Originally Posted by
ehasbrouck
The TSA published a
System of Records Notice for this database in February, 2010.
Other than TSA employees, the "Categories of individuals covered by this system include ... members of the public who have been involved in workplace violence at TSA facilities." So if you haven't actually been involved in violence, but merely were SPOTted as potentially violent in the future, they aren't allowed to keep a record about you.
But in February 2010, at the same time that they updated this notice, they
proposed a rule that would exempt this data from disclosure, so there would be no way to find out if you are (illegally) in this database.
This is different from the TISS database used by SPOT, for which
there doesn't appear to be any SORN at all, and the maintenance of which is therefore a criminal violation of the Privacy Act.
This piqued my interest enough that I set off on a less-than-exhaustive search for a legal definition of workplace violence. I had a hunch that the TSA was, once again, either misguided (Is Francine The Googler at it again???), devious, or both. But, after closer reading, even I can't blame Francine for this one.
I have no idea about the credibility of this website. But, their first paragraph was a legal definition:
Workplace violence is an act of aggression, physical assault, or threatening behavior that occurs in a work setting and causes physical or emotional harm to customers, coworkers, or managers. Broad definitions of workplace violence also often include acts of sabotage on work-site property.
These jump out at me:
1. This seems very much to be employment-centric. Employees commit workplace violence against customers. But, I don't see the reverse being true. In other words, I can conclude that screeners can commit workplace violence against passengers, but, not the other way around. Passengers can commit assault & battery, but apparently not workplace violence, against screeners.
2. Physical assault is easy to prove, but, "emotional harm?" The TSA is going to put you on a "workplace violence" list because a screener woke up in a cold sweat crying because you made him/her change their gloves? What is the TSA's standard for "emotional harm" -- especially one which the accused can't challenge in court?
I read through the proposed rule and I have a different opinion. It reads like a standard Workplace Violence Prevention Program system of records, which every federal agency is required to have. Members of the public are included if they were the objects of the workplace violence incident. I didn't read anywhere in the rule where this would be used to create another "no fly" or "special harassment" list.
My hunch is that there was an IG or GAO finding which embarrassed the TSA because they didn't have a workplace violence program. This rule happened before the attack on the Miami screener's manhood in the nude-o-scope. So, we can't blame that incident on this notice suddenly appearing.