"...a severe pat down"
Oct 23, 2012 | 8:11 pm
#31
Join Date: Nov 2008
Programs: AA EXP, 2mm; Hilton Diamond
Posts: 325
Oct 25, 2012 | 3:40 pm
#32
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 456
About half the time, I am instructed to take a seat while they run ETD on the gloves, and then they come back and pat down the bottom of my feet while I am seated. But I have noticed this occurring less frequently as time goes on.
My experience is exactly the opposite. Generally when I try to walk through a WTMD en route to an opt-out, they stop me and re-direct me to a separate gate - intentionally preventing me from going through the WTMD.
I don't understand the "logic" or purpose of this maneuver. The only thing I can guess is that somehow, they have to designate WTMD = NOS = pat-down = equally valid screening methods, and somehow, letting me walk though the WTMD but still requiring a patdown would expose the fallacy.
Perhaps TSORon could comment?
My experience is exactly the opposite. Generally when I try to walk through a WTMD en route to an opt-out, they stop me and re-direct me to a separate gate - intentionally preventing me from going through the WTMD.
I don't understand the "logic" or purpose of this maneuver. The only thing I can guess is that somehow, they have to designate WTMD = NOS = pat-down = equally valid screening methods, and somehow, letting me walk though the WTMD but still requiring a patdown would expose the fallacy.
Perhaps TSORon could comment?Quite simply, it's just math. Every half hour, numbers have to be compiled then sent up the chain from there. The AITs count automatically, as do the WTMDs. OTOH, small children/infants, wheelchair-bound passengers and opt-outs have to be counted manually. Management at airports that have opt-outs go through the WTMD on their way to their patdown have to go through the added step of subtracting those opt-outs from the WTMD tally. It's just as simple as that.
Oct 25, 2012 | 4:09 pm
#33
Original Poster
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: New York, NY
Programs: DL Gold. UA Silver, Marriott Gold, Hilton Diamond, Hyatt (Lifetime Diamond downgraded to Explorist)
Posts: 6,777
While this does sound like a logical theorem I don't see why this would make a TSO be so actively against a person going through when it can be see done at various checkpoints. The lack of consistency just punches a hole in the thoery. Do you have inside info on this? if so..then awesome we have an answer.
Quite simply, it's just math. Every half hour, numbers have to be compiled then sent up the chain from there. The AITs count automatically, as do the WTMDs. OTOH, small children/infants, wheelchair-bound passengers and opt-outs have to be counted manually. Management at airports that have opt-outs go through the WTMD on their way to their patdown have to go through the added step of subtracting those opt-outs from the WTMD tally. It's just as simple as that.
Oct 25, 2012 | 5:06 pm
#34
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 456
While this does sound like a logical theorem I don't see why this would make a TSO be so actively against a person going through when it can be see done at various checkpoints. The lack of consistency just punches a hole in the thoery. Do you have inside info on this? if so..then awesome we have an answer.
Oct 25, 2012 | 5:15 pm
#35
Original Poster
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: New York, NY
Programs: DL Gold. UA Silver, Marriott Gold, Hilton Diamond, Hyatt (Lifetime Diamond downgraded to Explorist)
Posts: 6,777
Well thanks for the info. The more we know the better.
I can't speak for other TSOs at other airports, but here - where opt-outs don't go through the WTMD - we could get into trouble if we allowed an opt-out to go through. The reason being is that it would cause that person to be counted twice. It's all a matter of numbers. This is also the reason why different airports with AITs allow passengers through the WTMD with different frequencies. The tally for the AITs have to be at a certain level before passenger traffic can pass through the WTMD. While at some airports "choose your own lane" and alternating lanes is sufficient, at some it's not. That's why you sometimes see a back up of people waiting for their turn at the AIT while the WTMD sits idle.
Oct 25, 2012 | 5:44 pm
#36
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Minneapolis: DL DM charter 2.3MM
Programs: A3*Gold, SPG Plat, HyattDiamond, MarriottPP, LHW exAccess, ICI, Raffles Amb, NW PE MM, TWA Gold MM
Posts: 102,617
While I agree with you that a blade could injure somebody, the TSA is supposed to be concerned with objects that could bring down the plane, not a blade that could cause a cut needing stitches or an eight ball. Obviously, mission creep has made the airport experience that much more unpleasant.
Mike
Mike
Oct 25, 2012 | 7:47 pm
#37
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 105
So it is not about security?
Not about security but numbers.
false
This is also the reason why different airports with AITs allow passengers through the WTMD with different frequencies.
