Overstaffed TSA in FAT
Apr 19, 2003 | 11:38 pm
#1
Original Poster
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Currently a man without a country; American Airlines-3MM, Executive Platinum; US Airways-Doesn't Matter AAnymore; Hilton-Diamond; Starwood-Platinum; Hyatt-Diamond
Posts: 702
Overstaffed TSA in FAT
Left out of Fresno (love the FAT designation...how many amateur travelers have written the airlines complaining about the FAT passenger designation on their ticket?) today...Saturday before Easter...AA to LAX at 6:28 p.m.
The AA counter alone had always 2 and sometimes 4 TSAers hanging around to process through 13 souls on the 6:28 to LAX. When I walked up, one bum was sitting on the luggage scale reading the sports section...he could barely mumble "are yuh check'n luggage" before I shot past him and woke the bored agents out of their slumber.
I sat and watched the Screening Area where, with 2 commuter flights boarding 1 or 2 hours apart and very light loads on both (I don't think I counted more than 30 traveling souls in the 2 hours I sat and watched) pass through. There must have been at least 12-15 TSAers standing around trying to look semi-concerned about Homeland Security. Plus, FAT has this series of ridiculous gates that they flip open as you pass one station after the next. Felt like a lamb to the slaughter.
This, of course does not count the other 10 plus luggage screeners over by the other airlines, most of which had already waved off their last flight of the day.
Plus, there seemed to be a small brigade (2-3) TSAers who seemed to be assigned the complex duty of walking about, sometimes with a coke or coffee, sometimes with a clipboard...guess that inconsistency is designed to throw off any would-be terrorists ("we can take him if he only has the clipboard, but Allah forbid if he has a freezing-cold coke that could splash into our eyes...let's go cruise the Wal-Mart, instead!")
This is one, tiny little airport that is a case study in wasted resources in the name of security. Pathetic.
The AA counter alone had always 2 and sometimes 4 TSAers hanging around to process through 13 souls on the 6:28 to LAX. When I walked up, one bum was sitting on the luggage scale reading the sports section...he could barely mumble "are yuh check'n luggage" before I shot past him and woke the bored agents out of their slumber.
I sat and watched the Screening Area where, with 2 commuter flights boarding 1 or 2 hours apart and very light loads on both (I don't think I counted more than 30 traveling souls in the 2 hours I sat and watched) pass through. There must have been at least 12-15 TSAers standing around trying to look semi-concerned about Homeland Security. Plus, FAT has this series of ridiculous gates that they flip open as you pass one station after the next. Felt like a lamb to the slaughter.
This, of course does not count the other 10 plus luggage screeners over by the other airlines, most of which had already waved off their last flight of the day.
Plus, there seemed to be a small brigade (2-3) TSAers who seemed to be assigned the complex duty of walking about, sometimes with a coke or coffee, sometimes with a clipboard...guess that inconsistency is designed to throw off any would-be terrorists ("we can take him if he only has the clipboard, but Allah forbid if he has a freezing-cold coke that could splash into our eyes...let's go cruise the Wal-Mart, instead!")
This is one, tiny little airport that is a case study in wasted resources in the name of security. Pathetic.
Apr 20, 2003 | 4:56 pm
#2
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Northeast MA, USA.
Programs: HHonors Diamond, DL Silver, TSA Harassee
Posts: 3,657
You just described both JAN and CAK.
There should be an immediate 25% cut in screeners nationwide. If the TSA can prove that some of the bigger airports require the staffing, they can always cut at least 50% from the smaller airports.
There should be an immediate 25% cut in screeners nationwide. If the TSA can prove that some of the bigger airports require the staffing, they can always cut at least 50% from the smaller airports.
