Zero Tolerance
Transportation security officers nationwide are shaking their heads after hearing about a fellow officer’s sticky fingers in Newark. It’s a kick in the gut for each of the 43,000 officers who are honest, hardworking, and take pride in their mission of keeping passengers safe. We are well aware of how folks forget about the important role TSA's officers have in security and remember events such as this one.
As a former officer myself, I just want to be clear that the actions of this individual are absolutely unacceptable and his actions in no way represent the overwhelming majority of hard working officers in airports around the country.
Federal investigators have charged the officer with theft and he is scheduled to appear in federal court today. TSA's Office of Inspection worked closely with DHS investigators to bring charges against the officer and execute a search warrant for the officer’s home. He faces 10 years in prison if convicted. The officer will eventually be terminated. Zero tolerance!
As we have mentioned before, when airports receive claims reports for stolen items, TSA's local management monitors them to look for trends and anomalies. If they see anything repetitive or suspicious, they can call in TSA's Office of Inspection to conduct an investigation. The Office of Inspection then works with federal and local law enforcement to resolve the case.
TSA has zero tolerance for theft and has gone as far as to terminate an officer for stealing pocket change totaling less than a dollar. Since May 1, 2003, less than 500* officers have been terminated for theft, which represents less than 1/2 of one percent of all officers. Unfortunately, this tiny fraction of officers causes damage that is hard to repair.
* Edited to change number from less than 300 to less than 500.
Bob
EoS Blog Team
Labels: mission
posted by Bob at
11:36 AM
Subscribe in a reader
203 Comments:
Bob,
I'm pretty sure you, or one of your fellow blogger-moderators (there are some of those, right??) approved a message not that long ago from Ellen Howe in which she stated the #of screeners fired for theft was well in excess of 400 & that was old data she quoting, as I recall, as well. I also noticed you made a point of using 5/1/03 as the cut-off date for your data; please provide the total #of screeners fired for theft from passengers since the inception of the TSA, not just an arbitrary date of your choosing.
Thank you.
October 8, 2008 11:50 AM
Punishing the TSO involved is one thing. But how, or will you, be compensating the people who had items stolen from them?
October 8, 2008 11:51 AM
Since May 1, 2003, less than 300 officers have been terminated for theft, which represents less than a third of one percent of all officers. Unfortunately, this tiny fraction of officers causes damage that is hard to repair.
Uh, isn't that number higher? I've seen numbers of over 400 for a shorter time span.
Oh, and the damage is irreparable. So about those folks who flew through Newark getting any of the goods returned or paid back for the theft by this DHS employee-what of it? What are you going to do for people who've had belongings stolen from them by TSA thieves? Wait six months and hope they go away?
Disgusting behavior. Please tell me how he managed to get a production camera out of the 'secured' area undetected. Please tell me how this went on day after day after day and no one paid any attention to this. Where was the FSD, the asst FSD, and his supervisor when all of this was going on?
October 8, 2008 11:56 AM
The bad thing is that it took two high end passengers to track this down, not TSA. The CNN cameraman did the legwork on this and reported it to the FBI. The HBO cameraman reported his camera on EBAY.
DHS, your TSA employees can stand around patting each other on the back in an orgy of mutual adoration when they find anything illegal in luggage but yet they ignore a guy who looks like he needed a baggage cart to get his daily haul out of the airport, into his car and home after a long day pilfering luggage. Did he find any contraband during his search and 'voluntary' abandonment exercises?
October 8, 2008 12:01 PM
If TSA cares about theft, at the many airports that scan checked baggage in the open terminal, why not allow pax to observer their bags being screened and place a real lock (not a TSA-openable lock) on their bag?
If TSA cares about theft, why not require that the searching TSO's name and badge number be on the form that is left inside checked baggage that is searched when the pax is not present?
If TSA cares about theft, how about making video of the non-public baggage-screening areas at many airports available to theft victims for use in verifying claims?
If TSA cares about theft, how about making it a punishable offense for TSOs to force or intimidate a passenger into not keeping their carry-on belongings in sight during primary screening, secondary screening, etc.?
