Sequester Security Nightmare?
 

How bad is it going to be this weekend? The administration is threatening to take it out on us fliers. Janet suggested waits as long as 4 hours!!

Maybe I'm wrong, but I am not buying into that hype.

Seriously, on Friday everything will be fine but by Saturday AM, so many TSA clerks are without jobs that the wait times are four hours? I guess we are talking about the government and TSA in particular, so anything is possible, but that scenario would be intentional and not due to any mandatory budget cut.

I'm thinking of adjusting my schedule to be safe...thinking that very early on sunday morning and the redeye for east travel because those times are generally best for security. But maybe that would backfire and those times would be when the cuts are most dramatic.

You've got me convinced. I'm going to adjust my schedule, too. To a time when the govt isn't run by self serving scheisters and the media isn't staffed by panic merchants. ;)

Personally, I'd love to see this. Nothing will turn the sheep against the wolves faster than messing with their timetable. The public opinion of them, already on a par with IRS Auditors, will sink down to congressperson levels.

Seeing TSA go down due to sequester will be analogous to watching Al Capone, after years of getting off on murder and mayhem, going down to tax evasion. ;)

Remember, any time your "security" experience exceeds 10 minutes for any reason, contact the TSA Complaint Line: 1-866-289-9673. Don't accept any excuses, don't allow yourself to be directed to the useless blog/blogger. File a formal complaint. Name any malingerer(s) who contribute to your delay.

Then, in light of the sequester, contact your elected representatives and suggest a solution: 100% defund TSA, return security of airports and airlines to... airports and airlines. It's time for the federal government to get the hell out of the equation.

Another government agency I know of is requiring employees to take one day each per pay period off. That is no more than would be expected to be on vacation.

If TSA or any other agency can't handle the impact of this minor event then I would suggest the managers are not competent.

Obama and his puppets are just trying to scare the populace and gain support for higher taxes and more spending without doing anything about the excessive spending being done by government.

You can't borrow your way out of debt.

I think there's some lead time involved before federal agencies can furlough employees. (30 days?)

Of course, every department will be motivated to concentrate the impact as much as possible on critical (e.g., ATC), sympathetic (vaccines for kids), or public-facing (TSA checkpoints, but not check baggage screening) services to make the cuts seem terrible/draconian. TSA's case may be unique because they are uniquely hated and the public, though probably not the media, may be more inclined to blame Pistole/Nappy instead of Congressional Republicans for problems at airports. So *maybe* TSA will behave and just cut down on standing around, pointless gate screenings, etc.

My understanding is that these "cuts" still keep us at or above 2006 spending levels, and really are cuts in growth not cuts in spending. So if everybody were being honest, things would get not worse than they were in 2006. In a family of real people with real jobs who pay real taxes, a "pay cut" means your pay went down in absolute dollars (not inflation adjusted). In the government, a "cut" means you didn't get as much of a raise as you wanted. :rolleyes:

If there is one thing the public masses are, its impatient. People don't like to wait in long lines. I see so many people go through the NOS with smiles on their faces without a care in the world about the rights they are giving up... but if they have to wait a long time for something, they'll be pissed. When I debate body scanners with people who don't fly a lot or aren't very informed, I don't get anywhere with any arguments about safety or our personal rights as U.S. citizens. But when I bring up that the WTMD is faster, that always gets a good response.

Looks like the scare tactics are out in full force about this sequester. Back in the mid 2000's, the airports seemed to be fine with less funding and WTMD's only. Yet somehow now the sky will fall if we stop adding to the money being given to the TSA? Bunch of BS. I've never seen less than 5 TSA employees at a checkpoint doing nothing, and usually its 10 or more. If they all actually worked, the lines wouldn't be so bad.

I believe most TSOs are part time. Their hours can be reduced rapidly.

Of course, I could be wrong. Someone with more knowledge may want to chime in.

