Poor babies at TSA. Don't like it? THEN QUIT. Just like you've told us to do as far as flying.

Needle on my sympathy meter seems to be stuck on zero. Tried tapping on it but the needle doesn't seem to want to come off of zero.

There are some outstanding supervisors who lead, inspire, motivate and develop subordinates. Then there are the run-of-the-mill supervisors who aren't necessarily bad but don't have that extra touch that distinguishes them as leaders. And then there are those who may have looked good on paper, may have interviewed well but turned out to be huge disappointments. I challenge anyone in here to point out how this is different than any other organization.

The issue with abuse from passengers is a different story. Being yelled at, unfortunately, comes with the job. When I train officers, I tell them that they are NOT paid to get angry; so let the supervisor earn the little bit of extra money that he or she is paid to deal with the angry passenger. The frustration comes from how supervisors deal with the passenger. In some instances, the supervisor really has no choice because of policies established either by local TSA management, airport management, the airport police or a combination of all three. Still, a good supervisor will know how to handle even the most disagreeable passenger with good old fashioned customer service. Many people respond better when the supervisor makes an earnest attempt to help resolve issues rather than to impose some measure of authority or hide behind the ol' SSI veil of secrecy.

Passengers who strike or otherwise physically abuse officers is a non-starter. That should be an automatic go-directly-to-jail-do-not-pass-go-do-not-collect-$200 situation with the violator's adventure at the airport ending right then and there. And TSA ought to throw the book at these violators by making them permanent members of the Standard Pat Down Club at every airport across the country.

However, before it gets to that point, I think there are a lot of more reasonable alternatives that can certainly help prevent the situation from escalating. And that all begins with good old-fashioned leadership. TSA certainly goes to great lengths to teach it; but it doesn't matter if supervisors don't put it in practice when they return to the floor. Again, I think those who have weak leadership skills are the minority. But all it takes is one lousy leadership decision to taint the perspective for both passenger and officer.

They fire them.

I absolutely agree.

You might want to tell that to the supervisor that would not take my NEXUS because he had never seen one. It took the FSM to resolve it.

I agree with you up to the point that you cast another vote for the retaliation against passengers using the screening process. The legal process should suffice.

The reason is simple. Good leadership is invisible. Bad leadership permeates the entire subordinate organization and stinks up the whole place. We really do not focus on when things go right, only when they go wrong.

Uh-huh. If you say so. You know that is NOT true across the board. Every organization has its share of bad apples in supervisory/management positions.



I agree. It should be based on the legal process. People who resort to violence should pay the price for their actions; and having SSSS permanently stamped on their boarding passes for violence against federal screening officers is part of that price. We will always disagree on whether or not this is retaliatory; I see it as the passenger, by his own actions, having put himself in that category. Don't do the crime if you can't do the time.

But going through the legal process would mean that they'd have to be on the same footing as passengers - and TSA employees invariably think they're better than the passengers.

I think TSA clerks who "karate-chop" people's genitals during the so-called pat-down should be taken out to the front of the terminal and dance to "Danny Deever."

But we all know that TSA clerks will never be held accountable for their behavior. They'll be "retrained," like the ones that screwed up screening on Tom Sawyer *twice*. And the retraining will never be effective because they're being "trained" by people who teach them that the "pat-down" is a punitive measure.

Of course it's not different than any other organization. But this is TS/S. When I want to complain about my boss, I have to go to a different Internet forum. :)

Also, TSA seems to spend plenty of time patting itself on the back about its successes. When it does so, it invites added scrutiny when it fails.

In other words, people respond better when the supervisor actually tries to help the passenger. Gee, what a surprise? :)

Agreed. You're only as good as your last performance.

I disagree slightly. I think that good leadership is visible --- but indirectly. It's obvious when you have an organization with good leadership ... not from the actions of the leaders, but from the actions of those they lead. Leaders that call attention to themselves, however, usually aren't good leaders.

More evidence that the patdown is retaliation or the expression of "respect my authority".

In other words, as punishment.

That is not what the selectee list is for.

But that's the way it is used. Has been for years. Lots of people end up on the list for reasons not related to terrorism or flight safety.

(bolding mine). What has just been posted here is all too prevalent on the floor - that the patdown is a valid punitive measure and we have here a TSO (real or alleged) going on record as supporting use of the grope as a punitive measure.

The problem is, the grope is already used as a punitive measure by individual TSOs.

It's the difference between proper legal remedies and a crude form of 'vigilante justice'.

What's with the double standards? Zero tolerance for pax, endless forgiveness for TSOs? :mad:

If a pax who slaps a TSO should always be prosecuted and should always be penalized for life (so a frequent flyer is SSSS every time, a one-time flyer is ...never SSSS again, yeah, that's appropriate), then a TSO who steals should be prosecuted by the TSA and banned from government service for life.

Perhaps a pax slaps a TSO, that pax should be 'retrained' a few dozen times. Now that to me would seem as appropriate as all the TSA retraining going on.

TSO 'karate chops' pax, clearly visible on the tapes, etc. TSO is sent for 'retraining' - watch a video and patdown five co-workers, good to go.

Pax reacts to 'karate chop' and strikes TSO. Pax is fined $11k, pax will be groped every time pax flies for life..

The grope should never ever be used as a punitive measure, under any circumstances, and the fact that a TSO clearly sees that as appropriate is really disturbing. Perhaps TSOs should be sent for additional gropes instead of retraining whenever they screw up.

I wonder what additional punishment Bart would recommend for someone who 'slaps' a groper, perhaps in response to an unexpected jolt of pain from a poorly administered grope - what additional punishment would Bart recommend for a pax who is physically unable to use the NoS? By virtue of the physical limitations, that pax is already SSSS for life.

It may not be true in organizations in which you have worked. In businesses that must make a profit, there is only a limited amount of time that a bad supervisor will remain in a supervisory position. Usually they "leave to seek additional opportunities" but occasionally they are found "a more appropriate position for their skills" somewhere else in the organization.

The last thing that will happen is that they are left in a position that will cost the employer time and money.

They are either gone or they disappear within the organization.

We disagree. And that's okay. I'm just some schmoe offering an opinion. And that opinion is that if a passenger violently attacks a TSO, it doesn't stop with whatever legal actions are taken; that passenger ends up on a permanent SSSS list. That's the price for taking a swing at a TSO. Don't like it, then don't do it or take the bus.

Before you get your panties in a wad; it will never happen. Political correctness will see to that. But since we're just throwing opinions around, I'm offering mine.

Your mileage may vary.

OK. I'll concede the point that if poor leadership/management affects the profit line, then the stuckee is forced to leave.

Not all bad supervisors/managers look bad on paper.

And federal agencies and agents that systematically violate the constitutional rights of citizens, strip searches them, and sexually gropes them, should also pay a price for their actions. I don't think you want to know what price some of us feel that you should pay.

Still, so far, cooler heads have prevailed and will continue to prevail, and retaliatory solutions such as the one you proposed will be avoided.

So then, you acknowledge that "standard pat down", which the rest of the world calls sexual assault, is a punishment measure.

Everyone knew this, but it is good to hear a Blue Shirt admit it.