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.

All this unjustified patting seem to be more to impress and reassure other passengers.

I did not set off the detector, nor the wand - do not wear nor carry anyhing with metal, yet was patted down and when i said that i did not like being touched the female agent called a National Guard
(I was still complying just letting her know how unpleasant the situation was) and was told that i would be "taken away" if i refused to which i pointed out i was complying just not enjoying the experience.

I was made to remove my shoes, walk back thru the metal detector barefoot , put the shoes on the belt and back steps again still barefoot - degrading and disgusting.

No paper slippers like in the hospitals..filthy!

I was pulled again out of the line before boarding the plane in business class and with a boarding pass showing 50k status and wanded again.

By the way. I wear thin travel clothes without pocket where it would be hard to conceal anything

This was the 3rd time in a 4 week period.. I'am 5'4 petite woman

San Francisco airport

Papotage

Hmmm...I'm curious, because I was recently traveling to Peru due to a death in the family with my mother. She's in her mid-50s and we were flying on two coach class FF tickets.

She was pulled for a more thorough search (while I was not) and after we boarded the plane she stated that it had seemed odd to her that a) she needed to submit to the extra search. b) that all the people submitting to extra searches were female (whether this is factual or perception I don't know).

My questions are the following:

1) What is the criteria used to select passengers for extra screening?

I ask this because after that flight I started looking more closely at the preboarding calls and I've noticed there is a tendency for the calls to come for people sitting in the last rows of the plane.

Coming back from OGG the 23rd it seemed all of them had infants (or at least 90% of them).

2) What are our rights or privileges in contesting or reporting what we feel are abuses in the system?

3) Is there actually any sense in doing these searches (especially if the are restricted to coach passengers as these usually are)?

4) Since FFs seem to be excepted from this procedure, is there any way we can get our traveling companions excepted as well? (I can hear the howls already)

You see I'm an elite member of AA, PLT to be exact, and my boarding passes were printed with a *CLR*, my mother's was not. After two days of not shaving and being pretty tired from being out the night before, I looked far more like the terrorist type than my dear mother (and with the laptop, mp3 player, phone, Blackberry, Visor PDA and air power adapter...well, come on, I should set off alarms across three airports.

4) Is there a consensus here regarding whether these procedures really work? Or are they just like the nail clippers and corkscrews? A joke?

Please forgive the lengthy post, thanks for your response.

Flake.

------------------
Travel light, travel cheap, travel often

My wife was "excessively probed" in Zurich by a security guard in an enclosed booth like a voting booth.

In Zurich the screeners who do the pat downs are all same sex as the passengers they check. They are all also older folkers. Eash person gets a minimum seach and there's no complaining about it....look at Zurich's safety record.

Oh, you were talking about airport security screeners.

I thought you were talking about FT board monitors.


Phew! http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/wink.gif

Effective immediately: No one will be allowed to wear clothes or carry anything beyond security. Screaners will all be members of AANR (American Assoociation of Nude Recreation) http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/smile.gif

[This message has been edited by mikey1003 (edited 12-02-2001).]

Unfortunately, there are only a few criteria at this point so searching is *supposedly* random.

What I've noticed though, is that they tend to try and search people with last minute tickets or generally who are umm.. more petite or feminine, and thus (apparently) easier to get to submit to the procedure. (hey, don't blame me, I'm just reporting observation, not making social commentary)

Think I'm lying? Consider how many older women are being searched or women with children, or young women. As opposed to big burly footbal player lookalikes like myself.

You think that's a coincidence?

Next time you fly, watch who they pick.

Regards,
-Bouncer-

Anyone watch 60 minutes tonight?
It TICKED ME OFF!
Our idiotic Transportation Secretary saying that little old 80 year old women should be searched with exactly the same frequency as young male muslim arabs. I know it's a touchy subject, and I do NOT advocate racial profiling where the potential crime is not tied to the race of the potential suspects.... BUT... Let's be realistic.

Bouncer.....I'm 6'2" and around 285(not exactly small)....and I was pulled aside and searched today...no changes in my tix...I'm CO PLAT with over 100 seg's this year and 145K miles flown....why me????????