Nothing would please me (and others) more than seeing TSA employees' hours reduced rapidly and completely. :)

Hit the Road

Beat It

+1, but I don't have a flight until the end of March.

I've stopped flying altogether until this farce is thrown out on its arse, so, long lines ahoy mateys! ;)

There's a shocker.


Actually, you can. The NZ & Oz governments did exactly that in the 1970's & 80's. It's an entirely feasible way to operate, although it requires more economic management skill than I'm willing to credit the US political system (because it basically doesn't function in any meaningful way.)

So, there will only be Hundreds Standing Around effective 3/1/13? Got it

So there will only be Hundreds Standing Around effective 3/1/13? No wonder the wait at the checkpoint is going to be ten times as long.

Taken Salary Away

If DHS is like the DOD, the first furlough will be sometime in late April. I do think that it depends on how each department implements their cutbacks. Good thing I am not flying anytime soon.

I'm sure the threat of death raining down upon us will rise dramatically. I'm so glad the FA's are there for our safety. :rolleyes:

^^ This.

I posted this in the other thread, so I'll paraphrase:

1) Contractors will feel it first, depending on the contract. Not sure whether MCI and SFO are contracted with TSA or the airports - if with TSA, then hit first.... if with the airports, then likely no effect.

2) The administration controls the personnel (absent direct laws mandating specific staffing). They can (and will) staff in a way that increases delays materially to make the other party look bad. It will backfire if there is documented evidence that they are deliberately reducing staffing to increase delays to make other party look bad. If, on the other hand, make the case that this is just in-kind fallout from the sequestration, it will in fact make the other party look bad. There's a fine line, and make no mistake that they will make it just bad enough to make folks squeal but not so bad that they get blamed.

3) Expect it to hit pre-check first as the few folks that use that are considered "privileged" and are expected to wield the most influence on the hill. The lines are seen by the public as overstaffed relative to the numbers processed (that's the failing of the agency to approve enough folks, but that's also a different argument). The net effect will be to make the regular lines longer and delay folks.

4) From the Global Entry perspective, I'd still expect GE to function normally, though they may shut the expedited Customs function. Meaning you'll still save some time unless you get the X, but not as much as normal. I'd also expect longer Customs lines as I'd expect them to understaff the regular exits.

I think this is another overblown Y2K scare-mongering, from the usual "the sky is falling crowd."

Yes. The United States has serious budget problems. But with a $3.6 Trillion budget with $1.2 Trillion in pure deficit...that $0.1 Trillion in cuts brings the US to a halt is completely ludicrous. The emperor is a fascist. How about cut the unnecessary, unprecedented secret service support for all the WH staff--no other admin has done that, and the record numbers of double-simultaneous executive vacations? Where's that branch of government's share of the pain? At least Senator Rand Paul turned over 20% of his Congressman's budget back to the US Treasury. That's leadership. What about the other 99 Upper House reps and the 435 Lower House reps? Throw the bums out if they can't trim their own fat.

When I set up work for this week, my customer requested Monday-Wednesday. I flew in on Sunday and will return on Thursday. Any other time it would have been Monday in/Friday out.

Whew!

I get to watch this mess from the sidelines. No more flights until late March.

Government manpower cuts won't hit until April. That's when things will get interesting.

I agree - I can imagine on or about 03/01/13 - there will be local television media at IND showing angry flyers standing in long TSA lines: looking pissed.

Perhaps TSA could save the cost of a furloughed frontline screener or two by choosing to suspend Blogdad Bob instead. The latter makes no direct contribution to airline or pax safety and his insulting, condescending and dishonest blog posts are unlikely to be missed by many.

Or stop checking IDs.

Or stop checking BPs.

Or stop using the nudeoscope.

Or stop making passengers take off their shoes.

Or stop sexually assaulting passengers.

Or stop the idiocy over liquids.

So many things could be done that would keep the lines moving and have no or a positive effect on safety since there would be fewer employees with fewer distractions.

Or just ____can the entire TSA and give the responsibility for airport and airline security back to the airports and airlines.

