|
The web site is out of date.
Who would have guessed that? |
Originally Posted by petaluma1
(Post 21255016)
I found that to be confusing also. The ZIP code hasn't been good since 2008 yet it wasn't until March of 2012 that Pistole signed the "technical amendment."
Just another example of TSA inefficiency. |
Originally Posted by Tika1505
(Post 21221625)
Logic? You expect logic from a group who have not read a book since high school? .
My research here and other places indicates that TSA makes up its own rules according to it's own whim at its own convenience. . . The SSSS designation happens without rhyme or reason, and there is nothing you can do about it except be victimized by it. Just be grateful that your daughter was not maimed, bloodied and permanently scarred as I was. . The most critical thing in my research is that TSA is not only clever, but motivated to keep their upper echelons from knowing what is going on under their watch. It only makes sense. When the lower echelons violate their own policy, it makes a bad mark on their own performance review which in turn affects their own promotions and pay raises etc. It is absolutely logical: No one can fix something if they don't know it's broken! And unless you rase _ _ _ _, the people with the power to do something don't know that something is wrong.. . According to what I have researched, TSA may not separate a MINOR child from his/her parent. Period. End of discussion. If they said that you could not be with your 13 year old daughter then they are in violation and you need to raise _ _ _ _ about it. The difference between the 12 and 13 is in the invasiveness of the "enhanced pat down" also known as sexual assault every where in the USA except TSA.. Also inquire as to the filing of criminal charges against them for kidnapping your child and holding her against your wishes and away from your protection. You won't get anywhere with it, but it will cost them money and take their time, and somehow get into their database. . . Again - the impossible - if enough people raise enough _ _ _ _ about their mistreatment of us, the greater likelihood of someone in Congress getting the message that we're not going to take their abuse of power any more. Their only mission is to search for weapons, explosives, and incendiaries, and if that has been exceeded by their actions - according to the narrative that you gave, then you have cause. Demand the name and contact number of the Federal Securities Director at that airport (and send me a copy because I am doing my best to compile a data base for that.) COMPLAIN! COMPLAIN! COMPLAIN! Don't sit still and let these bullies continue not to abide their own operations manual. Once you get the name of the FSD at that airport, the form for his/her e-mail is Firstname . Lastname @ TSA . DHS. Gov. It is likely is that a paper letter will get more attention than an e-mail, but expect them to give you the wrong address at least 3 or 4 times, and don't send it to the airport because the airport will simply return it as undeliverable. Still, an e-mail will give you a record in your out-box of having contacted them. Also write about it to the TSA ombudsman. We need a few million more people complaining loud and long and clear about TSA's school-yard-bully attitude and intimidation and endlessly exceeding their authority, terrorizing little kids and turning our travel experiences into a travel nightmare. Your help would be truly appreciated by everyone who flies. |
Originally Posted by gsoltso
(Post 21256804)
I will not venture to speak for HQs reasoning on the way things are set up on the site, however, it could be something as simple as tech orientation. With the current electronic capabilities, they may simply have gotten away from snail mail as a matter of habit instead of a distinct attempt to keep folks from communicating. I have not seen an active discouragement of feedback from passengers - but I work at a smaller airport, so that may be the reason for that.
I think that reporting something anonymously is something that we should provide for the public, some of the most constructive feedback comes when there is no publicity involved with the person providing the feedback. There are electronic ways to provide anon feedback, but it seems that the snail mail route may have been overlooked or underestimated - of course, I could be completely wrong about that! ( Based on comments I've seen on this forum and others from TSOs, I would suggest that perhaps it isn't just pax who might want the ability to report something anonymously without fear of retaliation. An airport worker who has to pass through the checkpoint every day might hesitate to report something as 'minor' as TSOs clowning or using inappropriate language instead of being focused on the job. I have also read complaints by TSOs that when they reported problems, they were sometimes retaliated against by their own management. Who cares what the source is if the problem checks out? I understand the argument about needing 'contact' info (apparently, on theft reports, this even includes gender and age) to verify details, etc. At the same time, I understand the very real fear of any complainant or 'informer' or 'whistle blower'. |
Originally Posted by eyecue
(Post 21258017)
=
. There is no such thing as an "enhanced pat down" . Lets see, so if TSA is tax funded, whose money is being used for your self admitted excercise in futility? . I dont believe that there are even 1 million disparagers out there. You may have read about TSA implementing enhanced pat downs as part of our layered approach to security. ..... Passengers who opt out of enhanced screening such as advanced imaging technology will receive an equivalent level of screening to include a thorough pat-down. Remember, you can always request to be screened in a private area. If a passenger cannot or chooses not to be screened by imaging technology or a walk-through metal detector, the passenger will be screened using a thorough patdown procedure instead. November 2010 enhanced screening procedures[edit source | editbeta] Beginning in November 2010, TSA added new enhanced screening procedures. Passengers are required to choose between an enhanced patdown, allowing TSOs to more thoroughly check areas on the body such as waistbands, groin, and inner thigh.[38] or instead to be imaged by the use of a full body scanners (that is, either backscatter X-ray or millimeter wave detection machines) in order to fly. |
Originally Posted by chollie
(Post 21258084)
(bolding mine)
Based on comments I've seen on this forum and others from TSOs, I would suggest that perhaps it isn't just pax who might want the ability to report something anonymously without fear of retaliation. An airport worker who has to pass through the checkpoint every day might hesitate to report something as 'minor' as TSOs clowning or using inappropriate language instead of being focused on the job. I have also read complaints by TSOs that when they reported problems, they were sometimes retaliated against by their own management. Who cares what the source is if the problem checks out? I understand the argument about needing 'contact' info (apparently, on theft reports, this even includes gender and age) to verify details, etc. At the same time, I understand the very real fear of any complainant or 'informer' or 'whistle blower'. |
Originally Posted by eyecue
(Post 21258017)
And how is it that you have come across with such a sweeping stereotype?
What research would that be? How objective was it? . There is a known profile and factors that lead to this designation. . TSA officers salary is frozen and has been for years. There is no such thing as an "enhanced pat down" . Lets see, so if TSA is tax funded, whose money is being used for your self admitted excercise in futility? I dont believe that there are even 1 million disparagers out there. |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 7:24 am. |
This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.