Travel Tips for Security Screening
Dec 19, 2003 | 1:52 am
#18
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 75
Greg I meant by the triplets is the 1 or 2 or 3 FF's that seem to post the most and have nothing but negative to say and very little positive about the TSA. Plus it is the same thing all the time. I think we are all in agreement there are things wrong with the TSA. I just returned from the supervisory training that all supervisr's will or have been through. From listening to the ones in class it the big airports that have alot of problems. I attended in MCO, they have as many supervisors as ther are personnel at my airport. All their management is in another building 5 miles from the airport. I saw no upper management when I left so the supervior has to make the calls on things. When I left and walke thu the mag the hand wander *****ed out the walk thru person for not sending me to secondary. The walkthru person knew I was TSA and did what he was supposed to. After I informe the hand wand person that I was a supervisor he said they send aircrew to secondary I told him he needed to read the regs about who is exempt from secondary. If a manager I would ave informed him of what happened. The nice thing about the training is we get the supervisors e-mail address so I e-mailed one of the supervisors what happened. With the 2 chance thing going on at all airports within 30 days this should stop the shoe thing that most people ***** about. Maybe with the e-mail thing we as supervisor can change thing at our level
Dec 19, 2003 | 5:47 am
#19
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Louisville, KY, US
Programs: QF Plat - OW EMD | DL Gold / Starwood Gold
Posts: 6,106
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by Fenito:
It is difficult to say which shoes have shanks and which ones don't. So at our airport, we will usually look at the footwear and ask if you have traveled wearing those shoes and whether or not they alarm, and ask if you wan't to remove...if not, we don't force it.</font>
It is difficult to say which shoes have shanks and which ones don't. So at our airport, we will usually look at the footwear and ask if you have traveled wearing those shoes and whether or not they alarm, and ask if you wan't to remove...if not, we don't force it.</font>
Too bad my travels haven't brought me through GSO.
Best,
SDF_Traveler
------------------
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Ben Franklin
Dec 19, 2003 | 5:48 am
#20
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Louisville, KY, US
Programs: QF Plat - OW EMD | DL Gold / Starwood Gold
Posts: 6,106
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by Fenito:
::in my best news reporter voice:: In other news today. Emergency crews had to rush to several airports across the nation today when many screeners were told by their upper management they were allowed to use common sense. This news was apparently so shocking it sent several screeners in Boston Logan into cardiac arrest. So far no one is in critical condition and everyone is being treated for minor injuries at local hospitals. More detail later. Back to you Tom.</font>
::in my best news reporter voice:: In other news today. Emergency crews had to rush to several airports across the nation today when many screeners were told by their upper management they were allowed to use common sense. This news was apparently so shocking it sent several screeners in Boston Logan into cardiac arrest. So far no one is in critical condition and everyone is being treated for minor injuries at local hospitals. More detail later. Back to you Tom.</font>
SDF_Traveler
------------------
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Ben Franklin
Dec 19, 2003 | 6:32 am
#21
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Northeast MA, USA.
Programs: HHonors Diamond, DL Silver, TSA Harassee
Posts: 3,657
tuner,
I am going to respond assuming that I am one of your "triplets".
A: I post very little positive about the TSA because the TSA has been vastly negative. When the TSA does something right I'll be the first to commend it.
B: You yourself saw firsthand the power trip that most leads/supervisors are on. Imagine going through that multiple times each week.
C: The "Second Chance" policy is a step in the right direction, but it will not effect any change at airports that have the "de-shoe, or else" policy.
D: The TSA will NEVER give the country a return on our investment. It is one of the largest boondoggles ever created by congress.
I am going to respond assuming that I am one of your "triplets".
A: I post very little positive about the TSA because the TSA has been vastly negative. When the TSA does something right I'll be the first to commend it.
B: You yourself saw firsthand the power trip that most leads/supervisors are on. Imagine going through that multiple times each week.
C: The "Second Chance" policy is a step in the right direction, but it will not effect any change at airports that have the "de-shoe, or else" policy.
D: The TSA will NEVER give the country a return on our investment. It is one of the largest boondoggles ever created by congress.
Dec 19, 2003 | 11:32 am
#23
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: MRY
Posts: 539
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by Bart:
Great responses from everyone and thank you for welcoming me to FT. Just to clarify a couple things:
The underwear remark was an attempt at humor; poking fun at the government bureaucracy; "if you think the TSA shoe policy is ridiculous, imagine IF...."