I saw a guy in EWR get the "open your belt" bit today and he was a bit surprised they'd ask that. Also, if there's a bulge in your pocket they weren't letting it through, even if you didn't set off the metal detector. So you had to dump wallets and anything else in pockets on the belt. They should have at least had a sign to that effect & put more plastic baskets out, but those are minor things. I thought maybe they'd had a specific threat.

originally by aflyer:

In the 'olden days' when I was a lad flying back and forth from England to Ireland, Nuns and Priests were routinely 'not interfered with' by security - why should they be, they were Nuns and Priests, right?

Guess what guys, anyone can put on a black suit and a 'dog collar', or a habit.

Everyone should be equal under the present security guidelines - no more 'nodding' through just because you are there every week and they all know you - or I'm an EXP and therefore cannot be a risk.

It is interesting to note that a few weeks ago people complained about $7.00/hour security people being lax - now they are complaining becuse these same people seem to be trying to do a better job!

It's just like the airline food fiasco, everyone complained about it when it was offered, yet when it was taken away there was on outcry!!

None of us should consider that we are above scrutiny, thats how terrorism invades us.



------------------
I'd give my right arm to be ambidextrous

Well, I really do think a little profiling is called for. Right now, the "random" gate search is not random at all. The first person at the gate gets hand-searched. Then as soon as he's through, the very next passenger is "randomly selected".

I've figured out this is why I never seem to get searched. I'm rarely one of the first to board, since I don't elbow my way to the front of the line or hover at the gate. So I usually don't get near the gate until the "random searches" are already underway.

Think how easy it would be to avoid being searched if you had a group of 5 or 6. Just make sure the first couple of people have clean records and carry no contraband. Then have them make the search take a long time by being uncooperative, make a fuss, etc... The screeners get all tied up and the other 3-4 people get waved through.

Profile and search...... It's better than searching a 70+ year old lady and waving the 20-something guy through.

I feel that the current security measures are more to provide passengers with the illusion of security. I think the rational is that if public sees all this searching, and guards, and security, then the public will feel safe and be willing to fly. I don't mind reasonable and fair security measures that provide a REAL security increase, but I do mind unreasonable or unfair measures that will not stop a planned security breach.

Here is what I feel should be the search criteria:

1) Everyone should be subject to the same level of search in order to enter a secure area. No random searches, no profiling.

2) Once inside the secure area, absent of probable cause, no further searches can be performed.

3) More intensive searching can only be done when there is just cause. Not randomly, and not by profile.

4) The searches must be for specific items and limited to areas those items may be contained.

5) If immediately available, the least invasive means of search must be used, such as use of scanning instead of hand searches.

6) Upon request, a person has a right to have searches performed in remote or private areas.

7) Searches must be for a reasonable threat and provide a real enhancement of security.

I have flown several times in the last 2 months. The last time, I had checked luggage on a no-notice ticket. Because of my same-day flight listing, I was automatically flagged to have both my checked and carry-on luggage searched.
Here is some of the detail:

1) Carry-ons searched by xray at security point, then hand searched at flight boarding point. Hand serached again at connecting flight boarding point.

2) Check bags hand searched. When checked bags are searched, all privacy is lost. Anything you may have is placed on dirty tables, by people with dirty hands, for all to see. And at the check-in counter, there are people in long, slow lines with nothing better to do than examine all of your person items. I saw them take dirty clothes out of plastic bags and place the clothes on the table. We already expect our privacy to be lost with are carry-ons, but now even checked luggage. And for what? bomb detection? I had a 16oz bottle of talc with me - they did not open or scan it. How much explosive powder could have been in there? And further, when I asked what they were looking for, the bag checker said, "bombs, weapons". But weapons(knives, firearms) are legal in checked bags! I believe that these bag checkers are not looking for explosives because they aren't looking in the places explosives would be and they probably can't recognize explosives without doing chemical testing. So, if they aren't looking for explosives, and weapons are legal, then what are the searching my bags for? Public illusion!

