PresRDC,

In fact, in another thread TSAMGR did just that: explained what shoes are "profiled" for additional scrutiny even when they don't set off the metal detector. Profiled shoes are those which appear to be more than 1 inch thick including any heel.

It seems pretty simple. I'm not sure why the TSA doesn't just put it on the signs in the airport.

Because, if it's like my airport management has said that the height thing is considered SSI. We were briefed not to talk about it anymore when the last SOP came out.

Another one of those inconsistence things.

From TSA Web Site: http://tsaweb.tsa.dot.gov/tsaweb/dis...0005198004841f

It is a year old but it shows it really isn't SSI. Plus if anyone looks at the type of shoes being profiled, it is easy to figure out.

Unless of course one is at an airport where the FSD is an incompetent communist and then all shoes are "profiled"...

Spiff, did you have to go there? You could have made your point without the name calling.

I thought I had toned it down with that remark instead of some of my more scathing opinions of such FSDs...

Incompetent is probably the kindest thing I can say about FSDs who play Shoe Carnival. Communist.... well I suppose I can leave that part out, but I definitely feel such FSDs are also extremely un-American. Communist is pretty much an antonym for American....

Hey man, I'm trying. Rome wasn't burned in a day.

I know, like I said you are preaching to the choir on some things. Just trying to be a little more civil. Remember you are in the company of the local grunts here. Preaching about how bad the agency is and what should be done really goes nowhere. No one from TSA has the power to do anything. We try to do our best for the areas we work at.

Maybe instead of venting and spewing venom you could give us some best practices you have seen during your travels. For the most part the shoe policy is what it is, I don't agree with airports that do not follow the SOP.

I ask for intelligent constructive ideas. Spiff, I know you are well versed in the WTMD and X-Ray systems, we have had some very productive conversations and I think your view could help some of us get little ideas done.

Define "best practices" .

I have the feeling that not everyone here would feel that the same level of searching and questioning is acceptable. And it is a balance we seek, since anything short of prohibiting air travel is taking a safety risk. First, we would need a poll on this topic, because I feel some on this board would accept to board a plane where no baggage was checked in any way. I am not sure I would, because bagage check can prevent some honest mistakes. I for one bless the screener that discovered a security metal key that I thought I had lost, and which was in the pocket of a shirt I rarely wear

But on the other hand, if I were a terrorist, I wouldn't try to smuggle explosive on board (which is currently difficult) but I would simply fire a put my explosive in the middle of a crowded area (bar, hotel...) where it is far easier. It is, after all, the way most terrorists attacks are done so far (Madrid, many times in Israel, Bali...). So I don't think it's wise to spend a lot of energy to try more than preventing honest mistakes. Especially when doing this shows we are prepared to change the way we live, which in itself is a victory for the terrorists : they succeeding in making us fear them. What will we do next ? If someone puts a bomb in a bar, injuring thousands, will we have an explosive detection device at every door ? After the train station attack in Spain, many people gathered in the street to show they didn't fear to congregate even though it was risky.

This said, I feel that what is most upsetting is not the security procedures, but the fact that they are not the same everywhere (even in the same country, I mean). It lets the traveller feels that is not treated as he should. It MAY be ok to say : this type of shoes is forbidden on a plane. It is not acceptable to have the same pair profiled sometime and sometime not (I am speaking of a theoric example here). It may be upsetting also if the security checks are to lax. I have taken the plane without ANY reasonable ID. I got up late one, arrived at the airport, was asked for ID when I wanted to buy a ticket and discovered I had none. I paid by credit card, and asked if I could use their fax machine. I called Ms Richelieu and asked her to fax me my ID card. It worked, but the printed picture was only a dark outline. I was sure I wouldn't be able to pass security. I did, no question asked, and in fact I did TWICE as I had a connecting flight. On this day, I lost all confidence in ID check in France. But if I could pass an ID check so easily, why even have them ? Even if I was glad to have my flight, I think it would be right if I had been denied boarding.

So how can you have "best practices" when some will complain when there is not enough security, and other will think this is harassment, some will tolerate removing a piece of clothing, other won't... Some will feel safer to be checked in private, I would prefer to be in public (at least there are some witnesses if things go wrong and the screener drops my laptop on the floor)... Do you really think you 'll accomodate everyone ? It's a personnal decision to decide if it's worth travelling by an airport according to the way checks are made there. I have read here that there are distinct difference between airports. Why not have a thread in the travel report forum to grade airport on their customer-friendliness ? (especially because I wouldn't mind opening my laptop if asked politely, but I would if I was barked at. It would help people decide, instead of dreaming about a perfect policy.