MANY shoes DO have steel shanks. This is true (I see them when they pass through the X-ray). And it's also true that running shoes, flip flops and a small number of dress shoes do not have steel shanks. HOWEVER, a lot of shoes do NOT necessarily have enough metal in the shanks to set off the walk-through metal detector by themselves. The issue then becomes a matter of OTHER metal objects you may have on you which increase the likelihood of setting off the alarm. The suggestion to remove the shoes is made because it is usually easier to remove them than to take additional time removing belts, watches, jewelry, buttons, pins, tie tacks, etc. However, in the end, YOU the passenger have the choice to remove or not remove anything before entering the checkpoint. I make it a point to explain this to the people who process through my airport and there are a number of them who prefer secondary screening over trying to guess what else may have set off the alarm. What I don't do is harrass passengers. At my airport, we do not give the "shoes off or else" speech, and our supervisors and leads enforce this non-harrassment of passengers.
As for the general comment about the shoes, the walk-through metal detector is designed to detect metal. Period. It is the TSA screener's responsibility to determine the reason why someone alarms at the mag. The metal shank has characteristics consistent with the blade of a knife which explains why the metal detectors are as sensitive as they are. I understand the frustration that comes from 80% of the alarms resulting from shoes (the other causes for alarms are medical implants, body braces, cell phones, large amounts of change, etc). However, OTHER items we have found resulting from these alarms at my airport have been knives inside of coat pockets, live ammunition inside pants pockets, credit card knives inside wallets and a pair of scissors inside a pants pocket that was wrapped inside a paper towel. ...and unfortunately some have even tried to distract the screener by claiming to be a member of the Platinum Club, or that they fly out every week and because we should know them by now, we shouldn't subject them to this treatment, etc. Once the item is found and the matter is turned over to law enforcement authorities (deliberately trying to conceal an item, even a pair of scissors, IS a crime),
Once again, thanks for the welcome. Appreciate all the responses and look forward to meaningful discussions.</font>
Great responses from everyone and thank you for welcoming me to FT. Just to clarify a couple things:
The underwear remark was an attempt at humor; poking fun at the government bureaucracy; "if you think the TSA shoe policy is ridiculous, imagine IF...."
MANY shoes DO have steel shanks. This is true (I see them when they pass through the X-ray). And it's also true that running shoes, flip flops and a small number of dress shoes do not have steel shanks. HOWEVER, a lot of shoes do NOT necessarily have enough metal in the shanks to set off the walk-through metal detector by themselves. The issue then becomes a matter of OTHER metal objects you may have on you which increase the likelihood of setting off the alarm. The suggestion to remove the shoes is made because it is usually easier to remove them than to take additional time removing belts, watches, jewelry, buttons, pins, tie tacks, etc. However, in the end, YOU the passenger have the choice to remove or not remove anything before entering the checkpoint. I make it a point to explain this to the people who process through my airport and there are a number of them who prefer secondary screening over trying to guess what else may have set off the alarm. What I don't do is harrass passengers. At my airport, we do not give the "shoes off or else" speech, and our supervisors and leads enforce this non-harrassment of passengers.
As for the general comment about the shoes, the walk-through metal detector is designed to detect metal. Period. It is the TSA screener's responsibility to determine the reason why someone alarms at the mag. The metal shank has characteristics consistent with the blade of a knife which explains why the metal detectors are as sensitive as they are. I understand the frustration that comes from 80% of the alarms resulting from shoes (the other causes for alarms are medical implants, body braces, cell phones, large amounts of change, etc). However, OTHER items we have found resulting from these alarms at my airport have been knives inside of coat pockets, live ammunition inside pants pockets, credit card knives inside wallets and a pair of scissors inside a pants pocket that was wrapped inside a paper towel. ...and unfortunately some have even tried to distract the screener by claiming to be a member of the Platinum Club, or that they fly out every week and because we should know them by now, we shouldn't subject them to this treatment, etc. Once the item is found and the matter is turned over to law enforcement authorities (deliberately trying to conceal an item, even a pair of scissors, IS a crime),
Once again, thanks for the welcome. Appreciate all the responses and look forward to meaningful discussions.</font>
The airports that I frequent (except ORD) just recommend you remove your shoes/flip flops. There is more often than not no "or else" said or even implied, however by observing passengers it is obvious that if you do not, and pass through the metal detector and do not alarm, you are still directed to secondary to sit and remove your shoes/flip flops while they x-ray them. While I have not experienced a "2nd chance" airport, I look forward to it.
The oh so dangerous items you listed aren't credible threats (perhaps the ammunition, but it's a stretch). I realize they are on the "list". I wonder, just because a pair of scissors is wrapped in a towel how is this an attempt to conceal unless the "offender" confessed. How can any prohibited metallic item be concealed when one places it through the x-ray. Maybe they didn't want it poking a hole in something. I'd be more concerned with the glass wine bottle on board the aircraft being used as a weapon than scissors.
"Mr. Platinum" should be able to have a one time background check and then unlimited/unscreened access to airplanes just like every single unscreened ground person that accesses airplanes. Pretty ridiculous don't you think?