What are you all complaining about? Some of these patdowns sound like heaps of fun to me.
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/biggrin.gif http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/biggrin.gif http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/biggrin.gif

"Everyone should be equal under the present security guidelines - no more 'nodding' through just because you are there every week and they all know you - or I'm an EXP and therefore cannot be a risk."

Why?

What's wrong with Profiling? We already do it.

Step away from the idealism for a moment and into the practical. If everyone were TRULY equal we'd ALL get a thorough prison inmate style search. But we don't. In addition, the idea should be to do a *Threat Assessment* of passengers and not blindly search everyone. Blind searches do NOTHING to improve security but do cause passenger distress and more systemic issues.

This isn't about equality as regards to employment or anything else. It's about the physical security of aircraft. There's no commonality between the two. Trying to apply a constitutional "rights" protection to an aircraft is a misapplication.

And foreign nationals DO NOT come under the protection of the Constitution. If a young foreign national wishes to purchase a one way FC ticket then he (or she) should DEFINATELY come under more scrutiny then Mrs. Jenkins , a 77 year old former second grade school teacher travelling on a two month advance purchase economy ticket. We already DO profiling on flights from certain nations where drug trafficking is very problematic. We've been doing so for years. It is pound foolish to do otherwise.

So we are being foolish. And we need to stop.

It's not difficult to come up with a threat escalation scenario:

1) Under fifty years of age
2) foreign national/green card holder
3) Little or no luggage
4) Travelling alone or without family
5) Heavy accent
6) short notice ticket or cash ticket
7) Of probable Middle Eastern lineage.
8) source/destination a Middle Eastern country or country known to harbor/support terrorists.

And I'm sure other (better) identifiers could be added to the list. The point is, the more of these you meet the more likely you are to be searched. If you meet all eight you definately should be searched. And once cleared allowed to proceed without further delay. Just as the young men from South America are.

But you should NOT be bypassed in favor of a *random (not random)* search of a grandma travelling with an infant both of whom are from DesMoines. To do so is to destroy the point of searching at all.

Regards,
-Bouncer-

I'd like to add a 9th criterion:

9) Male


While that might seem very politically incorrect, absolutely none of the terrorist attacks has been planned or executed by women according to all media and governmental sources.

I have no issue with the hand checking of any carry-on or checked-in luggage. But there is no logical national security excuse for groping female passengers.

I've seen way too many females getting the search. The whole system seems misguided.

Many of my flights are short haul on Southwest and my solution is to drive.

Lots of screeners are reveling in the ability to engage in a little class warfare, taking special joy in beating up on anyone who looks like a business traveler. I love how they yell at the lines of passengers drill-sergeant style. I openly laugh at them as they walk by yelling. Also highly recommended is taking names and writing letters -- especially for the patting-down offenses mentioned here. I find that "excuse me, can I see the name on your badge please?" said while holding a pad and pen does wonders.

To end on a positive note, however, has anyone noticed that the parking lot car screeners at SJC are extremely professional, thorough, and polite? Wish those same folks worked at the gates.

Agreed -- the SJC parking lot screeners are quite polite and professional. But I would be more enthusiastic about them if they hadn't left my trunk in such a mess after they went through it.

well, since i started this, i should give you all an update.

mrs. duxfan and i flew NW from CLE-MSP-PDX this weekend. had some interesting observations:

1. i was taken aside at the security screening for a secondary check at CLE. however, the guard was trying to get me to leave my briefcase, suitcase, and tray with cell phone on the belt while he did it. he kept asking me to step away from the x-ray machine while the other "guard" was running something back and forth, preventing me from retrieving my items. after the 3rd time he tried to get me to step away, i told him that "under no terms will i step away from my bags." he then picked my bags up off the belt, took them to the table nearby, and gave me the frisking of a lifetime, including the belt! didn't open my bags tho.

NW at CLE was the most efficient by far. they called everyone who was "randomly selected for a further screening" before boarding had started, took them out of the way of the boarding process, and violated their privacy there.

3. At MSP, it was different. no one called in advance. when FC boarding was called, mrs. duxfan started heading for the gate. i saw what was going to happen and grabbed her. i then saw the security guard tag the person who got to be the first to board. we walked by.

