Secondary Screening
 

I don't understand what all the big fuss about the shoes is anyway. Granted, it's assinine that the new directive came down that requires us to "suggest" that pax remove their shoes, but it is enforce and for as long as it is screeners will be asking you to remove your shoes. Granted also, you can refuse to remove shoes and walk through and get that secondary screening which you all seem to be screaming bloody murder about. However, apparently none of you have refused to take your shoes off since no one has posted what the consequences of refusing are; namely, should you refuse to remove shoes, then you go for secondary screening and your shoes get swiped (with you in them), and tested on the explosives machine. Big deal, big fuss, for what 90 seconds of delay? You are all going on about "wand raping", civil liberties and inconveniences when in reality that secondary screening is most likely a far less imposition than that of being chosen for random secondary screening (which includes shoe removal and wanding).

Why should we willingly submit to any harassment that was stupidly mandated by your jackass bosses?

Sadly, as long as your bosses act like clowns, you're going to keep hearing about it both on this board and at the checkpoint when you harass people.

------------------
"Give me Liberty or give me Death." - Patrick Henry

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Spiff:
[B]Why should we willingly submit to any harassment that was stupidly mandated by your jackass bosses?

Well, since you're going to have to submit to it if you want to fly, why would you opt for making a big scene about a process that's only going to put you 90 seconds out of your way, if you don't take your shoes off that is? Making a scene only ends up making your stay at the checkpoint that much longer. I cannot tell you how many people I pull for continuous "wand raping" who spend so much time fussing about the process and demanding they be allowed to get their shoes, bags, etc. that I could have had them wanded and on their way by the time they finish, if they'd only let me do my job. The secondary screening process for non-shoe removal takes about 90 seconds, the secondary screening process for continuous takes about a minute longer, at least when I'm wanding it does. I do my job effectively, efficiently and rapidly since I have so many other "randoms" to select.

I'll be fussing too if you try to separate me from my belongings to be secondary screened. This is just completely unacceptable to me. It won't happen.

------------------
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety
deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Ben Franklin

[This message has been edited by tazi (edited 06-18-2003).]

I don't think I take it as personally as Spiff, but I think the greater problem is that secondary inspections and the shoe obsession don't make much scientific sense.

It's not your fault, screenergal, nor is it the fault of your immediate superiors.

The current screening strategies, however, are reactionary rather than scientifically sound. As jetBlue CEO David Neeleman said on "60 Minutes," "we're looking for a needle in haystack, and right now we're looking at a lot of hay."

"Random" is perhaps the most dangerous word. Random screening has never been demonstrated to work in drug testing, nor screening for diseases, or in many other operations. US Customs abandoned random baggage screening years ago. So why should it work in airport security?

And, as you've noticed, passengers DO take it personally. And I don't blame them. It's unpleasant to think that everybody now has to take off their shoes because one man unsuccesfully tried to bomb a plane with shoe explosives. He had a suspicious passport and was denied boarding the day prior, so we're being punished by inconsistent security by ICTS in Paris (like all passengers, Reid had been interviewed twice, gone through Aeroports de Paris screening AND ICTS screening.)

This isn't the first time that shoes have been a focal point for airport security. There was a time in the 80's when everyone at Heathrow had to take off their shoes. Hats became an issue in the 90's; now we're back to shoes.

Let's hope that some of this will subside. The TSA is beginning to listen to policy analysts and industry representatives who have shown that there are better ways to conduct passenger screening. The current methodology is flawed, unpleasant for passengers, and extraordinarily expensive.

Let's hope that we'll all begin to work these issues out as the airline industry--and the economy as a whole--begin to recover.

And, as many here have said before, where would we be today if Richard Reid, the attempted shoe bomber, had hidden the bomb in his underwear instead of his shoe? Would we all be getting our underwear searched by screenergal and her friends? And God help us if someone hides explosives in a "body cavity" someday. Even screenergal might draw the line at that! Certainly she wouldn't be in a big hurry to fly, I imagine!

