Reluctant to Give Name
 

In the two instances where I have filed reports (retaliatory secondary screening) they were reluctant to give me names both times. I wasn't surprised, I just insisted. The supervisors were also reluctant, but it was my opinion that they were doing so to "protect" their subordinates, not to be rude. In both case I insisted, got the names (first and last, and the number). In the most recent incident (LAX) I was approached by at least 3 different more senior supervisors who wanted to know "if they could help me" in order to avoid the formal written report. As usual, no further contact from TSA.

No clarification needed on my part. I asked about it after a incident with another screener in the checkpoint. I see no reason to give a passenger my last name and my name tag is clearly visible for them to read. My SIDA Badge is not on public display other then in SIDA areas and passenger have no reason to see it.

We went over this about a year ago I think. I don't feel comfortable with a passenger knowing my last name because they always seem to be ticked off when they want it. I don't know the person, so I don't feel comfortable with it. And I stated then like I state now, I ever request a passengers name and I don't ever address a passenger by their name even if for some reason I looked at it on their BP. When I check a BP, I check it for the departing airport and the date and the SSSS.

Screenerex -- just as passengers implicitly give up some of their rights when they enter an airport (like the right to be free from unresonable searches and right to privacy) likewise, public servants give up rights as well. We live in a free society with checks and balances. When you wear the uniform in an official capacity, the public whom you serve has the right to identify you. This supercedes your right to privacy.

I can respect keeping your name protected, but employee ID or badge number or equivilent should, and as cited previously, must be presented.

We don't have secret police in this country. The ability to identify uniformed enfocement personnel is critical to our freedoms.

If you are afraid of a malicious complaint from a pax, so be it. You are entitled to the same system of investigation and due process that the passengers get when TSA complains about pax attitudes and issues administrative fines (As cited in other threads).

Sounds like the supervisor was a real ... too. Funny how TSA can demand ID and (as mentioned in threads about DFW) write down pax info from BP's when false alarms occur but passengers can't get ID from TSA. These are likely situations of poorly trained employees.

I'm pretty certain that when an official demands ID from a citizen, the citizen has the right to see ID first. How would that come across: A TSA agent demands to see my ID; I reply with "I'll show you mine if you show me yours." Would that get some laughs, or would that get me a fine?

It would get a chuckle out of me. I would probably give you a business card. TSA personnel normally wear two IDs, the TSA and Airport ID. They are only obliged to provide the name and number on their name tag.

Which I already stated that I did. As for my last name, you have no right to it. If you want a investigation done, the first name and number on my tag will do. I have no reason to give you my name so you can come and take out your anger with the TSA on me at my personal home. Passengers have no problem squaring off with screeners in the checkpoint, so my fear in my view is not a bad thing.


Nope the supervisor wasn't a .... I clearly stated that my name tag was clearly visible for the passenger. He wanted my whole name and he isn't entitled to that. He is entitled to my name and number which I made clear was visible.

Checks and balances. I don't request your ID, so why can you request mine? My supervisor or lead can request your ID, the check and balance works then. Again read my post, my last name is no concern to you and my tag name and number are on visible display. You can identify me by these two items.

Agreed. By name, I mean the TSA-issued nametag and corresponding employee number. SIDA badges are something else entirely different.

That's reasonable. First name and emp ID are enough to make a decent identificaiton. Situations where there becomes a problem are when the name tag is either not visible, or the screener doesn't verbally provide her/his name then turns his back and heads to the other side of the secure area, making it difficult for a passenger to get the name and ID should it be needed.

Your recourse has already been posted.

The point is that if there is a problem, we need the pertinent information required to fix it. Lack of cooperation by either the passenger and/or screener to provide simple identifying information only perpetuates problems.

A lot of screeners simply haven't experienced dealing with people who attempt to sue them for actions performed in the conduct of their official duties. They are justifiably concerned and worried about what actions a dissatisfied individual can take. Screeners need to realize that they are not so vulnerable to the whims of unreasonable people who think they can use the law as their means for private retribution. However, they weaken the government's ability to protect them whenever they refuse to give their names to these dissatisifed people.

System's not perfect, but it works.

I don't blame you at all for not wanting to give your last name.

And ear drops, soaps, etc. However, I thought it was NO2 that was being detected, not glycerin.

Nitrogen Dioxide is a pollutant.

Perhaps you meant NO3, nitrates? Yes, those are detected, but so are glycerins. Nitrates may be combined with other elements and molecules such as potassium and ammonium (ammonium nitrate was Timothy McVeigh's bomb) to form explosive compounds.

Glycerins not only indicate the possible presense of nitroglycerin, but also trinitrotolulene (TNT), as nitroglycerin will leach out of TNT if the TNT lies around for a bit. However, the ETD also detects TNT all by itself.

Well, I meant what's hanging off the ring. What I was really asking, though, was how glycerin would be detected. The bottle in my medicine cabinet is a testament to its rather low vapor pressure.

Glycerin isn't quite a ring: C3H5(OH)3 but traces of it will be picked up by the ETD.

A better option under study appears to be a mass-spectrometry-based ETD which more accurately detects such traces using a charge-to-mass ratio analysis. The TSA hopes to integrate a laser-based detection system into the x-ray machine, which would improve efficiency and accuracy of scanning hand baggage for explosives.