3. at PDX on the return, i got tagged for the first time. some had been called in advance, i got tagged as we were boarding. and since the NW agent never bothered to offer preboarding for FC, i was just a face in the throng. myself and two people behind me. of course, i was the only one with full carry on luggage. (briefcase and suitcase) full wand and pat down treatment. followed by a search (i wouldn't call it thorough) of my briefcase. this is where i had a problem. i was told that i could not help the agent open the compartments on my bag. nor could i help her as she fumbled around with the small camera bag i had inside my briefcase, which had my $800 digital camera. i just had to "stand right there sir". then watch the same thing as they pawed thru my suitcase.

then, to make matters more interesting, they let the people on line for a search behind me board the airplane because my search was taking too long. we must have be too clse to the newly scheduled departure time. to quote the agent directly, "its not necessary". if it's not necessary, why did we start it to begin with!?!?!?!!?

one thing i noticed in MSP. i noticed that it was not necessarily a "security guard" doing the searches at the gate. in many cases, it was a NW ramper in their grey and red uniform. are we deputizing rampers to works as guards now?

the whole experience left a bitter taste in my mouth. a screener can by anybody, and they can be looking for anything. or nothing, because they don't know what to look for? there appear to be no standards in place, and i did not feel any more or less safe.

IMHO, the searches at the gate are intrusive, and serve no other use than to make people FEEL more secure. it does nothing to actually improve security. there is no IDENTIFIED THREAT! either announce an identified threat, and look for it, or quit the "random" searches of people who meet no criteria for further searches.

this will make me stop flying when i can drive. i had less difficulty flying internationally last month than i have flying domestic this month. and my passport has stamps from both khazakstan and uzbekistan from earlier this year. you'd think i'd have more trouble getting on an international flight!

i'll get off my soapbox now.... thanks for listening...

i agree, it's totally out of control. the other day at ORD, i was "randomly" chosen for an additional search prior to boarding, along with three other people. the "security" guard was this big fat guy, and he was pretty gruff. he wanded me, then went through my briefcase. i had just been to macdonalds, and he searched my macdonalds bag!! it doesnt stop there - he ate about five fries, and TOOK A BITE OF MY BIG MAC SANDWICH telling me that it's all routine, and he has to make sure there is nothing hidden in between the all-beef patties or the sesame-seed bun. then, after taking a huge draught on my coke, he said, "you're all set!" and i could board. as i was collecting myself, i noticed that everyone chosen for the extra screening had a fast food bag as well!!! IT'S INSANE! i talked to the others, and it turns out that he ate a little bit of everyone's food except the guy that had been to cinnabon.

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/wink.gif

He should have punched you in the mouth and told you to "Have a nice day" too.

Two questions for the legal eagles reading:
at what point does some of the conduct described here become simple assault, and,
regarding the last absurdity, at what point does such conduct become petty theft?

Perhaps we, the abused and offended, should
delay our departure and call for the law.

Incidents like this one surely will be few and far between but it is up to us, the customers, to insist on a reasonable standard
of profesionalism and this incident certainly is not that. There must be supervisory people somewhere near and to ask for their intervention is quite reasonable.


[This message has been edited by nathan detroit (edited 12-04-2001).]

homey, thanks for the report. I don't know whether to laugh or cry!

What should one do? Call over the national guard and make a complaint? What's the best measure here? I personally would be very irratated if they take a bite out of my child's pizza.

I don't mind reasonable searches but where is the professionalism? The attitude of some of these people is so hostile and aggressive, others seem to be on a power trip looking to have a good time at a passengers expense. If they are going to use these $7 an hour bozos then at least have one highly paid supervisor at each station so that there will be someone there with some common sense to keep things in line. While I was into flying allot after 9/11 to support American Airlines, my experiences with security in the US (I fly to Europe allot, mostly the UK, and there they seem to have no problem getting people who can act with a professional attitude) have been unpleasant to say the least only because of the attitude of the security personel and not the searches which I welcome as I think most of us do if they are done in a reasonable and professional manner.