Not "Or", Spiff. "And". ;)

My hope has been that this would mean that the TSA does not have money to purchase new body scanners for the airports that do not have them.

There is no reason that the cuts should result in any delays. The TSA could easily open up the metal detectors instead of using body scanners and could have the staff that normally performs gate checks, chat-downs, etc. open new lanes.

Unfortunately, the agency will likely try to make things painful for travelers. Any inconvenience caused will be artificial, and not a result of budget cuts, but a result of attempts to cause pain.

Think of this being a second show put on by the same people who put on the security theater.

None of this will happen. The TSA's won't stop hassling people because the likely outcome will be that absolutely nothing will happen. That will only show the American people how utterly useless they are.

Frankly, we could just pay all of the TSA people to stay home, and that would be a win all the way around -- they don't have to work for a paycheck and we don't have to get hassled.

On the flip side, this is a golden opportunity for them to make a big pitch to get more sheeple to sign up for GE & Pre-Check. Sequestration could turn out to be a big money-maker for DHS.

As a guy who is in the national security/first response business, the timing of the sequestration was not lost on me. It's a quiet disaster period and is generally a time when federal agencies prepare for the coming year by cutting costs anyway. We're past hurricane season, we're about 6-8 weeks from the big tornado/thunderstorm season, and, snowstorms are mostly a state & local problem. The only things that could throw a monkey wrench into the political machine would be a major west coast earthquake or a west coast volcano that decides to blow its top. Both could happen in Alaska, but there aren't that many people up there to take care of.

That's where things get messy, generally title 5 employees have to get their 30 days notice for furloughs... but... TSA likes to highlight that TSOs are exempt employees, so they may try to apply their policy: http://www.tsa.gov/video/pdfs/mds/TS...NAL_090515.pdf which only requires 7 days notice.

So 3/1/13 will be like any other day.... it'll be 3/8/13 or April when the staffing would be affected.

We may be assuming they would follow procedure. All they have to do is not schedule enough people and when things back up scream "Sequester!"

Honesty and openness are not two of their redeeming qualities.

they'r blowing smoke!

Answer this question:

Is it within the administration's mode of operation to create havoc so they can blame it on the opposition?

If yes, then there will be problems. If no, they are blowing smoke.

If the sequester continues, I will be greatly surprised and pleased if the administration with the cooperation of the media do not maximize the perception of the problems just for political effects. It is what politicians of both parties usually do.

If even then. If the local media is correct, there's a 30-day notice period before furloughs start, and there is an appeal process. Headline on WTOP today was "Appealing your furlough". http://www.wtop.com/1303/3234553/Fur...-your-furlough


This would also be a perfect time for local airports to propose contract screeners with the city/airlines paying for the screeners. The Administration would oppose it, but doing so would make the Administration look bad. Since the cities feed at the Federal trough, it's not likely that they would push for contract screeners.
No question that the timing was carefully set for political reasons.

Yes. Ultimately the Administration is responsible for implementation. They can implement it in a way that amplifies the public impact.
Your last point is dead-on. As an example, the media is focusing on the Administration's demand for higher taxes on the wealthy, but completely ignoring the fact that they already got higher taxes. The media will focus on the inconvenience to the public, with air travel being a most visible sign.... and that's been particularly true for February, which is sweeps (ratings) month. If this drags on past April, we get into sweeps again....

The bolded bit - I think you have an inference problem with your statement there.

What is the $10 fee per roundtrip ticket for? I thought the airline passengers themselves paid for TSA.

I'm not so certain ... given that (a) the original idea was that the sequester wouldn't happen at all, and (b) much of US government action appears to succeed on the basis of dumb luck, I'd be much more likely to believe that the timing of the sequester was accidental, rather than intentional ...

Indeed. Whatever percentage of the screening operation that's covered by the fees should not be touched by the sequester. Unless the fees also drop in lockstep with the budget? Nah.