I agree with you on this one. DEN decided to not use the new SOP because of the issue with hand off of a PAX. So they are going to get the whole banana in the wanding chute still.

I guess the decision is that IED is the biggest threat. The xray person should be able to spot a gun.

So, if an individual FSD can decide to opt out of the SOP, why have any SOP at all? No wonder there's so much discrepancy between airports.

BTW, we've not heard anything from members flying out of EWR on the new alleged SOP. Anyone have anything to share?

Pretty hard to do considering how the SOP specifically prohibits FSDs from modifying procedures without clearance from TSA Headquarters.

Taking off your shoes would save everybody time.

I think screeners will respond more quickly. It's easier to only ETD shoes than to give the full Monty, so this alone is incentive enough for screeners. But the easiest thing is for you not to put yourself in that position to begin with. You already know what the so-called SSI standard is for shoes; if you're stubborn enough to keep them on and still protest about it, then that's a choice you'll have to deal with.

As pointed out by eyecue, that bag is already x-rayed. What you continue to ignore is that selectee bags are already screened once, and that should be sufficient, just as it is for everyone else who is not a selectee. So it's not like we are ignoring any aspect of prohibited items. We are, in essence, doing a security overkill on explosives. While that's not necessarily a bad thing; I think it's still ineffecient.

You're not the only one wondering. However, I still see it as a step in the right direction. I think this still boils down to the type of people hired by TSA: those with extensive security backgrounds. Not necessarily a good thing because security folks tend to be strongly rooted in risk avoidance. They pay lip service to risk management but really don't understand what it means. I think former military personnel (military police, military intelligence, security police, etc) have a better understanding because it's a philosophy the military has followed for almost 20 years.

But I'm just a small cog in a big machine.

Yes I do know the standard and I adhere to it. Many screeners do not and do not, which is why I am stubborn and protest about it.

Without going into details, if you saw the state of my feet you wouldn't want me taking my shoes off anywhere near you :eek:

Why don't they hand the passenger a card that says "Shoes" on it? If they don't have the card, they get the full treatment. Or you can put a little sticker on the boarding pass itself to indicate shoes only (just like with checked baggage). It shouldn't be too hard for passengers to hold on to since at many places they are required to hold on to their boarding passes.

That is what is frustrating. Because it would be slightly more difficult for the TSA at DEN to follow SOP, the passengers have to suffer for it.

No, don't worry. Us passengers will always get the blame for holding things up. Especially in these little instances when we expect SOP to be followed.

Just chalk another one up to DEN. It's already got a reputation among other TSAers at other airports. This just adds to it.

You are correct to legitimately complain IF the screeners are not following the SOP. I am death on screeners when it comes to this and emphasize that only certain shoes need to be screened as opposed to all shoes. In this regard, I completely agree with you. I'm talking about the ones who ARE wearing criteria shoes and feel compelled to fall on some sword by refusing to remove them AND complain about the secondary screening.

As far as giving the pax a card that says "shoes" goes, so that they just have to have shoes screened, it doesnt work because if you get put in the chute with another passenger, the other passenger could hand something off to the guy that is just in for his shoes to be checked. As far as not following the SOP and why have one at all... The local FSD can be more restrictive than the SOP but not less. That is why Denver can not go with the rule on just screening shoes now. At least that is what they are telling us...

I understand that possibility, but that seems to be really stretching. However, maybe if DEN did follow SOP, then something could be done about those demeaning cattle chutes. At least have one for shoes and another for full.

We have been told that being more restrictive than the SOP is not an option. If that was the case, couldn't the FSD decide to do body cavity searches on all passengers?

That makes absolutely no sense - the new SOP seems to be just to screen shoes - the DEN FSD would not be less restrictive, he'd just be following the new procedure.

Or a ploy to jusitfy staffing levels.

Actually, the FSD cannot modify the SOP at all. Nada, zip, zilch.

I know what you are saying! I could cite the section. However for example lets say that the SOP says that we have to check all pink flowers for bees. The FSD decides that we have to check all pink and all other flowers too! He isnt circumventing, he is being overly cautious. According to the SOP he can do that. At least that's the interpretation here.

Actually the FSD has a buttload of leeway to do things. As long as he doesnt circumvent the SOP. There have been a number of things that have been proposed that the fsd could do (like full open bag search and handwand all pax for a period of time.)