Originally Posted by
SATTSO
I honestly do not know if they are misclassifying info; but i do know i don't expect anyone here to agree with anything TSA does.
This really isn't a matter of whether we agree or not.
After all, it was you that stated that you didn't understand why it was SSI if you are mandated to describe it to the selectee and you are mandated to conduct by the SSI procedure (thereby rendering it "public").
If you've ever been involved in classifying materials or handling classified materials, you know when and why classification might be used and how the information must be handled.
Assuming that you are describing things properly and completely, then either 1) the classification has been misused, or 2) anyone who tells the selectee how they will be frisked is disclosing SSI. If things are different than you describe, then that conclusion may not hold.
Having said that, SSI is technically not "classification" as S/TS/SCI/etc are. That gives a little more latitude in terms of protection, disclosure and potential harm.
There are procedures that describe reasons that material may *not* be classified - classification cannot be used to hide potentially embarrassing facts or to avoid PR problems, for example. Those rules are there for a reason: many government employees used classification to cover-up illegal, improper, or unpopular behavior. It is also true that many agencies "bulk classify" information without considering each element to determine whether it really is potentially harmful or not. I would not put it past some folks in the TSA management chain to overclassify stuff until/unless they're called on it... and the likelihood of someone lower in the chain raising the issue (or even knowing the classification rules) is slim.
With an agency of over 50k employees who do exercise some amount of authority (regardless of whether or not you hold that authority in contempt), no matter the agency, it would not be possible for someone to abuse their authority in some way. Take an average police department for any major city (many post on this site how those officers are so much more professional that TSA employees), and how many complaints are filed with IA and the AG? Many. And those "highly trained" officers number MUCH less in number than TSA employees.
.....
It seems TSA, per capital is at least on par with other agencies, or doing better. Just my opinion, yet i doubt anyone here will agree.
And that may be. But I'd ask you to acknowledge that the high level of public contact that your personnel have (much greater than a PD, for example) and the unpopular things that you must do in a very stressful situation leave the perception that TSA has a problem. Add in the fact that TSA has access to valuable possessions, private information (what's in your wallet), and so forth - and at the same time screeners behave in an abusive manner (see the Philly events), it leaves an even worse perception. And perception is the traveler's reality, meaning that unless TSA employees engage in a polite, responsive, non-threatening manner it certainly leaves the impression that the TSA screeners regularly abuse authority.
I submit that yelling at passengers, threatening them with DY...T, barking orders, telling them that they have no rights, retaliatory searches and/or slowdowns of screening, disrespecting passengers and their possessions, etc, etc. don't exactly inspire confidence. You aren't drill sergeants, and passengers aren't Marine recruits.
Again, they may not truly be abusing authority, and in fact most of the screeners probably don't abuse authority, but enough do to leave a really bad impression. Likewise, when it is drilled into them that they ARE the authority, they can just tell folks that they are following orders.
All I can say is this, if you ever do receive the more invasive pat-down, follow up with management as to why it happened. With the new SOP, if it was done out of retaliation, you might then be surprised by the result you get. As I said, many of the changes are internal.
I will believe that when I see it. Given my past experiences complaining about TSA issues, I believe it's more likely to be covered up (like the TSA PR contact person at IAD that replied to my complaint about a 25 minute line to access security with a claim that their observation of the CCTV system showed less than 5 minutes....). And given that it's SSI as to what a "proper" frisk is (meaning that it's awful hard to complain about an improper search, and even if you do, all the PR folks have to do is say "it's proper"), it makes it pretty hard to sustain a complaint.
But I am willing to be convinced.