Some changes are coming
Sep 21, 2005 | 10:00 am
#46
Suspended
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 1,441
Originally Posted by ND Sol
I just went through IAH Term B security and the shoe carnival is in full effect. Recommended that I take my shoes off, I say that they are less than an inch and offer him my plastic ruler if he wants to check. He starts to say that they are looking for things other than metal when he realizes that I just gave him the other part of the equation.
I clear the WTMD without alarming and he puts me in the holding pen and calls for a supervisor. When I asked him if it was for my shoes, he would not respond (which is interesting given the new SOP in which you have to know if the reason is for shoes and no WTMD alarm, then you only ETD).
The supervisor eventually makes it over. I am taken over to secondary and they only swab my shoes (so the new SOP is in effect here). I explain to the supervisor about the shoes issue and my offer for measuring. He says that it is up to the screener to make the decision and I understand that, but believe that additional training is needed as SOP is not being followed (which does delay my transist through security). He said that if it was his decision, he would have let me through. I told him that IAH has too much of a focus on shoes and should follow the SOP.
I ask him for a complaint form and he provides me the form with the telephone number on it. I hand him the TSA complaint form that SDF Traveler sent me and ask him about that. He says that form is the one that he is required to fill out and send in.
He asks me a couple of times if I am with the TSA and I ask him if that would really matter. He does give the right answer that it would not. We shake hands and depart.
So at least the new SOP is being followed, but I shouldn't have had the opportunity to check it out.
I clear the WTMD without alarming and he puts me in the holding pen and calls for a supervisor. When I asked him if it was for my shoes, he would not respond (which is interesting given the new SOP in which you have to know if the reason is for shoes and no WTMD alarm, then you only ETD).
The supervisor eventually makes it over. I am taken over to secondary and they only swab my shoes (so the new SOP is in effect here). I explain to the supervisor about the shoes issue and my offer for measuring. He says that it is up to the screener to make the decision and I understand that, but believe that additional training is needed as SOP is not being followed (which does delay my transist through security). He said that if it was his decision, he would have let me through. I told him that IAH has too much of a focus on shoes and should follow the SOP.
I ask him for a complaint form and he provides me the form with the telephone number on it. I hand him the TSA complaint form that SDF Traveler sent me and ask him about that. He says that form is the one that he is required to fill out and send in.
He asks me a couple of times if I am with the TSA and I ask him if that would really matter. He does give the right answer that it would not. We shake hands and depart.
So at least the new SOP is being followed, but I shouldn't have had the opportunity to check it out.
Such a procedure would probably also eliminate/cut down on the paperwork a supervisor would have to complete.
Sep 21, 2005 | 10:27 am
#47
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 861
Originally Posted by robodeer
huge inconsistencies that i've seen pretty much revolve around shoes on/off and ticket checking. ^
Originally Posted by robodeer
from the comments in TS&S many still don't get the somewhat obtuse statement that is consistant at most airports regarding shoes (since you're using that one as an example). some airports will say "all shoes off" (against the rules), others will say "we 'suggest' you take the shoes off". ^
It sounds like:
"Some U.S. Post Offices won't mail your letter unless you put the stamp on the upper left corner of the envelope. Other U.S. Post Offices are OK with the stamp on the upper right corner of the envelope. You people would have a much easier time if you you just go with the flow and find out what each post office's policy is before mailing a letter. If you resist complying with the whimsy of each individual postal clerk, you're being unreasonably paranoid and making trouble for yourself and for others who are in line to mail letters."
Originally Posted by robodeer
least stress, although everyone is free to choose their own path of least or most resistance.^
Sep 21, 2005 | 11:38 am
#48
Join Date: Dec 2004
Programs: AA, WN RR
Posts: 3,122
Originally Posted by docmonkey
Why should passengers have to adjust themselves to different shoe removal practices at different airports?
.
.
.
Can't you see how stupid that sounds? Why do you seem to think that inconsistencies between different airports is acceptable?
.
.
.
Can't you see how stupid that sounds? Why do you seem to think that inconsistencies between different airports is acceptable?
Sep 21, 2005 | 12:14 pm
#49
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: BWI
Programs: AA Gold, HH Diamond, National Emerald Executive, TSA Disparager Gold
Posts: 15,180
Originally Posted by PatrickHenry1775
One of the profferred reasons for a federalized screening force (TSA) was to standardize procedures. What a crock! This reason was just a pretext to implement a new bureaucracy, and to gain a new bloc of government workers who would presumably vote Democrat, the party of government workers.
Sep 21, 2005 | 12:24 pm
#50
Suspended
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Tampa, Florida, U.S.A.
Posts: 7,664
Originally Posted by Den1KFlyer
Last month walked through TPA, forgot to take my shoes off - didn't set off the detector - and they never stopped me or gave me a second "look" ?? ^
Asked for the supervisor came over and I told him I was tired of being retaliated against especially since I have been through dozens of airports without having them beep or having to remove them.
He said apologied ( lot of good that does after the fact) and said some of his staff just dont seem to able to fully comply with their instructions.
Sort of surprised me, then he contradicted himself by saying "your shoes fit the profile" ...so I dont expect much change.
Seems instead of selecting the random pax with any sort of partern they just select whoever is ignores their "suggestion to remove"
mike
Sep 21, 2005 | 12:38 pm
#51
Suspended
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Tampa, Florida, U.S.A.
Posts: 7,664
Something just occured to me reading here by a number of posters including myself which has been recently sent to secondary have been given the same exact line when questioning the supervisor about shoe thickness.
Goes sorta " if it was up to me I would have let you through..but it up to the screener and some are not fully up on the rules..."
