Why are you discussing policy?

'Cause Bart's helping the terrorists, that's why.

:rolleyes:

As if discussing the shoe policy has anything to do with jeopardizing security.

How many shoes have been looked at since December, 2001?

And exactly how many of those have contained shoe bombs?

Some haystacks don't contain needles, and this is probably one of them.

(mini rant)
what is the security risk in stating what makes an operational process more efficient? :confused: if it's forbidden, prohibitted, illegal, etc it should be caught by the process (if not, then the process is flawed) but those knowing what to bring/not bring, what can/cannot be done to them, etc. should be publicized as it makes the process more efficient.

what Bart stated is what every passenger should know to make their travelling experience less worrysome/stressful (besides, isn't the permitted/prohibitted list part of "policy").

simply put, the tsa security checkpoint is an assembly/production line-get 'em in, get 'em properly screened and get 'em out.

the worst thing that can happen to a prodcution line is for it to slow down, get backed up or stopped so if folks (both tsa and pax) know exactly what is required, it can be run more efficiently (case in point, if a bag shows something "odd" (for lack of a better term) on the monitor while being x-rayed, don't have 3 people come over for a conference about the odd item, pull the bag off the line and manually search it because now every bag behind it is now backed up on the line)

if those entering the line know what is required, production will be more efficient.

if those running the line know what is required, production will be more efficient.

if those entering the line do not know what is required, they need to be educated or production will not be efficient.

if those running the line do not know what is required, they need to be educated or production will not be efficient and they defeat the purpose (example-if procedure is to "swab only" in no alarm, then everyone needs to know)
(end of mini rant)

Deleted

Why not? It's a free country...we can discuss anything we want. Do you honestly believe that anything discussed in this thread could actually "help terrorists" or "release classified information". If so, perhaps a chicken little anonymous meeting is the best medicine.

Also, please cite the law that grants the TSA 'law enforcement' and 'investigatory' authority. Screeners are not law enforcement officers - if you truly believe you are a law enforcement officer, that needs to be corrected. Claiming to be a law enforcement officer or federal agent, when that is untrue, is a violation of federal law and can result in fines and/or jail time.

Although many posters and Bart do not agree on everything, the one thing we can all agree on is an appreciation for his willingness to share reasonable and helpful information that empowers TSA customers to know the rules - what is expected of us and what rules are suppose to control the screening process.

I appreciate Bart's commentary.

I'm curious (and i went and read the 107th congress Aviation and Transportation security act)... It reads:

‘‘(q) LAW ENFORCEMENT POWERS.—
‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—The Under Secretary may designate an
employee of the Transportation Security Administration to
serve as a law enforcement officer.
‘‘(2) POWERS.—While engaged in official duties of the
Administration as required to fulfill the responsibilities under
this section, a law enforcement officer designated under paragraph
(1) may—
‘‘(A) carry a firearm;
‘‘(B) make an arrest without a warrant for any offense
against the United States committed in the presence of
the officer, or for any felony cognizable under the laws
of the United States if the officer has probable cause to
believe that the person to be arrested has committed or
is committing the felony; and
‘‘(C) seek and execute warrants for arrest or seizure
of evidence issued under the authority of the United States
upon probable cause that a violation has been committed.


From what i can find out with a cursory look online, it appears that screeners where not appointed by the undersecretary to have law enforcement powers. Air Marshals seems to have been appointed to have law enforcement powers as well as federal security liasons.

Is this correct?

OK, it is great if only all the non-criminal minds viewed this board, but it is not the case.

Policy should not be discussed whatsoever. Suggestions SHOULD BE without a doubt discussed, but definantly not exact word for word policy.

Eh... ok.. nobody said anyting directly to screeners.

TSA DOES HAVE L/E within the agency.

Yes. Initially, the plan was for the TSA to employ and train an army of actual law enforcement officers, separate from the screening force. Budget realities got in the way of that plan. That and the massive leadership failures at the top of the agency in its first four years. So for now, the TSA relies on local LEOs and the existing federal LEOs. Doubtful Congress will ever appropriate enough money to allow the TSA to hire its own LEOs.

The rolleyes smiley really doesn't do justice to my reaction to your post.

You honestly believe you're on the front lines of the War on Terror, don't you?

Are you kidding me? This is why passengers are so upset. No one takes the time to explain the process to them. Alot of our job is customer service. Why not make their day a little easier and tell them why you are doing what you are doing? Its idiots that bark orders and give them the "its SSI" line that are giving us such a bad name. Alot of people are afraid of flying, be nice to them, all of them, whether they are nice to you or not. You might just change their opinion. :)

I for one do my job with dignity and respect, I dont look at is just a paycheck, I do have another profession...

anyhow

Whenever I see wrong from another screener, I will take my time to suggest different approaches and ways to make the passenger feel a little better about their time thru security.


Nevertheless, policy should never be mentioned in public. You should know that. If you do see a screener yell out a SSI, make sure you tell your TM to suggest that screener for additional SSI courses.

Thats true. But when screeners abuse their "power", it makes us all look bad. The public has a right to know when screeners are wrong. And from the looks of it, an awful lot of them are wrong.

There are an awful amount of screeners!

Lets not forget about new hires who are taught wrong from the get-go.

We have implemented SHADOW plans, where a new hire(rare), is being LED by a highly respected screener with a couple commendations under his/her belt. They take meal together and usually have the same tour schedule. They usually end up nice, respectable and happy to work.

Ok, they are right to know when screeners are wrong, but are surely not right to know policy word for word. Have you looked into ANY TSA training manual?

Pay attention to the SSI, which is stamped at the very bottom!

I dont mean to sound like I am "hiding" behind SSI.

I can tell you how many contained bullets, knives and other forms of weapons, but I know all those dont count to you.

:rolleyes: