You are going to come at me with a 4-yr old press release regarding inadequate background checks by sub-contractors hired by the TSA? Last I checked it was 2008.

It would probably be safe to assume that since these findings were made 4 YEARS AGO, appropriate corrections have been made.

Don't attempt to insult with outdated "google" articles. Find me some updated information that TSA is still behind or hiring those with serious criminal convictions, and I will be glad to say I'm wrong.

Since we're up to providing links, here is the one that TSA put out after the deficiencies were found by the NY Times (IN 2004):

http://www.dhs.gov/xoig/assets/OIG_TSA_report_PR.pdf

Funny, I can't seem to find any recent articles that implicate the same.

Sure enough SgtScott31, why believe me? How about a TSA screener named Barbara Peterson who wrote in March 2007 (certainly a bit less than 4 years ago) that not one of her references were contacted. Does not sound like such a thorough background investigation to me.

http://www.concierge.com/cntraveler/articles/10624?pageNumber=3

It takes two minutes to fill out the information requested on the application and press the send button. Within three weeks, I receive an e-mail saying that I've made it past the first round. I then report to a location I was told not to reveal, for a surprisingly arduous test of my aptitude for picking weapons out of what amounts to a lineup of X-ray images of baggage. After an hour, I leave with a throbbing headache and the conviction that I've failed completely. But that same day, I receive another e-mail from the TSA with an effusive opener: "Congratulations! You have passed the…test to become a transportation security officer with the TSA."

Within a few days, I am directed by another e-mail communiqué to a TSA office at an airport. There, I am fingerprinted and consent to the expected background investigation. (I have no reason to assume it wasn't done, but not one of the half-dozen references I gave, including people who have worked with me professionally, was contacted.)

My "interviews" are so detached and impersonal that they could have been carried out by a robot. My first face-to-face with a TSA official consists of my sitting mutely while she reads to me stiffly from a script. I am then ushered into a different office, where another interviewer asks me a series of generic questions that he reads from his computer screen ("Have you ever helped anyone in need without being asked?"). The queries offer no opportunity for probing, and never during the hiring process am I asked about my reasons for wanting this job. One assistant tells me: "We are supposed to ask everyone the same questions," which, if correct, seems a rather literal-minded interpretation of a government-fairness policy.

When I'm contacted by phone, I get the odd feeling that I'm talking to someone in a telemarketing center. When I finally ask where the caller is located, I learn that I'm not dealing with the TSA directly but with Accenture HR Services, a division of the giant consultancy which was created out of the remains of the Arthur Andersen accounting firm. A quick check on the Internet reveals that Accenture and another recruiting firm, CPS Human Resource Services, were hired as a sort of "rent-a-personnel department" for the fledgling TSA. The contracts were valued at $776 million over five years. Although the TSA is hardly hiring at the pace it was five years ago—when some sixty thousand employees were needed to fill the ranks—the contracts with the two consultants are still in effect.


Like background checks, the history of an agency is a very good indicator of what currently going on or at the very least allowed to go on without much oversight.

If the TSA was a law enforcement (or even a licensed security) agency in Florida (and more than likely TN as well) they would have lost their credentials a long time ago.

I've already stated it once. The thoroughness of the background checks many of you expect to be done on airport screeners is not going to happen. I'm sure it was the same (or even less) prior to the inception of TSA. I am not surprised that TSA does not contact references of their TSOs (screening personnel). I have stated that a criminal history background check is conducted through fingerprint review (AFIS). Aside from an actual background check, I don't doubt that anything else is done. Anyone can obtain a badge to the secured (SIDA) area if they have a clean enough background. They can even have criminal convictions, but there are obviously certain convictions that will keep them from getting hired/access to the airport. This goes the same for every person that works in the airport. From the TSA screener, to the 19yr old Burger King worker. It is up to the TSA, LEOs, and others to make sure the sterile areas are considered a safe environment for the traveling public. You folks seem to imply that since someone is screening your luggage, they should be held to the same standards as a FBI agent. Not likely.

