danielonn

l just relived my College and University application years when i applied for Global Entry and assisted my Parents with the proccess too. It took me all of 20 minutes for mine and 15 minutes for my parents. Like applying for college or university you pay a non refundable application fee whether you are accepted or not. You have to be truthful and through and answer all the questions. Then you must schedule an in person interview and keep your criminal record clean just like your GPA.

For all you complainers about not getting accepted or the approval proc ess is taking too long just remember your days of applying to university. The more through you are the better chances you have at being granted. At the interview dress up like you would to an interview at Stanford arrive 15 minutes early and listen to the question take a short pause to answer look the interviewer in the eye and be truthful as your information is all on their computer. Just like a university apication you signed under purjury that all your information is correct to the best of your knowledge. Do not offer more information than is required and think of a good answsr why you are applying for GE just like you would for why are you applying to Stanford. Remember not evefyone gets into GE or Stanford.


Good luck and remember patience is virtue. Its your responsibility to check the status of your application and bring the proper paperwork and Passport.

I look forward to your discussion and MODs pleasd feel free to pin this on the Trusted Travelsr Forum!

Silver Fox

I did mine in 14 minutes. I was very "thorough" too. Dressed in t-shirt and jeans. Never even thought of lying. What's your point?

aidy

+1

i went to mine in shorts, t-shirt and sandals, i was approved in 5 mins, application took 10-15!

MSPeconomist

It's been a long, long time since Stanford required an admissions interview (if ever) for undergraduates, certainly not in my lifetime.

Silver Fox

All they wanted was my money !

TWA884

Since this thread is more opinion and commentary than practical Trusted Travelers information, I'll move it to the Debate forum where it properly belongs.

TWA884
Travel Safety/Security co-moderator

chgoeditor

On the plus side: Global Entry certainly cares less than Stanford about grammatical errors.

It seems as if the OP hasn't actually gone to his GE interview yet, so it's safe to say that not all of his info is accurate. No need to dress up -- they care about whether you're trustworthy, not whether you have style sense, money or professional attire. The last time I was waiting for my interview, I saw everything from shorts and flipflops to business attire.

GUWonder

Unlike DHS/CBP with Global Entry, Stanford waives fees for many of its applicants and even for many of its students to enroll or remain in school. And Stanford's budget is a small fraction of DHS/CBP's budget. Then again what do you expect from a government department that houses at least 3 times as many law enforcement officers as the US Department of Justice has on its book.

danielonn

Are you saying they accept people who only make $100 a month vs $50000 a year? Then why ask for your employment history? I thought that by dressing decently you give a better impression. If a person came unclean reaked of tobbaco smoke did not brush their teeth how could they even think to go to any interview? Trustworthyness in my book is also about how you comport yourself. Ok so ill wear jeans and a polo shirt but flip flops I have never worn those to the airport. A good pair of shorts yes. And no being rich or poor does not excuse dressing up like a slob.

GUWonder

Yes. Lots of people accepted into GE who have income levels at or below $10k. Young children, retirees, full-time students, other limited-work/non-working types.

Higher income doesn't necessarily mean a person is more credible and trustworthy than someone with a lower income. Some of the biggest con-artists in the world have had much higher incomes than they deserved. And many of the most credible and trustworthy people make well less than $50k/year.

The "conditional" and "final" approvals, if any, shouldn't be based on income level as much as other things.

catocony

Is this thread a long-form April Fool's joke?

TheBOSman

Money isn't important; where you worked is. Joe Blow the Walmart Greeter making minimum wage is going to get a different level of scrutiny from Joe Schmoe who has spent the last five years working for, to use a relatively absurd scenario, the Iranian government making millions of dollars per year. It also doesn't much matter if Joe Blow shows up in flip-flops and ripped jeans, so called "slob" attire (you'd likely be horrified at what I wear on flights), or if Joe Schmoe shows up wearing an Armani suit. Cynically, I'll just note that several of the 9/11 attackers purchased first class tickets for their flights. Money doesn't make the person; never has, never will, particularly so here. Some of the greatest conmen (and conwomen, see honey trap) have been well-dressed and well-presented in the eyes of many. Does the name Bernie Madoff ring a bell?

chgoeditor

They also want to know your employment history because it's another indicator of your truthfulness. (Just remember, if you file tax returns, the federal government knows the names of your employers plus any company you do more than $600 worth of work for each year.)

And do you honestly believe that someone who smells of cigarette smoke and doesn't shower is somehow unable to remember a GE interview appointment? I do not follow your logic.

TheBOSman

They know that info even if you don't file tax returns unless you're working under the table or for some really shady companies . Of course, if you're not filing tax returns when you should, probably not the best idea to voluntarily meet with the government when they're going to perform a significant background check on you beforehand.

GUWonder

The bigger issue than the background check is the possible perjury type charges if caught. Even worse consequences than tax violations other than those that happen to be criminal tax violations.

But they don't have as full employment history as much as the IRS/Treasury.