OP's survey seems to me like asking around in the office from colleagues 'Do you like me?' That puts people in the position of having to decide if they wish to be honest, or to continue to have a future good working relationship with the person.

In OP's case, as they are in a position of authority over the survey respondents, it is akin to the boss asking the subordinates 'Do you like me?' How does one expect the respondents to answer that question?

In fact, I believe that there may have been an episode of The Office centred around this very scenario.

I think eyecue posted this then cut & run.

However, it does amaze me at the absolute arrogance here (NOT talking about you, CM, just in general). Despite what you think I and other employees are thanked on a daily basis. It does NOT mean everyone who thanks me agrees with all TSA policy; I would bet they do not.

But what amazes me is how the collective you dismiss such people, as I've seen you do so many times in other threads. I guess not many of you can actually see someone saying/believing "I don't agree with this policy, in fact I think it's stupid, but i support TSA in overall".

Just read through the threads where the FT community talks about the comments people make supportive of TSA in the media - contempt, dismissal, disdain.

Believe it or not, not everyone agrees with you. And surprising, they do not have to agree with you.

I know of no one who says I support TSA & I've got a feeling you don't either unless people tell you that & you believe them.

Ah, yes. The now one out of ten average that supports the TSA, which I refer to as the Single Percenters.

Sadly, I find the checkpoint experience (now expanded into the sterile area) so stressful that I am almost grateful on the rare (and it is rare) occasion that I go through without any barking, slamming, yelling, or rudeness, whether or not it is directed at me specifically, coupled with the anxiety of never knowing whether or not something that is within the posted guidelines is not allowed today at this checkpoint by this TSO. (Last time through ATL, I got stopped, my bag was already open before I cleared WTMD. I was carrying on a gym bag and had tossed a 'TSA-approved' lock in the end pocket. The TSO searching the bag said the x-ray TSO had never seen one before. He advised me that such locks were for checked baggage, not carryon, and should be left home 'next time').

Once I have cleared the checkpoint, the stress isn't over. Now I can get my drink (overly expensive, purchased in the sterile area) taken for testing when I'm sitting at the gate. This after a group of four TSOs cut to the front of the line at the coffee stand. Then I have to be prepared to shift any valuables from my rollaboard to my small bag at the last minute if a gate check delays me so much that the overhead bin space is gone before I board.

Yes, sometimes I'm almost grateful just to get through without being the specific target of a TSOs over-irritated impatient barking and swaggering.

Honestly, I would think TSOs would stop all the barking just to improve their own quality of life in the workplace.

It's not the ostensible goal of TSA (safe flights) that folks complain about, it's the implementation. Unfortunately, most folks don't distinguish between the noble aims of the organization and the implementation they confront at the airport. I do not know any 'Kettle' of my acquaintance who considers the checkpoints and gate checks and liquids in the terminal checks and cutoff locks as anything but a huge unprofessional hassle. I don't know anyone who thinks all the yelling helps.

I don't believe that the vast majority of posters here woke up one day and decided that they didn't like TSA. Something drove most people to that point. TSA didn't earn its reputation by being polite and respectful and logical and effective.

I don't believe that Argenbright had the same reputation, nor does airport security in most other countries have the same reputation.

+1000

To be fair, not everybody has had to deal with them yet!

That may be true for some, but I have hated the TSA from Day One. They were created in haste to serve a political agenda, not a security need. A week after 9/11 people everywhere were driving around with American flags fluttering from their vehicles and thus began the national insanity that has lasted to this day.

Almost ten years on and the TSA has nothing to show for the billions of dollars that have been wasted on them.

So, yes, I can believe the flag wavers politely say "That you for protecting me", but they don't know they have been had. The truly sad part of this, is even when TSA is finally revealed to have no clothes, there will still be no righteous anger. They will go with a whimper, not a bang.

When we're out of Afghanistan and the jihadi rhetoric has nothing left on which to feed, the TSA budget will be slowly siphoned away for other pet projects. Then will come the call to privatize and Argenbrite will quietly take back the reins.

Which I would prefer to call the "single braincellers".

I have no doubt that there are people that thank you after they pass through the check point. The problem is that they are not thanking you for keeping them safe, they are thanking you for making them feel safe.

Your agency violates the US Constitution by the mere act of existing but some people will still accept that because they need a security blanket.

Probably not in this audience, no. What I can see in just about any crowd would be a slight modification of that statement:

"I don't agree with this policy, in fact I think it's stupid, but i support reasonable airport security overall."

Of course, the trouble lies with what the TSA considers reasonable.

Yeah, right. The only people who hate the TSA are those of us who actually come in contact with them. Those who do not fly seem to think that the TSA is just peachy.

For instance, an IQ higher than room temperature.