Superguy

Or tell them that's where they'll end up if they don't do good in school.

mikeef

Or even do well in school.

You can download an application right from the website.

Mike

Superguy

I was modelling who not to be.

mre5765

^

Any chance you can be appointed to run the TSA?

LadyPhoenix

As usual, there's no consistency in the "rules"...but why not allow the child to be carried through in his or her parent's arms?

HeHateY

Believe me, we've tried!

Bart for Cherty's job in 2009!^

mikeef

What has Bart ever done to you? Why would you nominate him for something that horrific?

Mike

txrus

Pretty much, as many, many others on FT will attest to. The thing to keep in mind is that as much as a self-proclaimed TSA screener can come along & post what the 'real' policy is, or how 'it's done in his airport', the fact still remains that he/she can truly only attest for what he/she does in whatever position he/she is doing on any given day (moat dragon, checked baggage screening, designated coffee gopher, etc). It's a proverbial crap shoot when it comes to what the other 44,999 screeners are doing, or should be doing.

'Consistency' wasn't included in the $6 billion (& counting!) price tag we paid for the TSA

Bart

Standardization is difficult to achieve in any organization. Perhaps it's because of the nature of the beast. Checked baggage screening is pretty straightforward, and pretty consistent across the country. However, checkpoint screening has many moving parts even though there are four basic functions. Perhaps it's because whenever you throw in the human element, there are too many dynamics. I don't have the answer.

What I do know is the TSA standard. I've known it all along as a former supervisor with a private security company, I've known it as a basic frontline screener, and I've known it as a Lead TSO. Now I know it even more as an instructor. But I can't explain why there are inconsistencies from one airport to the other. Then again, we've always been consistent having passenger remove their shoes at the WTMD, and we've always had passengers claim, "but they let me keep them on in Dallas." We had a TSO transfer from Dallas who told us the version she heard was, "but they let me keep them on in San Antonio." Go figure.

HeHateY

So he can shut down the organization? Usually means lots of going-away parties.

Superguy

It comes down to leadership and quality control. It also comes down to accountability. There is none at TSA. It doesn't care when customers/pax complain. Often times when a complaint IS made, the supervisor often backs up the screener and throws the line "Do you want to fly today?"

Yeah, humans will interpret some things differently. However, not to use the burger analogy as an insult, but if Burger King can consistently get orders right with every person ordering a different burger (have it your way), why can't TSA, which is supposed to be a professional organization do it when a business that relies on minimum wage labor, has different owners and fanchisees get it right at almost every location?

I think TSA can fix it. They have to want to fix it.

And that's the rub. They can consistently get the annoying little things down that don't make a difference (and sometimes overnight), but they can't give a consistent experience? If consistency isn't part of the plan, then the SOP might as well not even exist if it isn't going to be followed. If it's supposed to be followed, then management needs to ensure it's followed and make corrections for deviations.

I honestly think the "consistent inconsitency" that Kippie claims is nothing more than a cop out for not wanting to fix broken fundamental issues. Call it inconsistency and blame it on the pax and everything's ok.

Super

lupine

Disney does. For what we're paying to run TSA, surely a bit of that could be diverted to Disney to handle customer service and training. For that matter, the Imagineers could probably do a better job designing the checkpoints. And I'm sure Disney could have come up with better costumes for the TSA folk. (Not to mention cute little tunes as we while away our minutes in line.)

But seriously, Disney really does have an amazing ability to train and reinforce what they want in employee behavior. I read a cruise board, and if you look at the Disney sub-board you just never, ever see the kinds of problems that come up with service on the other lines -- particularly things related to safety and security. And if you've been to a Disney park -- particularly during Grad Night at Disneyland -- you know just how careful and pleasant their screening is.

Their training is more effective, and their reinforcement and testing to ensure consistency is unending. Finally, unlike the TSA, Disney understands scheduling and staffing.

TSAs biggest problem (beside the dolt that runs the joint) is that they've confused procedure manual updates with effective training. When I worked for the University of California years ago we had a 13 volume (3" binders) procedure manual. It covered seemingly everything, but was for all intents and purposes, useless. And the chances that any two sets of the manuals had the same updates were pretty much zero.

Bart's explanation of how to search a service monkey was a great example. How much time and money was wasted system-wide on a non-problem like this? How many TSA people are likely to NEVER see a service monkey in their entire TSA career? How many people need to be trained on an arcane possibility? At most this deserved a memo to supervisors. It didn't need to say a lot more than, "If a service monkey comes through with a passenger, call 1-800-TSA-Internal to get help, or look on our website at xxx BEFORE you screen the monkey."

Disney would not be training people on monkey screening, that's for sure.

Bart

It's a small world after all...it's a small world after all...

Disney doesn't have over 450 locations. But I do agree that checkpoints could be designed better. Problem is that checkpoints are an afterthought. They were placed in whatever locations would minimize inconvenience for the airlines yet meet the minimum standards for the FAA back then and TSA presently. And some airports are pretty strict about the space alloted to checkpoints. A few years ago, I made the horrifying mistake of rearranging chairs in our wanding area to accommodate passengers more comfortably. You would have thought that I had flashed the airport, peed in the coffee pots or committed some other horrible faux pas. The chairs were outside of the space designated for TSA even though it wasn't interfering with passenger flow. In fact, it enhanced it! However, I had crossed that imaginary line between rented space and unrented space.

I know you honestly believe this, but I'll politely disagree. TSA's training is pretty intensive, and TSOs are hit from all angles in tests ranging from quarterly quizzes and imagery tests to the much ballyhooed covert Red Team tests. I don't have an issue with TSA training. I do have an issue with TSA leadership and management practices, and this is where I think the root of the problem is both at the "trenches" and in upper management.

The one smart thing TSA has done is update the SOP in its entirety. Instead of sending out portions of the SOP that require updating, TSA publishes new SOPs in their entirety. Paragraphs that contain updates are bolded and have markings to draw attention. There's always a summary explaining the changes, and update briefings are immediately disseminated through our online learning center. The issue, I believe, is giving TSOs the time necessary to become familiar with these updates. In other words, I still see it as a leadership issue.

Amen.

I disagree. If there was an incident that resulted in negative publicity for Disney, it would move Heaven and Earth to make sure there wasn't a repeat of that incident no matter how remote the likelihood of similar circumstances ever occurring again.

Still, Disney is to be commended for taking some bold steps such as not discriminating against homosexuals and lesbians in spite of threats of boycotts from Southern Baptists. ^

Seems that some in here aren't so open-minded and would take issue if being patted down by a gay screener. Watch the responses this comment will attract.

birdstrike

I would prefer to be patted down by cute female screeners, but other than that wouldn't care. Seems like a lousy venue for a pickup.

lupine

OK, but really, if there was a monkey incident that TSA mishandled, and we didn't hear about it on FlyerTalk, did it really happen?

My comment: I don't believe that I've known the sexual orientation of any TSA screener I've ever encountered, which is fine by me. And, as long as the screener isn't using sexual innuendo, leering, groping, or otherwise behaving in an inappropriate manner, then I don't care. And if he (or she) is behaving inappropriately, I still don't care about the orientation -- I just want the bad behavior gone. Now.

Last I heard, being patted down by someone who's gay doesn't make you gay. Which is in a way really too bad, as there are a handful of people that I wouldn't half mind seeing suddenly become gay the way Tom Hanks became Big. That could generate no end of amusement.