New TSA PreCheck Rule for Disabled Passengers
Oct 29, 2018, 3:53 pm
#91
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: DFW
Posts: 28,110
Taking a break from our semi-annual fight over medical nitroglycerin, and moving us back towards the topic ...
I do not speak on behalf of TSA, but I can offer an opinion as to why this happens.
Speaking as an educator, a few obvious issues spring to mind.
I do not speak on behalf of TSA, but I can offer an opinion as to why this happens.
Speaking as an educator, a few obvious issues spring to mind.
- Just because a teacher says something doesn't mean that the student learned it. Education has to happen repeatedly, in a variety of contexts, in order for learning to occur. Whether TSA is engaged in those sorts of repeated educational activities is unknown to me.
- Every organization experiences staffing turnovers. (I think I've seen statistics here that suggest TSA has "higher than average" turnover, but I can't point to specific data.) This means that one never has "educated" everyone on the staff, as there are always new people coming along who need to learn.
- Probably most importantly ... the number of people with disabilities that TSA screens every day may be large numerically, but is probably small as a percentage of total traffic. Being educated on how to handle the special cases is important; however, even if properly conducted, if a given TSO doesn't put that knowledge to use right away, that knowledge can be forgotten. It's easier to remember how to screen for the things that you see every hour of every day; it's harder to remember how to screen for the things you might see at most once a week (if that often).
TSA claims to be a highly trained security force, with on going training and testing. Each screener is certified for each screening position, plus each checkpoint has several employees who can assist in difficult situations. Not to mention numerous supervisory staff at each checkpoint who can coach newer or poorly trained screeners.
With TSA being on the "Front Lines of the War On Terror" TSA's screeners don't have the luxury of not getting it right each and every time.
Last edited by Boggie Dog; Oct 30, 2018 at 4:41 pm
Oct 29, 2018, 5:28 pm
#92
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 38,410
I am clear on medical nitro, because the organization has a history of making pretty clear statements on it. At least a couple of times the organization has made the statement that medical nitro is a treatment that has never been prohibited. The site currently says that medical nitro is allowed in carry on and checked bags - very clearly. Pair those two things up, and it is clear, the organization does not confiscate or prevent medical nitro as a policy. Any TSO that steps outside of that, is wrong. I have not disputed your claim, or any claim without proof to the contrary, however, I can not step to the opposite side and take an unverified comment as fact either. I can support the individual making the claim by providing them the chance to file a complaint with the organization, outside of that, I am unable to make much more happen. I can also release findings if the organization publishes them, but if they do not, I have nothing more to give.
Oct 29, 2018, 5:58 pm
#93
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: where the chile is hot
Programs: AA,RR,NW,Delta ,UA,CO
Posts: 41,668
Twice in the past (at least) TSA has made the specific statement that medical nitro is indeed medical, and has never been prohibited. You can read for yourself here and here. I am telling you the organizations own words in its own publications - "Nitroglycerin tablets and spray (used to treat episodes of angina in people who have coronary artery disease) are permitted and have never been prohibited". I would recommend that you type in a series of items, and notice that the phrase you have posted never goes away, it is static on that page and is there when things like insulin, pills, pill cutters and any other medical device/medicine that you enter give a result. There are certain scenarios where any item can be prohibited, but there are other conditions that must be met first. What those conditions are, falls into the SSI category and I can not discuss it in a public forum - however, I can tell you that the organization has publicly stated the following multiple times "Nitroglycerin tablets and spray are permitted and never have been prohibited".
This is the reason I am able to maintain the position that I do, because the organization has consistently messaged that nitro is allowed.
This is the reason I am able to maintain the position that I do, because the organization has consistently messaged that nitro is allowed.
TSA's official statement on the matter still says it is up to the individual screener. In my case, the screener, backed by multiple levels of higher-ranked TSA employees, exercised personal discretion and/or a secret unpublished TSA rule to confiscate my nitroglycerine.
The confiscation was not WRONG according the website, then and now.. The language on the website clearly warns pax that this can happen and there is no recourse if it does.
If TSA was serious about not confiscating medicines like nitro tabs, they would have updated the formal rules on the website, instead of just putting it in the non-binding blog post. After all, non-FT readers are going to use the tool TSA created especially for pax, and that tool is going to tell them that the screener has the final say. Nothing about hidden rules or secret criteria (that clearly were followed in my case), and no reference to a non-binding blog post I sincerely doubt that most people looking on the TSA website to find out if something is allowed go searching the blog posts. They shouldn't have to - there should be no conflict between what is on the blog and what is stated in the rules that actually apply at the checkpoint.
