Checkpoint Evolution: Passenger Engagement
Passenger engagement… What is it? Is it the new romantic comedy about two passengers who meet at an airport and decide to get married? Not quite.
Passenger engagement is all about the way we are moving to an entirely different environment at our checkpoints. Checkpoints are noisy, confusing places that often leave passengers feeling as if they just ran through a gauntlet.
While we are adopting process and technology upgrades, we are also enhancing the training of our officers to include a heavy focus on better communication at the checkpoint between officers and passengers.
We’d like to change the environment for two reasons. First off, passengers deserve to travel through our checkpoints without feeling stressed. We all have enough stress in our day to day lives don’t we?
Secondly, the more relaxed passengers are, the easier it will be for our Behavior Detection Officers to pick out folks who are displaying signs of fear and deception.
In a relaxed environment, someone with ill intent will stick out like a man in a plaid suit at the Oscars.
Bob
TSA EoS Blog Team
Labels: innovation, mission
posted by Bob at
5:37 PM
Subscribe in a reader
106 Comments:
I am glad to see that a topic has been started on this new training technique. When I first came to TSA, I had hoped they would start to go in this direction in terms of new training.
I'm looking forward to seeing how this new technique will be implemented. It will have to be used by a majority, if not ALL of the TSOs in order to be effective.
April 3, 2008 6:22 PM
Sorry, Bob, the video doesn't cut it as all it does it put the onus on the victim, err, passenger to make the process calmer.
April 3, 2008 6:32 PM
Bob,
Now that's exactly what I've hoped for out of this dialogue. TSA acknowledges that checkpoints can be confusing and stress-inducing, which is bad both for passengers and for TSA. Further, some mechanisms for reducing stress can be implemented by TSA using "mere" personnel techniques, instead of technology.
So, kudos for saying "we can do better, and we're working on it."
One comment on Earl Morris' words: I don't think TSA can create a security screening experience that is "owned" by the passenger. "Ownership" implies, among other things, control; by TSA's own admission, passengers give up control by submitting to TSA's statutory authority to search their belongings and their persons when entering a checkpoint. I'm not sure how I can "own" the process when someone I've never met is examining me and my bags.
April 3, 2008 6:34 PM
Huh? I listened to that several times to make sure that it was understood. Typical administrator babbel with lots of smoke, mirrors, and little if any substance.
Don't these people even attempt to run speeches past anyone as a sanity check? Not even a nice try on this one.
April 3, 2008 6:58 PM
"Passenger engagement… What is it? Is it the new romantic comedy about two passengers who meet at an airport and decide to get married? Not quite."
Ugh...
Apart from that, nice post. Does anyone else find it odd that
April 3, 2008 7:28 PM
Only watched the movie once so I may have missed something but it seemed to me that he listed the TSA and the Transportation Security Administration. Am I missing something?
April 3, 2008 8:00 PM
Considering this blog has been up for 65 days, lets at least consider it a start.
We as passengers are never going to "own the experience", not flying through a commercial terminal. You just have to go next door to GA, and then it really is a different experience. TSA is never going to match it, they just can't. Too little money, poor training focus, too many people to deal with. No one has been savvy enough to set up a really effective lobby for passenger rights. There is, however, a thread over on Flyer Talk for that to happen.
April 3, 2008 8:20 PM
I'm very glad to see that the TSA has finally come to its senses.
You're going to give the TSOs thorough training in customer service so they'll treat passengers (the overwhelming majority of whom are no threat to anyone) with dignity and respect. No more yelling or bullying.
And I'm even happier to see you finally recognizing the stupidity of the rules about liquids and shoes, especially when they're capriciously "interpreted" by TSOs, and you're doing away with them. And you've finally recognized that a "security strategy" based on "unpredictability" causes more stress and confusion for passengers than it does for terrorists.
You're implementing consistent procedures and implementation (and training TSOs in them) so that passengers who follow the published rules need not be stressed about the potential confiscation of their belongings just because of a secret local "interpretation" of the published rules. That's wonderful! And best of all, you've added a new layer of security to protect the belongings of passengers as they go through checkpoints! Way to go!!
Or at least that's what I think your post about "relaxed" passengers means. If it's actually just a new way to sell those blue panels and "ambient sounds" (which, believe it or not, some passengers may actually find annoying, perhaps sufficiently annoying to trigger a very un-relaxing encounter with a BDO) then whoever thought this up is completely out of touch with reality.
You see, passengers emerge from TSA checkpoints "feeling as if they just ran through a gauntlet" because they have run through a gauntlet. It's a gauntlet of inconsistency, stupid rules about liquids and shoes capriciously "interpreted," multiple boarding pass checks, and (sometimes) bullying. And during all this, we have to worry about our belongings being stolen or damaged because whoever came up with your "layers" seems to have forgotten (or intentionally disregarded) that particular aspect of "security."
It's nice that you recognize how stressful the TSA "experience" is for passengers. But I strongly doubt that tweaking the environment and introducing new buzzwords about "ownership" will do anything beneficial. If you don't fix what actually makes passengers stressed, you will never have a "relaxed" environment. And if you're relying on the proposed changes to make the BDO's task easier, you'll probably just end up with a lot more false positives among the passengers who are anything but "relaxed" at checkpoints. You're just adding "noise and confusion" to distract from the real problems.
April 3, 2008 8:22 PM
Count me as a person who doesn't see how I can "own" the screening experience.
If I "owned" the experience, you can bet that the first screener that yelled at me or barked orders at me would be in my office (remember, I'm the owner -- I get an office) for some remedial customer service training. You can also bet the supervisor would be in my office for some remedial training on his/her responsibilities, because the supervisor is responsible for everything that his/her people do or fail to do.
Don't expect me to "own" what I don't control. I don't control some screener's goofball interpretation of the 3-1-1 rules, and I sure don't control the screener's attitude.
I've already taken ownership of as much as I can. I pay inflated airport prices for water after security, because I can't bring it with me. I make sure to leave my pocket knife in my car, have my notebook PC in the top of my bag for easy removal at the x-ray, have my passport in my shirt pocket, etc. I've tried to comply with the ill-defined 3-1-1 rules, though I'm still waiting for an operational definition of "liquid, gel or aerosol" to appear on the TSA web site. I'm also still waiting for a definitive answer (with link, of course) on whether my travel bottles have to be labeled, and if so, what manner of labeling is required.
The TSA needs to take ownership of its own behavior, instead of putting it on the passenger.
I'm all for a calmer environment -- so stop yelling, quit playing "gotcha", and try to be helpful instead of adversarial.
April 3, 2008 8:42 PM
"Passenger engagement… What is it? Is it the new romantic comedy about two passengers who meet at an airport and decide to get married? Not quite."
Actually, I can relate a story about that. Two traveling sales people, a gift of gab, a chance meeting in an airport, a romance, a happy marriage, and an untimely death due to cancer. Pre TSA, however.
April 3, 2008 9:03 PM
I get your intent but first things first.
Publish clear guidelines instead of the jumble of contradicting rules you now have.
Treat me and my belongings with respect. I am a lawabiding person traveling for my purposes what ever they may be. Don't unduly delay me, harass me or steal from me or make possible the theft of my belongings.
Require that TSO's have a name badge that is large enough to read and is displayed properly. The reversed name tag should result in immediate termination!
Provide comment cards without question or investigation when requested.
Stop the one shoe shuffle stupidity!
Stop placing potential hazardous material in common waste bins. If the material is to dangerous to pass the checkpoint then it must be handled as a dangerous material.
Identify the Supervisor on Duty at each checkpoint. A picture with name would be good. We deserve to know to whom to address concerns should they arise.
Take care of these types of things and our stress level will be much lower!
April 3, 2008 10:14 PM
Good. Earl Morris is exactly correct. A calm checkpoint is a win for everyone (well, except terrorists and they are not supposed to be winning). Now that the TSA has this as a goal you can start adjusting your policies and training your staff to create this environment.
Remember, the passengers and citizens of the United States are both your employers and your customers. It's not up to passengers to create this calm checkpoint. It's up to the TSA - you own the checkpoints, not us. Most passengers would love to have a calm, peaceful experience going through what most people accept as necessary.