They make attempts to weed out the bad ones. Since the public outcry was huge following the 9/11 attacks, the federal government attempted to get something in place quickly. With that obviously came problems, one of which Knoty provided regarding the background check issue (via the NY Times). The Inspector General recognized this and addressed it the best he could.

I guess you guys expect more out of TSO hiring due to the fact they are digging around in your luggage. I assume that those with DHS do not feel it is necessary to apply the same hiring standards to an armed agent versus someone screening bags.

How well do you think the background checks were conducted by the low-bid contract security agencies who supplied the screening personnel prior to 9/11?

Even the most diligent and thorough background checks cannot weed out thieves or child molestors, but you can't tell me it is worse than before.

The funny thing is that they're wanting to use such things with SecureFlight to keep people off of planes. Just looking at their own ranks and problems there shows why this is a bad idea.

Sorry i hate to say it but i totally disagree with you TSA should be held to a higher standard similar to other govt employees and civil servants. As for politicians I trust them as much as i do lawyers which is none, and i wish there was a hunting stamp for them but thats another subject.

Well gee why not hold TSA to the same standard that other civil servants are held to in similar positions(a civil service test, physical agility, interviews, polygraph ,etc), like i bet you had a pretty extensive background check and polygraph exam ( i have seen a list of questions that are asked of local FD and PD candidates and they delve pretty far into your preferences as well as to other areas, and if your not truthful you wont make it through) when you where hired. I still think that punishments should be enhanced due to the fact that they are supposed to be better then that but TSA has a pretty bad track record all over. Background checks may not be able to predict future actions but better mental evals and such would weed out the sickos

of being bubbas b*%$h in the pen is a guarantee but still this guy should have never been able to get a job like this at all.

This is true. The background check form is online somewhere, it asks for previous addresses and jobs only back 7 years IIRC. Not a complete life history.

If you go thru enough links on the TSA site regarding employment, you get the disqualifying list. Note you can be a screener as long as you have not hijacked a plane or committed murder in THE LAST 10 YEARS!

If they were US citizens, alive, and finished with their jail terms, in only a few years the 9/11 hijackers could qualify for jobs as TSA screeners. Are the standards tough enough?

#19 is only for aggravated abuse, simple lewd or "morals" type acts are not listed. Depending on exactly what the Denver TSO is convicted of, he may not violate any of the TSA disqualifications below. :eek:

From TSA:

"DISQUALIFYING FINANCIAL ISSUES
1. Cumulative delinquent debt of $5,000.00 or more.
2. Unpaid Federal or State tax liens of any amount.
3. Delinquent child support arrears of any amount (not inclusive of arrears that are actively being paid).

Conviction within the last 10 years of any one or more of the crimes listed below will disqualify you for employment with TSA.
1. Forgery of certificates, false marking of aircraft, and other aircraft registration violations.
2. Interference with air navigation.
3. Improper transportation of a hazardous material.
4. Aircraft piracy.
5. Interference with flight crew members or flight attendants.
6. Commission of certain crimes aboard aircraft in flight.
7. Carrying a weapon or explosive aboard aircraft.
8. Conveying false information and threats.
9. Aircraft piracy outside the special aircraft jurisdiction of the United States.
10. Lighting violation involving transporting controlled substances. Essentially, this means that if you have been convicted of transporting illegal drugs in a plane without activating the navigation or anti-collision lights you are disqualified.
11. Unlawful entry into an aircraft area that serves air carriers or foreign air carriers contrary to established security requirements.
12. Destruction of an aircraft or either a domestic or international aircraft facility. It is a federal crime to use any device, substance or weapon, to intentionally perform an act of violence against any person at an airport or to destroy or seriously damage the facilities of such an airport.
13. Murder.
14. Assault with intent to murder.
15. Espionage.
16. Sedition. (inciting insurrection against lawful authority)
17. Kidnapping or hostage taking.
18. Treason.
19. Rape or aggravated sexual abuse.
20. Unlawful possession, use, sale, distribution, or manufacture of an explosive or weapon.
21. Extortion.
22. Armed or felony armed robbery.
23. Distribution of, or intent to distribute a controlled substance.
24. Felony arson.
25. Felony involving a threat.
26. Felony involving:
i. Willful destruction of property.
ii. Importation or manufacture of a controlled substance.
iii. Burglary.
iv. Theft.
v. Dishonesty, fraud, or misrepresentation.
vi. Possession or distribution of stolen property.
vii. Aggravated assault.
viii. Bribery.
ix. Illegal possession of a controlled substance punishable by a maximum term of imprisonment of more than 1 year, or any other crime classified as a felony that the Under Secretary determines indicates a propensity for placing contraband aboard an aircraft in return for money.
27. Violence at international airports. (See 12, above)
28. Conspiracy or attempt to commit any of the criminal acts listed above. "