If TSA cares about theft, why are TSOs allowed to paw through wallets that do not alarm the metal detector by hand, rather than placing the wallet in a sealed plastic bag, keeping it in sight of the passenger, and running it through the x-ray?
October 8, 2008 12:03 PM
I once flew through Newark and gave my unlocked tool chest to TSA to xray, open and inspect. They locked the locks on my tool chest and sent it on its merry way. When I landed and retrieved the tool chest, both locks had been cut off by TSA. I talked to the FSD at Newark several times and got nowhere with this. They have no clue as to how a passenger can fly with secure luggage and only offer up 'use TSA approved locks' for all of your luggage.
TSA approved locks are garbage and when TSA has thieves working for it how can a person guarantee that their luggage will arrive intact?
October 8, 2008 12:09 PM
This incident proves that some TSO's are thieves!
However that really is only a minor part of the problem.
TSA is about security. If an item can be removed from a travelers baggage then something can be inserted just as easily.
With the new "No Screening of Screeners" policy any TSO is now a real threat to the flying public.
Until baggage is kept secure from the moment it leaves the hands of the traveler until the baggage is returned to the traveler TSA will have failed in their efforts to keep the public safe while flying.
This incident proves without a doubt that not screening TSO's is a bad policy and that supervision of TSO's while at work has also failed. All TSO's should be screened each and every time when entering or leaving their work area. No less action will ensure the safety of the public!
It is time for some heads to roll, starting with Kips. TSA is a failed agency and proves it every day.
October 8, 2008 12:16 PM
His depriving us of our property was unauthorized depriviation. Good that you're working on that, now how about the legal theft that the agency as a whole engages in.
While you're at it give me the legal basis for the MMW scans of people not attempting to access the sterile areas of the airport.
While you're at it explain how the more intensive screenings threatened for those who have the carved metal plates in their bags isn't retaliatory.
While you're at it please explain how on-the-spot fines for non-physical interference with a TSO performing his duties is authorized under the Administrative Procedures Act and how doubling the fine of anyone who dares to attempt to contest the fine is likewise authorized.
You've still got some homework to ignore, as you do any question I ask.
October 8, 2008 12:25 PM
As someone who ALWAYS gets checked luggage rummaged through by the TSA (I am an unhappy watch-listy - have no idea why), I like the idea of the TSA card with the officers name and code. Since they put the card in your luggage, there is no reason why it shouldn´t be personalized.
October 8, 2008 12:46 PM
Ayn,
When TSA discovered that at best they detect around 50% of contraband in luggage they expanded their role in providing security at any cost. They engage in acts of dubious legality and call it layered security. They hope if one layer fails that successive layers catch the failures of the first layer.
They won't answer your questions in either a public forum or privately because doing so would admit failure.
Miller
October 8, 2008 12:47 PM
Zero Tolerance is the right approach, however it is apparent that fellow TSO's allow co-workers to do illegal acts without reporting them.
TSA, your house is broken.
Some real leadership could certainly improve things!
October 8, 2008 12:50 PM
What is the "Zero Tolerance" policy of a TSO bringing a weapon through the checkpoint?
Oh, thats right, nothing happens!
So much for your "Zero Policy" post!
October 8, 2008 12:52 PM
"His depriving us of our property was unauthorized depriviation."
No, no. Not at all. There was no unauthorized deprivation. Remember what TSO Ronnie said in the other threads:
You had a choice. You could have just chosen not to fly, and then your stuff wouldn't have gotten stolen.
Interesting to think though...500 of 43,000 (1.2 percent, actually) of them are willing to break the law--to steal.
Now imagine if just 1 in 100 of the "bad" TSA officers were willing not just to steal, but to actually aid terrorists.
That would be 5 potentially very, very bad folks.
And this, folks, is why giving up liberty to attempt to gain a bit of security is stupid.
October 8, 2008 12:57 PM
So while your having a moment of angst Bob, could you explain why the cut off date for your data is May 1, 2003? Is there something you are not telling us?
Worse yet please don't try to make this out like the TSA was involved in the investigation. They were tracking the guy by buying the camera on E-bay and then searched his house.