Kudos on setting a clear direction. Follow through and you'll start getting the respect all of you so clearly want.
April 3, 2008 10:58 PM
Passengers "owning" the screening process? Come on. That has to be the most absurd thing I've seen yet from the TSA, which has made many absurd announcements in the past.
The whole premise of the TSA is that every passenger is presumed to be a terrorist or a criminal, at least until a thorough and meticulous screening at the checkpoint conclusively establishes that he or she is not. Do we really want terrorists and criminals owning a screening process that's supposed to be protecting us from terrorism and crime?
April 4, 2008 12:21 AM
Must be a pretty tough challenge to be human and extremely alert at the same time...
April 4, 2008 3:36 AM
I believe it all comes down to education. If you have poorly educated people and officers in charge of the screening you are bound to stress people. Unfortunately, I doubt that TSA or anybody has the funds to put well educated people in a job which requires invading someone else's privacy - and doing it tactfully.
April 4, 2008 10:00 AM
Ok, sounds like something worth trying. When can we expect to see it?
April 4, 2008 10:29 AM
Here's a communication opportunity:
Here the TSA says:
"Medications must be labeled so they are identifiable",
while here TSA says:
"We recommend, but do not require, that your medications be labeled to assist with the screening process."
Your website doesn't even get your own rules straight. No wonder your TSOs are inconsistent, your passengers complain about your inconsistent rules, and your TSOs complain about our inability to follow 'simple' rules.
Who should we "communicate" with? Some blogger on a website, Kip, or the TSO that can make up their own rules and control whether or not we get on our planes?
April 4, 2008 10:31 AM
What video?? Theres a big white space where the video should be.
April 4, 2008 11:01 AM
It is a difficult task to please everyone. Things may not be perfect but passenger needs are being addressed. I see not forum for input on taxes, mail delivery or any other government agency services. In my eyes ownership means being responsible for our part of traveling. Yes I am a TSO, but content passengers mean a better day for me too. Our world is not perfect and I cannot account for the actions of all officers, just as passengers cannot account for the actions of any other passengers. This is where I think the ownership comes in, it starts with ourselves. This is the beginning of proposed changes to improve airport travel and maybe down the line there will be a way to track and report rude power tripping TSO's but on the same level the same tolerance level should be held for passengers too. I guess the bottom line is that there is good and bad everywhere and at least TSA is giving us a starting point for cultural changes at airports. I for one am willing to take a chance and see if the changes will be for the better.
April 4, 2008 11:25 AM
"What video?? Theres a big white space where the video should be."
More damage control?
April 4, 2008 11:39 AM
Right on, the reason the process is stressful is because the TSA and its agents don't make it consistent or logical.
Plus, since when is acting weird enough to get you in trouble. What if I'm a nervous flier? What if I had a bad day or week? So now if I'm in a bad mood it could get me searched? Come on guys, you have to do better than that.
April 4, 2008 11:46 AM
HAHAHA! You won't allow people to comment on the video at YouTube!
April 4, 2008 11:51 AM
Ok, seems like a reasonable iead. When will it be deployed in the airports? The sooner the better
April 4, 2008 12:12 PM
Anonymous said...
"What video?? Theres a big white space where the video should be."
More damage control?
No, your Net Nazi software or firewall is blocking youtube.
April 4, 2008 12:32 PM
I watched the video and re-read the blog. The video sounds like a pitch from a consultant. How will "passenger engagement" change the level of stress for a passenger checking in with a screaming infant? I remain skeptical that the answer can be found in technology and using psycho-babble terms.
April 4, 2008 5:39 PM
Many of the previous commenters got it right; there's a wide variety of relatively small things TSA can fix to get most of the way there. Consistancy and openness (where possible) are the keys.
With regard to the Checkpoint Evolution project, it's good to see that TSA is augmenting its perspective with that of outside consultants. Even better would be to add the passengers' perspective. This can be done by engaging a passenger/traveler group like the International Airline Passengers Association or Air Travelers Association. They live to make a difference like this.
Keep on this path, it'll be better for all involved.
April 4, 2008 6:59 PM
What you folks miss is that people are going to be stressd by the mere fact of your unconstitutional search of their persons and belongings. You'll never be able to de-stress the situation.
April 4, 2008 7:30 PM
Doing what is possible to humanize the security screening process at the checkpoint is all well and good, but until TSA completely re-thinks the whole checkpoint process this initiative is not likely to be particularly successful.
The TSA needs to stop focusing on the one in a billion chance event (does anyone really believe that those guys in London while allegedly intending to do bad things (let the British legal system sort that one out) would actually have been able to do it -- so far I've not seen any credible evidence that says they would ever have been able actually to realize their plot even were they to have gotten it off the ground). The TSA needs to remember that is mission is to keep dangerous cargo and weapons off planes.
The TSA needs to remember that we all remember what happened on 9/11. People will no longer sit by idly and allow a group of thugs to take over a plane. With the hardened cockpit doors, even if by some 1 in a billion chance that hijackers were to get control of the passenger cabin, there would be almost no chance that they would be able to get into the cockpit before the pilot had a chance to get the plane to the ground safely and certainly to signal for help. In short, 9/11 is not at all likely to happen again. If the US again falls victim to a terrorist attack of that scale, that attack will very likely take a completely different form.
No one wants loaded guns or bombs or grenades or big knives or other such manifestly dangerous items on planes. When the TSA realizes that it will provide just as much security at the checkpoint by dropping the ID checks, focusing on just the big items and stop the "war on water, shoes and toiletries" (someone else's phrase, but I like it) and concentrates on other non-invasive aspects of the security process (i.e. screening cargo and even - gasp - the BDO program, which actually does provide some incremental security) it might actually stand a chance of rehabbing its broken image.
However, as long as TSA continues to treat each passenger as if he or she were a suspect instead of a citizen no amount of soft lighting and mood music is going to make the security process any less dehumanizing or demeaning and until TSA can actually show that its checkpoint obsessions with liquids and toiletries and nipple rings and all of the other things we have read about of late actually have made us even a little bit safer, the TSA will continue to enjoy near zero respect and only grudging tolerance from the vast majority of the traveling public.
April 4, 2008 9:23 PM
This whole situation strikes me as trying to solve a human relations problem with gadgetry. IMHO, the problems with the checkpoint process are 90% human relations and 10% infrastructure. The proposed solution is 10% human relations and 90% infrastructure. (Can you say, "the cart before the horse"?)
I watched the various videos, and wanted to share these thoughts:
The whole concept of the passenger "owning" the experience - totally silly. This new catch phrase sounds like corporate double-talk to me. As other have pointed out, I don't "own" what I don't control.
Video screens - Interesting idea. Could convey information, leading to less TSO need to shout instructions at the passengers.
"Automatically" sending bins into the x-ray - mixed feelings. While not having to push bins along a table saves me a bit of trouble, I lose control of my property as a result. Under the existing system, I can time it so my property enters the x-ray as I enter the metal detector. (It is funny that this "new" system is based on rollers and gravity, which is a "technology" that was being used in warehouses and shipping terminals over 40 years ago.)
Automatic bin return - Interesting idea. If the TSO's don't have to schlep bins around, maybe some of them won't feel the need to impose a "one bin per passenger" rule.
Automatically sending carryons that need a bag check to a second conveyor - Don't like this one at all. Instead of keeping a passenger and his property together, this separates a passenger and his property. I don't want my notebook PC going off to Lord-knows-where while I'm still navigating the metal detector, etc.
"Re-composure benches" - Like the idea, hate the name. I've made the suggestion before that chairs need to be provided for people that don't like to / can't doff and don their shoes while hopping on one foot. The bench design is interesting -- part table, part bench. The name, however, sounds like more corporate double-talk. Why not just call them benches?
TSO customer service training - Interesting idea, but where are the specifics? How will the TSO's be evaluated on their customer service skills? You can train people until the cows come home, but if there's no accountability, TSO attitudes are not going to change -- and that's where 90% of the problems lie.
April 5, 2008 8:33 AM
"Massachusetts and Florida police arrested a Logan Airport Lead Transportation Security Officer on a variety of child pornography charges."
