|
Originally Posted by michaelchertoff
Or, in other words, plugging the hole that does not bother you is good, but plugging the ones that do bother you are bad. Your constitutional argument will make sense when some court of ultimate jurisdiction agrees with your opinion. Till then, it's your opinion.
|
Deleted
|
Originally Posted by bdschobel
If the true goal is "safety," then a thorough hand screening does the job just fine. If the goal is merely following rules for the sake of following them, even when an alternative is just as good if not better, then the TSA is truly an organization of automatons.
Bruce ...ETD screening does NOT detect guns, knives, etc... That is the difference, and NO, hand screening does NOT do the job just fine. At TSA just like ANY other Federal agency, you MUST follow the SOP or jeopardize your job! |
Originally Posted by bdschobel
After 3+ years, we have learned that showing the SOP to the public violates the SOP. Really! The height of irony! :)
Many TSA employees (oh, wait, I almost forgot: "officers") have neither the interest nor the ability to understand their own rules. What most of them do well enough is follow the rules, without any need to understand them. Of course, many can't even do that! If managers don't have any discretionary authority, then why does the TSA have managers? Just to hire people and make sure the shifts are properly staffed? I don't think so. Bruce The FSD cannot even change or deviate from the SOP.... |
Originally Posted by whatsinyourbag
...ETD screening does NOT detect guns, knives, etc...
That is the difference, and NO, hand screening does NOT do the job just fine. At TSA just like ANY other Federal agency, you MUST follow the SOP or jeopardize your job! And we all know that doesn't happen, so apparently people aren't too worried about their jobs. Maybe that's the problem. |
Originally Posted by whatsinyourbag
The FSD cannot even change or deviate from the SOP....
|
Originally Posted by Bart
Still, you have those who will quibble over wording. I disagree that a TSA supervisor should show the SOP to a passenger on demand. However, I think TSA could do a better job of explaining things to passengers on request after it's been scrutinized by the legal advisors. In other words, TSA responds in writing as opposed to having one of its supervisors show the SOP to an unauthorized person. Members of the general public are unauthorized personnel.
The OP indicated that they did not know the real policy in this case – an example of cases where inconsistent screening leads to misunderstanding. Sharing SOP on the spot resolves this concern. For travelers who had no previous misconception, it is even easier because they do not have to un-learn anything first. Without a doubt, you will find the wanna-be-lawyer who will try to twist the wording of the SOP to mean what they want, however nothing will make them cooperate anyways. I cannot see how promising a written explanation some time (days/weeks) after their scheduled flight or a generic pamphlet would convince this type let it go and act 'normal' :p |
Deleted
|
At EWR, I was told that the complaint form -- blank! -- is SSI and cannot be released to a passenger. We can look at it while we complete it, but we can't take it with us to complete later. SSI! :rolleyes:
Bruce |
Deleted
|
Ya gotta see it to believe it, Bart!
Bruce |
I am typing this from the D concourse at LAS.
I went through security about 15 minutes ago. I had a disposable camera (with 800 ASA film) and I requested it to be hand-checked. "It's okay to go through the x-ray" was the screener's response to my request. "I don't want it to go through the x-ray." "I said it is okay to go through the x-ray." "But I don't want it to go through the x-ray, I want a hand inspection." "It won't hurt your film, it can go through." Lather, rinse, repeat... :( Finally, another screener overheard this and said that she will do it for me. We go over, it is done successfully (a full two minutes). I asked her why the hassle. She said that it is safe for 800 and lower. But if a passenger requests a hand inspection, why do you resist? "It's a real pain to do it" was her response. :td: |
Originally Posted by iluv2fly
We go over, it is done successfully (a full two minutes). I asked her why the hassle.
She said that it is safe for 800 and lower. But if a passenger requests a hand inspection, why do you resist? "It's a real pain to do it" was her response. :td: |
Deleted
|
Excellent! ^
My only question is how we can clone this Bart? Maybe we should buy every screener a big red truck? :D |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 6:32 pm. |
This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.