Originally Posted by
lovely15
So zero then?
Only if you are willing to dehumanize every TSO everywhere because of your inability to see beyond the uniform and the job. There is a person in that uniform, with their own families, their own lives, and they are there to earn a paycheck just like every other working American in the country. IOW, you are doing to the TSO’s
exactly what you think the TSA is doing to you. Does not seem like a very rational response now, does it.
Originally Posted by
T.J. Bender
But, see, that's the thing. If the words were written clearly (and I admit, I haven't seen them), there would be no ambiguity in there. If the rules say, "Liquids, gels and aerosols must be separated from all other toiletries and placed in a one-quart resealable plastic bag," where is the room for error on the part of the FSD? If things are written in clear, plain, direct English, one would hope that those in charge of enforcing those rules have a good understanding of them.
“No ambiguity in them”. Please, provide us with a document that has no ambiguity in it. Just one, and I will politely bow out of this discussion. There is no such thing as a document that totally has no unambiguity in it.
Originally Posted by
T.J. Bender
I'm not asking for a TSO to stand there with a ruler so that my 10" netbook can go through the X-ray without a fight. Nitpicking like that would be a disaster and could easily drive checkpoints to a standstill, but is it too much to ask that the FSD ensure his/her screeners have a clear understanding of laptop vs. tablet?
We don’t have calibrated eyes, we guess right along with everyone else. And an x-ray cannot tell the difference in size between them, there is no scale on the side of the screen giving us a representation of how large something is.
Originally Posted by
T.J. Bender
I would genuinely have much less of an issue with the TSA if the rules were uniform vs. airport-by-airport. Different people will interpret things differently--unless the directives are written in a crystal-clear manner and enforced as such.
And if WISHES WERE FISHES. Sure would be nice to have every McDonalds serve every sandwich the same way every single time, no exceptions, and the employee that gets it wrong is fired right then. But that would be an unrealistic expectation wouldn’t it. Human nature enters everything we do, everything we read, and there is no such thing as a “crystal-clear” document.
Originally Posted by
T.J. Bender
I guess you and I have a differing opinion on what constitutes a "fact" then. What you've presented are your own opinions about why people don't follow the guidelines at checkpoints, backed up by factual accounts from your own experience. I've, likewise, largely presented my own opinions backed up with factual experiences. I think I've made the underlying question here pretty clear, but I'll elaborate on it a little further: I'm sure you've seen the TSA SOP. I wouldn't ask you to jeopardize your job by revealing SSI, but I will ask you if the verbiage in there is crystal clear, or if it leaves lots of room for interpretation. If the verbiage is crystal clear, why do I still see screeners seemingly making up their own rules, and supervisors not addressing it?
I don’t believe I presented anything as a fact instead of an opinion. I’ll have to look again. I make a pretty good effort at differentiating the two.
Every document, even those of a non-technical nature, have ambiguity in them. No exceptions. There is always room for interpretation and misinterpretation. There IS written into the SOP room for judgment calls by the TSO’s. It acknowledges that humans can occasionally draw complicated conclusions from limited direct evidence (we call them “hunches”). Each person everywhere does this, some to a lesser degree than others.
Originally Posted by
T.J. Bender
Well, I like to think I'm an honest person, and that's how I go about deciding where my respect ends up. I'm probably in the minority here when I say that I'm pleasant with TSOs so long as they're pleasant with me. That said, if one is standing next to me barking their lungs out at 4:00 AM when I'm the only person in line, then asking me if I've removed my laptop after watching me do so before finally inquiring loudly as to why I've developed an attitude towards them, well, no. They're not going to get any respect. They're most likely going to be asked to summon a supervisor if they feel the need for any further communication with me, as I'm done dealing with them.
So far you have not given me any reason to believe that you are dishonest. Misguided and uninformed at times, but honest. I cannot say that for some of the others who post here.
No one forces anyone to “deal” with the TSA (escorted prisoners excepted). Everyone makes that choice for themselves. And please do not fall into the trap of believing that it is not a decision, it most certainly is. It may not be one they like, it may not be one they enjoy, but each and every passenger
does make that decision for themselves. There are always alternative choices available, no exceptions. Some people just have a bit of trouble relating choices with consequences.
As for the “barker”, well you might give them just a tad bit of human compassion. They have been up for more than an hour, driven into work, gotten their morning briefings, maybe have gotten some breakfast and coffee, and are usually on the job before 4am. I did that for a while, and I can remember being a bit grumpy a few times, and I am generally a very happy person (drives the co-workers nuts sometimes). I like mornings, am a morning person.
In any case I will be traveling in the next 2 months via air to one of the places that has been mentioned here as having “barking” TSO’s. When I get back I’ll post what my experience was like. The main difference between the average traveler and I is that I know the “what” and “why” that most travelers don’t. I get the honor of traveling through several different airports on the way there and back, so I should get a pretty fair cross-section of what my fellow TSO’s at other airports are doing. Should be interesting.