Boggie Dog

Wasn't Denver the airport where a TSA screener was purposely groping male travelers, TSA had a person observe these acts, then took no legal action against the screener?

You bet the public can count on TSA to put the publics interests above that of TSA! When pigs fly!

chollie

It's worth noting: some folks have acted like there's a hardcore group of malcontents on this forum that have never had anything good to say about TSA.

I think it's pretty clear from TSA's twitter feed (and posts in other blogs that go viral) that more people than just a handful on FT have found the TSA complaint system to be a joke.

Boggie Dog

Anti TSA, with 100% of my soul. Malcontent, absolutely not. Just because a person strongly opposes something does not a malcontent make.

chollie

In many cases, it's clear that TSA could address a problem with the information given in the tweet.

When you get enough people made enough to post pictures of luggage where screeners opened carefully packed containers and tossed them back into the suitcase with no attempt to reclose properly - you get enough of these, you don't need a name and flight info. A well-run organization notes 'x' number of complaints about it from a certain airport and immediately gets on the cameras - because it's clear that you've got at least one 'rogue' screener doing this and other 'rogue' screeners watching and saying nothing.

Identifying the problem employees and stopping the misconduct entirely is supposed to be the ultimate goal. Instead, there's this insistence that if the pax hasn't put themself at risk by supplying personal information, the complaint can't be researched.

In the case of my sister, if the TSO posting here had been sincere about identifying the abusive screener, she would have simply started observing the conduct of the screeners we described when handling wheelchair pax. She didn't want to address the problem, she wanted to discredit my sister - and target her and the family for future harassment while the offending screeners continued doing what they were doing.

BTW...based on the blog post, TSA is aware that medical nitroglycerine has been confiscated - but no attempt was ever made to contact me or to find out who the suit was who made it clear that nitro didn't enter the sterile area of 'his' airport.

That's how TSA handles complaints.

gsoltso

First off, I hate that your sister had a bad experience. The TSO that asked for the information here may have forwarded that info to local management looking for video, or statements - most of the time, with the flight info and passenger name, we can track down when and where they came through.

Something that I think we should put out for all the folks here - TSOs have a very low power quotient in terms of getting issues addressed. We can gather the information, forward it to local management or even to HQ through channels - after that, it is up to the higher ups to do something with it, sometimes it happens, sometimes it does not. I wish the organization would operate at a 100% rating in that department, but that does not seem to be the case (at least based on the comments here).

At GSO I have had the opposite experience for the most part, we have more positive comments submitted than negative through our boxes and online system. When we do get a negative comment, most of the time, it is about things that are out of TSAs control, or it is a disagreement with a policy. I have had absolutely no interaction with any kind of "trouble passenger list" at any of the airports I have worked at, so I can not comment on that aspect.

Boggie Dog said - "A person that places something under clothing for safe keeping isn't doing anything wrong or suspicious"

Agreed, which is why I took great pains to indicate that above.

Petaluma said - "Your former colleague Mike England claimed that "dangerous items" are found every day".

They are, sometimes during pat-downs, sometimes at the AIT, mostly in carryon bags. I can't say with certainty that dangerous items are found in pockets every day during a pat down somewhere in this country by a TSA employee - however, it is a regular occurrence. I have found one during a pat-down on more than one occasion, and at the AIT on more than one occasion.

Loren said - "To post on social media might eventually get congress to act"

Perhaps, but most of the time when congress acts, it is a flash in the pan, and gone the next week - with no real change. I keep asking for people to file the complaints because it is the easiest way for someone to get some format of a tangible result, and it informs the organization that there is a problem. Like most big companies, they address issues consistently, but it helps if they have active complaints about things from the passengers themselves. It helps to establish trends and gives us data we can use to make a difference, even if it is not as visible to you.

FliesWayToMuch said - "You have all those Twitter sites... how about reaching out to the complainants"

Personal opinion? Different ideas on how to use social media. Government at large does not use social media the way it was designed to be used. Most social media outlets we use are pretty starchy and uptight, that is too bad, because we could do much more good with our social media if we would embrace it directly, and use it as designed. What you mention would be a way for us to be proactive in addressing complaints, and it would make our process more transparent - it would also render the current complaint process that keeps official records for the organization pretty much moot. This is a double edged sword, as it cuts out a level of bureaucracy while cutting out the ability to maintain official government records in a controlled manner. Each choice has positive points, and not so positive points.

petaluma1

What I actually wrote, <redacted>, was: "Your former colleague, Mike England, claimed that "dangerous items" are found every day while sexually assaulting passengers."