I agree with another commentor, TSA staff should be searched when entering and exiting their work locations. Just because you claim only a small number of personell have been fired for this only means you have only caught a few of them. I'm sure the number is larger, hence your use off a random cut off date.
Remind me to order a metal plate that says "Steal me".
October 8, 2008 1:16 PM
TSA-approved locks all have a common master key, which is not hard to acquire. There are thousands of those keys in circulation, with no guarantee that they can all be kept in authorized hands. Therefore, TSA-approved locks provide no security whatsoever.
October 8, 2008 1:31 PM
Bob, Don't patronize us. This is a lot more than "sticky fingers." This is a violation of the public trust!
This individual is one in a long line of model employees who have been caught stealing. Your unverifiable approximation doesn't include those who have stolen from passengers or who continue to steal from passengers.
I know there is no way you will ever provide this answer, but, on behalf of the American People, I'm going to ask it anyway: I want to know the number of TSA screeners who have been arrested for crimes other than theft, since every crime committed by a TSA employee is a violation of the public trust. Here's a starter list to get you going gather ing accurate statistics:
1. Drug possession and trafficking;
2. Off-duty theft (stolen cars, breaking & entering, etc);
3. Robbery (armed and unarmed);
4. Assault & battery (armed and unarmed);
5. DUI;
6. Domestic crimes of violence;
7. Tax evasion;
8. Child molestation;
9. Kiddie porn possession and trafficking;
10. Murder, manslaughter (including vehicular); attempted murder (almost forgot this one);
11. Other types of fraud, blackmail, or extortion;
12. Criminal ethics violations;
13. Espionage or mishandling of classified information.
Everyone of these offenses is committed by someone who is very vulnerable to extortion or blackmail by a hostile intelligence service and/or terrorist organization.
All we want is transparency and full accountability.
October 8, 2008 1:52 PM
"She also said his crimes were rare and that less than 300 TSA employees have been terminated for theft."
The number of employees terminated for theft does not necessarily correlate to the number of thieves being employed. The fact of the matter is, a TSA employee who rarely steals, but does so upon occasion, is unlikely to be discovered. You catch the stupid ones because they become too brazen, like the man from this article, but until procedures are in place to ensure that attempted theft by a TSA screener will be seen by a superior and punished severely on the spot, passengers will still lose valuable items to the screeners who steal less frequently and with a little more cunning.
October 8, 2008 1:53 PM
An anonymous poster said:
If TSA cares about theft, why are TSOs allowed to paw through wallets that do not alarm the metal detector by hand, rather than placing the wallet in a sealed plastic bag, keeping it in sight of the passenger, and running it through the x-ray?
***********************************
I don't know where this is happening, but its not part of our operating precedures. First of all, we are required to make sure the pasenger has line of sight with his/her belongings, period. Secondly, anything that appears to be the cause of a walk through metal detector alarm, is required to be sent through the x-ray machine. On the flip side of this, I have seen passenger remove possibly hundreds of dollars from their pockets and place it in a bin to be sent through x-ray. I advise numerous passengers daily not to do this. You see, your money could be stolen, not only by a less than honest TSO, but by another passenger as well. Not long ago at my airport, a female passenger's wallet disappeared off the x-ray belt. It was returned later by another female passenger....less the cash that was inside it. Turns out the thief was working in conjunction with a male passenger and they stole the woman's wallet, took the cash then "returned" it. So while the focus is on "TSO theives" if you will, it is off the less than honest passenger who saw you put your cash in that bin. Keep your paper money in your pocket! If you have a money clip, remove it from your cash, send the clip through the x-ray and put the cash in your pocket.
October 8, 2008 1:56 PM
"TSA-approved locks all have a common master key, which is not hard to acquire."
Keys? Pfft! Most of them can be opened trivially with a shim or a probe (for the wheeled combo locks).
Keys? Please. Why go to the trouble?
October 8, 2008 1:57 PM
"Interesting to think though...500 of 43,000 (1.2 percent, actually) of them are willing to break the law--to steal."
Actually, 1.2% are caught stealing. The actual number that steals is probably higher.