Perhaps it is time to discuss the child safety issues. This guy could easily been a PR nightmare for TSA.
It does bring up questions about the employee vetting process.
I think it is fair to ask, what measures are being implemented to insure child passenger safety? A sex offender was able, recently, to molest a small child it a MA Public Library. What is being done to insure that someday, something similar does not occur in a TSA check point?
April 5, 2008 9:18 AM
For the very first time, I had a 'cold pak' to keep my salad cold taken from me at EWR; why is this considered a no-no, is it because it is a gel? Thanks so much.
Joan
April 5, 2008 10:12 AM
blue lights, that'll do it - stop the shouting from tsa staff. It'll allow the ill with sterile food for their feeding tubes to not be infected by opening their bottle, it'll allow folks with piercing to rip them out with pliers to appreciate the calming environment. Perhaps even allow the next terrorist to relax and thus not appear nervous to the screener.
This is all psychobabble.
Once again, you could have the checkpoint look like the Nazi cattle cars to the extermination camps and it would not be noticed by 99% of the people using the checkpoint. Its airport security, I simply do not care if looks like a high-end women's toilet.
I want TSA to expend ALL of its resources, and not borrowed taxpayer dollars, to train its staff as to what the rules really are. And then, apply them the same in Boise as in Atlanta.
Teach your untrained fools that ID is NOT required to access the checkpoint and that a refusal to show ID is not a problem, its merely an opportunity to make this safer, right?
Teach the untrained that a passport is in fact a government issued ID, and that if you used it Miami to board a domestic flight you should be able to use it on Newark for the flight back.
CONSISTENCY of application of the rules is primary.
Have a passenger ombsbudman at EVERY major checkpoint [lets call it every Class B and C airport - keep it simple] to resolve problems IMMEDIATELY. Whats one more person out of the tens of thousands you hire now.
April 5, 2008 11:50 AM
"Re-composure benches" - Like the idea, hate the name."
Sounds more like "time-out" seating - hopefully, for the screeners to recompose themselves.
"For the very first time, I had a 'cold pak' to keep my salad cold taken from me at EWR; why is this considered a no-no, is it because it is a gel?"
Because you were at EWR. If you carried the same thing to keep meds cool, they would have allowed it (or should have allowed it - knowing EWR, anything can happen).
Why something is safe for meds but unsafe for food is beyond understanding.
April 5, 2008 12:28 PM
Let's go back a few years, Sept 10, 2000. Pretty much the same checkpoint, same screening, same personnel (better trained, yes they are). What are the whiners complaining about. You got screened before 9/11, you're getting screened after 9/11. You just can't take as many things on the aircraft with you. Americans always feel stressed when they don't get their way. Grow up people.
April 5, 2008 1:07 PM
Is this 'engagement' like 'engaging the enemy'? If it is then it appears that the American traveling public is, once again, considered to be the enemy of a government agency.
April 5, 2008 1:09 PM
Jay Maynard said...
What you folks miss is that people are going to be stressd by the mere fact of your unconstitutional search of their persons and belongings. You'll never be able to de-stress the situation.
Jay if you are searched in violation of the Constitution (state or federal), please file a law suit. Be a patriot and fight it in the courts.
April 5, 2008 1:22 PM
I hate flying anymore. EVERYTIME I go to the airport I am searched with their wand and patted down because my artificial hip sets off the screener.
I just hate it. I always feel like a common criminal and have never broken a law more serious than a traffic violation. It's just me and a few other old men and women being checked because of our artificial parts, yeah, I really wish there was some way around this.
April 5, 2008 9:25 PM
What exactly is this video meant to show? I hear lots of buzz words like "calm," "well-intentioned" and "own" but I don't see how this solves anything or starts any constructive dialogue.
This reminds me of a former HR director I knew who used lots of cute terms to make us (and her) feel good. A breakfast meeting was called "A Baker's Dozen Team Huddle." Working overtime was called "thoughtful productivity enhancement." A write up was called "Affirmative Correction." She would also hand out copies of "The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People" to anyone who went in to lodge a workplace concern.
In watching this videa, I felt the same way I did when I had dealings with her: lots of words but no substance.
How could I possibly "own" my experience at the security areas in any commercial airport? The TSA has set the rules and I have no choice but to follow them or be kept from my flight and/or taken into custody.
You talk about having a calm security area. Really? Then explain my recent flight out of Phoenix where there were three of us in line and two TSO shouting the rules. When we took the few moments to unlace our shoes and unzip our computer cases, we were scolded for potentially holding up the line. There were three of us. Three. There was no line to hold up and there was absolutely no reason why the TSOs had to shout. There were only three of us at the station.
Three.
The only ones who were disrupting the natural calm of three people at a security check point were your agents.
I would like to own my experience at the TSA security areas, but you need to explain to me how to do that.
And, please, for the love of all that is holy, run these PR videos by focus groups and ask them for feedback before releasing them.
April 6, 2008 5:11 AM
I'll start by giving TSA officials credit for recognizing that the "signal to noise ratio" at checkpoints is too low to allow BDOs to do an effective job. The checkpoints themselves cause so much stress and unease among the millions of innocent passengers that any signs that (supposedly) indicate terrorist or criminal intent get swamped in the overall sea of anxiety. So they've decided to take measures meant to increase the signal to noise ratio by reducing the overall levels of stress and anxiety, so that "someone with ill intent will stick out like a man in a plaid suit at the Oscars." That sounds good, in theory. BDOs at least have a chance to provide some measure of genuine security, in contrast to the stupid and much-reviled (and stress-inducing) War On Liquids And Shoes.
Unfortunately, from what I can gather from this post and the video, TSA officials have apparently chosen to ignore numerous comments on this blog (and elsewhere) in which passengers themselves clearly and consistently explain exactly what causes them so much stress and anxiety at the checkpoint. Instead, they seem to have paid a consultant what must have been a significant chunk of our tax dollars (I'll bet the specific amount is SSI!) to come up with a list of utterly spurious changes that completely disregard everything passengers themselves clearly and consistently identify as the source of their stress and unease!
I would attribute this to the usual bureaucratic mindset that worships highly-paid (and perhaps politically-connected?) "experts" who have no idea what they're talking about. But intentionally or otherwise, reading this post and viewing the video gives good reason to believe that the TSA is yet again showing us the sort of contempt toward the traveling public that has earned it widespread distrust and disrepute.
In summary, if you generally want to reduce the stress and unease of TSA checkpoint "processing"-- and thereby potentially improve the effectiveness of that processing, you'll demand a refund from the consultant and respond constructively to the comments passengers themselves have offered you, free of charge. I need not reiterate them here, since that would be a waste of time. If you instead follow the consultant's recommendations, you'll find that the signal to noise ratio will remain just as low despite the soothing colors, ambient noise, and corporate-speak buzzwords about "ownership" and "engagement."
April 6, 2008 1:52 PM
Let's go back a few years, Sept 10, 2000. Pretty much the same checkpoint, same screening, same personnel (better trained, yes they are). What are the whiners complaining about. You got screened before 9/11, you're getting screened after 9/11. You just can't take as many things on the aircraft with you. Americans always feel stressed when they don't get their way. Grow up people.
You know, I think you've unintentionally made an important point. Screening really is the same as it was before 9/11 supposedly "changed things." It's the same security theater that failed so disastrously on 9/11. The only difference is that the former minimum-wage rentacops are now government employees who fancy themselves genuine police officers, and they now enjoy authority to capriciously "interpret" a far longer list of restricted items according to vaguely-defined policies and procedures. The lines are longer, we spend more time waiting at airports, we have more inconvenience and a greater chance of being bullied and subjected to humiliating searches. And our checked baggage is less secure from theft and damage thanks to a screening process that requires bags to be unlocked, and screeners who are often too rushed to bother with properly securing the bags they've opened.
But again, it's "pretty much the same checkpoint, same screening." So what reason is there to believe that the extra costs (in dollars, time, and privacy) and additional intrusion make the process any more effective? What are we actually getting for what it's costing us? Of course, we'll never get an answer to that question from the TSA other than "trust us."
