Originally Posted by
dan1431
I guess the poster is basically saying that the TSA should be more careful with people's possessions. Locks, like anything else cost money and the fact that you or others forget (which is human) costs us money.
It would be nice if the TSA had a program in place to re-imburse us (the flying public) when their agents forget to replace locks, but I do realize that would be a nightmare to administer.
Back on-topic, I was talking with a colleague who recently checked his gun and was more annoyed by what the TSA agent said to him rather than the process of checking the gun.
Apparently, the agent screened the gun and said something to effect of, you do not really need a gun anymore since we (I guess the Federal Government) are entrusted with keeping you safe.
As my colleague said, I realize that guns in airports are a touchy subject and that a little extra attention is going to be given to me because I am checking my gun and that is fine by me (him) but the commentary from the agent was really not needed.
That has been my point from day 1, I understand that there are going to be rules (whether I like them, lump or think they are stupid) but the general disrespect that I see from so many TSA agents is what bothers me. Laptops out (okay) but to bark at an old woman who may not know the rules, just seems mean. Or making a comment, oh I hope he "enjoys" his secondary because a gentleman opted out of the AIT machine, just seems wrong. Or telling my colleague that he does need a gun anymore because they are keeping us safe.
Do your job, follow the rules, but be respectful and avoid commentary unless it is solicited. I do my job and manage to be polite and avoid commentary, I am unsure why so many TSA agents find it impossible.
Dan
I agree: if TSA employees loose the lock, TSA should pay for a replacement. But again, I was describing a rare situation when the airline ships the bag to the wrong airport, and lets it sit lobby side. Then the bag has to be rescreened. In some airports, this might mean the bag has to be open. If it is locked, obviously the passenger isn't there to open it, so the lock has to be cut.
And those comments you mention are wrong. It shouldn't be tolerated, yet, sadly, too often it is.
The following is my opinion, nothing I have heard from TSA management, or any other TSA staff: Part of the problem with TSA is how it was created by Congress. I do believe there is a need for screening. I would change some of it, eliminate some of the staff/equipment, but I do believe there is a need. Thus, people are needed to fill those positions...
We have talked before about what at TSO earns. The first 2 years are TOUGH. After that, if the TSO has a decent record, meaning they have not been written up, tardy too often, etc., they are "promoted" to another pay band. Add the locality, differential, holiday pay, and after just 2 years experience they can make $40 to $45k a year. Not a lot, but not bad. After a few more years they can make even more. There are some TSO's who decide to work some over time, maybe 5 hours a week (45 a week total), who pull $55 to $60,000 a year. Again, not rich by a long shot, but still not bad. And all without an actual promotion, meaning they have 1 stripe. Now add just 1 or 2 promotions, and you can actually do fairly well. I am sure some 1, 2, and 3 stripe TSO's make more than some who post on this site (not that it means anything, but money does provide for quality of life in some ways).
Yet congress set it up so people with just GEDs can get these jobs. What congress did was to bring jobs to mostly low-income people, many without a higher education. Again, this is my opinion. I believe congress did this so that individual MoC could tell the poor in their district they brought them X many jobs, and federal money to their city/county/state.
When TSA was created, it was created by politicians. Personally, I would have had a professional organization already school in screening found TSA as a non-LEO addition to their force, such as the Secret Service, or Capital Police, as those are federal agencies, but that is just me. Politicians saw their chance, and they took it, and a new agency was created. I believe many of the problems originate from there.
It would have been easy to set the requirement not at just a high school diploma, but a minimum of 2 years college experience or equivalent. Perhaps higher? Yet we have people who have never studied government, American political theory (something I believe should be part of every TSA employees educational foundation), or even law.
Do not misunderstand me. I have met some of the best people I have ever worked with, while at TSA. I have also met some people I am happy to never see again - and as far as I am concerned, those people grew up uneducated (sort of not their fault), and they remain uneducated (entirely their fault).
Part of the problem TSA has is the perception of pay. As many have post here on many different threads, they think its very low. Again, first 2 years it is. But it does get much better, yet no one seems to know - which is TSA's fault.
I remember a thread started in December, I believe, where the most senior TSO from Chicago (?) was complaining about not making enough money - that he had to work as much over time as he could, and still couldn't make ends meet. It upset me, because I figured out that working an average of 1 1/2 overtime shifts a week (6 OT shifts a month, approximately) he pulled about $65 to $70,000 a year. A 1 stripe employee making that, and complaining...
TSA does need to do a better job letting the public know that the can have a decent living working as a screener. However, I will state that overall I enjoy working for TSA, and overall most of the employees I have met are positive, helpful people.
Again, all above is my opinion, nothing I have heard from any TSA employee.