Apr 20, 2003 | 5:05 pm
#3
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 928
Natural attrition and getting rid of deadbeats will lower the overall numbers and finally authorizing partime will help also. Major airports are generally located at large cities with major attitude problems amongst the screeners. TSA has a problem with letting anyone go because they do not have the ability to train new screeners right now. There is some stipulation about having contracted trainers. We already have the ability with many folks who have taught before to handle this problem but it has fallen upon deaf ears.
Apr 21, 2003 | 7:11 pm
#4
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Raleigh, N.C.
Posts: 732
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by CameraGuy:
There should be an immediate 25% cut in screeners nationwide. If the TSA can prove that some of the bigger airports require the staffing, they can always cut at least 50% from the smaller airports. </font>
There should be an immediate 25% cut in screeners nationwide. If the TSA can prove that some of the bigger airports require the staffing, they can always cut at least 50% from the smaller airports. </font>
Now if the airlines keep going the way their going now, you won't need a screening force.
Apr 21, 2003 | 8:20 pm
#5
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Northeast MA, USA.
Programs: HHonors Diamond, DL Silver, TSA Harassee
Posts: 3,657
I am very confident that I could find 1 out of every 4 screeners doing nothing.
But, as I stated, there is enough excess at the smaller stations that a 25% freduction could be done without the larger ones being impacted.
But, as I stated, there is enough excess at the smaller stations that a 25% freduction could be done without the larger ones being impacted.
Apr 21, 2003 | 9:21 pm
#6
Original Poster
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Currently a man without a country; American Airlines-3MM, Executive Platinum; US Airways-Doesn't Matter AAnymore; Hilton-Diamond; Starwood-Platinum; Hyatt-Diamond
Posts: 702
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by CameraGuy:
I am very confident that I could find 1 out of every 4 screeners doing nothing.</font>
I am very confident that I could find 1 out of every 4 screeners doing nothing.</font>
Plus, a reduction in TSA force would actually speed things up since I wouldn't have to beat them off with a stick as I make my way out of the screening area (could they at least have the logic to step to the side when they are hitting on each other or chit-chatting on their cellphones?).
Although, I think airport Starbucks may be behind the overstaffing...their profits have to be up what with all the breaks these people take.
[This message has been edited by mwp2paris (edited 04-21-2003).]
Apr 22, 2003 | 9:29 am
#7
Moderator: Coupon Connection & S.P.A.M
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Louisville, KY
Programs: Destination Unknown, TSA Disparager Diamond (LTDD)
Posts: 58,133
You're definitely not under-staffed. You're over-directed. You have people uselessly harassing people at the gates. Every one of them can be let go. You have people randomly screening people at the checkpoints. Fire them too. You have people opening checked luggage because your machines can't tell chocolate from C-4. They can hit the road. You can also lose a few people due to the the Great Pointy Object Search for non-credible threats. Time to smarten up and slim down. You have more than one ID check - time to can the extra ID checkers. In fact, you can pass that job off to the airlines. The ID check provides revenue protection for them and zero security.
Your staffing problems and my tax/ticketing fee problems have just been solved.
------------------
"Give me Liberty or give me Death." - Patrick Henry
[This message has been edited by Spiff (edited 04-22-2003).]
Your staffing problems and my tax/ticketing fee problems have just been solved.
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by TakeScissorsAway:
Sorry CG, but that is just not possible. A 25% cut accross the board would decimate RDU. We are understaffed as is. There is a mobile screening force in place, just to give us minimal manpower.
Now if the airlines keep going the way their going now, you won't need a screening force.
</font>
Sorry CG, but that is just not possible. A 25% cut accross the board would decimate RDU. We are understaffed as is. There is a mobile screening force in place, just to give us minimal manpower.
Now if the airlines keep going the way their going now, you won't need a screening force.
</font>
"Give me Liberty or give me Death." - Patrick Henry
[This message has been edited by Spiff (edited 04-22-2003).]