April 6, 2008 2:03 PM
anonymous said:
Let's go back a few years, Sept 10, 2000. Pretty much the same checkpoint, same screening, same personnel (better trained, yes they are). What are the whiners complaining about. You got screened before 9/11, you're getting screened after 9/11. You just can't take as many things on the aircraft with you. Americans always feel stressed when they don't get their way. Grow up people.Off the top of my head I can think of having to take off my shoes, take out my laptop, SSSS screening, no-fly lists and DYWTFT attitudes. And now I can't take on hardly any liquids and those that I can have to be in a quart size bag. I can't take on many items that are not a threat to taking down or hijacking an airplane. Expanding the list has, in fact, made us less safe are you are requiring TSOs to look for too many different types of objects instead of just the ones that are truly important.
On top of this, in the over five years we have had the TSA, we have yet to see any wide-spread deployment of technology that would be more effective and efficient.
Grow up? I'm not running around being, in essence, scared of one's shadow and believing in kabuki security.
April 6, 2008 3:50 PM
someone wrote:
"Re-composure benches" - Like the idea, hate the name."
don't you only need to recompose yourself after some sort of ordeal or stressful situation? ;)
April 6, 2008 5:37 PM
Let me get this straight.. It has taken the TSA almost 6 years to figure out how to incorrectly do what the Israelis, the British, the Irish, the Swiss.. Ah, heck, lets just say "All of modern Europe and the Israelis".. were doing before 9-11?
Our tax dollars at work.
April 6, 2008 7:13 PM
I'm waiting to see you post the phrase:
"TSO's caught using the phrase 'Do you want to fly today' will be suspended without pay for seven days."
I'm also waiting for you to announce that the TSO's must prominently wear ID badges containing a name and ID number that can easily be read by the average 50-year-old standing across the conveyor.
Bet I'm in for a long, long wait.
April 7, 2008 12:07 AM
Trollkiller said: No, your Net Nazi software or firewall is blocking youtube.
No, the TSA has choosen to use the somewhat common but decidedly non-standard Adobe Flash encoding and delivery, instead of something like mpeg encoding and http delivery.
TSA- please don't assume that everyone uses MS-windows or has Flash installed.
April 7, 2008 12:23 AM
The "calming" color light panel are a good idea (as shown in the video) of the checkpoint of the future.
But those shown are not green! The presenter "Catherine" should look at LED alternatives that consume a fraction of the power.
April 7, 2008 12:44 AM
Gunner said:
"I'm also waiting for you to announce that the TSO's must prominently wear ID badges containing a name and ID number that can easily be read by the average 50-year-old standing across the conveyor."
I work at DCA...all you have to do is ask. Most of us are more than happy to show you our badges so yuou can both see and spell our names. As for the people asking about supervisors; again, just ask. A supervisor is anyone with 2 or 3 stripes on their shoulders.
Please folks, we understand (most of us) that you are stressed and uncomfortable. Most of the screening force would rather not search your bags or tell you that your liquid can't go. Just give us basic civility. Most of us try to give you that as well.
As for those that believe that TSOs are power hungry, illiterate, ect. that's just being rude. You wouldn't entertain comments like that said about yourself but you feel that it's okay to do it to us because we have to follow procedures set down by people higher up than us?
I'm saddened that I can try my hardest to do my job and be polite to people and because a few unruly TSOs have made the public upset, that everyone feels it is okay to take it out on all the workforce.
April 7, 2008 4:34 AM
As for those that believe that TSOs are power hungry, illiterate, ect. that's just being rude.
Ok, I do agree with you that it is rude. Suspect that the traveling public is just as fed up by the continued rudeness of TSOs screaming at them when a calm demeanor would have gotten the TSO what they were attempting to get anyway. FYI SCREAMING is a rather feeble attempt at intimidation and as such should be used sparingly, if at all.
You wouldn't entertain comments like that said about yourself but you feel that it's okay to do it to us because we have to follow procedures set down by people higher up than us?
'Want to fly today' ring any bells with you? 'We're just following procedures' ring any bells with you? Your own TSA web site is so full of inconsistancies that if your procedures are written like that it is no wonder that we, the traveling public see inconsistancies from airport to airport.
I'm saddened that I can try my hardest to do my job and be polite to people and because a few unruly TSOs have made the public upset, that everyone feels it is okay to take it out on all the workforce.
A FEW? When one of your coworkers goes off on a passenger do you later pull that coworker aside and talk to that coworker about courtesy or do you just ignore the rudeness on the part of your coworker. When you ignore it, you become part of the problem by your tacit approval of your coworker abusing passengers.
April 7, 2008 8:23 AM
>>Then explain my recent flight out of Phoenix where there were three of us in line and two TSO shouting the rules. When we took the few moments to unlace our shoes and unzip our computer cases, we were scolded for potentially holding up the line. There were three of us. Three.<<
Sounds like what I ran into in Flint MI -- TSO shouting at four people. I still think it's classic that we were somehow to manipulate bags, put notebook PC's and ziplocs in bins, remove footwear, etc. all while "keeping photo id and boarding pass in hand at all times."
Somebody from the TSA please explain how the new process with address this situation.
April 7, 2008 8:25 AM
I work at DCA...all you have to do is ask. Most of us are more than happy to show you our badges so yuou can both see and spell our names. As for the people asking about supervisors; again, just ask. A supervisor is anyone with 2 or 3 stripes on their shoulders.
That's the problem -- we shouldn't have to ask, especially given the possibility of retaliation for making a complaint. Lots of jobs require name tags to be worn in plain sight. What's the reason to hide one's name tag?
As for those that believe that TSOs are power hungry, illiterate, ect. that's just being rude. You wouldn't entertain comments like that said about yourself but you feel that it's okay to do it to us because we have to follow procedures set down by people higher up than us?
I can tell the difference between someone following a silly mandate and someone who's plainly on a power trip. From my side of the conveyor, I see a much higher percentage of rude screeners than I do rude passengers.
I'm saddened that I can try my hardest to do my job and be polite to people and because a few unruly TSOs have made the public upset, that everyone feels it is okay to take it out on all the workforce.
I applaud you for trying to be polite, especially in this rude world. As I've said before on this blog, I'll be a lot more understanding of a TSO who's at least civil, and preferably polite. OTOH, start yelling at me for no good reason, and my willingness to give that TSO the benefit of a doubt goes straight to zero.
Personally, I haven't witnessed passengers "taking it out on the workforce" at the checkpoints, though I have experienced a lot of unnecessary yelling, barking of orders, etc. from TSO's. As I've said before, if a passenger walked up to the checkpoint and didn't open their mouth without yelling at the TSO's, that person would be gone over with a fine-toothed comb.
In my line of work, I find that I end up paying for the sins of others -- the collective reputation of an organization gets visited on the various individual members of that organization.
As an organization the TSA has a reputation for nonsensical rules, capriciously interpreted and enforced, capped off with a lack of accountability. If that's not a recipe for acrimony, I don't know what is.
April 7, 2008 8:51 AM
Yes, I'm sure the TSA would like to make us all partners in our own oppression.
Pull the other one.
April 7, 2008 9:28 AM
"Yes, I'm sure the TSA would like to make us all partners in our own oppression.
Pull the other one."
Color me confused by the comments on this post, especially the one above. Yes, TSA needs to improve customer service. Yes, the video says next to nothing. But,the video with the text implies to me that TSA is trying to keep things calm; so the average passenger's stress level is kept low....so the not average passenger -- i.e. bad guys, terrorists -- stands out.
I know there are lots of folks blogging here who seem to hate the TSA, but why, oh why is that a bad thing and why in the world would you not want to help your government keep terrorists off airplanes?
April 7, 2008 12:24 PM
The video with the text implies to me that TSA is trying to keep things calm; so the average passenger's stress level is kept low ... I know there are lots of folks blogging here who seem to hate the TSA, but why, oh why is that a bad thing and why in the world would you not want to help your government keep terrorists off airplanes?
I don't think anyone faults the overall goal. But what many people fault is (some of) the particular means TSA employs in pursuit of that goal. Not everything done in the name of "security" actually improves security.