Last edited by chollie; Oct 29, 2018 at 6:04 pm
Oct 29, 2018, 6:07 pm
#94
Original Poster
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,526
TSA blog posts and news announcements are not binding at the checkpoint.
TSA's official statement on the matter still says it is up to the individual screener. In my case, the screener, backed by multiple levels of higher-ranked TSA employees, exercised personal discretion and/or a secret unpublished TSA rule to confiscate my nitroglycerine.
The confiscation was not WRONG according the website, then and now.. The language on the website clearly warns pax that this can happen and there is no recourse if it does.
If TSA was serious about not confiscating medicines like nitro tabs, they would have updated the formal rules on the website, instead of just putting it in the non-binding blog post. After all, non-FT readers are going to use the tool TSA created especially for pax, and that tool is going to tell them that the screener has the final say. Nothing about hidden rules or secret criteria (that clearly were followed in my case), and no reference to a non-binding blog post I sincerely doubt that most people looking on the TSA website to find out if something is allowed go searching the blog posts. They shouldn't have to - there should be no conflict between what is on the blog and what is stated in the rules that actually apply at the checkpoint.
TSA's official statement on the matter still says it is up to the individual screener. In my case, the screener, backed by multiple levels of higher-ranked TSA employees, exercised personal discretion and/or a secret unpublished TSA rule to confiscate my nitroglycerine.
The confiscation was not WRONG according the website, then and now.. The language on the website clearly warns pax that this can happen and there is no recourse if it does.
If TSA was serious about not confiscating medicines like nitro tabs, they would have updated the formal rules on the website, instead of just putting it in the non-binding blog post. After all, non-FT readers are going to use the tool TSA created especially for pax, and that tool is going to tell them that the screener has the final say. Nothing about hidden rules or secret criteria (that clearly were followed in my case), and no reference to a non-binding blog post I sincerely doubt that most people looking on the TSA website to find out if something is allowed go searching the blog posts. They shouldn't have to - there should be no conflict between what is on the blog and what is stated in the rules that actually apply at the checkpoint.
Oct 29, 2018, 6:07 pm
#95
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: where the chile is hot
Programs: AA,RR,NW,Delta ,UA,CO
Posts: 41,668
My training as a Flight Engineer had elements for events we hoped never happened, and in my case many never happened outside of training, yet those procedures were known dead cold.
TSA claims to be a highly trained security forced, with on going training and testing. Each screener is certified for each screening position, plus each checkpoint has several employees who can assist in difficult situations. Not to mention numerous supervisory staff at each checkpoint who can coach newer or poorly trained screeners.
With TSA being on the "Front Lines of the War On Terror" TSA's screeners don't have the luxury of not getting it right each and every time.
TSA claims to be a highly trained security forced, with on going training and testing. Each screener is certified for each screening position, plus each checkpoint has several employees who can assist in difficult situations. Not to mention numerous supervisory staff at each checkpoint who can coach newer or poorly trained screeners.
With TSA being on the "Front Lines of the War On Terror" TSA's screeners don't have the luxury of not getting it right each and every time.
When the pilot who safely landed a plane in the Hudson River was hailed as a hero, Sully said it was an event that he had trained for all his life, just as all pilots do. They train and hope to heck it never happens, and it won't for most of them, but if and when it does, they are expected to remember what to do.
Oct 30, 2018, 3:39 pm
#96
Join Date: Jun 2010
Programs: DL, AA
Posts: 34
This.
When the pilot who safely landed a plane in the Hudson River was hailed as a hero, Sully said it was an event that he had trained for all his life, just as all pilots do. They train and hope to heck it never happens, and it won't for most of them, but if and when it does, they are expected to remember what to do.
When the pilot who safely landed a plane in the Hudson River was hailed as a hero, Sully said it was an event that he had trained for all his life, just as all pilots do. They train and hope to heck it never happens, and it won't for most of them, but if and when it does, they are expected to remember what to do.
Oct 30, 2018, 4:48 pm
#97
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: DFW
Posts: 28,110
Pilots are trained to fly the airplane first. Sully did just that using years of training, experience, and personal judgment to guide his actions. No checklist of procedural steps can make up for learned knowledge and skills. He is a true professional, TSA screeners not so much.
Oct 31, 2018, 1:09 am
#98
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: BLI or CLT
Programs: The usual suspects
Posts: 1,902
In most work places, people are trained to perform their duties correctly and if they do not, they are either retrained so that they do perform correctly, or they are terminated. Usually, employees who wish to keep their jobs learn from the mistakes of others and avoid the actions which earned a colleague a slap on the wrist.
