castrobenes

Predictions -

In 4 years whether Romney or Obama wins, I predict the following:

Fewer than 15 large airports (Cat 1, 2, and x) will go SPP employing fewer than 5% of the TSO workforce.

The pat-down will change but not go away. Flyertalk consensus will be that it is worse, and that we are on the brink of TSA going away.

Total number of all TSOs (SPP and federal) will be less than 37,000 due to budget constraints not SPP.

I will be still employed as a federal employee in aviation security in a management position. (In other words the manager job will exist but may be renamed).

I will keep posting here each year, so I will see if my predictions hold true.

castro

castrobenes

SFO and a number of other airports are SPP. Go to one of them, opt out, and take a swing at the private contractor doing the screening. Tell us what happens...

castro

Boggie Dog

If TSA doesn't tighten up its hiring standards and continues having a bunch of TSA Thugs on the payroll I'm not so sure your predictions will come true.

Things like this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O5kCL...layer_embedded continue to happen and TSA Managers seem unable to take control of the problem. Problems like the BDO issue at JFK, and I'm sure that problem is not limited to JFK, discredits TSA in the most severe way. TSA has lost the public's trust. Without that trust the course forward for TSA is going to be hazardous.

cbn42

So are you saying that the contractors that manufacture the machines are the same as (or affiliated with) the contractors that provide screening through SPP?

chollie

Real encouraging to hear that the grope will change and get worse. I don't know how it could, but I trust you to know what you're talking about on this.

castrobenes

Nope. I have no idea who the SPP contractors are, and it would be silly to assume that the current contractors would be the ones if the program goes national.

I am saying that if you support the current screening procedures and believe that what is needed is better management, and you believe that contractors will provide that management, then you should support SPP.

If you support a greatly diminished federal role in aviation security, that is not what you will get with SPP. If you also support changes in screening procedures, that is also not a part of SPP. The introduction of contractors, who profit from federal involvement in aviation security, precludes those types of reform.

castro

castrobenes

I said that the flyertalk consensus of the new procedure is that it is worse. I didn't say it would actually be worse.

castro

chollie

I think it's a bit like the national elections. We know what we have with TSA now and there's just no sign of improvement; if anything, things are getting worse. SPP is still a bit of an unknown - maybe it will be better, maybe the same, hard to see how it could be worse because it will be under the oversight of the same agency that's so unpopular now. Federalization didn't professionalize the work force, but it is saddling the taxpayers with expensive federal benefits going forward.

Ultimately, I hold an errant screener responsible, his/her co-workers who refused to call him out for his misconduct equally responsible, and the management chain who sets the tone and refuses to address the problems most responsible of all (and this is not a criticism leveled at you personally).

I think it's hard to defend the mess EWR has become, and it seems to me that it's a failure of will or competence at the management level that allows it to continue to be a problem airport. You may disagree - if so, I'd like to know where you think the blame lies.

Now whenever I fly, because I am an 'involuntary medical opt-out' (physically unable to use the AIT), I get hands in my pants and shirt and between my legs every single time I fly - along with struggling to keep an eye on my bags without generating retaliation from the screeners. I can't say I find it very encouraging going forward when you post that the gropes will not only persist, they will get worse.

And honestly? I don't scare easily, but what happened at Fayetteville did scare me.

halls120

Contractors didn't make the decision to deploy those useless machines. Your bosses did. That you don't understand this basic fact suggests you are truly clueless as to how the federal government works, or are simply not interested is a rational discussion of this issue.

Good move on your part, because it is an indefensible policy.

Wow. You are proud of the fact that your agency perpetrates a massive fraud upon the traveling public every day? That it was created under false pretenses, that it continues to operate under false pretenses, shredding the Constitution as it does?

Must be pretty strong kool aid they dole out at your union meetings.

chollie

With all due respect (sincerely), you are using almost exactly the same language another TSO used here when gleefully posting about the 'changes' to come when the AITs were introduced and the wands went away. His point, of course, was that from the pax perspective, it would be worse, but from the TSOs perspective, it would be better. I don't think pas discontent with the new procedures has been limited to a few disgruntled folks on this forum.

Walk in my shoes for a moment (not at the checkpoint, of course). I already get a full-body grope every time I fly, rarely performed with any degree of respect or 'professionalism' (and I've gotten pat-downs at airports around the world - I use the word 'grope' because it is markedly more invasive than anything I've experienced elsewhere). (On one notable occasion when the grope was actually performed without undue invasiveness and I tried to provide feedback on that particular screener, management prevented me from doing so). You defend this practice as acceptable and predict changes that will be regarded as an improvement? But that won't be welcomed here?

Color me skeptical.

chollie

I think it's no coincidence that the former head of TSA publishes a book saying that the lga restrictions should be abolished and TSA HQ's immediate reaction is renewed attention to lga enforcement.

Perhaps someone could tell me why taxpayers are wasting all this money on large screen TVs, expensive taped loops and outdated signs (at boondoggle contractor prices) if they are ineffective.

And they are ineffective, or there wouldn't be a need for this renewed attention to lga's. And if the problem is that the TSOs have been lax, well, how is that the fault of the pax? Why aren't managers and TSOs being disciplined for supporting such laxness? Why is TSA taking a punitive approach against pax instead?

castrobenes

I think that the federal employee benefits and employee management are strong arguments. I will counter that under SPP that the contractor and TSA will point fingers at one another, and observers have not said that any of the SPP airports are that different than TSA.


I haven't been to EWR, so I can't comment on it specifically.

However I agree that the responsibility for TSA's problems is with the organization. To the extent that any employee within the organization doesn't take ownership of problems, they are part of the problem.

I don't believe discipline is the solution to problems. However I do believe that you can't find the solution unless misbehavior is dealt with appropriately. It's hard to keep good employees if you let poor employees become the norm. As a manager, I have fired employees.

This is not the place to share my management philosophy, but let me assure you that I don't tolerate garbage in the workplace.

castro

chollie

Too bad I never fly through your airport.

I mean that.

castrobenes

Maybe the confusion here is my fault. I don't know about any potential procedural changes. I was making a prediction that a pat-down change will happen not telling you that I know anything about one that is actually planned.

You seem to be arguing about the intrusiveness about a hypothetical procedural change that hasn't even been planned yet, which would be absurd.

In terms of your last comment, I believe everyone should be treated with respect. It is unacceptable to treat anyone with rudeness for whatever reason that they get a pat-down.

castro

castrobenes

When you read this, move your finger very slowly so that you can understand. I am not absolving (hint-that means excusing) TSA leadership from any responsibility for installing the AIT.

I am arguing that decision took place in an atmosphere only made possible because contractors were ready to sell them the machines. Remember SPP does not remove the AIT.

Concentrate real hard here because you're almost there... The contractors profit (they make money) by selling services to the government. Historically (that means in the past) contractors have had influence over the government officials that purchase their services.

If you're goal is to reduce the federal role in airport screening, adding contractors into the process prevents (stops) that from happening.





This is exactly what I said verbatim...good summary skills

I am not eligible to join the union, wouldn't join if I could, and don't support the AFGE.

castro