Witness the evolution of TSA's own rules. Lighters were banned as a security precaution, then permitted when they were judged as distracting from other threats. Breast milk was banned as part of the ban on liquids, then permitted when the medical necessity of breast milk for infants was seen as more important than any possible threat.
So, the question here (at least for me) comes down to this. Yes, reducing stress levels at checkpoints is good for everyone. What is the best means for doing so? TSA talks in vague terms about "improving TSO training", but in much more specific terms about environmental lighting and mood music. Which is more likely to have the greatest effect? To me, this isn't a rhetorical question: it is a question worth debating.
In particular, the question as to whether the stress at a checkpoint is inherent or accidental is worth discussing. If it is accidental, then plenty of things can be done to improve the screening experience. If it is inherent, then cosmetic changes are unlikely to have much effect.
I don't know the answers. But I certainly enjoy the questions.
April 7, 2008 1:08 PM
Nohwhere Man said...
Trollkiller said: No, your Net Nazi software or firewall is blocking youtube.
No, the TSA has choosen to use the somewhat common but decidedly non-standard Adobe Flash encoding and delivery, instead of something like mpeg encoding and http delivery.
TSA- please don't assume that everyone uses MS-windows or has Flash installed.
Not every computer has an MPEG decoder installed, not every computer has Flash, not every computer has [insert media player here]. We get it.
Blogger Bob please please please convert all video to every format know to man. I am tired of hearing the whines from people that can roll their own Linux but can't seem to install a frikken player.
April 7, 2008 1:31 PM
Francois said...
The "calming" color light panel are a good idea (as shown in the video) of the checkpoint of the future.
But those shown are not green! The presenter "Catherine" should look at LED alternatives that consume a fraction of the power.
Comments aimed at the TSA not Francois.
Why waste the money on that kind of stuff anyhow? Light shows indeed.
Want to kill the stress? Straighten out the attitude of the screeners.
People wait in line all the time without going ballistic. Do you see Wal~Mart hanging fancy light panels in their store? How about the grocery store? Why not?
Maybe because they are not needed if we don't have some jerk barking orders at us.
April 7, 2008 1:42 PM
The TSOs who read this blog should be offended by the near-constant discussion of rudeness by TSOs.
It is the 80-20 rule in real life. 80% of the TSOs get tarred by the actions of the 20% who treat the airline passengers like criminals.
I appreciate that the majority of you are hard workers who believe in what you are doing and don't go out of your way to seek confrontation with the traveling public.
so the challenge is: how do you get the 20% (it may be smaller, but let's not quibble over numbers) to get in step with the majority? As peers, you can apply more pressure than the flying public can. How about insisting that there be an internal hotline where TSOs can reports TSOs who are consistently out of line? How about embracing a ban on the phrase "do you want to fly today"? How about making it decidedly uncomfortable to be yelling or raising your voices at fliers?
The majority of us just want to get on our airplanes with a minimun degree of hassle. Yet, we approach going to the airport with great dread because we don't know if we are going to run into the TSO from hell.
Help us, and you'll probably find that there will be fewer passenger-initiated confrontations.
And maybe the standard response to "do you want to fly today?" should be "Hell No, do you want to keep your job today?"
April 7, 2008 4:06 PM
It's funny about "keep the ID handy." I found a very good way to do that, and the TSA hated it.
As a biker who works on a military installation, I wear my ID on a pouch around my neck so that I can show it to the gate guards. I used that on the TSA.
Now the ID pouch had 1 drivers license, 1 military ID, 1 contractor ID, 1 credit card, 1 debit card, and 1 military motorcycle training card. All told the pouch was about 1/4 inch thick.
I got through the line, showed the pouch to the TSO. Since it was a full whopping 1/4 inch thick he made me remove it so it could run through the X-ray machine.
Here I thought I was making their jobs easier.
April 7, 2008 4:31 PM
Much ado about nothing. Your little video doesn't tell us anything about the how.
April 7, 2008 8:41 PM
"Off the top of my head I can think of having to take off my shoes"
Shoe bomber?
"take out my laptop"
I have yet to see any instance of a laptop being used badly, so ya got that.
"And now I can't take on hardly any liquids and those that I can have to be in a quart size bag."
Have you ever been to an isle at Wal Mart that sells small items? If not, go, and you'll see everything you could want to stuff into a quart bag. No sympathy here.
"On top of this, in the over five years we have had the TSA, we have yet to see any wide-spread deployment of technology that would be more effective and efficient."
I think TSA decided to use "off the shelf" stuff and develope new stuff as they went on. And not all of it works: their Puffer machines appartently get set off by dust! I've seen them at some airports, but never in use.
April 7, 2008 11:11 PM
Thank you for taking our comments.
I want to express great concern about full body imaging. I see this as an unreasonable search. A good test of the unreasonableness is the need/desire to hide the observer in another location. If people would be offended to have their body-images shown in public then I think the TSA will be going to far by implementing this.
I admit that if we strip searched everyone then flights would be much safer, but the cost out weighs the benefits.
Please, please, don't do this.
Besides, I think that the thogut of being images will be counter to the concep of reducing stress.
In my experience, the stress is least when the lines are short. As lines backup up, passengers and screeners all try to hurry.
Also, if you could implement a formal policy for checking for passengers who are close to missing their flight that would also help.
April 8, 2008 2:02 AM
"the more relaxed passengers are, the easier it will be for our Behavior Detection Officers to pick out folks who are displaying signs of fear and deception."
The more docile the sheep are, the easier it will be for us to Dominate, Intimidate, Control, Detain, or Abuse anyone who doesn't kowtow to petty jackbooted thugs.
It was fun being detained in 2003 for not taking off my boots (when it was highly suggested but not 'mandated').
I remember when I wasn't treated like a criminal in my own country. Good times, TSA. Good times.
April 8, 2008 2:19 AM
What a bunch of PR speak.
April 8, 2008 2:26 AM
People could be a lot calmer if the agents did not treat passengers like scum.
Thanks
April 8, 2008 6:32 PM
Passengers "owning" the screening process? Come on. That has to be the most absurd thing I've seen yet from the TSA, which has made many absurd announcements in the past.
The whole premise of the TSA is that every passenger is presumed to be a terrorist or a criminal, at least until a thorough and meticulous screening at the checkpoint conclusively establishes that he or she is not. Do we really want terrorists and criminals owning a screening process that's supposed to be protecting us from terrorism and crime?
April 8, 2008 6:57 PM
Kip and Company:
I fly several times each week for business. Last week, much to my surprise, I saw several of your screeners wearing jackets with large lettering that said, "FEDERAL OFFICER." What on earth are you thinking?
The term FEDERAL OFFICER implies that one is in law enforcement. These ill trained, poorly supervised, rude, loose cannons are not law enforcement. They are nothing more than glorified mall security.
I read on a law enforcement blog that you recently purchased new uniforms for your screeners that closely resemble police uniforms. Additionally, I read that you are in the process of issuing metal badges. You are asking for serious trouble if you continue down this path.
What happens to the first person who tries to detain another? What happens to the first person who inappropriately flashes their badge? And, what happens to our tax dollars when people begin to sue TSA for the inappropriate conduct of its pretend police force?
April 8, 2008 8:13 PM
After accidentally forgetting a dive knife in a scuba regulator bag I was carrying (you don't want regulators you depend on 60 feet underwater travelling in checked luggage) it was confiscated by a very arrogant and pompous TSO at FLL the other day.
This guy actually said 'It's mine now!' and flashed it around showing it off to all the passengers waiting in line. I don't know if he was just trying to intimidate the rest of the passengers, or was just lording his authority over me, but his obvious over-reaction to a common scubadiving accessory being accidentally forgotten in a regulator bag is exactly why all the training in the world won't change the usual exasperating experience we passengers have.
When a low paid rent-a-cop-wannabe gets to take away your personal possessions in the name of some un-realistic security measure, and does it with an arrogance and over-bearing and deluded self-importance, it's pretty hard to place credence in 'passenger engagement'.
By the way, the TSO who wrote up the report actually said TSA would be in touch with me, and that this was a serious matter,so chances are he will do his best to cause me legal problems for a stupid, forgotten scuba knife. The law enforcement officer who my lady and I talked to through the entire affair was pretty dismissive of that claim by the TSO, but given the TSO's obvious lack of proportional judgement, I would not be surprised.