What's your position on checked luggage? For or against the leave it unlocked "or else" we aren't responsible for destroying it to "inspect" rule? Do you think this is a resonable request, to leave your checked luggage unlocked? Considering that all cargo on passenger planes is not screened but rather randomly screened it seems ridiculous to destroy someones luggage because of the need to inspect, while potential threats can easily slip through in cargo.
Tuner, I assumed you were including me in your triplets comment. Again, without de-shoeing and using my toes, I still count more than 3.
Dec 19, 2003 | 11:41 am
#24
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Long Island, NY
Programs: JetBlue True Blue, AAdvantage
Posts: 22
Although I am not a FF, I only fly maybe once or twice every other year but since I just recently returned from Maui Hawaii and had to deal with TSA, I will give you my input.
Fist off Barts comments will be helpful to future travelers who may stumble onto this site like I did a month ago. I read so many things about the TSA that I already arrived at airport (JFK) with a chip on my shoulder for them. What I encountered at JFK (AA terminal) was somewhat chaotic. TSA telling some to take off shoes, others not to, yelling at some people. TSA just looked at my Merrell Clog type shoes and said No you don't have to take them off. My husband's Boat shoes had to come off. My carry-on had to go through a double screening for whatever reason. At one point TSA telling me to get moving but still my bag was not returned. Finally TSA holds up my bag and say's it needs to be hand checked. Fine, Whatever. . . the guy was nice but kinda cold. I asked him why it was being hand checked and he just said sometimes the machine cannot see "everything" thus having a 3rd check. Upon arriving in Maui (OGG) our check in bag was not opened nor did it look like it was checked.
When returning home from Maui (OGG) I encountered very very friendly TSA people with the Aloha Spirit. First off they have some sort of metal device with a shoe imprint on it. Both my husband & I had to place our foot (shoe on) onto this thing. TSA say's "your ok" with a smile. This time my carry-on which had the same exact things in it cleared the scanner with no second checks. Even TSA said to us as we were leaving "have a safe trip home" which I reply "I wish this was my home" with a smile.
While waiting at the gate my husband & I were standing up front as we were due to board first. Just then a male & female TSA agents come up to us. Surprise . . we have been picked for a random inspection. I have to say we were laughing all through it. My husband is a NYC Police Officer and now the "search" was on the other foot. Even the TSA guy was laughing with my husband as it's just a random thing. No big deal. We are actually happy that they are checking. The female who searched me was courteous, etc... About the only thing that I did not "care" for was that they started boarding and the other passengers where all staring at us like we did something wrong but really there was no place else to go. Right after they let us go they grabbed another couple. When we landed in JFK our check-in bag had a locking plastic twist tie on it. When I broke it off I noticed a card inside from the TSA saying that our bag was inspected in Maui. Nothing was damaged or missing. The Kona coffee and trinkets all made it back home safe & sound.
Although I do not encounter TSA as much as some of you do but for my first time flying since 3 weeks after 9/11 my experience was positive.
Fist off Barts comments will be helpful to future travelers who may stumble onto this site like I did a month ago. I read so many things about the TSA that I already arrived at airport (JFK) with a chip on my shoulder for them. What I encountered at JFK (AA terminal) was somewhat chaotic. TSA telling some to take off shoes, others not to, yelling at some people. TSA just looked at my Merrell Clog type shoes and said No you don't have to take them off. My husband's Boat shoes had to come off. My carry-on had to go through a double screening for whatever reason. At one point TSA telling me to get moving but still my bag was not returned. Finally TSA holds up my bag and say's it needs to be hand checked. Fine, Whatever. . . the guy was nice but kinda cold. I asked him why it was being hand checked and he just said sometimes the machine cannot see "everything" thus having a 3rd check. Upon arriving in Maui (OGG) our check in bag was not opened nor did it look like it was checked.
When returning home from Maui (OGG) I encountered very very friendly TSA people with the Aloha Spirit. First off they have some sort of metal device with a shoe imprint on it. Both my husband & I had to place our foot (shoe on) onto this thing. TSA say's "your ok" with a smile. This time my carry-on which had the same exact things in it cleared the scanner with no second checks. Even TSA said to us as we were leaving "have a safe trip home" which I reply "I wish this was my home" with a smile.
While waiting at the gate my husband & I were standing up front as we were due to board first. Just then a male & female TSA agents come up to us. Surprise . . we have been picked for a random inspection. I have to say we were laughing all through it. My husband is a NYC Police Officer and now the "search" was on the other foot. Even the TSA guy was laughing with my husband as it's just a random thing. No big deal. We are actually happy that they are checking. The female who searched me was courteous, etc... About the only thing that I did not "care" for was that they started boarding and the other passengers where all staring at us like we did something wrong but really there was no place else to go. Right after they let us go they grabbed another couple. When we landed in JFK our check-in bag had a locking plastic twist tie on it. When I broke it off I noticed a card inside from the TSA saying that our bag was inspected in Maui. Nothing was damaged or missing. The Kona coffee and trinkets all made it back home safe & sound.