Since the TSA has never been consistent about anything its almost comically uncanny. One wonders if that is a line they have been instructed to use the both BS and pacify the selectee after the fact.
mike
Goes sorta " if it was up to me I would have let you through..but it up to the screener and some are not fully up on the rules..."
Since the TSA has never been consistent about anything its almost comically uncanny. One wonders if that is a line they have been instructed to use the both BS and pacify the selectee after the fact.
mike
Sep 21, 2005 | 12:48 pm
#52
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Land of ORD
Programs: AA Plat UA Premier
Posts: 9,339
Originally Posted by MIKESILV
Something just occured to me reading here by a number of posters including myself which has been recently sent to secondary have been given the same exact line when questioning the supervisor about shoe thickness.
Goes sorta " if it was up to me I would have let you through..but it up to the screener and some are not fully up on the rules..."
Since the TSA has never been consistent about anything its almost comically uncanny. One wonders if that is a line they have been instructed to use the both BS and pacify the selectee after the fact.
mike
Goes sorta " if it was up to me I would have let you through..but it up to the screener and some are not fully up on the rules..."
Since the TSA has never been consistent about anything its almost comically uncanny. One wonders if that is a line they have been instructed to use the both BS and pacify the selectee after the fact.
mike
Sep 21, 2005 | 1:09 pm
#53
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 10,034
Originally Posted by MIKESILV
Something just occured to me reading here by a number of posters including myself which has been recently sent to secondary have been given the same exact line when questioning the supervisor about shoe thickness.
Goes sorta " if it was up to me I would have let you through..but it up to the screener and some are not fully up on the rules..."
Since the TSA has never been consistent about anything its almost comically uncanny. One wonders if that is a line they have been instructed to use the both BS and pacify the selectee after the fact.
Goes sorta " if it was up to me I would have let you through..but it up to the screener and some are not fully up on the rules..."
Since the TSA has never been consistent about anything its almost comically uncanny. One wonders if that is a line they have been instructed to use the both BS and pacify the selectee after the fact.
The TSAers chat in person and online too.
Sep 21, 2005 | 1:48 pm
#54
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: ORD
Programs: CO PLT, HH DIA
Posts: 1,461
Originally Posted by sxpsxpsxp
I had an oddly not-too-unpleasant experience departing a CO flight over the Labor Day weekend. The screening area was very quiet with few people around. The guy suggested that I remove my shoes, and I told them that I didn't want doing that. I did not set off the metal detectory. He of course called for "male assist" and when the the other guy came over he asked what the matter was -- "shoes" was the answer. The guy doing the screening asked me why I didn't want to take my shoes off, and I just said that I didn't feel comfortable doing it. So all he did was swab my shoes -- I didn't have to take them off. I still got the full treatment otherwise, but at least I kept my shoes on. 
The screenes were even more or less polite about the whole thing.
The screenes were even more or less polite about the whole thing.
The one time I have gotten tense with them (I was late for the flight, the line was really long and didnt have time to risk being bogged down in the secondary) when I DID take my shoes off, the screener on the far side of the X-ray machine where you reclaim your irradiated belongings was YELLING at people to hurry up, move on, we were holding up the line. (This was at EWR "A"). I snapped back at him "Well if we weren't forced to disrobe to get to our flight, you wouldn;t have this problem, would you?"
His response was "Is there a PROBLEM, sir?"
My response was "Yeah, and it's a dman shame that you don't have any clue what it is."
I got a "right on" and some light applause from the people around me. I left whistling the "Barnum and Bailey" theme song in honor of the Shoe Carnival.
--Paul
Sep 21, 2005 | 11:56 pm
#55
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Bay Area, CA
Programs: UA Plat 2MM; AS MVP Gold 75K
Posts: 35,092
Originally Posted by red456
I'm wondering if the TSA has had so many complaints, contrary to what we are told, that in order to try to prevent pax from filing complaints, they have set up the website and phone number, figuring that by the time a pax gets to use a phone or computer, he/she will have forgot about the incident.
One even told me to return the complaint form to them. I just laughed and told them I'll mail it in.
Sep 22, 2005 | 3:55 am
#56
Suspended
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 8,389
Originally Posted by channa
I doubt it. I've had supervisors attempt to squash complaints by means of intimidation -- requesting ID, SSN, etc., in the hopes I'd get scared and not pursue it.
One even told me to return the complaint form to them. I just laughed and told them I'll mail it in.
One even told me to return the complaint form to them. I just laughed and told them I'll mail it in.
Sep 22, 2005 | 1:38 pm
#58
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: May 2001
Location: LAX; AA EXP, MM; HH Gold
Posts: 31,789
Originally Posted by Bart
I can understand asking for your name but not the rest of it. Usually, we want to know the name of the complaining passenger so that we can respond to the complaint more accurately. Otherwise, it turns into a he-said-she-said situation with no one able to resolve or correct the problem. As for turning the complaint form in, that's the best way to expedite the form. Still, there are those who insist on mailing it in, and we have our mailing address pre-printed now on our forms (didn't have it on there before).
Good grief. Not all of us just fell off the turnip truck like your typical passenger, Bart.
Sep 22, 2005 | 11:10 pm
#59
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: WAS (DCA, IAD, BWI)-->now GPT
Programs: NW Plat-->ugh, only Silver
Posts: 55
I agree that the "I'd rather not take off my shoes" and "Ok, I'll just take the secondary" statement gets a good response. The shocked expression of disbelief on the female screeners' face was well worth my price of admission!
Today at COS, since I didn't alarm, I was only subjected to the "Brand New Easier Procedure" that included having a seat and waiting for the "ERT" swabbing of my shoes.
Today at COS, since I didn't alarm, I was only subjected to the "Brand New Easier Procedure" that included having a seat and waiting for the "ERT" swabbing of my shoes.