Why aren't TSA employees required to correct their mistakes and "follow the rules"? Why do the senior people continue to back up the errant employee who has obviously made a mistake? Why are such mistakes routinely ascribed to "screener discretion" when everyone can see that the screener was wrong/vengeful/stupid? Why are 95% of dangerous devices missed - over and over, without any improvement?
I occasionally come across helpful, polite and professional TSA employees, neat and squared-away in their uniforms, focused on their job, not their cellphones. Why are they not the models that all employees follow and emulate, instead of the rare exception?
Something is wrong in an organization that behaves this way yet continues to draw billions in tax dollars to operate.
Why aren't TSA employees required to correct their mistakes and "follow the rules"? Why do the senior people continue to back up the errant employee who has obviously made a mistake? Why are such mistakes routinely ascribed to "screener discretion" when everyone can see that the screener was wrong/vengeful/stupid? Why are 95% of dangerous devices missed - over and over, without any improvement?
I occasionally come across helpful, polite and professional TSA employees, neat and squared-away in their uniforms, focused on their job, not their cellphones. Why are they not the models that all employees follow and emulate, instead of the rare exception?
Something is wrong in an organization that behaves this way yet continues to draw billions in tax dollars to operate.
Oct 31, 2018, 3:47 am
#99
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Baltimore, MD USA
Programs: Southwest Rapid Rewards. Tha... that's about it.
Posts: 4,332
In most work places, people are trained to perform their duties correctly and if they do not, they are either retrained so that they do perform correctly, or they are terminated. Usually, employees who wish to keep their jobs learn from the mistakes of others and avoid the actions which earned a colleague a slap on the wrist.
Why aren't TSA employees required to correct their mistakes and "follow the rules"? Why do the senior people continue to back up the errant employee who has obviously made a mistake? Why are such mistakes routinely ascribed to "screener discretion" when everyone can see that the screener was wrong/vengeful/stupid? Why are 95% of dangerous devices missed - over and over, without any improvement?
I occasionally come across helpful, polite and professional TSA employees, neat and squared-away in their uniforms, focused on their job, not their cellphones. Why are they not the models that all employees follow and emulate, instead of the rare exception?
Something is wrong in an organization that behaves this way yet continues to draw billions in tax dollars to operate.
Why aren't TSA employees required to correct their mistakes and "follow the rules"? Why do the senior people continue to back up the errant employee who has obviously made a mistake? Why are such mistakes routinely ascribed to "screener discretion" when everyone can see that the screener was wrong/vengeful/stupid? Why are 95% of dangerous devices missed - over and over, without any improvement?
I occasionally come across helpful, polite and professional TSA employees, neat and squared-away in their uniforms, focused on their job, not their cellphones. Why are they not the models that all employees follow and emulate, instead of the rare exception?
Something is wrong in an organization that behaves this way yet continues to draw billions in tax dollars to operate.
Any uniformed organization fosters this feeling of brotherhood, loyalty, and closeness. This is not always a bad thing, but it often creates an adversarial, even hostile, attitude toward any outsider. And that can be a very bad thing in the case of an organization endowed with power over the general public, such as TSA, law enforcement, or military. Uniforms aren't really necessary for such attitudes - look at various professions like politicians and unionized factory workers - but uniforms reinforce the isolation from outsiders and worsen the superior, adversarial attitude.
Oct 31, 2018, 5:39 am
#100
Original Poster
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,526
I think the uniforms have a lot to do with it. The uniforms a) make them look like a paramilitary organization (like police or law enforcement), and b) foster a cliquish, brotherhood, us-vs-them attitude amongst the rank and file. Of course, the uniforms are not the only factor, since the suits on the line so often back up the uniformed TSOs when they screw up or abuse a traveler, but I think the uniforms are definitely a factor. And I wonder how many TSMs are former uniformed TSOs who worked their way up, and thus still have the feeling of brotherhood?
Any uniformed organization fosters this feeling of brotherhood, loyalty, and closeness. This is not always a bad thing, but it often creates an adversarial, even hostile, attitude toward any outsider. And that can be a very bad thing in the case of an organization endowed with power over the general public, such as TSA, law enforcement, or military. Uniforms aren't really necessary for such attitudes - look at various professions like politicians and unionized factory workers - but uniforms reinforce the isolation from outsiders and worsen the superior, adversarial attitude.
Any uniformed organization fosters this feeling of brotherhood, loyalty, and closeness. This is not always a bad thing, but it often creates an adversarial, even hostile, attitude toward any outsider. And that can be a very bad thing in the case of an organization endowed with power over the general public, such as TSA, law enforcement, or military. Uniforms aren't really necessary for such attitudes - look at various professions like politicians and unionized factory workers - but uniforms reinforce the isolation from outsiders and worsen the superior, adversarial attitude.