Good luck with 'passenger engagement', TSA. My friends and family are all writing our Senators and Congress folk to reduce the TSA to a small group of pros, and suggesting tripling or quadrupling the sky marshall program.
April 8, 2008 8:44 PM
I found the comments from the anonymous TSO who posted here amusing. That if we wanted his ID all we had to do was ask. The company I work for requires all of our retail associates to have name tags for a reason. If a customer feels dissatisfied with the service they received from our associate we want to know who it was. This doesn't automatically mean our associate was out of line. I recall an incident that came across my desk at corporate once (and I'm not even in customer service) where a customer claimed our associate threatened to stab him with a screwdriver. The associate said our customer left out the part where the customer threatened to stab him with a knife. The store video tape appeared to back up our associate. In cases where our associate was not professional with a customer we need to be able to correct the situation. A customer should never feel to intimidated to ask a rude associate for his nametag. I understand there are legitimate privacy issues here. The name tags only need to have a first name or maybe first and initial (middle or last name initial) followed by a badge number:
Mike 4321
Very readable and easy to see. By the way TSO's I had your job when I was fresh out of high school one summer 20 years ago. I never treated passengers like what I have experienced on multiple occasions. Then again I wore a badge number that was visible to the travelling public. I only had one complaint that summer. A passenger felt I was deliberately cranking up the X-Rays on his bag and would ruin his exposed film at the check point. Unfortunately his bag happen to go through while I was training my replacement and that was what the customer felt was happening. However my supervisor was able to assure him the machine took one scan only, just like every other bag. That what he was seeing was the enhancement of the image in active memory and not additional X-Ray scans. Unfortunately I do have to admit airport security was a joke back then. I had a supervisor over rule me and allow a passenger to keep in his carry-on bag a large cermonial blade he purchased in Japan. My supervisor felt it was extremely unlikely someone would takeover a plane with a cermonial blade, even if it was as big as my arm. While I tend to agree with that opinion a blade that big was simply to far over the line to look the other way. Unfortunately people like him helped to create the TSA :)
April 9, 2008 12:41 AM
It's simple, really. Get Playboy bunnies in bikinis to offer free body searches. All the people with nothing to hide will go through the airport security at maximum comfort, while all those who have something to hide will be easily spotted.
April 9, 2008 7:46 AM
Good to here about the plan from TSA. I wish it does get executed properly so that the passengers get a much deserved relaxed environment. Thanks.
April 9, 2008 8:31 AM
frequentflyer 101:
What airport were you flying out of when you saw this? I am a TSO (also a double-major college student), and I have never heard of such a jacket being worn. What style of uniform were they wearing? As you can see, i'm rather curious as to who these officers were. I haven't seen or heard of it before, so I don't have much to comment on about t.
April 9, 2008 1:52 PM
Here's a little note for those of you complaining about being unable to read TSO's badges:
Quite often, it is *not* intentional. I'm sure many of you are familiar with the badge-holders which are attached to one's shirt with a retractable cord. These are quite common, and easy for us to use, especially when we often need to swipe our badge through a reader, and wish to do so without the hassle of removing it from our shirt and reattaching it.
The "problem" with this type of holder is that, as it is attached by a thin cord, it rotates freely, and approximately half the time will end up backwards. With all the bending down we do throughout the day, the badge hangs down freely and whatever direction it happens to be facing when we stand up again is what will be showing at that point in time.
So, again, it's *probably* not intentional, it's just the way that it happens. It's not "grounds for immediate termination", as a previous poster suggested.
April 9, 2008 1:57 PM
So this past weekend, as I was "owning" my security experience in OAK and ONT, I noticed that as we were all corralled up in a long, winding line waiting to get into the checkpoint. Probably 300-400 people in line. What an easy target for a would-be bomber. They don't have to get past security, don't have to board a plane. All they would have to do is pull up in front of the terminal, walk into the airport, run into the middle of the crowd and boom. The casualty count could be as high as if a plane were brought down.
TSA is just inviting a disaster by keeping large groups of people herded together like cattle in front of the security area. If you are truly concerned about keeping me and my family safe, this needs to be thought through some more.
April 9, 2008 6:36 PM
Hello Daniel,
I've heard of this as well, but haven't seen it. I'm concerned about this on several levels. When SWAT first came on the scene you began seeing ordinary police officers dressing up as SWAT members (black uniform, jump boots, bloused pants, etc). It remined me of playing soldier when much younger
If you (generic, not addressed to you Daniel) want to look like you're in the military then join up. I suggest the Marines because they have the best uniforms of all branches of the armed forces otherwise it is just a play at being a member of the military. It looks silly and isn't effective.
What next, up armored TSO's wearing riot gear? This is money being wasted. You can put lipstick on a corpse and it will still be a corpse.
April 9, 2008 6:41 PM
The saddest part of all of this is that passengers and bloggers actually feel like their voice matters. If it did TSA would have been handed back over to the private sector long ago. There's a reason three government agencies make people cringe, TSA, IRS, and FEMA. It's because customer, passenger, whatever you want to call it, feedback doesn't matter.
TSA is a smoke and mirrors operational agency. They promise their employees better opportunities and rarely make good on them. They promise the passengers a better experience but then force the responsibility back on the passengers if their "lighting door" tactic, and others like it, doesn't work.
Employees continually hear about how they are the "Frontline," or "the first line of defense." Personally I think if a threat has made it past the FBI, CIA, NSA, military intelligence, TSA isn't going to stop it.
Most of us at work for TSA do try to make the experience better for passengers. Believe me, we know how invasive we are being and most of us can't say we're proud to pat down four year old boys because their mothers alarmed, however some factors of the management has been running rampant with little to no accountability.
There is always the TSO who believes yelling at the public as they timidly try to put their belongings on the xray belt is a good idea, and we try to deal with him/her the best way possible, but until management stops their power trip, the peeons will continue to power trip as well.
The real problem, however, is the belief that complaining on a blog will make a difference. It won't. Tax payers writing to their senators will.
The United States Government system was made to repair itself when part of it was broken. Fix it.
Otherwise you will continue to be a victim of the Smoke and Mirrors PR game that TSA plays not only with its passengers, but also with it's employees.
April 9, 2008 7:05 PM
Daniel:
The people in question were wearing the ordinary screener uniform and a black wind breaker style jacket with the TSA seal on the front and large letters on the back that said FEDERAL OFFICER.
April 9, 2008 8:41 PM
Daniel:
By the way, it was Washington - Dulles Airport.
April 9, 2008 8:45 PM
I'd like to see more about the new "customer service training". After the initial TSA hoopla about the new checkpoint design, and the initial round of comments (including my comments about trying to fix a human behavior problem with gadgets), I'm not seeing much new detail come to light.
April 9, 2008 10:57 PM
The anonymous TSO who commented above me about the ID cards is right. My ID is on an ID reel using a thin cord, and i'd have to say more times than not the ID winds up facing the wrong way. It can get very aggravating, as I have no problem with everyone seeing my ID, and would actually prefer it to be visible.
Please remember that when you speak of TSOs in a negative light, it is not all of us, but rather a group of TSOs who have been ruining it for the rest. I do my job as professionally, courteously and efficiently as possible, and I know of a good number of my co-workers who I would rely on to get the job done in the same way I do. With that being said, I respect everyone's right to express their opinions, and I greatly appreciate all feedback, as it helps shed light on issues that are important and demand attention.
I hope that other TSOs can either follow my lead or retain some sort of valuable skills from the new training. Things really do need to change, and will be changing soon, one way or another.
April 10, 2008 12:04 AM
Quite often, it is *not* intentional. I'm sure many of you are familiar with the badge-holders which are attached to one's shirt with a retractable cord.
I'm familiar with that style of badge holder -- I use one myself on my corporate job.
Here's the problem -- there's a perception that if a passenger asks a screener for their name, intimidation and threats follow. When this blog first opened, the phrase "retaliatory secondary" entered the lexicon. Similarly, a common complaint was being asked for ID when asking for a comment card.