The tally for the AITs have to be at a certain level before passenger traffic can pass through the WTMD.
Oct 25, 2012 | 8:39 pm
#38
Join Date: Nov 2008
Programs: AA EXP, 2mm; Hilton Diamond
Posts: 325
If what myrgirl posted is indeed false and you have a source or definitive information you can cite that would educate us, by all means, please do so -- actual, correct information is extremely welcome. But I don't see the point of being rude to someone who is offering information without actually refuting it.
Oct 25, 2012 | 10:27 pm
#39
Join Date: Jul 2006
Programs: United
Posts: 2,710
If what myrgirl posted is indeed false and you have a source or definitive information you can cite that would educate us, by all means, please do so -- actual, correct information is extremely welcome. But I don't see the point of being rude to someone who is offering information without actually refuting it.
Oct 26, 2012 | 7:07 am
#40
Join Date: Feb 2011
Programs: AA, UA, Marriott Gold
Posts: 349
Only reason that I would say it is false is that we were assured that the AIT would never be used for primary screening. So if a required number of people have to go through the AIT before people are allowed through the WTMD then we were lied to and I believe that my government would never lie to me.
If the minimum number of people going through AIT is set to some % of anticipated total traffic that is less than 50%, even if the management tells the front line to make sure you "hit the numbers" before offering the WTMD, at the end of the day (or half hour as it may be) so long as the numbers show 51% of people using something other than AIT, they could say it isn't primary since it isn't the majority.
Kind of like how the bank front loads the interest payments on my car loan. At the beginning of the term, I pay much more towards interest than principle, even though the "percentage rate" is fixed. The end result is still what is on paper.
Oct 26, 2012 | 7:38 am
#41
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Baltimore, MD USA
Programs: Southwest Rapid Rewards. Tha... that's about it.
Posts: 4,430
Well, sort of.
If the minimum number of people going through AIT is set to some % of anticipated total traffic that is less than 50%, even if the management tells the front line to make sure you "hit the numbers" before offering the WTMD, at the end of the day (or half hour as it may be) so long as the numbers show 51% of people using something other than AIT, they could say it isn't primary since it isn't the majority.
Kind of like how the bank front loads the interest payments on my car loan. At the beginning of the term, I pay much more towards interest than principle, even though the "percentage rate" is fixed. The end result is still what is on paper.
If the minimum number of people going through AIT is set to some % of anticipated total traffic that is less than 50%, even if the management tells the front line to make sure you "hit the numbers" before offering the WTMD, at the end of the day (or half hour as it may be) so long as the numbers show 51% of people using something other than AIT, they could say it isn't primary since it isn't the majority.
Kind of like how the bank front loads the interest payments on my car loan. At the beginning of the term, I pay much more towards interest than principle, even though the "percentage rate" is fixed. The end result is still what is on paper.
Oct 26, 2012 | 7:52 am
#42
Join Date: Feb 2011
Programs: AA, UA, Marriott Gold
Posts: 349
According to myrgirl, the "numbers" are sent twice an hour. If that happens at :00 and :30, it doesn't mean you would never get WTMD early in the morning, but that you wouldn't get them at :01 or :31, but would be more likely to at :25 and :55.
Oct 26, 2012 | 1:22 pm
#43
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 456
Originally Posted by myrgirl
This is also the reason why different airports with AITs allow passengers through the WTMD with different frequencies.
Originally Posted by FatherAbraham
Not about security but numbers.
Originally Posted by myrgirl
The tally for the AITs have to be at a certain level before passenger traffic can pass through the WTMD.
Originally Posted by FatherAbraham
false
Oct 26, 2012 | 1:29 pm
#44
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 456
Interesting info -- thanks a lot for sharing it. It sounds like you're a TSO, and if so, I hope you ignore the rudeness of many here and continue to contribute. There are plenty of us here that appreciate the info you might have to offer, even if we don't appreciate the policies your management enacts.
Originally Posted by UshuaiaHammerfest
If what myrgirl posted is indeed false and you have a source or definitive information you can cite that would educate us, by all means, please do so -- actual, correct information is extremely welcome. But I don't see the point of being rude to someone who is offering information without actually refuting it.
Oct 26, 2012 | 1:34 pm
#45
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 456
Only reason that I would say it is false is that we were assured that the AIT would never be used for primary screening. So if a required number of people have to go through the AIT before people are allowed through the WTMD then we were lied to and I believe that my government would never lie to me.