October 8, 2008 2:05 PM
tso tom,
please realize what the TSA screeners are "required" to do and what actually happens at checkpoints are two totally different scenarios.
October 8, 2008 2:41 PM
TSO Tom siad...So while the focus is on "TSO theives" if you will, it is off the less than honest passenger who saw you put your cash in that bin. Keep your paper money in your pocket! If you have a money clip, remove it from your cash, send the clip through the x-ray and put the cash in your pocket.
October 8, 2008 1:56 PM
........................
Except when going through the Strip Search Machine, right Tom?
Doesn't TSA require pockets to be empty in that case?
Of course being stripped search, even electronically, is in itself a violation of ones rights when no crime or suspected crime has been committed!
I would just as soon take my chances without TSA help.
October 8, 2008 2:48 PM
Hang in there Blogger Bob, the Friday Puppy Post is just a couple of days away.
Let me make sure I have my facts straight. This TSO stole at least 2 or 3 items a week for a year. The only reason this TSO was caught is the victim in one of his crimes tracked him down.
According to the TSA official position, TSOs do not need to be screened because they have had a background check and therefore are trustworthy.
We as we can see this is a foolish position because past behavior is not an accurate predictor of future behavior.
As we have mentioned before, when airports receive claims reports for stolen items, TSA's local management monitors them to look for trends and anomalies. If they see anything repetitive or suspicious, they can call in TSA's Office of Inspection to conduct an investigation. The Office of Inspection then works with federal and local law enforcement to resolve the case.
Blogger Bob, I know this is the way it is supposed to work but it did not work in this case and I doubt it has ever worked this way.
In fact if the local management were monitoring missing item complaints it would not have take the theft of a commercial camera and a post on eBay to catch this criminal.
I wonder how many victims of this criminal TSO had their claims denied because TSOs are "vetted and would never steal". Most likely the excuse the TSA gave was "Must have been the airline people".
The big question is how much is this thief going to cost ME when the TSA has to pay out for all the claims made in the last year for stolen items? Anybody put a number on that yet?
October 8, 2008 2:58 PM
Posted by TSO Tom:
First of all, we are required to make sure the pasenger has line of sight with his/her belongings, period. Secondly, anything that appears to be the cause of a walk through metal detector alarm, is required to be sent through the x-ray machine. On the flip side of this, I have seen passenger remove possibly hundreds of dollars from their pockets and place it in a bin to be sent through x-ray. I advise numerous passengers daily not to do this.
There are numerous reports of TSOs engaging in intimidation, retaliatory screening, and outright denial to pax requesting that they keep their items in sight. It is particularly bad during SSSSelectee SSSScreening. My favorite case was written up in the WSJ and is from the early 2002 days of TSA when a woman was denied travel at PDX because she insisted her purse be kept in sight. But there are also more recent cases, which usually result in the pax caving in to the TSOs power-trip.
Current SOP for SSSSelectee SSSScreening also seems to be to paw through any wallet that the passenger does not put through the x-ray prior to walking through the metal detector, regardless of if the wallet alarms the hand-held metal detector (which isn't even used for non-WTMD-alarming pax anyway). A number of passengers report TSOs actually reading the contents of their wallet--i.e., membership cards, credit cards etc.--which is inexcusable because printed matter is neither a threat to aviation nor a weapon, explosive, or incendiary which TSA is allowed to screen for.
And within the past 60 days, I have had a WTMD TSO "suggest" that I, who was not a SSSSelectee, put my wallet through the x-ray machine or I and it "may be subject to additional screening." I have a relatively large men's wallet, but it is not abnormally so. It never alarms. But is was clear to me that my choice was to comply or face retaliation and delay.
October 8, 2008 3:05 PM
So if there is zero tolerance for theft, why is there tolerance for those that bring weapons into the sterile area? Or in other words, why does DEN TSO Alvin Crabtree still have a job? Is theft a bigger problem than an unauthorized gun in the sterile area?
October 8, 2008 3:29 PM
Hmmm looks like TSA opened up a couple of bulging cans of worms and now try to round up all of the worms and cans.