Intentional or not, an unreadable badge is taken as a sign that the screener is trying to hide their identity. That's why I've been advocating a "name tag" -- the kind that affixes to the uniform above the pocket.
April 10, 2008 8:28 AM
Whether it is intentional or not that the TSO badges are flipping backwards so they are unreadable to the general public that is not acceptable. As I stated in a previous post all of our retail associates at my company have nametags that must be readable at all times. It may not be an individual TSO's fault that their organization has such little regard for an obvious courtesy that should be extended to all of the flying public. However since TSO's routinely ask for our ID it is not to much to ask that at least their first name and badge number be visible at all times. TSA needs to correct this situation. The fact is that the majority of the flying public fears retaliation from TSO's if they ask for this info. I have been treated like pond scum by TSO's (being humiliated in Columbus Ohio by a TSO screaming at me I was lying about emptying my pockets, then telling me it was my fault for not letting him know men's slacks had a button in the back pocket). I was afraid to ask for his name and badge number for fear I'd be detained just long enough to miss my flight. I should have been able to call TSA Customer Service immediately after my flight and reported his obnoxious behavior by name with his badge number. We can always ask for your name and badge won't cut it guys.
April 10, 2008 9:04 AM
Anonymous TSO said...
Here's a little note for those of you complaining about being unable to read TSO's badges:
I have to disagree with you on this. A TSO can and should wear the badge properly at all times. It is no different than wearing your uniform properly. If the badge cord does not permit this then it should not be used.
Your explanation is just a rationalization for a TSO to use the hidden badge as an intimidation factor with the public. I should never have to ask the screener for a name or ID number.
Try again!
April 10, 2008 11:28 AM
When a low paid rent-a-cop-wannabe gets to take away your personal possessions in the name of some un-realistic security measure, and does it with an arrogance and over-bearing and deluded self-importance, it's pretty hard to place credence in 'passenger engagement'.
This is perhaps a canonical example of the sort of unprofessional and arrogant TSO behavior that has earned so many complaints on this blog and elsewhere. The anonymous passenger was indeed carrying a Prohibited Item (intentionally or otherwise); and politely confiscating it then and there would be entirely appropriate. The TSO clearly crossed the line from professional behavior into unprofessional arrogance when he "said 'It's mine now!' and flashed it around showing it off to all the passengers waiting in line." He crossed the next line into bullying when he threatened legal action.
Even worse, all those people in the line who saw this behavior immediately increased their antipathy toward the TSA. All it takes is one unprofessional bully to tarnish all their professional and courteous colleagues. If the TSO deserves disciplinary action for anything, that's the most serious offense. As long as the TSA allows such incidents to go by with no consequences for the TSOs who perpetrate it-- or, as with the piercing incident in Lubbock, with the full support of TSA management-- passengers will have every reason to be brimming over with fear and anxiety as they approach the checkpoint. That will needlessly complicate the BDO's job, and probably undermine whatever effectiveness they can bring to the screening process.
If the TSA genuinely wants a "relaxed and calm" checkpoint, it's obvious what they need to do. Hint (in case it's not obvious): mood lighting, ambient sounds, and buzzword-strewn press releases about "engagement" and "ownership" are not among those things.
April 10, 2008 1:01 PM
I have to disagree with you on this. A TSO can and should wear the badge properly at all times. It is no different than wearing your uniform properly. If the badge cord does not permit this then it should not be used.
Ask any airport employee who wears a SIDA badge on a lanyard how they spin around. We never know what way they will be facing. if you want to know a TSO's name, read the small metal nameplate on their right breast pocket. It will say something like "Joe 74597".
April 10, 2008 3:40 PM
We have a metal nametag with our first name on it as well as a badge number. The dangling TSA and Sida badges aren't really there for you folks to be reading anyway as the print on them is very small. I'm assured our new metal nametags on our new uniforms will have our last name instead of our first name. But if you ever really have a difficult with a TSO you should ask for a supervisor as they'll be able to help you much more than complaining about some random TSO on this blog.
April 10, 2008 6:04 PM
"If it did TSA would have been handed back over to the private sector long ago"
You forget your history: TSA had a sunset clause which allowed airports to go private. When the deadline hit, only 3 or 4 went back to private security, in addition to the 4 or 5 which already were private. The majority satyed with TSA.
April 10, 2008 10:57 PM
Please remember that when you speak of TSOs in a negative light, it is not all of us, but rather a group of TSOs who have been ruining it for the rest. I do my job as professionally, courteously and efficiently as possible, and I know of a good number of my co-workers who I would rely on to get the job done in the same way I do.
Despite my very negative opinion of the TSA (based on the negative light I've personally experienced), I am very willing to believe that Daniel represents the majority of TSOs who genuinely care about doing their job professionally, courteously, and efficiently. Unfortunately, in the current environment I would guess that about 100 courteous, professional, and efficient passenger "engagements" at checkpoints are necessary to neutralize the toxic effects of one unprofessional, discourteous, and inefficient "engagement."
The real problem seems to be TSA management that either fails to recognize the toxicity, just doesn't care about it, or (conceivably) may actually believe that bullying and intimidating passengers is somehow beneficial for "effective security." As we saw from the Lubbock piercing incident, whenever a TSO's behavior is egregious enough to gain embarrassing attention, TSA management won't apologize or admit to a problem. Rather, they'll issue a mealy-mouthed press release standing behind the TSOs and even commending them for protecting passengers and crews!
Individual TSOs can do their job professionally. But as long as management does nothing to discourage the "group of TSOs who have been ruining it for the rest" (and even encourages them by backing them up when their actions become embarrassing), the traveling public will have good reason to judge the entire TSA by the acts of those "few" bullying petty tyrants who apparently derive pleasure from abusing their authority.
TSOs are merely the visible tip of a bureaucratic iceberg. And within the frozen core of that iceberg are managers, completely insulated from the traveling public, who tacitly or otherwise create a culture that enables TSOs to bully and intimidate passengers.
April 11, 2008 12:02 PM
By the way, the TSO who wrote up the report actually said TSA would be in touch with me, and that this was a serious matter,so chances are he will do his best to cause me legal problems for a stupid, forgotten scuba knife. The law enforcement officer who my lady and I talked to through the entire affair was pretty dismissive of that claim by the TSO, but given the TSO's obvious lack of proportional judgement, I would not be surprised.
April 13, 2008 7:46 AM
It all comes down to the staff... If you do not hire properly education and people that enjoy being around people, you can and will not be able to turn the TSA around.
TSO are the first impression one gets when traveling...
I recently returned from a trip from Portugal. When I left Lisbon the airport security was on point, friendly and respectful... They had well spoken staff ( Yes, in english as well!). I boarded my flight, enjoyed a nice meal and a movie... Then I arrived in Newark Liberty Airport.
The customs office was a very pleasant African-American woman (great smile... and a great big Hello, how are you!)... I then went on to my connecting flight in another terminal...
I entered the line for the security checkpoint only to find 6 officers, and only 2 actually working... I waited about 10 minutes in line... There was only about 20 people in the line! Once I reached the checkpoint, the first thing out of the TSO mouth was... " you gotta take that watch off, and da hat too..." Then that was followed by a woman yelling... " I said wait a minute!" at me... I guess I did not heard her due to the noise coming from the TSO station with them all laughing and playing around while the flying public waited on them..,
Congratulations are in order to the TSA and their TSO...
If I offended anyone, I am not sorry, I intended too!
To all of the TSA and TSO employees that actually do care and respect their customers... keep up the good work, I hope that it will rub off on the rest of the crew... and speak up, these guys are giving you a bad rap....
The first thing that came to my mind was... "Why would anyone want to come visit America... I don't care how much value you can get for the US dollar... It is not worth!"
I was actually embarrassed for the guy... He did even realize that this was not proper english...
April 13, 2008 10:29 AM
Anonymous said...
"If it did TSA would have been handed back over to the private sector long ago"
You forget your history: TSA had a sunset clause which allowed airports to go private. When the deadline hit, only 3 or 4 went back to private security, in addition to the 4 or 5 which already were private. The majority satyed with TSA.
