pat down for milk? and bonus tsa bozo
 

Flying through ORD today, two things happened:

1. My young son had a sealed chocolate milk
box with us. I declared it, and they said
ok, but then you have to have a pat down.
How is this anything other than
punishment, particularly since
in the "sterile" [sic] area, they were
giving me the choice to
or not (and lose DS's milk if not)...?

2. Bozo agent objected to my booties;
was overruled by another agent.

ORD TSA is routinely the worst. In BOS
yesterday, two milk boxes for DS and they
swabbed them, no groping.

--LG

Presuming the milk box was over 100ml., how about thanking the Officer for letting you take it through the checkpoint when it's a prohibited item?

No good deed goes unpunished.

Uhhm... food and beverages for young children are permitted.
http://www.tsa.gov/traveling-formula...milk-and-juice

Let's not debate who's the worst. But file a complaint about this, maybe it will actually accomplish some good:
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nati...icle-1.1766297

The TSA employee obviously doesn't know the rules and neither do you.

The screener is a clerk, not an officer, and as others have pointed out, you obviously don't know the rules.

:) Thx for the link. Definitely did not mean to debate who is the worst; I was just frustrated. IME ORD collects screeners who make my life personally difficult. Often I bring back interesting gourmet cheese from this store in Chicago that I like, and they *always* need to search my bag when they see them [such that I now carry a dedicated tote-bag for the purpose of holding cheese and being searched], but more than that, they give me attitude, like more than once I've been asked, "why do you need so much cheese". It is crazy-making.

ORD is also where that other officer grabbed my ponytail from the back with no warning (I think I posted about it here on FT and some allies described it as verging on assault).

The more I fly, the more I see real variation in training, politeness, quality, etc. of the TSA employees depending on time/date/location.

--LG

So by now you know this is not correct. But your post is concerning me in another way - suppose I had a duly "prohibited item" and some goon let me take it through, anyway - this is a good deed according to you? How is it even legal?

--LG

I've been patiently awaiting the day I get a friendly TSA groping.

Sucks OP. Sorry :td:

Chocolate Milk ≠ Formula, Breast Milk and/or Juice though.

Chocolate milk is still milk, and milk for young children is allowed.

When you come up with dairy milk that isn't breast milk, you've found a non-mammaries' source for "milk" that isn't breast milk. ;)

The problem with the TSA is that it doesn't even know how to operate according to laws and regulations where terms are appropriately defined; then again, the TSA has a problem with even operating in a generally consistent manner. One of the only things about the TSA that is consistent is that it is inconsistent; and it can't even properly run a glossary.

:rolleyes:

It's not so much as prohibited as it is restricted in ways that may be inconsistently applied -- but that is sort of a given as this is about the dog and pony show that the TSA operates.

Thanks! :) Yes, re the formula/etc. - I contacted TSA a few months ago, before a different [uneventful] trip.

The situation is that my son is allergic to corn and soy, which means that almost every food we could buy post-security would send him into anaphylaxis (yes I have an epipen but hope not to use it in the airport!). So I asked and was told that any "juice-box sized item" of that nature, for a young child, would be acceptable.

I can make up a whole day's food for him with almost all solids, but the lack of a non-corn/soy-ingredient drink with more calories than water (he is also failure-to-thrive, needs to gain weight, so isn't supposed to drink too much straight water) - was difficult without some kind of milk boxes. Most juice boxes have ascorbic acid derived from corn.

I specifically asked if I needed a doctor's note and was told that a chocolate milk or regular milk box was in the category of a "juice box" and shouldn't be a problem - which it normally isn't.

I also have a kind of visceral problem having to explain my son's detailed medical history to a TSA goon whose only goal is to humiliate me. But that's just me. ;)

--LG

And I'll stop you right there. At that point, your son's chocolate milk is not a beverage for a child. It's a medically-necessary liquid, at which point a different set of rules applies:

http://www.tsa.gov/traveler-informat...essary-liquids

According to that site, such liquids in excess of the 100ml limit may necessitate additional screening, which might include a patdown.

Of course, it is regrettable that some airports perform the patdown and others do not, and there's no way for an ordinary passenger to know what the proper expectation should be.

So, right, that's what I thought. Which is why I asked TSA and also called the airline months ago, i.e. needing a doctor's note etc. - however they said it "counted" as a juice box.

It's still very unclear to me how a pat-down after the fact, which might or might not be accepted (because they said I could leave the milk and not be groped), could be of any security use.

Are they imagining that after scoping/detecting me electronically, that there is something pat-able that would be in any way connected to the milk box? And that I coerced some random little boy to accompany me cheerfully and pretend the milk box was his?

The box was an obviously-commercially-sealed item, too.

Honestly, the whole liquid ban is so stupid to begin with, but I wasn't even challenging their little rule in general, but complying with it! Maybe I should have brought the email answers from before, but then that could also look like talking back to my TSA superiors and get me more groping ;)

I'm bewildered by all of this, unless I conclude that the pat-down is a punishment for someone using a granted exception, administered by TSA goons at some locations where they take this kind of attitude.

--LG

The airline's advice on such matters really doesn't matter much, as they have little-to-no say in how TSA conducts its operations at the checkpoint.

Regrettably, you've stumbled into the area frequently discussed here: the inconsistency exhibited between the TSA corporate office (where you presumably called) and the checkpoint you entered, or even between two different checkpoints. TSA chooses to state that it varies its procedures from checkpoint to checkpoint in order to make it more difficult for terrorists to know what to expect at a checkpoint. Of course, (a) that same inconsistency makes it difficult for ordinary passengers to know what to expect, and (b) cynics claim that TSA uses "varied procedures" simply to cover up for its poor performance in executing its own procedures.

Clearly they think so. Somehow, whatever dangerous substances you introduced into the "milk" would have left evidence on your person. Or, perhaps, the "milk" contains ignition fuel and you're carrying the detonators on your body. Or ... well, your imagination is probably as good as mine.

Terrorists world-wide are not above using children as weapons. It's much more likely that you (in the eyes of the TSA) are a suicide bomber, and more than willing to take your actual son with out on your suicide mission. So your son's cheerful demeanor really isn't relevant to the security issue at hand.

Which could've been resealed after you introduced your contraband into the box.

It wouldn't be the first time. Of course, it's not unique to the TSA; there are plenty of times and places where employees choose to enforce their rules to the letter in order to punish a client, or to register a protest against superior authority, or any number of other reasons.

The TSA rules don't say chocolate milk for toddlers and infants is excluded. Rather it says milk, regardless of type, is allowed based on consumer.

TSA HQ is inconsistent with itself.

Some TSA HQ policies are designed in such a way that TSA screeners can't possibly always abide by all TSA policies concurrently applicable for a given situation and not violate one or more TSA policies while attempting to do it all.

The whole mess of a situation with inconsistency at the TSA is a product of the TSA failing to follow the K.I.S.S. principles, operational principles which are even more necessary when dealing with a distributed workforce: (a) whose actions aren't technically constrained by automated controls to prevent deviation; and (b) whose competency levels are going to gravitate toward being mediocre even at best.

The blame for the TSA mess and mess-ups is best assigned to the top. Unfortunate as some of us find it, the country has got the TSA which the country deserves.