That was the problem. Based on the facts presented, the TSO was not following SOP. It is that failure that raises most of the issues on this forum. McDonald's can prepare a hamburger the same around the world. Can't the TSA have its SOP followed in fewer than 500 airports?

And that provides an excuse? If an airline was using that as an excuse, it would be clear indication that it was in a death spiral. TSA has had over four years to work this out.

And that is part of the problem. The most effective way would be treating passengers as cattle. That just doesn't fly.

The line between inconvenience and harassing is one that is crossed too often. What is inconvenient is for the TSO to take five seconds to see that a shoe's heel is actually less than an inch. My perception many times is that it is whatever is the most convenient to that TSO is what will be his course of action.

Uh, I would think this should be a laudable goal, especially considering that the TSA has yet to stop a hijacker through its airport screening.
One hundred persons per day in their face. I find that hard to swallow. Even so, that is not an excuse for the "Officers" to do the same, which you are condoning. It is part of their job.

What a "trite" statement. :rolleyes:

MCDonalds are built exactly the same with the same equipment all over the world. No two airports are alike in equipment, manning, or set-up. Even with an SOP, if your boss at McDonalds tell you to do it different than the SOP, you follow your orders or lose you job. I haven't seen any evidence that the officer was disobeying orders regardless of what the SOP might say. Are we just to disparage all TSA officers as lousy on these few incidents out of millions of fine incidents each month?

Its the government. If 4 years proves anything, nothing gets fixed in 4 years, especially when it comes to spending tax payer money. I guess the government could assess a $50 fee to every passenger to pay for the fixes though.


This isn't a problem at the courthouse, a concert, or the roadway, but it is a problem at the airport. Why is it so hard to just follow instructions and get through the line quickly? LEts be truthful here, people want their safety but they sure as heck don't want to be "inconvienced" by it. God forbid.

Define "too often". Every time you are there?? Every millionth, thousandth passenger?? Got some stats (read as proof) for these assumptions?? If certain people have repeated difficulty at an airport while everyone else doesn't, I tend to believe that the person is the problem, not the system. You may see it as most convient to the TSO, but as you probably have never stood in their shoes, it is easy to assume you know better than they do.

Are you sure?? The rule I remember is no one ever knows about a job well done, but everyone knows about something that was missed. You can assume that they do nothing but I can assume that the cop on the corner has done nothing to stop a criminal also. Assumptions get you nowhere.

No it isn't condoning, its trying to get people to understand that when they get into SECURITY's face, you are not the first nor the last and they are not going to be respectful and tolerant of you being a pain. If you worked in an airport, you would know that a 100 people in a single day is easily achievable. Have the weather strand 30,000 people in single building sometime and you see how you think it runs. I know ticket agents that surpass that mark at least once a week.

Very much so. Passengers far to often think they are above the system because they paid for a ticket. Let me tell you, from the view point of all the different kinds of people that work at an airport, we get great laughs at how far people go, especially since they don't have the "right" to. Maybe these same people should inform congress where they expect their tax money to be spent.

Ah, an original thought at last @:-)

As usual, I didn't take off my non-profile Ecco shoes last night at DFW. I was told to "step over there", meaning waiting for the "puffer". When I twice asked why, I wasn't given an answer, just "it won't take long". I found it strange that there was no explanation given at all. When I asked the supervisor about it, he gave me the usual "continous screening" line which I challenged with pointing out that nobody had been through the puffer before me or after me.

He really tried to give me a complaint form when I asked for it, but it turned out he was out of them. He gave me a business card to the "Customer Service Manager" at DFW. Considering all that has been written here about TSA not being in the customer service business, I found that title a bit amusing.

BTW, I was still told that "we don't do the Privacy Act here" when I asked about that.

Last Thursday at LGA central terminal, C gates (United), I started to walk through the metal detector in my Eccos when the moat dragon, Rubio, demanded that I remove them. I said that a swab would be no problem. She called out, "Male assist." I told her to be sure to tell the guy who came that I did not alarm. She ignored me. I persisted. The guy waited. She still refused. I got the full secondary and complained to a very nice supervisor.

He was concerned and went to talk with Rubio, who claimed that I came very close to alarming ("4 bars"), which was simply a lie. I didn't have even a paper clip in my pockets, no metal knees or anything like that. She was just looking for an excuse for the retaliatory secondary. I told the supervisor that she was lying and offered to go through again to prove it. That somehow could not be done. He said that I would have to leave and come back through the line again, which wouldn't prove anything (I agreed). I filled out a complaint form.

Today I got a call from a very nice screening manager at LGA, who assured me that this sort of behavior is unacceptable. He promised to follow up with Rubio and to speak with the supervisor. This sort of thing just reinforces my view that LGA is a very professional TSA operation.