Of course the majority stayed with the TSA. Let's see the airports can either take the money out of their pocket to pay for security or let the Feds pick up the tab. Simple choice.
April 13, 2008 4:06 PM
At MIA on Saturday April 4th at 8:30am - so you can see who was on duty at the time - the screener on duty promised to send anyone to the back of the line that didn't have their passport opened to the correct page (mind you - you don't need a passport to travel but there were a lot of international travelers in this line). It wasn't necessary to be yelling this out on a regular basis. Then, I was in a line that was moving perfectly well and the supervisor thought we should move to a line that wasn't even opened - if you are going to use the line then have someone there to do the screening.
April 13, 2008 5:52 PM
All screeners have silver metal name tags with a TSO assigned number next to the name. The only TSOs that wouldn't have that would be the trainees who haven't recieved their uniforms yet.
I proudly display my name tag. I consider myself to be one of the friendliest TSOs out there. Yes, I get firm if I need to, but most passengers like to comment on how I am always smiling and polite. It is unfortunate that there are so many angry TSos that you all run into... there aren't many at my airport (ORF). I apologize on their behalf.
April 14, 2008 3:46 PM
... the screener on duty promised to send anyone to the back of the line that didn't have their passport opened to the correct page (mind you - you don't need a passport to travel but there were a lot of international travelers in this line).
Nice, I bet that the international travelers were all very impressed by our retaliatory TSOs and want to vacation/do business with the US because of it. /sarc
The bad thing was he probably was 'just following orders' without thinking of the repercussions of his/her actions.
April 14, 2008 7:25 PM
Passenger Engagement is an all encompassing phrase that takes into account the changes we are suggesting to ease the passenger into the screening process with the least amount of stress. Will there be any training available for our TSO’s that will provide them with the skills necessary to defuse tense situations with passengers; something on the order of what police departments use?
April 17, 2008 1:10 PM
I'm up for some Checkpoint improvement. So tell me what actions have been made to correct this screener;
"TSO NY said the following;
"that may be true, but without a prescription it doesn't go."
"It's all well to know the rules, but when you're on the checkpoint sometimes the rules get "changed" to suit the situation."
"TSA states that if those bottles are not labeled, they aren't allowed to go."
Are or improvments just additional control of lawabiding citizens?
Please Bloggers tell me and others here what corrective action has been taken to educate TSO NY and others would so poorly understand their duties. Surely you will not let something like this go without corrective action!
But you have, haven't you?
April 18, 2008 10:28 PM
why in the world would you not want to help your government keep terrorists off airplanes?
If the true goal was to keep terrorists off airplanes, airlines would allow their pilots to be armed and would give discounts to any passenger with a CWP to carry his weapon aboard.
I've been advocating this for years, in speech and in print. Which is why I am currently on the No-Fly List.
April 19, 2008 7:13 AM
On improving the security experience I would have to suggest that some logic and sanity be applied to the process along with fairness. Eliminate the Clear Pass and any other '1st class' process - we are all citizens and all equal (at least according to the Constitution). Next, as I said add some sanity, and work with the states to provide a secure drivers license or other form of universal ID. Profiling travelers also works (as Israel has proven). Next why require the removal of jackets and belts, shoes, etc. when you can have test methods. Lastly open more screening lines.
April 22, 2008 12:09 AM
Lionel writes:
Work with the states to provide a secure drivers license or other form of universal ID.
As I've pointed out elsewhere, the security value of this is less-than-clear, at least to me. Verifying a person's identity doesn't tell a screener anything about a person's intentions.
April 22, 2008 1:56 PM
I came through a checkpoint a few days ago and had my toothpaste confiscated. It was a half-empty four ounce container of toothpaste. The size indicator on the tube, i.e. 4 oz., violated the rules. All my other liquids were fine because the containers were three ounces or under. None of your engagement strategies are going to lower passenger frustration as long as you fail to allow the screeners to make common sense judgments.
April 23, 2008 1:07 PM
I came through a checkpoint a few days ago and had my toothpaste confiscated. It was a half-empty four ounce container of toothpaste. The size indicator on the tube, i.e. 4 oz., violated the rules.
I would like you to go and see your replacement tube of toothpast. What is the unit of measure? How was that tube of toothpaste sold to you (i.e. volume or weight)? Most likely it was sold to you by weight, not volume. What does TSA's (not so clear)rules say about the 3-1-1? Everything is done by volume, not weight. Tell me, what procedure did TSA use to determine the volume of that tube of toothpaste they confiscated from you? Did they have scales to weigh the tube? Did they have a graduated cylinder to find the total volume of that tube? No, they just confiscated something because their near total lack of both science and mathematics has 3oz (mass) being the same as 3oz volume.
April 23, 2008 6:00 PM
"I came through a checkpoint a few days ago and had my toothpaste confiscated. It was a half-empty four ounce container of toothpaste. The size indicator on the tube, i.e. 4 oz., violated the rules. All my other liquids were fine because the containers were three ounces or under. None of your engagement strategies are going to lower passenger frustration as long as you fail to allow the screeners to make common sense judgments."
It's comments like this that make me want to scream at my fellow passenegers. I just got back from Target with a 3oz tube of toothpaste. I bought it so I would not have to check anything (and not because of theft: I don't want the airplines to lose any more of my luggage!). Where did you get a 4oz tube of toothpaste? And it says on TSA.gov that the limit is 3 oz. (although I know its 3.4) Why would you think if you were caught that you 4OZ would be all right? Did you flunk basic math? Here's a clue: 4 > 3.4. My 8 year old daughter figured it out!
Until TSA drops this liquid theater, why make it harder on yourself? Oh, I know. So you can blog here and make you look cool and TSA a fool.
April 24, 2008 12:15 PM
Until TSA drops this liquid theater, why make it harder on yourself? Oh, I know. So you can blog here and make you look cool and TSA a fool.
Okay Einstein, look at the unit of measure for that tube of toothpast. It is sold by weight, not by volume. Something heavier/denser/thicker than water occupies less space/volume. A 4 oz by weight tube of toothpaste could actually be under the 3.4 oz by VOLUME restrictions. You've failed basic high school science.
April 24, 2008 5:27 PM
Lets just do away with airport security common 911 was so many light years away. Its too stressful at the checkpoints the noise level is ridiculous and anyways the cockpit doors are stronger than ever! And if anything should happen and thousands of lives are lost and our economy plummets once again and our confidence is shaken then we will just gladly accept that we decided checkpoint security was too stressful and noisy to support and so we did away with it.
April 24, 2008 9:54 PM
"Anonymous said...
Lets just do away with airport security common 911 was so many light years away. Its too stressful at the checkpoints the noise level is ridiculous and anyways the cockpit doors are stronger than ever! And if anything should happen and thousands of lives are lost and our economy plummets once again and our confidence is shaken then we will just gladly accept that we decided checkpoint security was too stressful and noisy to support and so we did away with it."
Yes, I do agree, the checkpoints are too noisy and stressful. Perhaps something could be done about that?
In case you haven't noticed, the economy is plummeting right now. Food and energy prices world wide are climbing, while the dollar declines. Then there is the sub-prime mortgage crisis, affecting millions of people, who probably won't be flying anywhere.
What is it that you are worried about?
April 27, 2008 11:17 AM
So you're talking about running passengers through a glove?
A gauntlet is the glove worn by a swordsman to protect his hand. A gantlet is an ordeal where the victim is forced to run past people who will strike him as he goes.
As for IDs, has the TSA ever considered putting the identification information on both sides of the card, so even if it's flipped, we know the identity of the screener?
And please don't insult us with this "I'm only following orders" shtick. It didn't work at Nuremberg, and it definitely doesn't work for you whiteshirts.
April 29, 2008 2:36 AM
From a canadian perspective, I've never personally had an issue with TSA service or people getting out of control - and I fly a lot. These security folks have a tough job, but they do it well and their track record is pretty darn good. We'll never see a point where passengers own the process - it only takes one bad egg to spoil the carton
May 6, 2008 7:30 PM
I like the ideas of relaxed environments - i think it would make someone with ill intentions stick out a lot. It would be nice to go through security checks without feeling rushed or being manhandled.
September 10, 2008 11:13 PM
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home