Originally Posted by
chollie
I realize you don't make the rules. I also realize that the common sense you exhibit is not always present at checkpoints.
As you point out, a checkpoint is anything but sterile and cross-contamination can happen (it can also happen in a so-called 'sterile' environment - witness recent events in a quarantined government facility where a dangerous 'superbug' got loose).
IMHO, when a test is positive, it should be standard procedure to immediately rerun the test with explicit attention to the possibility of contamination - ie, TSO removes gloves, sanitizes hands, gets a new set of gloves from a different box/location, tests gloves in machine, if clear, swabs pax and re-tests.
This should, IMHO, be the first step after any 'positive'. It's the sort of 'first step' many professionals in other lines of work take when a test comes up positive. The 'first step' should not be to force the pax into a mandatory backroom unwitnessed, unphotographed frisk of body and belongings, accompanied by a report on the pax that becomes a permanent part of a that individual's government record.
I understand this and think that this is a possible solution, but it is not the current policy. I would welcome this type of procedure if it is deemed feasible to implement at the checkpoint. We have standard decon protocols that go into effect when an alarm is triggered, perhaps the next step should be as you suggest.
Originally Posted by
nachtnebel
That is simply not true. Not when you reserve the right to touch any part of the passenger's body that you want, when you want, for no reason, at random. Not when you treat passengers's bodies as if you had full rights to them. Or rub their sex organs thoroughly in humiliating fashion if they alarm on a test that produces 100% false alarms. No human being should be treated that way without cause. No human being wants to be treated that way.
If you want to see people getting treated like human beings, go to New Zealand or any number of countries abroad whose screeners don't conduct themselves like TSA clerks do, as ordered by TSA.
Sorry, but the words don't convince me. Not when they are contradicted at every airport.
I always treat every passenger and bystander and employee in my sphere of influence with professionalism and courtesy. That is what ALL TSOs are supposed to do without fail. The fact that some of the workforce does not "get it" is something I work to correct every time I see it happen. Policy is always up for debate, but TSOs should always be expected to conduct themsleves professionally and courteously - period.
Originally Posted by
RadioGirl
Of course infections happen in hospitals. But the attitude demonstrated above was "it doesn't matter if someone contaminates the swabs because contamination is inevitable." I find it unlikely that a hospital would say "it doesn't matter who handles the surgical instruments or whether the doctors wash their hands, because contamination is inevitable."
There's a difference between taking reasonable measures to avoid contamination and dealing the odd case that couldn't be anticipated, and taking no measures to avoid contamination at all. And so, as gsoltso says, there's a difference between a hospital - where they try to prevent contamination - and a TSA checkpoint - where they don't.
The attitude that I display is simply an understanding that cross contamination is going to occur from time to time. TSA has and follows (at least in my experience - even at LAX when I worked there, and LAX is a zoo!) the SOP and manufacturers recommendations for decon, maintenance and cleaning procedures.