If the spin gets to be too much just tell the truth. It is easier, faster and no one gets fired for lying.
October 8, 2008 4:01 PM
Don't worry, guys, he'll "eventually" be fired.
'nuff said.
October 8, 2008 4:06 PM
Some numbers to ponder:
and what it states:
"A rarely released TSA database reveals that in a three-year period nearly 42,000 travelers have reported items as lost from their luggage at an estimated value of more than $31 million. We are not talking lost for a couple of days. We are talking lost for good. Listed as MIA are medicine, clothing, fine jewelry, laptops, perfume, and even cell phones."
42,000 travelers and $31,000,000? Bob, we're talking some very serious numbers here. Care to comment?
October 8, 2008 4:38 PM
So who is getting fired besides the TSO? How about the management chain in the airport/region?
What about obstruction of justice charges against the fellow TSOs who did not report this one's obvious felony-scale thefts?
October 8, 2008 6:07 PM
I understand fully that passengers worry about their luggage out of sight and what goes on with it once it leaves their possesion. There are two ways checked baggage is screened and it depends on the airport.
Some airports have the machines that sit in plain sight of passengers and passengers are welcome to stay and wait for their bags to be checked and sent on their way. With the other system, which we have at SDF, checked bags go through automated machines and ONLY the bags that alarm come into the bag room for inspection. With both systems, only the bags that alarm are inspected.
With that said, I still understand that if someone wants to steal something bad enough they will find a way. I know there are untrustworthy people in TSA, but that is anywhere you go as well. Beside the fact that we do the bag checks, airline employees have the bags in their possesion much longer than us and have more opportunities to get into a bag than we do. So, yea, we cant deny our guys stealing what they did, but don't put blame solely on TSA.
SDF TSO
October 8, 2008 6:15 PM
This guy really deserves to be someones 'wife' in the slammer for a very, very long time. He gives us all a big black eye. We have enough problems trying to get people to treat us like human beings w/o this creep setting the worst possible example. And HE (not TSA) should make full restitutuion for all damages.
Lets all keep in mind that he in no way represents TSA as a whole. He is a bad apple no doubt. We just have to work harder to overcome his bad example since this is all people see us as.
Bob H, you gave a long list of offenses you would like TSA numbers on. I have know idea where to find those kinds of statistics. But I am sure they are around. Just like all the same numbers are available for your particular career as well. Lets face it, there are bad cops, bad doctors, bad lawyers, bad stock traders, bad teachers, bad military, bad garbage men, bad social workers, bad retail workers, bad mechanics, bad (insert your career of choice here)
Lets all agree there are bad apples everywhere. And they do NOT all work for TSA.
Ronnie
October 8, 2008 7:09 PM
Numerous responses to my previous post, and all good points. I still advise that you do NOT put your paper cash in that bin to go through x-ray screening. Couple things you can do if you feel intimidated and I know this will bring multiple negative responses as well from the posters here, but i'm gonna say it anyway.
1. immediately ASK (do not demand, please) for a supervisor, keep your kool and explain your case.
2. if the supervisor is of no help to you, ask for the manager. Again, keep your kool and explain your case.
3. If the manager is unavailable or of no help to you, contact TSA headquarters directly.
I feel that there is NO EXCUSE for any TSO or STSO that intimidates a passenger. Now, for the flip side of that:
Sometimes passengers are so irate when they speak to a Supervisor or manager, that its impossible to explain things to them in a rational manner. This is usually when the DYWTFT comes out, and it alwasy quiets the passenger to a normal tone at which point the supervisor or manager is able to resolve the issue peacefully and the passenger is on his or her way, usually okay with the outcome. Go ahead, pick it apart. ;-) As far as selectee screening, I know of no requirement to "paw" through wallets during this process. I normally x-ray anything that has not passed through x-ray prior to secondary screening. I usually do it on a lane closest to the passenger so that he/she can see his/her item as it passes through the x-ray. Are there TSO's who are going to steal? Yes unfortunately so. I'm not gonna explain it away or make excuses for it, there are none. TSO's who steal should be fired on the spot and prosecuted to the fullest, and sued by the passenger they stole from. Just my humble opinion.