Oct 31, 2018, 9:01 am
#101
Moderator: Travel Safety/Security, Travel Tools, California, Los Angeles; FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: LAX
Programs: oneword Emerald
Posts: 20,631
Moderator's Note: Topic Drift
Folks,
When posting in this thread, please keep in mind that the subject of this discussion is the TSA rules for dealing with disabled passengers in the PreCheck lanes.
Please try to keep your comments at least tangentially related to this topic (FlyerTalk Rule 5). While debating TSA screeners training maybe relevant, comments about TSO uniforms are not; those belong in other threads.
Future off-topic posts will be summarily deleted without further notice.
Thank you for your understanding.
TWA884
Travel Safety/Security co-moderator
When posting in this thread, please keep in mind that the subject of this discussion is the TSA rules for dealing with disabled passengers in the PreCheck lanes.
Please try to keep your comments at least tangentially related to this topic (FlyerTalk Rule 5). While debating TSA screeners training maybe relevant, comments about TSO uniforms are not; those belong in other threads.
Future off-topic posts will be summarily deleted without further notice.
Thank you for your understanding.
TWA884
Travel Safety/Security co-moderator
Nov 3, 2018, 1:24 pm
#102
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 3,657
When the pilot who safely landed a plane in the Hudson River was hailed as a hero, Sully said it was an event that he had trained for all his life, just as all pilots do. They train and hope to heck it never happens, and it won't for most of them, but if and when it does, they are expected to remember what to do.
I do not know how often TSA trains and retrains its workforce. Retraining the workforce isn't a sign that the first training "didn't work"; it should be a recognition that training must be periodically refreshed in order to be effective. That could be a contributing factor here.
Nov 3, 2018, 6:10 pm
#103
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: where the chile is hot
Programs: AA,RR,NW,Delta ,UA,CO
Posts: 41,668
Note in that example, though, the implicit underlying idea that training must be a continuous process. Sully trained for that event "all his life", not just once in order to complete a form somewhere.
I do not know how often TSA trains and retrains its workforce. Retraining the workforce isn't a sign that the first training "didn't work"; it should be a recognition that training must be periodically refreshed in order to be effective. That could be a contributing factor here.
I do not know how often TSA trains and retrains its workforce. Retraining the workforce isn't a sign that the first training "didn't work"; it should be a recognition that training must be periodically refreshed in order to be effective. That could be a contributing factor here.
Nov 3, 2018, 9:25 pm
#104
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: DFW
Posts: 28,110
In defense of TSA (boy, I find myself defending them more and more) they did set up a training center to help ensure just one training program is being used instead of 400 or so different programs at the many airports. Of course it all goes wrong when these fresh new faces, trained with the latest policies, return to their airports. Airports where the FSD can interpret things how ever they like or even new hire screeners use their discretion to confiscate a person nitroglycerin pills because they think they are explosive.
Nov 3, 2018, 10:33 pm
#105
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: where the chile is hot
Programs: AA,RR,NW,Delta ,UA,CO
Posts: 41,668
The thing about newbies is that if they don't last, they never get re-trained after they've gotten some experience. They aren't a majority of the work force, but the rate is significant enough to have an impact. TSA newbies, like newbies on any job, either take up extra resources because they require more oversight until they are fully up to speed, or they are left to wing it, and we've all witnessed how well that works out.
It would be very interesting to know if TSA keeps track of how long TSOs who fail Red Team tests have been with TSA. Are they primarily newbies, complacent long-termers, TSOs with disciplinary history (tardiness, etc)?
I honestly can't see any reason why all wheelchair-bound pax aren't directly handled by at least an LTSO, if not an STSO. Those folks should (generally) have more time on the job as well as first shot at retraining. It doesn't make sense to have newbies who haven't even cut their teeth handling 'ordinary' trouble-free pax handling pax who are particularly diverse in their abilities and the screening challenges they present.
It would be very interesting to know if TSA keeps track of how long TSOs who fail Red Team tests have been with TSA. Are they primarily newbies, complacent long-termers, TSOs with disciplinary history (tardiness, etc)?
I honestly can't see any reason why all wheelchair-bound pax aren't directly handled by at least an LTSO, if not an STSO. Those folks should (generally) have more time on the job as well as first shot at retraining. It doesn't make sense to have newbies who haven't even cut their teeth handling 'ordinary' trouble-free pax handling pax who are particularly diverse in their abilities and the screening challenges they present.