FlyerTalk Forums - How random, really, is secondary screening?

FlyerTalk Forums (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/index.php)

- Checkpoints and Borders Policy Debate (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/checkpoints-borders-policy-debate-687/)

- - How random, really, is secondary screening? (https://www.flyertalk.com/forum/checkpoints-borders-policy-debate/560135-how-random-really-secondary-screening.html)

Quote:

Originally Posted by PoliceStateSurvivor

My understanding is that what many of us call "retaliatory screening" is the type 2. Seems that at some airports passengers who refuse to remove their shoes are "continuously selected". As you aptly pointed out, it is nothing but harrassment. Hence the assertion about abuse of power.

Actually I think a lot of us have an even more narrow definition of "retaliatory secondary screening" that includes those cases where a pax declines to follow silly non-SOP screener "suggestions." E.g., "we suggest you take of your non-alarming, non-profile shoes/belt/etc.," and since you don't, you (and maybe your bags) get the full secondary treatment. Or "we don't like how you insist you keep your bags in sight during wanding," so we drag out the process by putting your wallet through the x-ray. These cases are pretty clearly different from continuous secondary screening--e.g., ETD on a laptop, shoe shine, etc.

The line between continuous secondary screening and retaliatiory secondary screening is often very clear. Unfortunately, a major flaw in the TSA system is that TSA can always use "continuous screening" as an excuse for such inappropriate behavior.

Quote:

Originally Posted by studentff

...a major flaw in the TSA system is that TSA can always use "continuous screening" as an excuse for such inappropriate behavior.

And indeed they do. That's how they can determine that virtually all complaints are invalid. At least half the time when I complain about retaliatory behavior, I get, "Have you heard of continuous screening?" Well, yes I have, but that's not what I just got!!! :rolleyes:

Bruce

Quote:

Originally Posted by bdschobel

At least half the time when I complain about retaliatory behavior, I get, "Have you heard of continuous screening?"

"Sure. Now how do you spell your name, tough guy?" ;)

Quote:

Originally Posted by drbond

In Jamaica they screen every adult male completely. Remove shoes and they go through them, completely go through carry ons and so forth. Explain this descrimination.

Er, because Jamaicans are not subject to the US Constitution? :D

Most countries (unlike the US and a few others) do not protect the rights of their citizens to be free from "unreasonable/unlawful" search; as far as I can recall, the Jamaica is not an exception to this general rule.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bart

Sorry, but I have to throw in my two cents in disagreement.

"Retaliatory screening" means one thing and only one thing to me: screening someone in direct response to a previous behavior. Someone gives a screener a hard time and happens to be a selectee who didn't alarm the WTMD. Rather than conduct the quick body pat-down, as is now authorized by the SOP, the screener instead decides to give the passenger the full Monty with a hand-wanding, quick body pat-down and perhaps even ETD of the shoes. All loosely within the SOP by definition but none of it warranted by the situation. The screener decided to throw in the "extras" just to "teach" that passenger a "lesson." This, to me, is clearly retaliatory screening.

In the case of non-profile shoes, I look at that as screener laziness to make a sound judgment call or screener reluctance. In the case of screener laziness, it's a matter of the screener taking the easy way out by simply having everyone remove their shoes. In the case of screener reluctance, it's a matter of that particular screener being beat up by leads and supervisors to the point where the screener is indecisive and reluctant to apply the SOP correctly. Each case is equally bad.

By SOP, we're supposed to run the wallet through the x-ray. On my floor, I instruct my screeners to physically check the wallet in the passenger's presence and run it through the x-ray as an exception (in other words, when a physical check cannot resolve an alarm or concern). And in those cases, to bring the passenger to the lane so that the passenger can observe his wallet as it is carried to the x-ray (wallet is ALWAYS in a bin rather than in a screener's hands).

By SOP, we're supposed to call for an ETD anytime someone fails to place the laptop in a bin by itself (or with a jacket/sweater that contains no metal items). Many people will remove the laptops but either place them on top of their case or the case on top of it, shoes, coins, other items on top of the laptop. I instruct my screeners to simply inform the owner of the correct policy and then separate the laptop for the owner from the other items and re-run the item through the x-ray instead of calling for an ETD. If the laptop is still inside its case, then I have my screeners call for an ETD. This is a variation from the SOP I take as a common sense approach to the spirit of the law rather than blindly obeying the letter of the law.

I wondered about you guys since you dont have a loader if you get a lot of laptops in bags. This seems to be the reason that DEN uses the loader position and has refused to let it go. Wallets are a pain in the ... because they have to be x-rayed and we have to seal them before leaving the passenger's site. You are correct on the interpretation of retaliatory screening.

Quote:

Originally Posted by eyecue

There are a lot of reasons that you could get secondary screeing. One of them is a random factor. you will never know the exact reason why. However some of the reasons are:
1. You checked in late. This includes changing carriers that is not your fault.
2. You purchased late. Within 96 hours of departure.
3. You used a credit card with a name different than your own.
4. you paid cash
5. You checked no bags.
6. You have a name similar to ones on a list
7. You have reported an identity theft.

These things are all compiled and given a numerical value. When a certain value is reached, Bingo you are SSSS. Of course there is a random factor.

Random it was, I suppose. I figure I score zero on the point scale. Perhaps that, in and of itself, raises the red flag.

1. You checked in late. This includes changing carriers that is not your fault.
90+mins each leg
2. You purchased late. Within 96 hours of departure.
7 day AP
3. You used a credit card with a name different than your own.
Corporate Card
4. you paid cash
Corporate Card
5. You checked no bags.
True, but as stated before, how could this be known w/online checkin?
6. You have a name similar to ones on a list
Very, very unlikely
7. You have reported an identity theft.
Nope

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bart

Still, I do not believe in using loaders. It slows down the process tremendously.

