I have to ask. Why the screen name of a Delta CRJ flight from Memphis to Cincy?

What's stopping me would be the $80,000 pay cut and the fact that I served many years in the military sworn to uphold the constitution of the Unites States of America. I would have to be willing to violate the oath I took as a commissioned officer to have that job. I would rather be shot than dishonor myself in that fashion. Death before dishonor!

If I wanted to juggle balls for money I'd just hang out at a navy base.

Yes, in fact I am now in the process of trying to change a government bureaucracy from within. I am NOT a top political appointee, in fact I am not a political appointee at all. And YES it is very difficult but that doesn't mean that I should just quit. Just think of all the things that would not be accomplished if people just quit when the going got tough.

Fair enough. People need money to live including TSA employees.

My comments don't presume any such obligation. It was simply an inquiry as to why certain people were not springing into action to act on their convictions. It might not be a popular thing these days with all of the "what's in it for me" attitude displayed by some, but many, many people do act on their convictions. In the process many of them accept lower pay and less than ideal work and living conditions. They do it, I presume (and have read) because they believe it is the right thing to do and don't expect others to do what they will not do themselves. They didn't have a rule or statue or constitutional provision that mandated their action, they did it by choice.

The original post was not a joke nor does it contain a logical fallacy. It was a series of questions. I never said that one could not (or should not) complain without taking action. I simply asked why certain people were not taking action.

No one said you must do anything. It was a series of questions. I am sure that there are many people who are opposed to a wide variety of things and they take no action on any of them.

FlyerTalk requires a screen name to post. What's in a name? That which we call a rose. By any other name would smell as sweet. (W. Shakespeare)

Buy this man a drink, he knows what he's talking about. Government, at all levels are full of idiots and lazy incompetent people who are there because they can't make it any where else. The good ones leave very shortly unless they have a sense of patriotic duty to stay. However, they normally don't do the work that destroy our way of life such as working for tsa.

Just an FYI...

Speaking out *IS* an action.

Perhaps I'm missing something here. Is the TSA looking to hire people who do not agree with its current direction? Why would they employ someone who refuses to engage in the activities he is being paid to perform?

Whiskey Tango Foxtrot?

I would not join the TSA if it was the only option available.
I would rather starve to death.

Halloween has passed, and I would feel silly wearing a policeman's costume with fake badge.

Because I can't fix everything that's wrong with the world. I have plenty of work to do in my little corner of the world --- work which is making a difference in people's lives. It is work that I'm well-qualified to do, and I've proven I can do that work well. I see no reason to give that up in order to attempt to fix a problem in another corner of the world --- and perhaps have less impact than the work I'm doing now.

So give us some details, and let us know how we can help you out. There are some lawyers on this forum. Just posting rhetorical vague questions is not productive nor helpful.

No offense, but it should be blatantly obvious to you why people here don't work for the TSA. Do you think most people here on FLYERtalk, who generally have to travel extensively for business or have the money to travel often for pleasure, are desiring jobs with the TSA? Perhaps there are a few teenagers here (not just in chronology, evidently), but many are bona fide professionals.

Because one of the job requirements is to be able to stand for moderate periods of time and since a little speed dating thing with a S-75 Dvina (more widely know as a SAM 2) over Bolikhamxai Province in 1970, I can't. Does that adequately respond to your churlish suggestion/question?

I am a physician who often needs to do physical examinations for medical reasons that are only very slightly more intimate than what the TSA has done to me and to others.

If a patient has an earache, I examine the head and neck; I do not do a pelvic exam on the woman nor palpate the man's testicles that day for that complaint. I do not examine the breasts or genitalia of every patient, no matter what their concern that day. Doctors rightfully lose their licenses for that sort of sexual offense.

I will not violate my Hippocratic oath to do the best for my patients, nor the oath of federal offense I took to protect and defend the Constitution. Therefore I am not eligible to work for TSA, as I would refuse to view naked, or intimately feel up, every passenger every day.

The pay cut might not be much, as I understand there are more than 5,000 TSA employees who earn over $100,000 per day, and anyway, I often work for free when I do humanitarian aid work, so money is not everything.

But there are some things I won't do for any money, or for no money - and one of them is to work for TSA. There will be no "changes from within" as long as people like John Pistole are in charge.

To be blunt, there are several reasons:
1. I am gainfully employed in a career I like, at a position I want, at a I firm where I enjoy working. I do not see my satisfaction level increasing through switching careers, taking a low/entry-level job, and working in an environment where little trust, dignity, or respect exists among employees.

2. I see no benefit in this course of action. If change could be created from within TSA by front-line employees then it might make sense under the right circumstances. But let's face it, the only people making policies at TSA are people at the top of the organization who have no respect for civil rights (Pistole's law enforcement background says it all), no connection to reality (when was the last time you saw/heard of Pistole or Nappy getting groped?), and purely benign motives at best (most aren't benign but are for self gain only). Once this changes perhaps TSA will attract people with a more reasonable perspective toward respecting civil rights (but I don't count on it changing - ever).

3. There's the pay element to consider. I currently have financial obligations and goals that would preclude my becoming a screener - even if I wanted to do that. Perhaps if I were sitting at home, out of work, waiting for my Papa Johns to arrive I'd consider TSA as a temporary option just to get money - but that would be the only way. (If I did, I'd be the screener you'd all want to get as I wouldn't go anywhere near anyone's crotch... even if it would mean potentially allowing the "scrotum bomber" through. )

That's like suggesting you join a political party you loathe to try to change it from within instead of campaigning against it. It's a completely ridiculous proposition.