RadioGirl

I didn't dispute <redacted>'s claim that the TSA website says the official policy is that cremains are not to be opened. Of course it does. The existence of text on a website does not make something true in fact. For years the website said a Nexus card was a valid ID, while TSA clerks across the country refused to accept Nexus cards.

Let me put it more simply. I don't trust the TSA website to tell me what I would actually experience at a TSA checkpoint.
I think the simplest explanation is this: most TSOs don't treat other people's property as they would expect someone to treat theirs. Perhaps it's the experience at looking at thousands of suitcases and handbags and laptop bags every day until you stop understanding that to someone, every single handbag, every single suitcase is valuable and important.

I'm frequently told at checkpoints not to worry about keeping sight of my bags "because we've got cameras" they say, as the wave at the ceiling. Yet the security people don't leave THEIR handbags, wallets, cell phones or laptops sitting there on the checkpoint table, protected from theft by those magical cameras.
And the fact that it's reasonably rare - and that travelling with cremains is rarer still, yet we hear multiple events of TSA mishaps with cremains, suggests this is not a minor anomaly as TSA would like to claim. If (say) only 1 in 10,000 passengers travels with cremains, and 1 in 10 of those have problems with TSA, TSA will claim it's only 1 in 100,000 passengers affected, rather than admitting that people with cremains have 1 in 10 chance of problems.
You are still missing the point. You can put "more information" and "more information" and "more information" on the website/twitter/blog/whatever, but as long as it's untrustworthy, it doesn't matter how much information you post. First - and this is much harder than a few more pages of web text - you need to rebuild trust that what is on the website is what actually will happen at the checkpoint. As long as it's only "it's what's supposed to happen" or "it's what should have happened" or "unless the screener decides otherwise" or "I wouldn't have done it that way myself", no amount of additional information is going to fix things.
Aware of what - of what should have happened but didn't? Not helpful. Of what <redacted> would have done (but the TSA clerk at some airport didn't)? Not helpful.

Use the information in any claim of incorrect screening? Your colleagues do not, for the most part, deal well with passengers who argue with them about "correct screening", especially since TSA arms them with the all-purpose "screener's discretion" card.

And when
or
or
... having a website printout is really not much of a consolation.
This.

chollie

However...the screener will still have the 'final say' as to whether or not he leaves a 'Gotcha' note.

Just like the screeners have the final say on whether to put the cap back on a bottle of shampoo that has been opened because? Are they strip-testing the contents? Oh, right, that's SSI. No, they aren't testing the content, they remove closed LGA containers from sealed baggies, remove the caps, and toss the bottle/jar back into the luggage. It happens repeatedly.

'Academy' training? Stupid? Unsupervised? Malicious?

Nope, just 'final say'.

petaluma1

Returning items to luggage not properly sealed has nothing to do with "final say" and everything to do with maliciousness.

gsoltso

I agree with you that the Blog used to be much more interactive, I believe you may have put your finger on where the differences began. I try and interact somewhat consistently - but I am limited in my time allotted for doing that, I have other job responsibilities that I have to keep up with. The difference is in the way the current leadership sees social media tools, and I am uncertain if a change is in the immediate future.

I understand the frustration with what seems to be a logic loop, but those decisions are way above my pay grade. I keep emphasizing that I am not saying that things are not happening, but that I am not going to take unverified reports as gospel. If no formal complaints are made, then it places TSA at a disadvantage to address issues like cremains. Anyone can go on social media and say "XXXXX happened, and it has ruined my life" - no tangible information, just a statement. This happens all the time, and I am uncertain that the organization would be well-served by using tons of resources to track down every single claim and try to instigate an investigation on it. Even with trends in statements, it is difficult to determine whether folks actually had the experience, or if they are simply piling on (which does happen contrary to the opinion of some folks).

I would love to return to the old school blog days, where we took questions we could answer and gave direct answers in many cases, and then explained when something was SSI and we couldn't. I prefer the direct dialog, to the current methodology we are using - but again, I am not always privy to the information they use in making those types of decisions. I also prefer jumping on an issue right now, communicating consistently throughout, and then giving some form of resolution - even if the resolution is not what the passenger/complainant asked for. When we (used to) do that type of consistent interaction, it begins to build and maintain a basic relationship with the public, and it keeps building as long as you do the same thing consistently. When we have that, and one of us comes on here and comments about how:

"1. Cremains are to never be opened, and that we have screening methods designed specifically for Cremains.

2. Brass, Crystal and other heavy materials used in display or permanent Urns can be extremely dense, and difficult to clear on an X-ray.

