Resurrected: Young boy being groped over computer left in bag
Mar 21, 2019, 7:37 am
#16
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: DFW
Posts: 28,083
OK, the laptop alarmed. How does a pat down resolve the alarm on the laptop? A reasonable person would investigate why the laptop alarmed. So I'm gonna called BS on this whole thing. The kid got a pat down because he left a laptop in his carry-on bag and TSA retaliated.
Mar 21, 2019, 7:47 am
#17
Original Poster
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,526
The pat down was not because the passenger left their laptop in a bag, it was because during the course of screening, the laptop alarmed.
In many cases, when TSA works with passengers to try and affect change, they reach a point where they can no longer disclose the steps involved, and the passenger gets frustrated (which is understandable). TSA has to walk a tightrope when engaging special interest groups, or individual passengers, because they can not reciprocate information like many other companies can. We are constantly getting classes on working with passengers that have challenges (large and small). The things we get from these passengers, is incorporated into that training to help communicate to the workforce how to better assist those passengers, and passengers at large.
In many cases, when TSA works with passengers to try and affect change, they reach a point where they can no longer disclose the steps involved, and the passenger gets frustrated (which is understandable). TSA has to walk a tightrope when engaging special interest groups, or individual passengers, because they can not reciprocate information like many other companies can. We are constantly getting classes on working with passengers that have challenges (large and small). The things we get from these passengers, is incorporated into that training to help communicate to the workforce how to better assist those passengers, and passengers at large.
As a reminder, TSA asked his mother to work with them to improve screening of people with disabilities, which she did. The result?
"She says during their 'dialogue for change' she asked something. They went silent. "We are positive they pacified us in order to try to get the media flurry to calm."
"She says during their 'dialogue for change' she asked something. They went silent. "We are positive they pacified us in order to try to get the media flurry to calm."
Now that your video has surfaced again, did anything positive come of your work with the TSA to improve the way they work with people with disabilities?
Nothing
Mar 21, 2019, 10:04 am
#18
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Greensboro
Programs: TSA
Posts: 2,424
If any of those folks outright stated that TSA does not have recurrent training, or consistent training, or that TSA does not interface with different organizations and even individuals to help develop policy on how to work with passengers with special needs, then they are sorely mistaken, or furthering an agenda. I know for a fact that we have worked with numerous organizations, medical specialists and even security specialists that happen to have special needs - across all spectrums in order to develop policy that is as accommodating as possible, while keeping security as the goal. Sometimes, folks may make mistakes, and there have been folks in the past that have done bad things outside of the SOP and policies of the organization. I make no excuses for the latter, I can understand the former (as all humans make mistakes), and I strive to prevent anything outside of the policies from happening (and there is a vast majority of the workforce that does the same). Asking one of the folks above to comment on the actual training programs at TSA is using the wrong source, because they may have given feedback, they may have worked with someone at HQ and that someone then incorporated some of the info into the training programs here. These folks were not a part of program development, curricula design or learning objective determination. So, at best, their commentary is an emotional response based upon their experience and/or perceived mistreatment, while being mistaken or unaware.
Mar 21, 2019, 10:53 am
#19
Original Poster
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,526
If any of those folks outright stated that TSA does not have recurrent training, or consistent training, or that TSA does not interface with different organizations and even individuals to help develop policy on how to work with passengers with special needs, then they are sorely mistaken, or furthering an agenda. I know for a fact that we have worked with numerous organizations, medical specialists and even security specialists that happen to have special needs - across all spectrums in order to develop policy that is as accommodating as possible, while keeping security as the goal. Sometimes, folks may make mistakes, and there have been folks in the past that have done bad things outside of the SOP and policies of the organization. I make no excuses for the latter, I can understand the former (as all humans make mistakes), and I strive to prevent anything outside of the policies from happening (and there is a vast majority of the workforce that does the same). Asking one of the folks above to comment on the actual training programs at TSA is using the wrong source, because they may have given feedback, they may have worked with someone at HQ and that someone then incorporated some of the info into the training programs here. These folks were not a part of program development, curricula design or learning objective determination. So, at best, their commentary is an emotional response based upon their experience and/or perceived mistreatment, while being mistaken or unaware.
We have contacted Ms. Beck to discuss her concerns and will continue to work with her and other members of the transgender community to improve training and protocols," said spokesman Bruce Anderson.
Mar 21, 2019, 11:17 am
#20
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: DFW
Posts: 28,083
Would you please explain how doing a pat down on a person mitigates an alarm on an object like a laptop or carry-on bag?
Mar 21, 2019, 1:54 pm
#21
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 38,410
Mar 21, 2019, 6:59 pm
#23
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Baltimore, MD USA
Programs: Southwest Rapid Rewards. Tha... that's about it.
Posts: 4,331
The pat down was not because the passenger left their laptop in a bag, it was because during the course of screening, the laptop alarmed.
In many cases, when TSA works with passengers to try and affect change, they reach a point where they can no longer disclose the steps involved, and the passenger gets frustrated (which is understandable). TSA has to walk a tightrope when engaging special interest groups, or individual passengers, because they can not reciprocate information like many other companies can. We are constantly getting classes on working with passengers that have challenges (large and small). The things we get from these passengers, is incorporated into that training to help communicate to the workforce how to better assist those passengers, and passengers at large.
The pat-down was a result of the laptop alarming, not the fact that it was left in the bag. TSA has a standardized response to alarms, and they *should* follow that process every single time.