Apr 22, 2003 | 6:13 pm
#9
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 928
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by Spiff:
You're definitely not under-staffed. You're over-directed. You have people uselessly harassing people at the gates. Every one of them can be let go. You have people randomly screening people at the checkpoints. Fire them too. You have people opening checked luggage because your machines can't tell chocolate from C-4. They can hit the road. You can also lose a few people due to the the Great Pointy Object Search for non-credible threats. Time to smarten up and slim down. You have more than one ID check - time to can the extra ID checkers. In fact, you can pass that job off to the airlines. The ID check provides revenue protection for them and zero security.
Your staffing problems and my tax/ticketing fee problems have just been solved.
</font>
You're definitely not under-staffed. You're over-directed. You have people uselessly harassing people at the gates. Every one of them can be let go. You have people randomly screening people at the checkpoints. Fire them too. You have people opening checked luggage because your machines can't tell chocolate from C-4. They can hit the road. You can also lose a few people due to the the Great Pointy Object Search for non-credible threats. Time to smarten up and slim down. You have more than one ID check - time to can the extra ID checkers. In fact, you can pass that job off to the airlines. The ID check provides revenue protection for them and zero security.
Your staffing problems and my tax/ticketing fee problems have just been solved.
</font>
Apr 25, 2003 | 6:08 pm
#11
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Portland, ME USA
Posts: 6
I could not agree with the overstaffing issue more. I fly out of Portland Maine (PWM) at least 3 times a month. You can always see several TSA agents standing around chatting, drinking coffee and not be proactive with security.
One Sunday afternoon, it took me 30 minutes to clear security. At PWM they have 3 check points. Only one was open. 15 TSA agents were in the security checkpoint area. A couple of passengers complained to the agents at the x-ray belt that they were going to miss their flight. The response was a rather snippy Youre suppose to be here 2 hours before your flight.
At that point I started timing the amount of time it took to get people through the metal detector and out the other side of the check point. They were running slightly over 90 seconds per person. Clearing enough people to fill a 737-300 would take 3 hours 8 minutes at that rate.
After being nice and cooperative with the screeners, I asked to speak to the supervisor. He came over and I asked him why they only had 1 lane running. His response was he did not have enough people working to open a 2nd lane. Mind you, I just had counted 15 TSA minions. I asked him (and yes I was being polite and respectful) How many people do you need per lane. His response, 6. Okay now I was a little surprised by this. The next words out of my mouth were How many people do you have now?, The answer 9 . He then saw the look of shock on my face and added that several of them were on break.
My feeling is: If a TSA employee is on break they have ZERO reasons to be in a secure area. They can only serve as a distraction to those agents who are working trying to keep air travel safe from screwdrivers.
I know this will never happen. But gee, wouldnt it be neat if they had to wait in the same security line as the rest of us before returning to work. Wouldnt it suck if you went on a half an hour break only to spend 5 minutes of it on break and 25 minutes in line getting back to work. A lot of you are probably saying thats a waste of taxpayers money making them wait instead of fast tracking them past all the travelers. Yup, it is. On the other hand how much money is mine and every other travelers companies wasting on their employees with the loss of productivity hours due to inefficient security processes?
Long answer to a short point. TSA is way over staffed. They are almost 600 million dollars over budget. They need another 3 billion from congress over the next two years to continue to function. IMHO, they are doing more damage then good to the air travel industry.
Yesterday I flew out of Lansing MI. The TSA there were polite, professional, staffed appropriately, and quick. Now if only the rest of the USA would follow that line.
[This message has been edited by pwmflyer (edited 04-25-2003).]
One Sunday afternoon, it took me 30 minutes to clear security. At PWM they have 3 check points. Only one was open. 15 TSA agents were in the security checkpoint area. A couple of passengers complained to the agents at the x-ray belt that they were going to miss their flight. The response was a rather snippy Youre suppose to be here 2 hours before your flight.
At that point I started timing the amount of time it took to get people through the metal detector and out the other side of the check point. They were running slightly over 90 seconds per person. Clearing enough people to fill a 737-300 would take 3 hours 8 minutes at that rate.