I emphatically disagree. We've tried running lanes without loaders and the process comes to a screeching halt.

Quote:

Here's what happens: Joe Passenger comes up to the table ready to load his or her property into the x-ray. Jack Screener asks if Mr. Passenger has a laptop in his carry-on, and Mr. Passenger says he does not. Then Jack Screener asks if Mr. Passenger has anything metalic in his pockets and lists keys, coins, cell phones, cigarette packs as examples of items that will alarm the WTMD. Mr. Passenger checks his pockets and says he thinks he's got it all. Then Mr. Passenger hesitates and asks if he should remove his belt. Jack Screener looks at the belt and thinks the belt should be okay. But then Jack Screener looks at the shoes and says he recommends that the shoes be removed and placed in the x-ray. Mr. Passenger then removes his shoes and looks for a bin to place the shoes in. Jack Screener runs to the front where the bins are stacked and retrieves one for Mr. Passenger. Just as Mr. Passenger is about to enter the WTMD, Jack Screener asks him if he remembered to keep his boarding pass handy. Mr. Passenger says that he just showed the boarding pass to the ticket reader just a few feet away. Jack Screener explains that the ticket reader is looking for one thing and TSA is looking for something else on the BP. Finally, Mr. Passenger walks through the WTMD. Jack Screener greets the next passenger and the whole process repeats itself.

That's a very inefficient bin loader you have there, Bart. Here's what happens with a bin loader: Mr. Passenger walks up to the table and jams his 3 or 4 carryon into bins which Jack Screener promptly removes and places on rollers. "Sir, do you have your boarding pass on you before I start sending your things through?" Mr. Passenger says yes it's in his pocket or retrieves it from one of his bags. Then Jack Screener asks Mr. Passenger if he has a laptop or camcorder in any of his bags. If Mr. Passenger says no, Jack Screener pushes bags into xray and gets that process started while in the meantime watching Mr. Passenger check his pockets and reminding him that the keys, coins, and cell phone he just put back in his pocket are metal. Jack Screener then hands the boarding pass back to Mr. Passenger for the 2nd or 3rd time while pushing the bin into the xray. Here's what happens without a bin loader: (Scenario 1) Mr. Passenger approaches and jams everything, laptop bag, backpack, grocery sack full of souvenirs, lunch sack, and jacket into one bin and tries to jam it into xray tunnel. (Scenario 2) Mr Passenger approaches and dumps everything on the rollers (he may push it into the xray or he may just leave it there for the xray guy to sort and load), then walks through alarming the metal detector. He gets sent back out for a second pass and after patting himself down and removing a watch or belt or his glasses he tries again and alarms again. He then tries to go back out for a third try protesting, "But I have nothing on me! No metal!" He then joins the line for wanding, where he eventually divests a pocket full of change, a ring full of keys, magnetic money clip, an eyeglass case, an inhaler or smokeless tobacco, and a cell phone.

Quote:

I found that by not having bin loaders, passengers will divest more quickly and efficiently.

We've discovered that without loaders, most passengers don't divest enough items (or the wrong items) and many don't divest at all. Some have actually looked at the xray operator and asked, "What do I do?" I'm amazed at the number of people who state, "Oh my bracelet's not metal; it's gold," and "But my phone's all plastic."

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bart

"Retaliatory screening" means one thing and only one thing to me: screening someone in direct response to a previous behavior. Someone gives a screener a hard time and happens to be a selectee who didn't alarm the WTMD. Rather than conduct the quick body pat-down, as is now authorized by the SOP, the screener instead decides to give the passenger the full Monty with a hand-wanding, quick body pat-down and perhaps even ETD of the shoes. All loosely within the SOP by definition but none of it warranted by the situation. The screener decided to throw in the "extras" just to "teach" that passenger a "lesson." This, to me, is clearly retaliatory screening.

This is exactly what happened to me my last two times through LGA. Did not want to take off my shoes, did not alarm the detector and then was given the full monty. The excuse - continuous random. One time the agent lied and told the three-striper that I did alarm. I offered to go back through the detector as many times as they wanted me to, just to show them I did not alarm. Nope - full patdown for me.

You don't obey - you will pay. :td: :td: :td:

Quote:

Originally Posted by iluv2fly

Exactly. And it happens

All

The

Time.

Maybe not at Bart's checkpoint in San Antonio, but it happens at ORD, JFK, MIA and a variety of other TSA checkpoints.

Obey, citizen, or I'll do what I can to you. And you won't like it.

Often accompanied by a smirk.

Quote:

Originally Posted by eyecue

I hate not having a loader which usually we don't here at OMA because of just that reason. Also we always get people trying to put huge carry ons in the bins.

It really depends on the types of passengers that come through the airport to determine whether or not a loader is needed. For those that have more frequent flyers, you may not need one.

At my airport, we have some frequent flyers and we don't have to tell tehm anything. They're ready before they enter. We also have a lot of infrequent flyers and a loader isn't really essential, but helps a lot. The primary purpose for our loaders is just to make sure the items are placed and loaded properly to help minimize the number of bags needing to go through xray again. Many passengers try to cram as much into one bin as they can. We simply help rearrange them.

Normally, as we are talking to one passenger, the next 2 or 3 can hear the conversation and realize what must happen, so they already know what to divest and what they don't need to.

I do have to say that a loader does benefit our efforts here, although not required.

Could be TSO's need to learn the dance steps correctly prior to ordering their "customers" (par'm me while I vomit!) to do them. There is nothing---absolutely NOTHING--- the pax can do to obtain even a tiny bit of redress when insulted by a TSO. Reason? Powerlessness in the Constitution-Free Pig Pens.