October 8, 2008 7:19 PM
This is a statistic that is more relevant to travelers and should be posted on your home page as one of the measurements that you publish each week. Termination, suspension or disciplinary actions of TSOs for failing to abide by any law or internal regulation they break.
Thanks,
Frank
October 8, 2008 7:30 PM
TSA what are you thinking? You put a thief on administrative leave while you make up you mind on if he should or shouldn't be fired? This shouldn't be rocket science.
FIRE HIM IMMEDIATELY.
October 8, 2008 8:21 PM
"Or in other words, why does DEN TSO Alvin Crabtree still have a job?"
Why does DEN TSO Ronnie still have a job after talking about how much she's looking forward to retaliatory screenings on this blog?
October 8, 2008 9:28 PM
I've got a question. As an emergency management/homeland security grad student, I know that many states utilize fusion centers to share information among law enforcement agencies. Does the TSA maintain relationships with these fusion centers?
October 8, 2008 9:45 PM
I would love to know why the TSA isn't using "bait luggage" to test the trustworthiness of TSOs.
The concept is no different than the bait cars the Phoenix police use in catching auto thieves.
Have someone check baggage with, say, a digital camera in it and track that bag through. If the camera goes missing once it clears TSA hands, then you double bag, arrest the TSO and then you can separate the wheat from the chaff.
Any chance you might implement something like this, Bob?
October 8, 2008 9:58 PM
Why was my message linking to an excellent article about the lack of Science behind behavioral scanning by the TSA deleted?
October 9, 2008 5:00 AM
"42,000 travelers and $31,000,000? Bob, we're talking some very serious numbers here. Care to comment?"
Why would they comment? They completely ignored the story earlier this year about how much not being able to secure our bags costs us. It is a HUGE amount.
But it's worth it. If it means terrists can't slip things through in their luggage.
Wait.... What? TSA repeatedly does very poorly with test threats?
You mean we arn't safe from things in luggage AND our stuff is made vulnerable to theft by TSA policies?
Thanks folks. Keep up the good work.
October 9, 2008 5:58 AM
Mikado said...
TSA-approved locks all have a common master key, which is not hard to acquire. There are thousands of those keys in circulation, with no guarantee that they can all be kept in authorized hands. Therefore, TSA-approved locks provide no security whatsoever.
October 8, 2008 1:31 PM
Ummm, you think Master Lock doesn't have master keys too? Trust me, they do, and they are used.
Every TSA master key set has a similar set of "other manufacturer" master keys. Since there are thousands of other brands, not every lock can get opened with the "other" master keys, which is why they get cut if needed. Also, not every brand master key works on all their locks.
October 9, 2008 6:54 AM
since we are slamming TSA for any criminals included in its work force, how many criminals have you, the commenters on this blog, voted for to hold office. Meaning, how many guys and gals have you said, "hey, I wnat him to be mayor (or congressman or senator)" even though they are drunk drivers, druggies or killers.
Massachusetts democrats don't need to raise your hands, we know you have.
October 9, 2008 6:59 AM
When this blog first came on line there a number of comments about theft from checked luggage and how things went missing. The response was that there were a lot more people working for the airport handling the luggage than TSA personnel.
So who watches the watchers?
October 9, 2008 7:33 AM
*sigh* Still trying to figure out how 'anonymous' thinks a bag check on an unclear bag is retaliatory.
October 9, 2008 9:47 AM
Lets face it, there are bad cops, bad doctors, bad lawyers, bad stock traders, bad teachers, bad military, bad garbage men, bad social workers, bad retail workers, bad mechanics, bad (insert your career of choice here)
Lets all agree there are bad apples everywhere. And they do NOT all work for TSA.
Ronnie
Ronnie, we're not talking about anyone else. Bringing that up is a distraction from the main issue of TSA employees stealing from passenger baggage. TSA rules mandate that luggage be unsecured so as to facilitate the inspection process. We give it to you unsecured and want it back with the contents intact. We often don't get it back without the luggage looking like it was tossed during a search, contents badly repacked and sometimes missing items (stolen, left behind, swapped, etc).
