj99738]

There's also the likelihood that the individual TSOs pay nothing. Based on the theory of respondeat superior, as long as the tort is committed during the course and scope of employment, the employer is responsible for the actions of the employee. So in this case, it would be DHS and John and Jane Taxpayer.

Given the circumstances as outlined in the articles, this appears to me to be one of those cases. I haven't reviewed the pleadings but it would be an unusual case for the employees to be individually liable.

[mikeef]

Alas, there is still some sorrow in the outcome:

TSA spokesman Christopher White, while noting that the TSA was not a party to the suit, said "There is absolutely no intention to take disciplinary action against the employees involved."

Mike

[Ari]

Originally Posted by mikeef

Alas, there is still some sorrow in the outcome:

Indeed:

Coming into an airport while wearing a T-shirt with Arabic letters on it is equivalent to going into a bank while wearing a shirt saying, 'I am a robber,'

--TSA Employee Harris

There is absolutely no intention to take disciplinary action against the employees involved.

--The TSA

It is truly amazing that the TSA doesn't even think that sentisivity training is in order. Absolutely amazing.


- - -

The fact that other passengers or crew have a feeling of discomfort or uneasiness that can be attributed to an individual's skin color, race, ethnicity or clothing that may be indicative of an individual's race, ethnicity or religion (e.g., t-shirt with Arabic writing, turban) is not a justifiable reason to deny boarding to that individual or to require that individual to accept restrictions such as sitting in the rear of the aircraft in order to be allowed to fly.

--DOT Investigation Report

The settlement amount represents a fraction of the amount originally sought by Mr. Jarrar . . . JetBlue continues to deny, outright, every critical aspect of Mr. Jarrar's version of events.

--JetBlue Spoheshole

(For those not aware of what happened when he was allowed board his flight, he was given a new boarding pass, the old one ripped up; his seat was change from row 3 to the second-to-last row in the plane, right out of the Rosa Parks days.)


- - -


Nothing says "we did nothing wrong" like a check for $240,000.

[jkhuggins]

Originally Posted by jennj99738

There's also the likelihood that the individual TSOs pay nothing. Based on the theory of respondeat superior, as long as the tort is committed during the course and scope of employment, the employer is responsible for the actions of the employee. So in this case, it would be DHS and John and Jane Taxpayer. Given the circumstances as outlined in the articles, this appears to me to be one of those cases. I haven't reviewed the pleadings but it would be an unusual case for the employees to be individually liable.

See, I'm not sure that the TSOs here were acting within the "course and scope of employment". Others have noted here that TSA's official policies seem not to endorse the specific actions taken; in that case, the employer may not be liable for the acts of their employees. Which also explains why many federal employees are advised to purchase individual liability insurance.

Disclaimer: I'm no lawyer ... not even close.

[goalie]

Originally Posted by Ari

No one thinks they did anything wrong!!!!!

and you're surprised? i have yet to see any organization accept full responsibility, own up to a mistake, or otherwise admit that "yeah we did it and we screwed up" so why would the tsa, dhs or b6 be any different. simply give the finger (oops, i meant point the finger ) at someone else and move on with the hopes that you will be overlooked and/or forgotten about.

[FliesWay2Much]

Oops -- wrong thread... Senior moment...