goalie

Sorry to hear about your arm but a quesiton.....did you utter the words "I opt out" or something similar or simply state that you can't raise your arm?

If the former, then you are an opt out but if the latter, then you are not an opt out but rather a medical* and are to proceed thru the WTMD "just like the old days" (tho one may randomly be SSSSelected for a pat down)

*it's in their SoP

bdschobel

Same here.

Bruce

Pesky Monkey

It depends on the groper. The newer the groper the more karate chopping there is. More senior gropers realize they won't get fired for not groping balls or patting bare skin.

chollie

No, I never use the words 'opt out', which in TSO-speak means 'bring it on, jerk!'

Quite some time ago, two of our resident TSOs suggested what you do. Maybe it's just the airports I fly through, but I'm always one of the lucky ones. I explain my physical limitations and get one of a limited variety of responses: "then you are an 'opt-out'", "you are opting out, you know that you will get an thorough body pat, you may have to wait a while because no one is available now", and (rarely) "show me how much you can raise your arm".

First two times I explained it, I got the above. Third time, I printed out the PM from our resident TSO and asked for a supervisor. Let me tell you, that got scary. Nothing in my manner, trust me - nobody is more obsequious and cringing than me at the checkpoint. I ended up with a suit lecturing me that I didn't know who the poster was, could be a t***orist testing the system, took my copy of the PM and made copies of my BP and ID and told me he'd have to make a report about it.

I posted elsewhere about a particularly hostile and aggressive 'traffic director' at PHX (T2? - UA terminal) a while back. She kept saying "then you're opting out" and I kept saying "no, I am not able to raise and hold my arms above my head" and she'd repeat "then you are telling me you are 'opting out'". She had me demonstrate how far I couldn't move my arm, then called for my groper.

(That was the episode where I turned around after my grope and a TSO was returning my BP/ID to an outside unlocked pocket on my bag. They had gotten them out and taken copies while I had my back turned being groped. Interesting thing was, the main compartment was locked and they never did a bag search, just opened the outside pocket that only had my ID/BP in it).

BTW, I think your 'source' is wrong about it being in the SOP. Someplace else on this forum, someone posted what someone at TSA HQ had to say on this very issue. It was (as expected) rather coyly worded, but I'll recap from memory: "Yes, physically unable pax may, at the discretion of our officers, be allowed to use WTMD as an alternate form of screening, but they may also, at their discretion, require other forms of screening instead of the NoS or WTMD."

It's easy to say push back, but please remember: thanks to the advice of a resident TSO on this forum, I 'surrendered' a PM from that TSO, along with copies of my BP/ID, to a suit who told me the incident would be written up because it sounded like someone 'testing' the system.

dinoscool3

Opted out today in AVP from the MMW. Everyone was quite professional, and there was no silliness such as "resistance" pat down was quick, and I was on my way. All in all was an alright experience. ^

spyvsspy

I followed a family through the metal detector that just opened for them and got yelled at and had to come back out to opt out. Not successful.

tkey75

A couple things - If it's your thing, push it farther when they declare you an opt out as opposed to a medical opt out. Get a supe involved.
Also, you had your back to your bag. Never, ever let this happen.

chollie

Re-read my post. I had a PM from a TSO who posts on this board. I ended up with a 'suit' taking that PM, along with copies of my BP/ID for a 'report'. He said I didn't know who I was getting advice from on this forum, it was NOT policy, NO real TSO would tell me it was, that it sounded like someone was using me to 'test' the system.

So I got groped, got delayed, got written up as taking advice from someone pretending to be a TSO on an IBB who gave me false information to involve me in 'testing' the system.

I got caught out on the bag. I don't use this terminal often. Instead of the TSO moving around me to do the grope, I was told to turn around. That's when I lost sight of my bag.

It was a new bag - large interior compartment, one small exterior compartment. I locked the large compartment (as usual). Different bag, got distracted by the particularly aggressive 'traffic director', and instead of unlocking the large compartment and putting my BP/ID inside, I stuffed them in the otherwise empty small outside zip pocket.

This is what really bothered me. They used to always do a full bag search with a grope - purely punitive, my bag rarely got pulled for a bag check before the gropes, then it was getting a full search every single time I got groped. That's eased off a bit; I don't always get a full bag search every time I fly (The most I ever carry is a P&S and a 'dumb' cellphone). Anyway, they never did a bag search this time. Obviously the only reason they went into my bag was to get my BP/ID, and since it was in the outside pocket, they didn't cut the lock or ask me to open the main compartment.

If I hadn't turned around right when I did, I would never have known they had been in my bag and copied my ID/BP (he had the copies in his hand).

When I asked for a supervisor and asked about it, she told me that they have the right to search any bag, any time and they do NOT have to advise the pax or do it in front of the pax.

