Originally Posted by
jkhuggins
The pedant in me must point out that correlation is not the same as causation. Given how extremely rare malicious incidents aboard commercial aircraft are, I'm not sure there is public evidence to justify a conclusion that TSA has directly prevented planes from going down. Simply counting the lack of incidents over the last 15+ years isn't evidence.
TSA has groups that solicit input on how to screen people with disabilities, and yet we continue to read verified reports regarding how people with disabilities are mistreated at TSA checkpoints. How would your proposed citizens group be any better?
Engaging the public requires actually listening and responding to the public's concerns. TSA's social media response these days seems to be limited to regurgitating approved boilerplate messages.
I will grant you that the logic is not completely sound, but the "15+ years with no major incidents at US originating airports" is the one thing I hear the most - and not just from TSA.
I do not know whether the results would be better, worse, or the same - however, I would prefer that we as an organization continue to reach out to the public in different ways. I may not be happy with what HQ takes away from these meetings/information sharing groups, but I would rather that we continue to listen and try to make a difference in how we do things for all people, than not listen to any of them.
The TSA social media sites are pretty specific in scope
1. TSA Instagram -> Wow! Look at this crazy stuff they find!
2. [MENTION=334464]ASK[/MENTION]TSA -> Specific answers for specific questions that they are able to give out (based upon SSI regs), and a handful of basic responses for things that go outside of that lane
3. The Blog -> Weekly finds, basic informational posts about our folks and programs, direct address on a handful of hot topics
None of those have dedicated PR staff that are in place to do more than the basic answers - for the most part. Combine that with SSI regs, and you have a situation where it may seem like they are just brushing people off, when they are simply limited in what they can respond with.
I would love to see our social media group move more into an engage and communicate type of department, but that would be a big time shift for any governmental group. I can always hope, but I am a front line Joe, not a PR guru guy, so what do I know?
Originally Posted by
Boggie Dog
The percentage of travelers that have bad TSA experience appears to be more than just a small number. And small numbers sure seem to concern TSA, just look at all the shoes that get removed due to one failed attempt of a shoe bomb in another country. And look how TSA harps on the guns and stuff found each week, just a fraction of 1% of all passengers that are screened each day. And TSA doesn't keep planes from going down. Locked cockpit doors do that. Toss in the repeated testing across the country of TSA screeners showing a high failure rate of detecting target items and I think claiming that TSA is responsible for preventing planes going down is laughable.
TSA partnering with disability groups hasn't really worked out so well for people in those groups. The same abuses still occur.
The public, in my opinion, does not trust TSA to conduct an investigation of its workers that is not biased against travelers. Verified reports of complaints being thrown away, too many times of "policy was followed", lying under oath during a court trial, and other such abuses removes TSA and its employees from the credible witness list. Simply put, TSA cannot be trusted on any matter.
I recognize that you will disagree with my beliefs. So be it but unless someone within TSA takes up the gauntlet of bringing some real change to the organization these discussions will continue and TSA workers will find their jobs more difficult each day.
Statistically speaking, I would argue that bad experiences are a tiny part of what happens every day. That being said, no bad experience because of TSOs doing the wrong thing are acceptable.
I am not so certain. The process in place now, is much more streamlined and there are more options for folks with challenges than there used to be - even if the challenge is simply trying to work through a checkpoint with a small child. I think that working with these groups has allowed TSA to tailor screening better with regards to those groups. Like anything, it is not perfect, but it is tons better than it used to be. Again, any bad experience because a TSO does the wrong things is unacceptable.
I would not say that we necessarily disagree on all of our beliefs. If TSA is going to be responsible for screening at the airports (and/or other locations), we can both agree that we want TSA to be a high-functioning security group that does a good job at what they are assigned to do. Right? I rather think that where we differ is the application of that process, not the overall goal - and in some cases, we do not disagree at all. You want TSA to take any complaint it receives seriously - so do I. You want TSA to address TSOs that are outside the SOP properly - so do I.