If you're going to quote me, quote me accurately, or use an ellipsis, and respond to the statement accurately. We know TSA finds "dangerous" (dangerous to the TSA, that is) items every day. It's bragged about weekly on the blog. It's obvious that TSA has never found anything that could threaten the safety of a plane while in the air while groping a pasenger. Had it ever been so, we would have heard about it loud and clear, especially if that item was found hidden in the passenger's genitals or a sanitary/incontinence pad.

petaluma1

Chollie, I have noticed recently that @ASKTSA seems to be reading @TSA and will sometimes ask a passenger who has complained to only @TSA to get back to them or give a link to the completely useless TSA complaint form.

FliesWay2Much

Absolutely wrong! How about spending your day off looking at NOAA, NASA and USGS on social media? If you don't like science, try the FAA, CDC, FDA or any of the military social media sites.

You can start by unblocking social media accounts of people who disagree with you on AskTSA and TSA. BTW, do you understand that a federal judge ruled that a government official blocking citizens from their official social media sites is a 1st Amendment violation? I'll make it easy for you: Davison v Loudoun County Board of Supervisors. I'll make it even easier for you: Synopsis on Slate. You violate this judge's ruling on a daily basis. BTW, the judge is a federal judge in the same federal district as TSA HQ, so his ruling directly applies to you.

Which means you'll never do it.

Absolutely wrong again. There is nothing in the U.S. Code (including FOIA), OMB and National Archives guidance that prohibits you from making social media posts official government records. I dare you to read NARA Bulletin 2014-02, which clearly states that government social media sites are official records:

chollie

There's too much focus on the pax's personal information, and for a well-run organization, it's frequently unnecessary and counter-productive to recognizing problems and making improvements.

Dwelling on pax information reinforces pax concerns (along with the recently announced 'troublemaker' designation) about systematic retaliation for the pax and possibly family members every time they fly.

Every complaint on TSA/AskTSA should have been logged whether or not an official TSA complaint form is submitted. When you have fifteen different complaints with photos showing opened containers dumped in luggage inspected by TSA at LAX or MIA, that is more than enough information for TSA to hit the cameras at LAX or MIA. They don't need time stamps and personal information from every single one of the folks who complained.

Somebody posts real-time that they just got strip-searched at LAX and are terribly upset? If TSA really cared, they don't need the pax's intimate details to start an investigation. They can immediately contact LAX and ask who just took a pax to the back room. After all, I seriously doubt that dozens of pax are being taken off for back room searches these days, and with a very narrow time frame, it should be pretty easy to narrow it down and start more investigation.

That's what a well-run organization will do. Above all, TSA should remember that every time a pax complains, there are likely many more pax who have experienced the same mistreatment from the 'rogue' screener but who are afraid of retaliation and didn't complain.

I, myself, will never submit a complaint. After I got warned and my medical nitro tabs were confiscated, I'm sure if I complained I would be put on the 'troublemaker' list, if not the 'watch list'.

petaluma1

Pray tell, gsoltso, how was social media designed to be used?

Of course that's the way an organization should be run*, but this is the TSA we're talking about. At least AskTSA following @TSA seems to be a start. People can file a complaint with the DHS IG anonymously if they wish to; TSA doesn't allow anonymous filings.

*I once posted a complaint about a product on a social media page unrelated to the product. Within 3 days, the company that made the product got in touch with me! That's the way it should be. But as we all know, TSA takes responsibility for nothing.

gsoltso

The quote was factually correct, based upon the point I was addressing. Point of fact, TSA pat-downs are not currently deemed to be "sexually assaulting passengers" - which makes the rest of your comment an opinion that I was not interested in addressing. The blog does not list all of the items found or discovered, nor does the Instagram, and while I agree that if we had found an IED it would most likely have been the story of the year for TSA - that does not mean that dangerous items are not found consistently during pat-downs, or with the use of the AIT machines.

I used "government at large" as a blanket to include the entirety of all social media sites operated by both federal and local entities. There is a clear majority of government sites that are not used well, or consistently, however, if you would like to offer the 20 or so sites you mentioned as a large scale reference to refute the "government at large" descriptor, you are welcome to do so.