Another idea, difficult to implement, is to let the airlines decide the level of security they want. If a plane is hijacked, it will be shot by the air force. So 9/11-like events are unlikely to happen again. As the passengers are the one taking the risks, they should be allowed to choose. It is a totally liberal approach of the situation, and probably a dream, but it would make everyone happy.

OK, after reading a FFs version of War and Peace I think I need to clear something up. The best practices I mean are some of the things you see at different airports such as the shoe tester, a table in the que so you can pre-divest, bags so you can put change and personal items in so it is easier in the composure area. Things that we can do at the local level. Policies like the shoes profiling are from Headquarters (I'll beat you to it Spiff; having a consistant policy is our wish too. Bad FSDs!!).

I am trying to find little things we can do at my two airports to make the experience a little easier on the passengers.

Hi TSAMGR,

Thanks for asking about best practices. One thing that some airports have allowed in the past: putting your jacket (with nothing in the pockets) under your laptop for padding as it goes through the xray. At first, many airports allowed this, but the rules seem to have gotten stricter. If there's any flexibility left on this point it would be appreciated.

Also, I do think it's essential that screeners not use the threat of "You won't be flying anywhere today" lightly. At BWI, I used to hear this sentence all the time, when quibbling with the slightest point of procedure with a screener. I think you're already sensitive to this point, TSAMGR, so I'll assume your airports meet this request. In addition, it would be nice if screeners were advised not to needle passengers with condescending talk. The screeners I see sometimes get a kick out of picking on people who obviously dislike or object to the screening. I've had the experience of several screeners ganging up on me to tease me for the way I looked uncomfortable or unhappy about being sent to secondary.

I think passengers do better without the intervention of a hovering person right at the x-ray entrance. I prefer to be allowed to send the stuff down the chute myself. Right or wrong, I take offense (like I wasn't moving quickly enough or I did something wrong?) when there is a screener rearranging my bags, and especially when a screener lifts things out of my hands! I know that sometimes the arrangement needs to be fixed by a screener, but the least intervention necessary would be best.

my two cents.

TSA procedure states nothing in the bins but the new bins we will pilot have foam and are set up to minimize the sliding around (sorry, I told the manufacturer we would spill the beans until they were ready, I'll give you more when I can)

As far as the "you're not flying comment", I understand what you are saying. Screeners should be referring any problems to the Supervisor and the Screening Manager. In my mind, the Screening Manager should be the only one making that determination with the LEO and Airline Supervisor. No it shouldn't be taken lightly but there are times when this must happen. We haven't done this much, but when we did it was because the passenger was so drunk they couldn't stand. The airline refused to let them fly. I have pulled screeners to the side and told them to knock off the attitude. Almost all of our screeners will great you with a smile, help you through the process and hope you have a nice flight. We had a few "wonderful" screeners but they didn't last too long.

The position you refer to is called the Bin Loader. This position serves a few functions. They are there to assist passengers set their items, make sure the bins are spaced so the X-Ray images are easier to read and don't have to be re-screened and expedite the line. We have had people just dump their bags on the divesting tables and walk through the WTMDs or wait until they get right up to the belt then divest everything thus holding up the line. I have helped out and worked this position and have found people appreciate the help.

I understand you concerns and past history but perhaps you taking offense puts the screeners on the defensive. My suggestion would be once you head toward the belt state to the screener (in a calm voice) that you prefer to load it yourself. I can't guarantee it will work.

At a lot of airports you will probably have to load your own bags on the belt. Screener numbers are getting so tight that the bin loader position has been eliminated or left vacant.

TSAMGR,

Could you do me a favor and read the new SOP about loading of the xray. I could of sworn I read that other items can be in the bin with the laptops or camcorders as long as there to the side of the laptop or camcorder. I don't honestly have the time anymore to read the SOP at work because of screener numbers.

Gladgirl if I get a chance, I'll get the section and stuff for you to provide to screeners like TakeScissorsAway did. It won't let you place your laptop on top of your jacket but can place it to the front of the bin and help with the possible impact on the other side at least.

10.1-B-1-e

Must be submitted separately with no other items on or underneath them. Doesn't say anything about items being allowed next to the laptop which doesn't necessarily mean you can do it.

Kids need to be fed...rent needs to be paid. I agree that the screening system is ineffective but it's not like they are being asked to commit murder so it's not fair of us to blame the little guys.

If I'm reading the posts on this thread correctly, there is a protocol for screening and wanding shoes, based to some extent on whether or not the shoe has a steel shank. Yes?

I admit that my shoes are cheap and made out of plastic and that I don't set off the xray. But if we're not allowed to take nail clippers on board, why is it okay to let steel shanks through, even if they're in currently part of a pair of shoes? Couldn't a terrorist just pull his shoes apart once on board?

Oh, and my solution is to let us take nail clippers on board, not to make people wear non-steel shank shoes!