After being nice and cooperative with the screeners, I asked to speak to the supervisor. He came over and I asked him why they only had 1 lane running. His response was he did not have enough people working to open a 2nd lane. Mind you, I just had counted 15 TSA minions. I asked him (and yes I was being polite and respectful) How many people do you need per lane. His response, 6. Okay now I was a little surprised by this. The next words out of my mouth were How many people do you have now?, The answer 9 . He then saw the look of shock on my face and added that several of them were on break.
My feeling is: If a TSA employee is on break they have ZERO reasons to be in a secure area. They can only serve as a distraction to those agents who are working trying to keep air travel safe from screwdrivers.
I know this will never happen. But gee, wouldnt it be neat if they had to wait in the same security line as the rest of us before returning to work. Wouldnt it suck if you went on a half an hour break only to spend 5 minutes of it on break and 25 minutes in line getting back to work. A lot of you are probably saying thats a waste of taxpayers money making them wait instead of fast tracking them past all the travelers. Yup, it is. On the other hand how much money is mine and every other travelers companies wasting on their employees with the loss of productivity hours due to inefficient security processes?
Long answer to a short point. TSA is way over staffed. They are almost 600 million dollars over budget. They need another 3 billion from congress over the next two years to continue to function. IMHO, they are doing more damage then good to the air travel industry.
Yesterday I flew out of Lansing MI. The TSA there were polite, professional, staffed appropriately, and quick. Now if only the rest of the USA would follow that line.
[This message has been edited by pwmflyer (edited 04-25-2003).]
Apr 25, 2003 | 7:00 pm
#12
Moderator: Coupon Connection & S.P.A.M
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Louisville, KY
Programs: Destination Unknown, TSA Disparager Diamond (LTDD)
Posts: 58,133
Welcome to FlyerTalk, pwmflyer!
It's stories like these that show what a failure the TSA is and why its "leadership" needs to be run out of town on a rail.
------------------
"Give me Liberty or give me Death." - Patrick Henry
[This message has been edited by Spiff (edited 04-25-2003).]
It's stories like these that show what a failure the TSA is and why its "leadership" needs to be run out of town on a rail.
------------------
"Give me Liberty or give me Death." - Patrick Henry
[This message has been edited by Spiff (edited 04-25-2003).]
Apr 25, 2003 | 7:46 pm
#13
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Raleigh, N.C.
Posts: 732
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by pwmflyer:
I could not agree with the overstaffing issue more. I fly out of Portland Maine (PWM) at least 3 times a month. You can always see several TSA agents standing around chatting, drinking coffee and not be proactive with security.
One Sunday afternoon, it took me 30 minutes to clear security. At PWM they have 3 check points. Only one was open. 15 TSA agents were in the security checkpoint area. A couple of passengers complained to the agents at the x-ray belt that they were going to miss their flight. The response was a rather snippy Youre suppose to be here 2 hours before your flight.
At that point I started timing the amount of time it took to get people through the metal detector and out the other side of the check point. They were running slightly over 90 seconds per person. Clearing enough people to fill a 737-300 would take 3 hours 8 minutes at that rate.
After being nice and cooperative with the screeners, I asked to speak to the supervisor. He came over and I asked him why they only had 1 lane running. His response was he did not have enough people working to open a 2nd lane. Mind you, I just had counted 15 TSA minions. I asked him (and yes I was being polite and respectful) How many people do you need per lane. His response, 6. Okay now I was a little surprised by this. The next words out of my mouth were How many people do you have now?, The answer 9 . He then saw the look of shock on my face and added that several of them were on break.
My feeling is: If a TSA employee is on break they have ZERO reasons to be in a secure area. They can only serve as a distraction to those agents who are working trying to keep air travel safe from screwdrivers.
