Continued ...
Kidding! But yeah, I'll admit the agency does face some, ummm, challenges along these lines. Off the top of my head, a few reasons:
1) Policies enacted On High may not be carried out as envisioned on the front lines, especially when the troops are spread out among hundreds of facilities in 50 states.
2) Even without the presence of a union, TSA management appears highly reluctant to fire anyone, regardless how egregious their conduct. (Although I can just picture someone in Admin reading this and going, "Oh yeah? Won't she be surprised how quickly she's going to be fired for posting on FlyerTalk?") *chuckle*
3) The calibre of employees undoubtedly varies widely depending on the local job market. Wages across-the-board are set in Washington, D.C., and even though locality pay is offered in pricier places, it's determined by the cost of living, not by the job market. In the economically depressed area from whence I came, I worked with a number of folks who had graduate degrees. I now live in an urban area, and my co-workers are predominantly from blue-collar backgrounds.
Actually, add that to the list of things the TSA has missed -- my Surefire E2D Defender torch (flashlight). That's always in my laptop bag, so it's been through security and carried on every flight I've been on in the past few years.
I'm not familiar with this particular model, but generally speaking, flashlights are not a prohibited item.
I attend a working level maritime security meeting chaired by NSC on a routine basis. I can't begin to count how many times over the past 6 years that DHS attendees have come to the meetings to brief us on the newest URGENT THREAT, that we MUST RESPOND TO NOW or else face the consequences of a an ATTACK THAT MIGHT PARALYZE our country!
You know how many of those dire warnings have come to fruition? None. Zero. Zilch. Your superiors, in contrast, have developed a well-deserved reputation for yelling fire in a crowded theater, when there is none.
Yeah. As a taxpayer, I also find particularly egregious the DHS policy of handing out homeland security grants willy-nilly to law enforcement agencies across the country. One rural northern MI community in which I previously worked actually hired a part-time staffer simply to pursue these grants! That's the tail wagging the dog, IMO.
Mueller says some things about protecting quote-unquote terrorist targets in BFE, North Dakota, which would be very funny if it wasn't our tax dollars being spent. GRRRR!
I really don’t mean to pick on you personally, so accept my apologies in advance if that is your impression.
You're OK; don't worry about it.
If I didn't get some modicum of enjoyment out of posting here, I wouldn't keep coming back!
DHS is a train wreck waiting to happen. I see their incompetence on almost a daily basis, and it isn't pretty.
Yeah, so do I, and I alternate between rage and laughing until I nearly pee myself.
I think the most frightening thing about this agency is its tendency to expand rather like a virus replicating itself. It's the nature of government to do so, of course, but most bureaucracies have been around since time immemorial, so their growth is rather imperceptible, in contrast to the TSA's, which is like watching time-lapse photography.
I also fear the ways in which the agency might be used by subsequent administrations, especially if it keeps heading down the path of becoming a quasi police force. Actually, quite a bit of stuff done during this administration may come back to bite us in the buttocks someday, in which case, what are we going to tell our grandkids? That we were too busy watching "Dancing with the Stars" to pay attention to what the boys in Washington were up to?
It's a crazy world, folks! I'm off to chug more Dayquil, which has gotten decidedly less enjoyable since they eliminated the alcohol.