I am actually on your side in terms of addressing comments in the public forums/social media realms - I believe we should have a group of people dedicated to reaching out to the public in our various social media areas, and being more proactive in how we address the public in general. This would mean direct contact in a public forum, asking for more information so we could do research and get to the bottom of the situations (whether that is outing someone as a false commentary, or taking it on the chin when we have something wrong). I like transparency, I like active engagement, and I like helping people. My personal preferences aside, I do not anticipate large changes to the way the TSA Social media group operates at this time.

No, I am not wrong. The record keeping is different for random comments on a social media comment thread than it is for a system generated complaint. One is simply macro data, which is addressed differently than the individual reports generated by an official complaint. In some ways the record maintenance is the same, but there are more specific guidelines for the handling of officially filed complaints/comments/etc. I would like to see more of this process out in the public forum, and for it to be more interactive, but I am not in the policy or management groups for our social media/complaints process.

I can start by reminding you that I am a TSO, at a small airport, not the legal team, or social media management team, you would be better off trying to get word to HQ to make some sort of a change for this, as I have no input or control over what you are mentioning.

Not the way most governmental agencies use it...

chollie

With all due respect, please don't go shifting the goal posts.

We are specifically talking about real threats to aviation security being found concealed in/around genitals, between butt cheeks or under breasts.

Not 'contraband' like jewelry or money or a joint concealed in someone's underwear for safety or a 2.1" pocket knife in a pocket next to a man's testicles or a good luck charm or a tiny bottle of nitroglycerine pills.

We're talking an actual threat to aviation safety. I get fingers between my butt cheeks nearly every time I am groped. When has TSA ever found a genuine threat to aviation safety concealed between someone's butt cheeks? When the pervy TSO went back and stroked the young boy's genitals a second time with his open palms, what possible item could have been concealed that he might have missed the first time?

A number of years ago, a TSO (might have been you, but maybe not) claimed that the reason for running fingers around necklines, even of lightweight low-cut silk blouses, was because a 'garrote' could be concealed in a collar or neckline. I personally suspect that no TSO has ever found a 'garrote' concealed in a neckline - or even any other contraband, genuine threat or otherwise.

I suspect the same thing is true about genitals and butt cracks and under breasts and women's sanitary pads and incontinence briefs.

I'd be happy with the same security experience the rest of the nations in the world use. Somehow they keep planes flying without unnecessary handling of people's private parts.

ysolde

Let me describe something for you, sir: I am a middle-aged woman in a wheelchair. Earlier this summer, I was traveling out of FLL with my mother, who is in her 70s. I travel more than the average American, I suppose, and am used to the somewhat intrusive pat-down to which wheelchair passengers are subjected. This time, it was different.

It took almost twenty minutes for the TSO to complete the pat-down. It was extremely invasive and ultimately humiliating. She felt the most intimate parts of my body over and over again. She felt under my top. I am a small person. It was mid-summer in Florida. I was wearing skinny jeans and a short-sleeved (polo shirt) top. No padding or wires in my bra. I was speechless, and my mother was livid. What, exactly, was this TSO looking for?

When I was single, I went on dates that involved less physical contact . . .

chollie

ysolde, what kind of patdowns do you get in non-US airports?

I have occasionally gotten a patdown outside the US. Without exception, it was a genuine patdown. No pressure, no groping, no squeezing, no hard poking, just a feather-light touch.

It's offensive and highly inaccurate to use the term 'patdown' to describe what TSA does in the US.

ysolde

Much less invasive, even at the most security conscious ones (which I would argue are FRA and LHR). They do a quick, non-invasive physical pat down, sometimes using the wand to check for metal. No lifting of my top (at LHR once, I was wearing a cashmere sweater over a thin turtleneck; I offered to remove the cashmere sweater -- the TSO, who was quite polite, assured me that would be as unnecessary as it would be for any other passenger). In other airports, it tends to be a polite patdown, not much different from those performed on passengers who "beep" when going through security -- thorough, polite, quick, painless, and to the point. Sometimes, the wand is used.

And yes, you are right that outside the US, there is no groping, no touching of private parts (let alone the whole "resistance" thing -- ugh). It's just a much smoother, more professional experience.