I know this will never happen. But gee, wouldnt it be neat if they had to wait in the same security line as the rest of us before returning to work. Wouldnt it suck if you went on a half an hour break only to spend 5 minutes of it on break and 25 minutes in line getting back to work. A lot of you are probably saying thats a waste of taxpayers money making them wait instead of fast tracking them past all the travelers. Yup, it is. On the other hand how much money is mine and every other travelers companies wasting on their employees with the loss of productivity hours due to inefficient security processes?
Long answer to a short point. TSA is way over staffed. They are almost 700 million dollars over budget. They need another 2 billion from congress over the next two years to continue to function. IMHO, they are doing more damage then good to the air travel industry.
Yesterday I flew out of Lansing MI. The TSA there were polite, professional, staffed appropriately, and quick. Now if only the rest of the USA would follow that line. </font>
I could not agree with the overstaffing issue more. I fly out of Portland Maine (PWM) at least 3 times a month. You can always see several TSA agents standing around chatting, drinking coffee and not be proactive with security.
One Sunday afternoon, it took me 30 minutes to clear security. At PWM they have 3 check points. Only one was open. 15 TSA agents were in the security checkpoint area. A couple of passengers complained to the agents at the x-ray belt that they were going to miss their flight. The response was a rather snippy Youre suppose to be here 2 hours before your flight.
At that point I started timing the amount of time it took to get people through the metal detector and out the other side of the check point. They were running slightly over 90 seconds per person. Clearing enough people to fill a 737-300 would take 3 hours 8 minutes at that rate.
After being nice and cooperative with the screeners, I asked to speak to the supervisor. He came over and I asked him why they only had 1 lane running. His response was he did not have enough people working to open a 2nd lane. Mind you, I just had counted 15 TSA minions. I asked him (and yes I was being polite and respectful) How many people do you need per lane. His response, 6. Okay now I was a little surprised by this. The next words out of my mouth were How many people do you have now?, The answer 9 . He then saw the look of shock on my face and added that several of them were on break.
My feeling is: If a TSA employee is on break they have ZERO reasons to be in a secure area. They can only serve as a distraction to those agents who are working trying to keep air travel safe from screwdrivers.
I know this will never happen. But gee, wouldnt it be neat if they had to wait in the same security line as the rest of us before returning to work. Wouldnt it suck if you went on a half an hour break only to spend 5 minutes of it on break and 25 minutes in line getting back to work. A lot of you are probably saying thats a waste of taxpayers money making them wait instead of fast tracking them past all the travelers. Yup, it is. On the other hand how much money is mine and every other travelers companies wasting on their employees with the loss of productivity hours due to inefficient security processes?
Long answer to a short point. TSA is way over staffed. They are almost 700 million dollars over budget. They need another 2 billion from congress over the next two years to continue to function. IMHO, they are doing more damage then good to the air travel industry.
Yesterday I flew out of Lansing MI. The TSA there were polite, professional, staffed appropriately, and quick. Now if only the rest of the USA would follow that line. </font>
Apr 26, 2003 | 12:07 am
#15
Moderator: Coupon Connection & S.P.A.M
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Louisville, KY
Programs: Destination Unknown, TSA Disparager Diamond (LTDD)
Posts: 58,133
Perhaps you'd care to dispute pwmflyer's issues?
Oh, I'm sorry. I forgot that in the interest of the illusion of "security" you cannot comment on these issues. Never mind; please continue to waste my tax money and "security" fees...
------------------
"Give me Liberty or give me Death." - Patrick Henry
Oh, I'm sorry. I forgot that in the interest of the illusion of "security" you cannot comment on these issues. Never mind; please continue to waste my tax money and "security" fees...
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by TakeScissorsAway:
Another example of an uninformed FT speaking of subjects they know nothing about.
</font>
Another example of an uninformed FT speaking of subjects they know nothing about.
</font>
------------------
"Give me Liberty or give me Death." - Patrick Henry