Why should TSAers be held to the same standard? Cases like this prove that the TSA cannot control, or even know, what their workforce does.

For example, the Russian airplane bombing was a product of bribing a "security" person. We have seen numerous instances of TSAers breaking the law. When will someone be brazen enough to feel that lifting a bottle of perfume or stealing money from a checkpoint is not enough?

The TSA employs a risk-avoidance system with passengers. It only takes one -- passenger or TSAer -- to do harm. Background checks failed to catch the likes of Robert Hanssen, Jonathan Pollard and other people who go against their oath. It's when video comes out (like at PHX) of employess getting unfettered access that a "pilot program" (or some stupid acronym) that will "randomly" screen employees...and only to save PR face.

TSAers should go through the screening every single time they leave the "sterile" area. And that includes to simply re-stock bins at the end of the line. It isn't a "tit-for-tat" thing -- it's something that's needed to prove they are truly serious about security. Something that probably won't be embraced by TSAers...largely because it would inconvenience them.

The TSA right now is essentially keeping their fingers crossed that nothing major happens (aside from petty theft) among their workforce. The whole TSA "security" charade is ripe for a 60 Minutes piece. Only when the "security" hot dog is shown how it's made will people be outraged.

Well, since our government refuses to hold trials for them, their have been no convictions, and thus their actions on 9/11 do not disqualify them.

Some criminals are going to get through the TSA's screening process. Fair enough, stuff happens, what are you going to do about it?

However, when problems occur between TSO's and passengers at the checkpoint, it's important for any TSA managers and police personnel to realize that the TSO with which the passenger is dealing could be a liar, thief, rapist, whatever and that the passenger should be treated with respect rather than assaulted, tasered and shot dead.

Unfortunately, TSA doesn't have a justification for someone who gotten background check records. That's why TSA has been failed to do required fingerprinted screening process. It's taking own responsibility someone who have bad background checks. Its could be result to be termination from job immediately. I certainly remember what happened from years ago when FAA is orders screening background checks all employment at airports. if they figured out who have bad records but, its will be subject to arrested them. They will never work at airports for rest of the life.

Did I miss something on the news?

The only passenger I've heard who got shot was the one who yelled that he had a bomb and reached for his backpack when he was being held @ gunpoint (in the jetbridge). I think that was in Orlando. :confused:

No one with a criminal record should be offered federal employment in any kind of security or law enforcement agency.

It isn't all that difficult to find out if a potential applicant has a criminal record. If TSA can't, they are even more incompetent that I thought.

Could not agree more!

"Good job, TSA. Instead of trying to rid crime yourselves, might want to check with your own workforce."

So they're supposed to monitor the home email use of their employees now? What exactly are you trying to suggest here. Anyone who's watched CNBC has seen people from all backgrounds caught this way. Are you expecting that the TSA should replace what the police did in this case? Should we now have TSA workers dedicated to scouring the internet chat rooms for TSA agents looking to contact minors? I'm not sure what exactly you're expecting.

I'm glad they caught the guy, but it's the job of the police and not the TSA. Background checks can't catch crimes that someone will commit in the future.

What about people like Frank Abagnale? Blanket policies like this can restrict your applicant pool in bad ways.

If a reformed former terrorist wants to work with the TSA as part of a red team and the HR person is convinced that the person is truly reformed, why not employ him/her? What about a 30 year-old woman that was busted for marijuana at age 18? etc. etc.