I buy something from a fast food chain in LA and the same thing from a fast food chain in NC and the differences are minimal if any. Why do you suppose that is? Training, perhaps? If the same trainers went from airport to airport then the 'regional differences' would pretty much be gone. Chalk another one up to poor senior management at TSA/DHS.

You also can't chalk up fast food consistency to the high pay and great benefits the workers receive, to low turnover rates, or to powerful standardizing unions...

BTW and slightly OT, I wonder why some TSOs want bargaining rights regarding uniforms? Do the women want the right to wear skirts? Do they want hats? Custom cellphone holders? Do they want to redesign uniforms so taxpayers have to pay for new ones? What is different about their uniforms (and the input they have about them) and the pilots, or McDonald's employees or the military and their uniforms?

So grabbing a woman's crotch during screening might be ok up in New York but bad form in North Carolina, is that it?

Thought TSA claims it has a highly trained work force. Training is where standardization is taught.

Where is Bart when you need to ask a question about standardization?

I am already on the consistency bandwagon, gimme the same exerience at all checkpoints and I would be monumentally pleased.

I am interested to see what will come out of union negotiations, the list of things that were excluded was pretty large - pay, security regulations, and a whole bundle of other things that unions normally have some input on. I am interested to see what sorts of changes will come down and what sort of bargaining will be done. I personally am not a union kind of guy in general, but if they can foster some positive changes in the organization, I might be able to give them a vote to the good.

I have no idea on why they want uni control. It truly makes no sense unless it is something about the way they are made or something of that nature. I have not heard of an inordinate amount of complaints about the unis and the most common complaint I have heard was "why aren't they made in the USA?".

Yeah, it sort of seems like 'union lite' to me (worked at a very large company with multiple unions, government contracts, so I have some knowledge of some union issues). I guess I can kind of understand some of the 'concerns' that the union will be able to negotiate about - scheduling and leave - I read that there have been complaints about favoritism in those areas and that there's hope that a union can help. I'm doubtful.

But I totally didn't understand the uniforms being specifically mentioned, particularly since they are fairly new. Did y'all have a lot of input into the design/whatever of the current uniforms?

Not asking you to comment, but I will say that I've also read that some in TSA feel that the union will enable them to speak more freely without fear of repercussions. Again, based on what I've seen of unions in the past, that may or may not work out. I'm particularly skeptical because TSA 'corporate' doesn't listen to anyone and TSA middle management seems completely out-of-control and AWOL. Hard to tell who's running the shop, but if Kippie couldn't get the barkers to stop barking and Pistole can't get the TDCs trained to recognize the ten commonest acceptable IDs on the website, I'm skeptical about just how much the union can accomplish in these areas.

FWIW, I voted no union. I don't see an upside to them with how tied their hands are on what they can do. And as far as the uni's go, biggest complaint I've heard is 6 month backorders for pants and jackets.

Guess I should have 'googled' (a la Francine).

Depending on who you want to believe, there were some real problems when the current uniforms came in a couple years ago. Lots (or only 20) of complaints about rashes, apparently from the uniforms made in Honduras, not the ones made in Mexico. TSA ignored the problem until AFGE got involved. Apparently even then it was tough - FSDs would authorize alternative cotton uniforms, some managers refused to handle work comp claims, a real mess. Very interesting blog entry - first time I have seen disgruntled TSOs speak out against their own organization. Also complaints about the poor quality of the uniforms.

http://blog.tsa.gov/2009/01/formalde-hype.html

So..... the rule didn't change to allow 1 gallon bags at the checkpoint?

Inconsistency from airport to airport is almost understandable.

Inconsistency between check points in the same airport is less so.

But what is absolutely not understandable, or acceptable, is the day to day, or even passenger to passenger, inconsistency between screeners at the same check point.

http://www.spiegel.de/panorama/0,1518,448217,00.html

Bombenbasteln im Duty-Free-Bereich
'bomb building in the duty free zone' - this caused quite some uproar after the liquid ban was put in place - shows how to blow up a car using liquids purchased at Duty Free.

The union wants in because it makes them money. That is the only reason.

Agreed. As is the case for most unions, IMHO.

Sorry for not replying all last week, but my daughter and Grandbaby came to visit the week of my birthday and I was off, doing the 4am diaper changes and singing (quite horribly mind you, most Klingons would find it pleasing, but not most of us!) lullabyes!

I agree it seems like union lite, but then I read somewhere this morning that one of the first things the union seems to be focusing on is eliminating PASS and converting to the GS pay system - go figure.

I have also heard complaints of favoritism and in many cases unions have cut down on some of it, but also in many cases it has just shifted from management favoritism to union favoritism.... Kind of a catch 22 situation I guess.

I have nothing on the uniforms, they are only aboout 3 years or so old, and why would you push for a redesign as part of your serious negotiations? What is the end goal of that argument, we ant ... a different uniform? Different grooming standards (they are fairly lax compared to say - the military or LEO organizations or even most civilian security companies)? New patches? What end are they angling for or is this just a throw away piece being entered into the mix to make it look like they are giving something substantive up when negotiations get nasty? I too have no clue what they are working on with this as an angle. As to the input, I do not know how much was taken from the workforce, I know that I personally was not asked for, nor gave any input, nor do I know of anyone that was involved.

I think one area that seems to be coming out more and more as I read around is the whistleblower protections and the ability to speak up more freely about things that you disagree with, and suggest alternatives. I do not have any specifics in my experience, but I have friends and colleagues that have mentioned something along the lines of a "keep your mouth shut and do what they tell you or else" mentality (I will add a disclaimer that none of these folks work here with me). I am not in fear of speaking up currently, but I am at a small airport and have the benefit of being aquainted with all of the workforce on a more personal level than I would be at say IAD or LAS. I am just interested in seeing what develops and the direction the union takes in the negotiations, and seeing what happens after the contract goes into effect.

I have heard that about the dickies and jackets, not so much the pants so far.

Not that I have seen, no. I will double check on it, but I have not heard that anywhere but here (mind you I have been out a week, so I have to spin back up to speed).

I agree.

True, but sometimes good can come of the situation. I am decidedly on the fence - on the one hand, I think most unions are simply self serving gluttonous beasts that have outlived their need... On the other hand, I see where a union can enter into a workforce that is seriously undermanaged, mistreated and unfairly ajudicated by unworthy upper management get turned around and improve work conditions. Based on my personal experience and knowledge, the first description is usually the more apt one in recent times.

NO infact it is well known that x-ray operators have no discretion to allow liquids in a passengers bags to go through uninspected regardless of size.

Well, then clearly the only reason liquids would make it through the checkpoint without being removed is due to a detection failure, right?

I am not the only person here claiming that they routinely forget or deliberately refuse to remove liquids from cabin baggage at the checkpoint. What is your explanation for the number of us experiencing a near 100% detection failure rate at multiple airports around the country?