Originally Posted by TSAMGR
Since you don't know me, and since you seem to be extrapolating to me experiences you had with screeners, this is the very definition of bias.
As you stated the posts are not personal, I used an example you may be familiar with. Do you feel that some of the posts and name calling here are not bias?
Are there incompetent screeners? Yes, as there are incompetent doctors, police officers, and teachers. Wouldn't say it is as high as you estimate.
I understand that you are repeating my words back at me. But if you read what I wrote, you will see that
I did
NOT extrapolate anything in your direction, nor in the direction of any specific screener. I was writing about actual, real experiences I had and not judging anyone beyond the individual involved. Yet you still complain that I am doing you or some other innocent person an injustice.
Yes, some of the posts here show bias. Many from travelers and some from screeners. More from travelers, which is understandable. But I do not believe that MY posts show bias against screeners. Yours is personal against me. Can you get that difference?
I did actually ask you some questions in my last post. Here they are again:
Originally Posted by Me!
Do you deny that standards for hiring screeners are low?
Do you deny that there are people at the screening stations who are working at or above their capacity for flexibility in thought and judgment?
Are you at all concerned that the percentage is too high given the nature of the job and what it is supposed to represent in terms of safety and efficiency?
C'mon, a year's experience as a security guard in lieu of high school?