Daytona Beach News-Journal: TSA workers at DAB get more training after complaint
 

Another "flying with medical conditions" story, this one out of DAB:

Daytona Beach News-Journal:
TSA workers at Daytona Beach (DAB) get more training after complaint
Published: Friday, May 17, 2013 at 8:07 p.m.
Last Modified: Friday, May 17, 2013 at 11:07 p.m.

A short quote:

Robi Mandell, who has multiple sclerosis and lupus, suddenly found herself arguing with a trio of Transportation Security Administration workers. For 20 minutes, she said they repeatedly told her she couldn't get out of her wheelchair and walk through the metal detector – even though she told them several times she was capable of doing that with a cane.

"I've never in my life been spoken to as indignantly and rudely as I was that day," the 57-year-old Mandell recalled in a phone interview from her home near Ogden.

Mandell shared an email that she received May 13 from an official with the TSA, the federal agency that has focused on aviation security since it was formed after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

"I have spoken with individuals at (Daytona Beach International Airport) who are familiar with your screening experience," wrote Zach Bromer, an official with TSA's Disability Branch in Virginia. "They have explained to me that (Daytona Beach airport) management is aware that your screening was not handled as sensitively as it could have been. They have already taken corrective action with the transportation security officers that you mentioned in your complaint, providing them with additional training on screening passengers with disabilities."

This is rather interesting as the TSA most often tries to force people out of their wheelchairs and into the Nude Body Scanner.

Seems like the screeners just wanted an opportunity to grope this poor woman.

She needs to hire a lawyer.

The full article adds even more disturbing details. Her husband had her meds. She got upset while all this back-and-forth was going on and asked for her meds and her inhaler and was refused access to either because she hadn't been screened yet.

TSA needs to fire screeners who misapply procedures. No retraining or second chances. Train them right the first time around and demand proper performance.

Agreed 100% ^^^

I'm surprised it wasn't her fault -- and it might yet be by the time this goes viral and Pissy has to respond.

Give Blogdad Bob a little time. It is the weekend, you know. By Monday Wednesday, I'm sure he can spin her into terrorist status while exalting the innocent, brave little re-trainees who stood between this woman and another 9/11.

I dislike "zero-tolerance" statements like these, for a number of reasons. Does the fault lie with the screener(s) who should've known better? Does the fault lie with the trainer who did not train the screener properly? Does the fault lie with a system that imposes a thousand different rules on screeners that make it impossible for any screener to know what the rules are on any given day at a checkpoint (to say nothing of the passengers who must comply with them)?

Don't get me wrong --- the problem lies with TSA. But assigning blame within TSA is a little trickier.

It would be easier just dissolve the agency. Blame, shame.

If I, the pax, am expected to know and follow whatever the rules are on a particular day, even though the website is always out-of-date or doesn't apply, each screener/checkpoint/airport can apply the rules in different ways, the signage at the airport isn't necessarily what actually takes place at the airport - if all pax, including first-time flyers and non-English speakers, are expected to know and immediately comply with all 'rules' at the checkpoint without any training or reliable reference to consult, then I don't think it's too much to hold anyone in a TSA uniform accountable for knowing all rules at all times.

TSA established the 'zero tolerance' (including zero tolerance for common sense) at the checkpoint. If it applies to pax, even when it seems unfair or doesn't make any sense at all, then why shouldn't it apply equally to TSA employees, even when it seems unfair or doesn't make any sense at all?

If a TSO is disciplined and threatened with suspension or firing over an incident like this, he/she has ample opportunity to plead his/her case if he/she thinks the blame belongs elsewhere.

Furthermore, any TSO, at any time, can summon someone one level up in the food chain to verify any procedure that is being challenged. Contrary to what some TSOs would probably like us to believe, 'everyone' doesn't question or challenge TSOs on procedure. These TSOs could have immediately requested assistance from a CSR (?) - the individual responsible for dealing with situations like this. If one is not on site, then a manager should know the HQ contact information.

No more excuses.

Nope. It makes it much easier. Fire the lot of them.

I agree as well. Some screeners should be fired. They doesn't have a chance. I wasn't too ashamed for what they did to her. This is not excused. It's unacceptable!

Because 'zero tolerance' doesn't apply at the checkpoint towards passengers --- despite what we might think.

We've seen any number of reports here where, when there's a conflict between passenger and screener (usually because of TSA's unwritten rules), the screener will sometimes say "well, we'll let it go just this once, but you'd better get your act together next time". Usually at that point our commentary here is focused on the arbitrary (and obnoxious) nature of TSA enforcement --- but it couldn't be arbitrary if there wasn't some sort of discretion involved.

It was a 'zero tolerance' attitude by TSA that led to Nipple-Gate. In that
situation, we were all howling that TSA needed to have the 'common sense' to recognize when its own procedures made no sense.

'Zero tolerance' and 'common sense' are antonyms. If we're going to choose between them, I'll take 'common sense'.

^

So we can study the problem forever and still have the same mess next year that we have today.

Bottom line an employee goes through training then a period of OJT for certification purposes. At that point the employee is responsible for their actions.

Of course the best path forward would be to get government out of airport and transportation security.