In many cases, when TSA works with passengers to try and affect change, they reach a point where they can no longer disclose the steps involved, and the passenger gets frustrated (which is understandable). TSA has to walk a tightrope when engaging special interest groups, or individual passengers, because they can not reciprocate information like many other companies can. We are constantly getting classes on working with passengers that have challenges (large and small). The things we get from these passengers, is incorporated into that training to help communicate to the workforce how to better assist those passengers, and passengers at large.
The pat-down was a result of the laptop alarming, not the fact that it was left in the bag. TSA has a standardized response to alarms, and they *should* follow that process every single time.
Shouldn't you search the person or thing that alarms, rather than searching something else which did not alarm?
"Out of an abundance of caution" will likely be the standard response that the agency gives, but I fail to see how caution dictates that "B" should be searched when "B" did not alarm.
Mar 22, 2019, 7:09 am
#24
Original Poster
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,526
Why is it SOP to search "B" when "A" alarms?
Shouldn't you search the person or thing that alarms, rather than searching something else which did not alarm?
"Out of an abundance of caution" will likely be the standard response that the agency gives, but I fail to see how caution dictates that "B" should be searched when "B" did not alarm.
Shouldn't you search the person or thing that alarms, rather than searching something else which did not alarm?
"Out of an abundance of caution" will likely be the standard response that the agency gives, but I fail to see how caution dictates that "B" should be searched when "B" did not alarm.
Mar 22, 2019, 7:29 am
#25
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: DFW
Posts: 28,083
It would seem that when they search the "owner" of an item that alarms, (and by alarm, I assume that means the ETD swab produced a positive result), they are actually looking for traces of explosives on the clothing of the person being violated. Same with parents who refuse to allow breast milk/baby food to be contaminated by a search. I'd wager than 90% of the reason for such thorough "pat downs" is punishment than an actual search that TSA believes will find anything.
What happened in the video shown at the top of this thread was simple retaliation for not following TSA's made up rules in force that day.
What TSA did was not security, it was simple abuse!
Mar 22, 2019, 7:57 am
#26
Original Poster
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,526
If an item like a laptop alarms, and in the case of the boy the alarm was simply a laptop being left in a carry-on bag, then first determine if the item is truly a concern. If it is then do what is needed to resolve the issue which could include checking the person for explosives or explosive residue.
What happened in the video shown at the top of this thread was simple retaliation for not following TSA's made up rules in force that day.
What TSA did was not security, it was simple abuse!
What happened in the video shown at the top of this thread was simple retaliation for not following TSA's made up rules in force that day.
What TSA did was not security, it was simple abuse!
Mar 23, 2019, 11:30 pm
#27
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 38,410
It would seem that when they search the "owner" of an item that alarms, (and by alarm, I assume that means the ETD swab produced a positive result), they are actually looking for traces of explosives on the clothing of the person being violated. Same with parents who refuse to allow breast milk/baby food to be contaminated by a search. I'd wager than 90% of the reason for such thorough "pat downs" is punishment than an actual search that TSA believes will find anything.
Mar 24, 2019, 1:16 pm
#28
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Greensboro
Programs: TSA
Posts: 2,424
Each one was asked by TSA to "help" resolve issues with screening of individuals with either LGBT, physical disability issues and in Ms. Williamson's case, her son's sensory disability. Each of them will tell you that TSA did nothing as a result of their participation with TSA to resolve issues and, in fact, just requested that participation to placate them and, hopefully, put a lid on the bad PR.
Why is it SOP to search "B" when "A" alarms?
Shouldn't you search the person or thing that alarms, rather than searching something else which did not alarm?
"Out of an abundance of caution" will likely be the standard response that the agency gives, but I fail to see how caution dictates that "B" should be searched when "B" did not alarm.
Shouldn't you search the person or thing that alarms, rather than searching something else which did not alarm?
"Out of an abundance of caution" will likely be the standard response that the agency gives, but I fail to see how caution dictates that "B" should be searched when "B" did not alarm.
Last edited by TWA884; Mar 24, 2019 at 4:45 pm Reason: Merge consecutive posts by the same member; please use the multi-quote function. Thank you.
Mar 24, 2019, 4:51 pm
#29
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 11,513
We have walked this path before. Giving specific clearance procedures and or resolutions is SSI and can not be disclosed. I am simply reiterating what was in the press releases at the time.
Actually the answer is the same as above for Boggie. Specific SOP and or resolutions are SSI and can not be divulged in a forum with folks that are not designated as "Need to Know". I am simply reiterating the information from the press releases at the time.
Actually the answer is the same as above for Boggie. Specific SOP and or resolutions are SSI and can not be divulged in a forum with folks that are not designated as "Need to Know". I am simply reiterating the information from the press releases at the time.
Mar 24, 2019, 5:17 pm
#30
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: DFW
Posts: 28,083
Exactly how many of those people work for the organization, and have access to the training programs and curricula for any and all classes pertaining to the screening of Individuals with special needs?
We have walked this path before. Giving specific clearance procedures and or resolutions is SSI and can not be disclosed. I am simply reiterating what was in the press releases at the time.
We have walked this path before. Giving specific clearance procedures and or resolutions is SSI and can not be disclosed. I am simply reiterating what was in the press releases at the time.
Actually the answer is the same as above for Boggie. Specific SOP and or resolutions are SSI and can not be divulged in a forum with folks that are not designated as "Need to Know". I am simply reiterating the information from the press releases at the time.