Trust me - I'd like to see Loy get felt up at security to see how he enjoys it.

The boss might like it -- funny how that works.

To screeners who post here: I might like you personally, but, sorry, I despise anybody whose only alternative for employment is torturing fellow citizens. You could be delivering pizzas, or selling shoes, or greeting folks at WalMart.

Instead, most of you have that job 'cause you love lording it over others. You enjoy telling us that something idiotic is for our own good. You are, as pointed out above, very good at parroting "it's just our orders".

How many of you have failed to be hired by local police departments? That would be telling, but probably an unachievable statistic.

Your job does not make us more secure. It probably makes us less secure, by making airline finances more precarious. What will make us more secure is passengers who no longer believe passivity is the right response to terror, and information systems that can flag dangerous individuals.

Nothing in the current airport security system is better than random ineffectuality. That would be much cheaper, eh?

If you, personally, are not like that, you are extraordinary.

I know all about the "Nuremburg" defense. However, since I am at the bottom of the chain of command there is really nothing I can do to change any directive coming from Washington DC. You might think otherwise, but there are 4 levels of management above me at my airport, not to mention the regional directors and their chain of command. No, like it or not, there really is nothing that can be changed at my level. So the "Nuremburg" defense is hardly an appropriate analogy since it was not the "Landsur" that was on trial, it was the commanders. I am a "Landsur" in this organization, not a commander.

Yet another person who knows nothing about the average screener. As a retired USAF Survival Instructor, I know something about torturing people. The TSA is hardly torture, it may be inconvienient, and assinine at times, but hardly torture. As for this being my only alternative for employment? hardly, I left a better paying job to do this. I enjoy it, and am not on some kind of "power trip" although I am sure that there are some out there that are. That is true in every profession. Does the TSA make flying safer? I don't know. I have a rock out in my yard that I swear keeps elephants from getting close to my house. I challenge you to dispute that it does not work. It is impossible to prove a negative.

For what it is worth, I have never had a desire to be a police officer, nope, not this guy. I don't particularly like police officers, nor do I know any.

TUS: "inconvenient"... "assinine"

I would add "counterproductive" and "pointless".

Most of what you do is to reassure idiots. Very little of it makes us any safer. It consumes multi-billions of dollars. It drives many of us away from flying, flying less or not at all.

It is an honest job in the sense that you show up for work. But of the millions of passengers harassed, the best that can be said is that it's not too bad.

There IS NO RELATIONSHIP between this crap and the THREAT. It is VAST OVERREACTION. Your anecdote about the elephants is VERY TELLING. Your entire operation is a grand effort to keep elephants from rampaging here in Lexington, Kentucky. Wow! What a success!

IT IS KILLING AIRLINES and dissuading many of us from flying.

If we devoted this proportion of resources to common colds, we would be broke in a week.

"Torture" is a loaded term, meant to inflame. I have never seen my wife as angry as she gets being harassed in "randomized secondary" security. For her, this is absolute, pure torture, whatever your expertise from the government indicates.

The facts are that your bosses are pursuing the work of Osama Bin Laden by strangling American airlines much more thoroughly and successfully than he ever imagined. And it is your deputy sheriffs who want to fondle my crotch and screeners who want to separate my wife from her carry-ons while harassing her "because they weren't busy" who are doing irreparable damage to American airlines.

Your bosses are fools, and I will give you credit for being an honest employee, but if you buy that crap you are a fool too.

For the record, the airlines were bleeding out before the TSA was created. Furthermore, it is only the big six that are dying, more due to poor management than anything the TSA has done. Not all the airlines are dying. Jet-Blue being one whose revenues rose 63% in the first quarter of THIS year.

http://biz.yahoo.com/p/j/jblu.html

So no Mr. Chicken Little. The TSA is NOT killing the airlines, their business plan is. You FF guys might not be flying as often because of it, but that is your own fault, the leisure flyer is still out there and still flying, as are many "business" travellers. As an aside, the customer service that United Express shows at my airport borders on the criminal. I have seen shouting matches initiated by the airline employees result in police response. I guess poor customer service by the airlines is the fault of the TSA too.

If ANY of you guys think that going back to private screeners is going to change ANYTHING, then you are sadly mistaken. The TSA will STILL be there calling the shots. The ONLY thing that will change is the signature on my paycheck and the uniform I wear. My pay and benefits will be the same, my screening manager and up will be the same guys. No sir, you guys can complain all you want, the "empire" has been built, and politicians being what they are, their buddies come first.

Again, I challenge you to PROVE the TSA has not foiled a SINGLE terrorist act. You cannot, nor can I prove it has. A negative is impossible to prove. However, we CAN prove that the prior screening directives did nothing to prevent anything. Nor was there a requirement that the screeners be US citizens, or even have a working knowledge of the english language. Thats all the creation of the TSA did, strengthen the directives, and require citizenship and language skills in english.

Kool-Aid anyone?

I'm trying to be cop, but it's pure coincidence because I really didn't want to become a screener and I hate my job. We have fifty people and about five of them are rules nazis who make it a miserable environment for the rest of us who just want to be nice to people and collect our paycheque. I keep this job because the pay is not too bad, they're flexible in regards to me going to university, and it's near the airport so it makes flying lessons easier to fit into my day. I know of only one guy who wanted to be a cop and failed. The rest are mostly of the retired ilk (many former retired military), students like myself, and a few in their thirties and forties who tend to be the losers.

[This message has been edited by CATSA Screener (edited 06-04-2003).]

My opinion is that what you guys do is mostly worthless.

Your opinion is that it's a job, and somebody has to do it.

When we show you attitude, it's because of our opinions about the value of the harassment and inconvenience. We buy the tickets and are entitled to our opinions, even at the checkpoint. You are employed and are supposed to be nice to us, even if we're attitudinal.

The airlines were troubled due to the economy. Many are now on the ropes, due to aversion to flying. A major component of this aversion (AAA survey earlier this year suggests up to 25% of declined flying) is based on our decision to avoid you screening types.

Stupid policies which do not reflect probabilities. Attitudinal, pushy screeners in too many situations. Aversive, cancelling flyers. There is no relationship?

Not quite, we're to be "friendly, fair and firm." When passengers start being rude, we drop the friendly part and start with the firm. Not all of us are customer-service specialists so my definition of firm is different from my co-worker who grew up in the Bronx.

And I decide to fly less and buy fewer tickets.

QED.

A screener, as long as s/he is being polite, is entitled to be treated fairly by passengers. It's not right to be abusive just because you disagree with the procedure. You don't actually have to respect us, but you should treat us humanely.

Your US conterparts represent an agency that violates my civil liberties. If they leave me alone at the checkpoint, they can expect no ill-treatment. The moment they engage in any kind of random harassment or harassment with no probable cause, they can expect to be treated like the nazis they have chosen to ape.



------------------
"Give me Liberty or give me Death." - Patrick Henry

You know, I decide whether or not to buy the tickets.

Thank you for making it easier to decide whether or not. Not. Capish? (Parlo italiano, e capisco benissimmo that the spelling is wierd).

Ahhhh Spiff. I do respect your opinion, and on a small degree agree with you. However, there is not one SINGLE instance of anyones civil liberties being abused or denied. NOT ONE. Of course you disagree with me on this, but you cannot point out one LEGITIMATE instance of anyones rights being violated. I however, can show you which laws were passed that provide the TSA the authority to do what it does. If these laws are deemed to be unconstitutional, then they certainly would be changed and or repealed. Since that has not happened, I guess they are in fact constitutional.