Bruce

The TSA employs far too many worthless punks like "Rubio" who don't like it when passengers who actually know the rules and show them up. And you showed her up, but good. In front of all those other sheople. Little tyrant mind of hers could lord over you in just that one little way and you had to burst that bubble. Shame on you. ;)

Yeah, yeah, the supervisor and the screening manager told you what you want to hear, but unless punks like "Rubio" are fired, I'll bet it continues.

But the rules are secret!

These secrets are safe with the 45,000 TSA employees. There are no leaks.

Oops, there goes my monitor as I have sprayed water on it, trying not to laugh.

Perhaps you haven't noticed that McDonald's come in all shapes and sizes. The passenger screening area itself is not all that different among airports and I would think that almost all the equipment is similar. But even if not the case, this does not provide an excuse for procedures that don't rely on differences, e.g. different numbers of boarding pass checks.

Just following orders has put many into jail, so that is not an excuse.

Following the SOP is required and even FSDs are not permitted to institute higher levels of intrusion for screening than permitted under the SOP. Would it be okay for you to say you were just following orders if your TSA supervisor required every person to undergo a body cavity search to ensure no prohibited items make it on the plane? (After all, think of the children. :rolleyes: ) Or is it even okay for a TSO to tell a passenger that he may not walk through the WTMD with his shoes on because that is what the supervisor ordered?

Let's not lose focus on the incident. A little girl who is undergoing cancer treatment was ordered to remove her hat (even after the TSO knew about the situation) and when she didn't want to, was given a full pat down/wanding. The SOP was not followed.



Why, once again, is this a valid excuse for proper security? So if we just throw money at the problem, it will be fixed? We spend billions per year on this and it still isn't right. How will additional money change it. Do you also realize the drop in discretionary travel if you assess a $50 fee? IMHO, your solution is actually part of the problem.


The instructions can be different at each airport (even at different checkpoints within the same airport) and sometimes the instructions don't follow SOP. There are even instances where signage and videos contradict oral instructions. I want security that is looking for credible weapons that will take down or hijack a plane in our current environment. I don't want the shoe carnival. I want screening for explosives and guns. That will make screening more effective and less of an opportunity for credible weapons to pass while searches are done for lighters.

Every time I go through EWR with my non-profile shoes on.:D And it appears that they have never been in their customer's shoes since they keep asking for us to take off non-profile ones. If you do a search you will find many instances where the TSO is doing something for his convenience and not according to the SOP, e.g. requiring all shoes to be removed.


The evidence is that there is no evidence that a TSO has stopped a hijacking through airport screening. The rule that you mention relates to PR, but the TSA certainly toots its horn when it thinks it has found something bad. It just doesn't turn out that way, e.g. the blade contained inside the sole of a shoe in Hawaii.

And how about the GAO study in March where 21 out of 21 U.S. airport screening checkpoints failed to detect test packages of bomb materials. The cop analogy is flawed since crime does occur on a daily basis and we have data related to deployment of LEO's. Don't consider a TSO an LEO. At least an LEO has to have a reasonable suspicion in a Terry frisk and probable cause or actual consent in all other searches.

Based on a 10 hour shift, that would be one person every six minutes that is being "angry, rude or trite." And that would include time at all stations at passenger screening (including x-ray). I just don't believe that number or if it is true then "I tend to believe that the person [TSO] is the problem." And this is still not an excuse for an officer to be rude or harassing to his customer. In most industries there are consequences for being ill-mannered to your customers, even if your customers aren't the nicest.



What we are generally talking about at screening checkpoints are the "rights" per the SOP that are not being followed. And if you want to have great laughs and talk about passengers (your customers), then I hope you are least doing it where you are not being viewed by your other customers.

why are pax considered TSA's customers? You bought your ticket from the airline, not from us. And for the love of God do not say 'Because my tax money pays your salary." I pay taxes too therefore I pay my own salary.

We pay the TSA a fee with every ticket we buy, and they perform a direct service to/for us. What else do you call people that give you money in exchange for a service?

This is known as a tax which I stated earlier that I pay too. You pay a tax to your local DMV as well and I know they are worse than TSA.

Wirelessly posted (BlackBerry8700/4.1.0 Profile/MIDP-2.0 Configuration/CLDC-1.1 VendorID/100)

I don't get felt up at the DMV.

No one forces you to own a car or have a license, so if you don't like the DMV, feel free to find another mode of transportation.

No, but their lines and attitude make the airport look like Disneyland.

Disneyland on acid. As another poster pointed out, I do not get felt up and groped at the DMV. Moreover, many states are moving toward online license renewals. Sorry, the analogy does not hold up.