abuse by newly empowered screeners
 

here's a link to a story in today's USA Today:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/attack/...urity-usat.htm

this article deals mainly with the treatment of crewmembers as they go thru security. if you'd like the quick and dirty, here are some highlights of the article:

A pregnant flight attendant based in Portland, Ore., "was subjected to a search during which screeners pressed against her belly" after the buttons of her blouse set off metal detectors. "When she asked them to refrain from doing this," the letter says, "the screeners became angry and threatened her with a strip search."

A female flight attendant "was repeatedly rubbed all over her body with a screening wand wielded by a male security guard" at San Francisco International Airport. "Although she asked him to stop touching her body, the guard continued to do so until she eventually stepped away from him. The guard got angry, then called for a female pat-down."

A male flight attendant passing through security at Boston's Logan Airport "was frisked, made to open his belt and the top of his pants and to shake them in front of passengers in the airport boarding area." When he boarded, he noticed a passenger with knitting needles, which screeners should have confiscated, the letter says.

A female flight attendant was asked by a screener at Los Angeles International Airport "to put her food container through the X-ray scanner. The flight attendant told the screener that food could spill, and asked that it be hand searched. The screener became irate and asked the flight attendant if she wanted a private room, without explaining why. The flight attendant indicated that she didn't know why she would need a private room, at which time the screener had armed National Guardsmen surround the flight attendant and demanded she strip down," the letter says.

according to the article, AFA president pat friend still seems to think this is temporary and will stop when the screeners become federal employees. apparently she's never had to deal with a postal worker with 20 people in line and a scheduled break.

if the most frequent flyers of all are being subject to this harassment, what will happen to our once a year flying mothers and grandmothers?

looks like we may have opened a real can of worms when we traded freedom for security...

What's REALLY sad is that some idiots think that this kind of behavior is justified because of our newfound "security" needs. I have been complaining about this kind of thing from the very beginning, but the news media was slow on the uptake.

Bruce

I like it when they confiscate a pilot's nail clippers, before putting him in a cockpit with a fire axe in arm's reach.

I guess you can argue that you don't want disgruntled employees armed (witness FedEx of years ago), but if they've got an axe sitting right next to them anyway? And it's just nail clippers? Come on.

Not to mention the entire plane under their command...

it's like they are getting even with us....

What do you want from $7 an hour felons?

The fact that they'll become federales isn't what will increase the competence of screeners. What will increase their competence is the pay hike from $14,000 a year with no benefits to $35,000 a year with benefits.

At that pay rate, screening starts to look like a decent job for a college student who is graduating with a liberal arts degree.

And I'm so not slamming liberal arts degrees -- I have one.

Don't they have a security camera that records what happens at the security checkpoint? There should be a review of the tape, and such offense as described in the article should be grounds for dismissal.

Have you ever actually tried to fire a Federal Employee?

Regards,
-Bouncer-

Yes, indeed! When I was a Fed, I spent 2 years trying to fire someone. It seemed like an open-and-shut case to most observers, but in the end we lost.

Bruce

The weekend before Thanksgiving, I received a full body pat-down by a female employee at LGA (I am female too) I did NOT set off the metal detector, nor did they ask to look at my luggage more closely.

Pissed me off, but know by looking at the screeners that arguing would simply make me miss my flight.

This kind of security is a joke and will only serve to anger FF's and does nothing to improve security. I just think it will be worse after federalisation of the employees.

------------------
I Love New York

i would imagine that the people who stare at htose screens all day know exactly where the blind spots are, and take advantage of em....

Boston Logan seems especially problematic over the last couple of weeks and I think largely because there is such pressure to step up security at BOS in particular. I will say that while I am glad they are working to improve and try hard to be cooperative so that this can work, there need to be better standards in place. Some things slip through and many others are harrassed and treated inappropriately. I have had to undo my pants in public and once was not patted but grabbed in the crotch. In any other setting this would not go and frankly I was stunned. I feel even worse for woman who are regularly fondled and patted. Not that there should not be such measures in place, and if it makes for a safer world they may do as they must. Just make sure that it is neccesary and that if done it actually works.

Couldn't decide which line made me laugh more:

according to the article, AFA president pat friend still seems to think this is temporary and will stop when the screeners become federal employees. apparently she's never had to deal with a postal worker with 20 people in line and a scheduled break.

What do you want from $7 an hour felons?

Just because the detector didn't beep doesn't necessarly mean you didn't set it off. I haven't heard a detector actually beep since 9/11 but they still were doing secondary checks of people.

This crap is unacceptable. I want to see more cameras in airports, especially at the screening point. Besides any possible law enforcement benefits, when screeners are sexually harassing people, complainants can simply tell them to roll the tape.

Maybe if the screener is convicted of sexual harassment there may be a slightly better chance of getting them fired, even if they are a federal firing-immune employee.

d

Some of the newer metal detection wands no longer beep as it passes over metal. There's a color-coded bar which lights up as it passes over metallic items, indicating how big a disturbance is recorded.

Besides a count as you are sweeped, the new ones also record how much TOTAL is recorded, and if the total is too high, you get extra screening. The idea is that someone might get away hiding contraband behind items like belts or in boots. The total count lets the screener see if there's an abnormally high amount of metal on this person.

A friend of mine worked on something like this.