Yeah, I know, that's BS. But the website is 'out-of-date', and all TSOs are officially allowed to do pretty much anything they want at their discretion, so apparently at this terminal/checkpoint, it is up to the TSO whether or not he/she advises you of a bag search or allows you to watch.

aerodrome

Body scanners, a scroll thru all cell phone pictures, no metal earrings... this is a daily ordeal for employees at high security production offices. Ya know, ones that make money and expensive metal stuff, among others.

nachtnebel

Not sure what the point of that is. Some people get strip searched and have to do the squat and cough and pass visual cavity inspection after seeing visitors. In prisons, etc.

and this is similar to people traveling how...?

chollie

I think he's referring to the screening the employees go through at some manufacturing plants, expensive research labs, secure facilities at defense manufacturers...

IIRC, Apple requires their employees to undergo far more rigorous screening on both entry and exit from the workplace than TSA - and Apple is 'only' worried about theft and corporate espionage. TSA employees are trusted with the lives of hundreds or potentially thousands of pax.

An employee who steals or takes cellphone pictures in the 'nudie booth' is not necessarily jeopardizing aviation safety, but it is an employee whose behavior has demonstrated disregard for the law and lack of focus on the mission. It is not someone who should be trusted with the safety of thousands of lives.

Even more than pax, we should be screening all TSOs every time they enter a secured area and every time they exit a baggage area. Like pax, if they follow the rules and have nothing to hide, they will process quickly and painlessly.

InkUnderNails

Me as well in some of the facilities I visit. All private businesses and none of them are acting under the authority of government. None make me submit except as a condition of employment as a consultant. If I do not want to do it, I find other work in another place just down the street or across the country. No big deal.

However, there are very specific restrictions on the power of government and government actors to prevent just the type of soft tyranny that we experience at the airport. If I do not want to fly, I have to seek other transportation that is both more expensive and time consuming and as a consultant, my time is my money. Therefore, to avoid flying I have to make less money. I find it repugnant to surrender a constitutional right just so I can maintain my level of income. It is a choice I make.

I am slowly moving my business to more local clients, as in 400 miles or less. Within three years I plan to be virtually airport free and still making a good living doing the same thing. In fact, I have five jobs in a row that are all in driving distance. Then I have two California and a Texas. I am getting there. It is hard work and I am to old for marketing, but I am doing it anyway.

dan1431

My maternal Aunt passed through PHX T-2 today she injured her rotator cuff approx 2 months ago and is just getting back her range of motion (with the help of physical therapy).

She brought with her a medical note from her Orthopedist explaining her limited range of motion and being unable to raise her arm above her head. She explained her issue to the TSA employee directing traffic and he said that she was an opt-out and asked to her step aside. When the female TSA employee came to escort her to the patdown area, she was asked about any injuries and the like she again mentioned her rotator cuff injury and handed the note from her MD to the TSA employee who read the note and called for a Supervisor.

The Supervisor read the note and explained that she is NOT an Opt-out and is instead considered a Medically ineligible and should just utilize the metal detector while she recovers from her injury. He than walked her back through and had her use the metal detector and wished her a nice day.

She asked him how she should avoid this confusion in the future and he said that it is best to enter the machine and than explain to the TSA employee on the other side that she is unable to raise her arm due to an injury and than the TSA employee can determine if she is able to use the machine or not.

He said that if she can raise her arm enough for the machine to be useful, she can continue through and just have the arm cleared as it will alarm if it is not raised above her head, or if the TSA employee feels that the height which my Aunt is capable of raising her is not enough for the machine to be useful, she will be directed to exit the machine and utilize the metal detector.

He said that the TSA employee on the other side of the body scanner (airside) is the ONLY one with authority to determine if a PAX is medically ineligible or not.

Hope that helps,
Dan

chollie

Well, I have three comments.

One, that was not my experience (I did get told, as usual, that I was an 'opt-out' and I was led away for my grope.

Two, doesn't it strike you as odd that the only one who knows the rules is the supervisor and the TSO on the other side of the NoS? Did the supervisor say why his/her traffic director(s) have so much trouble understanding the rules?

Three, I hope goalie weighs in on this. It would appear that either there is ambiguity in the SOP, the SOP varies from checkpoint to checkpoint, or he has been misled (like I was).

Thanks for posting your experience at that checkpoint. FWIW, as I have posted elsewhere, depending on checkpoint layout and ability to see my bags, I generally walk into the NoS and then explain my limitations (not just the arm raise, I can't 'assume or hold the position' for a good scan. When I do it that way, I get an immediate full-body grope on the other side of the NoS (no waiting for an assist, strangely enough).

dan1431

That is a good question and one that I do not have an answer to, I will say this much, not much regarding the TSA surprises me.

Some of the stuff that comes out of TSA employee's mouths blows me away, especially the level of stupidity.

Recently at a gate search a TSA employee opens a female PAX purse and comes upon assorted liquid makeup products and goes ballistic asking why she did not have her liquids in a baggie. She responded that she did while going through security but removes them from the baggies and puts them back in her purse after finishing with security formalities.

The TSA employee responds that all liquids need to be in the baggie at all time while at the airport and on the airplane. He explained that the TSA requires the baggie for safety and if the liquids are not in the baggie they are not safe.

He clearly had no idea that the baggie is not to make the liquids safer but to limit their size.

Sadly, it is not surprising that the traffic director does not understand the rules.

Dan