3. We understand that this is one of the most difficult times in your life, however, we suggest that if you are transporting cremains, please consider bringing them in a temporary container like wood or plastic."

The public are used to hearing information/advisements/communications directly from us. As things have been since the change in direction, we do not currently have the same type of relationship that we had back in the beginning and earlier days.

It depends, sometimes when dealing with private property rights, things can get a bit murky (see some of the cases against paparazzi). General rule of thumb is yes, but there are still some pretty archaic rules on the books throughout the country.

The positioning would be a challenge. Perhaps in a corner, just below the zipperline with a fisheye style lens at a 90 degree angle would work - but it would also up the cost a bit.

Boggie Dog

............................

If a person using social media posts a comment on @ASKTSA, for example, and says X bad thing happened to me then that is a complaint. All to often the response from @ASKTSA is "we expect out officers to treat people with respect" or other typical boilerplate response. TSA has a complaint, they have a contact point, and if no follow up is conducted by TSA that is a failure on the part of TSA. Opportunity for TSA to take action is available but ignored.

This was from a discussion about recording what happens during a checked bag search. I think the video recording of these searches could be accomplished by using body cams on those screeners that are opening bags for searches. Interfering with the cam, or stored video, should result termination. A new cost yes but a cam could be shared by people on difference shifts.

Why did this change on the TSA Blog and by who's direction? Was it a written order that blog team workers were not allowed to answer questions? If so who gave that order? Who said it was a bad thing to communicate with the public, the people who pay TSA employees?

jkhuggins

FYI: I went back and started looking at old blog posts, and it appears (at least to me) that this change of emphasis (and tone) happened right around President Obama's second inauguration in January 2013. Which doesn't make a whole lot of sense, considering that John Pistole was TSA Administrator from 2010-2014. But perhaps there was another change to which this could be attributed.

Boggie Dog

I doubt that the head of TSA would be involved in that level of management.

TWA884

FlyerTalk Rule 21:
I've just had to edit about a half dozen posts where a FlyerTalk member was addressed or identified by a name that he or she does not use on FlyerTalk.

The moderation team takes privacy issues seriously. Do not post private information of others and do not refer to any other poster by any name other than the one that he or she uses on FlyerTalk as their handle or in their signature.

Please consider this to be your only warning.

The next member who posts any private information of another member will lose their posting privileges for a minimum of one week!

TWA884
Travel Safety/Security co-moderator

Loren Pechtel

Yeah, that was my thought. Offset and with a fisheye would be about the best that could be done but that means low detail and still doesn't show what's happening in the bag.

FliesWay2Much

As an agency, you have no credibility and have demonstrated a complete lack of integrity. Just kill the social media sites. They only accomplish two purposes:

1. Make the TSA feel good; and,
2. Is the "Charlie Brown and the football syndrome" for many of us because we keep going back to get even more angry.

You could probably get away with this. Combined with the cop-like blue uniform and the tin badge, this would make them feel even more like real cops.

chollie

I would add:

3. Often makes TSA look abusive and/or ignorant.

Snarky, insulting, and incorrect blog answers byTSOs left unchallenged by Bob weren't just read by the targets of the bloggers - they were read by many innocent people going to the TSA blog looking for actual valid information. The view non-FTers and infrequent flyers get of TSA from the Blog, FB and Twitter is hardly reassuring.

petaluma1

Here's yet another incident of TSA being responsible for a mess:

TWA884

Reminder!

I'll add that we also have threads discussing baggage inspection.

This thread is about traveling with cremation ashes.

Future off topic posts will be deleted. Repeat offenders will be subject to losing their posting privileges for a minimum of one week. Please consider this to be your only warning.

TWA884
Travel Safety/Security co-moderator

gsoltso

Again, this is based upon assumption, not facts. The individual may be completely right, however, they may be completely wrong. We do not know what happened other than there is a note in the bag from TSA, and the item was open.

Like the incidents where cremains are open inside the bag, or have a hole in the plastic, or have had an urn opened and the ashes scattered - unless we have had an investigation, and have actually found the person that opened the item or damaged it, we have no idea how the cremains got out of the container, only that they did. To make the leap that TSA is responsible for all of these incidents without supporting factual information, is (at best) mistakenly guessing, and (at worst) is just lying to promote an agenda.

Boggie Dog

We know in some cases that TSA did in fact open and search luggage and that these types of issues have been reported more than a few times.

Who else would be in a persons bag? If others can access baggage after TSA inspection then what good is the inspection in the first place?