Bruce

We object because it is the right thing to do as an American who cherishes freedom. Our fathers fought and died for our freedoms and anyone who tries to take freedom away or even erode it is our enemy.

People who don't stand up and object to erosion of freedom are un-American. That's why I'm glad to see plenty of people objecting here and in the airport checkpoints. At SFO, which seems to be the worst place for shoes, myself and two other people were getting wanded for refusing to take our shoes off. One of the staff seemed used to it and took our objection in stride. Another staffer was quite upset and put the passenger through extra paces.

I have refused to take my shoes off at various airports throughuot the country. I have never seen the secondary screening take 90 seconds like you state. It takes 90 seconds for the TSA employee to check the wand "to make sure it is working" by wanding their own watch. The least amount of time is 4-5 min. for the screen. The longest has been 15 min. when they were backed up with three passengers to screen and only one screener (with 6 other TSA employees watching from about 8 feet away and laughing and joking around)

Screenergal you would do yourself a favor and all travelers if you would only open your eyes and see how the process works and in the process you would discover that this is the biggest waste of taxpayer dollers ever.

If I am out of line-of-sight of my stuff, either an unscrupulous passenger or screener might steal it. And don't give me BS about video cameras protecting me; that doesn't get my stuff back.

If you won't let me stay in sight of my belonings while you wand me, and if I'm not in a hurry to get to destination (which is usually the case; for business I try to travel 1 day early), then you and I are going to be spending a very unpleasant afternoon with your supervisor and possibly her supervisor discussing incident reports.

Try to understand the concern of the passengers. It's legitimate.

http://www.flyertalk.com/travel/fttr...m/thumbsup.gif http://www.flyertalk.com/travel/fttr...m/thumbsup.gif http://www.flyertalk.com/travel/fttr...m/thumbsup.gif

My thoughts exactly. http://www.flyertalk.com/travel/fttr...orum/smile.gif

Are we supposed to be scared that you will talk to our supervisors? Like me, he is retired military also and so is the next manager and also the FSD.Best have your .... together when you want too talk.HOOAH


[This message has been edited by tsadude (edited 06-20-2003).]

This is the attitude of TSA. If you don's like the way we do things ****off.

I'll celebrate the day when TSA goes away

This is an attitude that you will probably receive when you become less than cival. I understand why most policeman react the way they do when you poor *******s starting threatening to have their badge because we do not know who we are messing with blah blah blah

Your poor grammar, spelling and attitude reflect poorly on you and your pathetic employer.

You write like a high school kid (or a country bumpkin). Accordingly, I doubt you are employed by the TSA.

If you want to impress us with how professional you all are, perhaps you could take some refresher courses in all three areas. http://www.flyertalk.com/travel/fttr...um/biggrin.gif

I have only worked one airport, so can only speak about procedure and policy at that airport, and at our airport pax are never out of sight of their belongings, if they request their items are brought over and set down beside them while the screening process occurs, if they don't request the items are shifted from the belt to a table that is in plain view of them as they are being screened. As I said before, the secondary process for not taking off shoes is simply having the shoes swiped and that swipe run through the explosives machine. As I also said before, screening someone with the wand does take about 3 minutes (I stated it takes 90 seconds for the shoe secondary screening). With a pax who is cooperative, I can have them screened and on their way about the time their items come out on the belt. This of course is assuming the person isn't wearing much metal; with those who have all their bracelets on, metal studs on their pants, belts, etc. yes, it does take a bit longer. I do understand how many of you could feel this is an inconvenience, and as I stated in my original post I do agree the shoe policy is not the best thing TSA has thought up, but they have their reasons for it (all SSI of course) and since they do, then we are enforcing it. I also have to take my shoes off since they fall under the guidelines for inspection, the difference is, I do it at least three times a shift, and I just go ahead and do it instead of griping and complaining about having to.