We don't care about your problems. We want our belongings properly dealt with and if you either can't or won't properly deal with our belongings then you should seek out another job.
October 9, 2008 10:19 AM
kellymae81 said on October 8, 2008 6:15 PM...
Some airports have the machines that sit in plain sight of passengers and passengers are welcome to stay and wait for their bags to be checked and sent on their way.
********************************
Could you please share that sentiment w/the 3 ladies screening checked bags @ BNA on 10/3 @ approximately 1:30 pm behind the AA counter? One of them all but tried to chase me away when I insisted on waiting for my locked bag to be cleared & then intentionally kept putting it behind other bags that were checked after mine, no doubt hoping I'd just give up & walk away. I'll be back there in 2 weeks & would very much like to hear just one of them tell me I am 'welcome' to wait for my bag...
Remember what I said previously about your checkpoint, your shift, & your airport??
October 9, 2008 10:25 AM
" Anonymous said...
since we are slamming TSA for any criminals included in its work force, how many criminals have you, the commenters on this blog, voted for to hold office. Meaning, how many guys and gals have you said, "hey, I wnat him to be mayor (or congressman or senator)" even though they are drunk drivers, druggies or killers.
Massachusetts democrats don't need to raise your hands, we know you have."
How nice of you to share your obsessive issues with us....
October 9, 2008 10:28 AM
Bob, it looks like you've got some very angry people on both this thread and the last. Why doesn't DHS sit down and make at least a feeble attempt to figure out why those same people are angry and do something about it?
October 9, 2008 10:29 AM
"Or in other words, why does DEN TSO Alvin Crabtree still have a job?"
Why does DEN TSO Ronnie still have a job after talking about how much she's looking forward to retaliatory screenings on this blog?
Crabtree was transfered do the research. TSO Ronnie currently digs a deeper and deeper hole.
October 9, 2008 10:32 AM
I like the fact you mention zero tolerance, then mention he will "eventually" be terminated.. Why isn't he fired now?
October 9, 2008 10:35 AM
kellymae81 said...
I understand fully that passengers worry about their luggage out of sight and what goes on with it once it leaves their possesion. There are two ways checked baggage is screened and it depends on the airport.
...............................
OK, one more time real slowly...
If a bag is not maintained in a secure environment from the time it leaves the hands of the traveler until its return then "Bad" items can be placed in the bag. Items that could perhaps explode while the aircraft is in flight.
Yes, we have to worry about airline employees because TSA does not keep baggage and cargo secure after they inspect it. Of course we all know that most cargo is not inspected at all.
Now we also have to worry about the sticky fingers of TSO's. Yes I know it's not all of you but since TSA requires me to not lock my baggage or to use "play locks" then I have to suspect all of you are thieves.
Kinda like how you treat me when I move through your screening line, you don't know me so you have to suspect that I am a bad guy. That statement has been made on this blog many, many times.
So, as far as I am concerned, anyone of you TSO's are thieves, I have no way of knowing which ones, have no way to protect my belongings and must treat each of you as a thief until you prove otherwise.
Now that the shoe is on the other foot so to speak it's kind of unpleasant, eh!
Next time I traverse your checkpoint perhaps I won't be treated like a crimminal of some sort!
Until baggage is maintained in a secure manner from acceptance at the airport until returned to the traveler TSA will have NO real security. No one should have access to any baggage without a second person at hand. It's called the "Two Man Rule" and while not perfect at least required two actors working together to do bad things.
This problem , and it is not a new problem, is a sign of management failure, and will require the most senior TSA officials replacement.
The public has almost zero support for TSA. Good Show!
October 9, 2008 10:43 AM
@Anonymous: "Why does DEN TSO Ronnie still have a job after talking about how much she's looking forward to retaliatory screenings on this blog?"
Probably for the same reason Alvin Crabtree still has a job.
October 9, 2008 10:44 AM
re: Ronnie said...
*sigh* Still trying to figure out how 'anonymous' thinks a bag check on an unclear bag is retaliatory.
October 9, 2008 9:47 AM
..........................
Ronnie said...