Although I do not encounter TSA as much as some of you do but for my first time flying since 3 weeks after 9/11 my experience was positive.
Dec 19, 2003 | 11:43 am
#25
Moderator: Coupon Connection & S.P.A.M
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Louisville, KY
Programs: Destination Unknown, TSA Disparager Diamond (LTDD)
Posts: 58,133
Bart,
I think that no one here will object to a secondary screening when they alarm at the WTMD, unless the sensor level is set so low that a stiff, non-ferrous/ferris breeze sets it off.
However, what many of us will object to is any form of secondary screening when the WTMD does not alarm. Such a policy is the source of many of my negative comments about the TSA and why I would rather see this agency disbanded.
------------------
"Give me Liberty or give me Death." - Patrick Henry
I think that no one here will object to a secondary screening when they alarm at the WTMD, unless the sensor level is set so low that a stiff, non-ferrous/ferris breeze sets it off.
However, what many of us will object to is any form of secondary screening when the WTMD does not alarm. Such a policy is the source of many of my negative comments about the TSA and why I would rather see this agency disbanded.
------------------
"Give me Liberty or give me Death." - Patrick Henry
Dec 19, 2003 | 12:08 pm
#26
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 2001
Location: LAX; AA EXP, MM; HH Gold
Posts: 31,789
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">Originally posted by Spiff:
Bart,
I think that no one here will object to a secondary screening when they alarm at the WTMD, unless the sensor level is set so low that a stiff, non-ferrous/ferris breeze sets it off.
However, what many of us will object to is any form of secondary screening when the WTMD does not alarm. Such a policy is the source of many of my negative comments about the TSA and why I would rather see this agency disbanded.
</font>
Bart,
I think that no one here will object to a secondary screening when they alarm at the WTMD, unless the sensor level is set so low that a stiff, non-ferrous/ferris breeze sets it off.
However, what many of us will object to is any form of secondary screening when the WTMD does not alarm. Such a policy is the source of many of my negative comments about the TSA and why I would rather see this agency disbanded.
</font>
With one exception, my thoughts exactly. Mineta the idiot instituted the "set off the WMD and you get the full treatment" rule following September 11, abandoning what had been a sensible "if you accidently left your phone or keys in your pockets you can empty them and get a second pass thru the WMD" policy that had universally been my experience prior to Mineta the Terrorist's changes.
There never was a legitimate reason to get the full treatment just because the dammed machine beeped, and everybody knows it.
Fortunately, some semblence of sanity has returned in the form of the "2d chance" WMD policies showing up at various checkpoints.
Now, if the second pass after emptying pockets (I refuse to use bureaucratic-speak like "divestment") still produces a beep, then the full secondary treatment may be warranted. Like has always been the case.
And don't even get me started on the subject of "random gate secondary inspections."
Dec 19, 2003 | 2:24 pm
#27
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 940
I've noticed that a lot of people don't really seem to have a problem with the carry-on bag checks.
I want to address the rescan on xray of some bags. The reason for a rescan sometimes, is to get a different angle on the bag, lay the bag down, or because of a weird image. The rescan can usually save a bag check.
But if a bag check gets called at one airport but not another, don't get to upset. Remember each airport has a different set of screeners, who are more comfortable on the xray then others. Maybe the screener at the first airport just wasn't sure what the item was, so had it checked. But the screener at the next knew exaclty what it was and didn't have to check.
Honestly, on a daily basis, we see at least one or two new items on the xray.
My airports policy is we can tell you what we're looking for and even ask you to point it out if you can. But we can't give you access to the bag until we've cleared it after a bag check has been called.
Dec 19, 2003 | 6:47 pm
#29
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 940
hehe Like I said, it's my airports policy to ask. It just seems to speed up the process.
Ask where the said item is, clear that area, rerun the bag through xray without item(s) in it, have the passenger on the way.
Average bag check seems to take about 5 minutes. Most people know where they put their stuff in their bag and it's just getting to that spot and finding the said item hehe.
PS Fenito, my airport has pretty much the same policy. Some consistence.
[This message has been edited by screenerx (edited Dec 19, 2003).]
Ask where the said item is, clear that area, rerun the bag through xray without item(s) in it, have the passenger on the way.
Average bag check seems to take about 5 minutes. Most people know where they put their stuff in their bag and it's just getting to that spot and finding the said item hehe.
PS Fenito, my airport has pretty much the same policy. Some consistence.
[This message has been edited by screenerx (edited Dec 19, 2003).]