OH! I cannot wait to see the first yahoo that puts one of these in his bag! It has "BAG CHECK!!!" written all over it.
I hope I am the TSO to do that bag check.
Ronnie TSO DEN
October 7, 2008 3:33 PM
Ronnie, your statement reposted above for all to see implies that you would do something out of the norm if "you" had the opportunity to screen a bad with one of the plates the article referred to.
You can attempt to spin your words but must responders got your message.
I would suggest that you resign now, better than getting fired for ethical violations later.
Oh thats right, TSA does not require its workers to have ethics!
October 9, 2008 10:49 AM
Kellymae81 writes:
So, yea, we cant deny our guys stealing what they did, but don't put blame solely on TSA.
Except that this kind of theft would be far less common if TSA didn't require that all baggage be unlocked (or locked with a TSA-approved lock to which TSA has the keys). TSA's policies helped to create an environment in which this dishonest activity was easier to perform. So TSA gets at least a little bit of blame.
October 9, 2008 11:22 AM
The situation could be vastly improved if there was simply more accountability. Video cameras should be used over each inspection station, and TSOs should be including their ID number or other identification on the "your bag has been searched" card that's inserted into the luggage. This would encourage honesty, provide more comfort to travelers, and provide a record of any wrongdoing. I've had items in my luggage tampered with (face cream, for example, which was clearly opened and smeared with dirty fingers), and taking the problem to the TSA is an exercise in futility - I'm treated like a criminal.
Security cameras would benefit TSOs, by allowing the honest ones to prove that they've been honest via a video record.
The TSA continues to operate without sufficient internal oversight or controls, and this type of problem will continue to occur as long as that holds true.
October 9, 2008 11:47 AM
Goalie wrote:
I like the fact you mention zero tolerance, then mention he will "eventually" be terminated.. Why isn't he fired now?
Because that's not how it works when you work for the federal government. If they don't make sure that everything is ironclad, with every single "t" crossed and every single "i" crossed, then he could (easily, actually) get his job reinstated to him on grounds that the investigation was shoddy and the evidence against him not solid.
This wouldn't change if he was a contract screener, as opposed to a government screener, either. According to the Screening Partnership Program (the TSA program that allows for airports to opt-out of government screeners and utilize contract screeners under TSA oversight), contract screeners have to be given the same pay and benefits of federal screeners, which would seem to include the disciplinary process.
Even in things that are set in stone that you could be "terminated instantly" for take a good long while. Getting a DUI is an offense for which you can be "terminated instantly" (violation of the public trust by showing blatant disregard for the nation's transportation system) but it still takes two or three months for the full investigation and all the paperwork to go through.
Like I said - cross every 't,' dot every 'i.'
October 9, 2008 12:14 PM
So Dean, he's been suspended pending investigation and once the investigation finishes he will be fired. In the mean time he continues to draw full pay? I really hope not especially since he's admitted to stealing the passengers belongings.
I'm curious as to how he managed to get a production camera from luggage to his vehicle. Someone had to have noticed that. I suspect that some of his coworkers might also have sticky fingers and need to feel the full weight of our legal system.
Any comments on passengers suing DHS and winning? Do you suppose that this might be winnable for those who had belongings stolen from Newark? Did he keep records?
This is just another reason for the public to have a healthy distrust of those entrusted to protect us.
October 9, 2008 12:38 PM
HSVTSO Dean said...
Getting a DUI is an offense for which you can be "terminated instantly" (violation of the public trust by showing blatant disregard for the nation's transportation system) but it still takes two or three months for the full investigation and all the paperwork to go through.
..................................
So "Terminated Instantly" is in fact not possible.
In other words its another TSA misstatement of the truth!
Why does TSA have such a problem with "truthfulness"?
Bob?
October 9, 2008 12:44 PM
Comments may not:
"contain offensive terms that target specific ethnic or racial groups,"
So, hateful slamming of political parties is ok?
"...how many criminals have you, the commenters on this blog, voted for to hold office even though they are drunk drivers, druggies or killers. Massachusetts democrats don't need to raise your hands, we know you have."
How many of you Republicans voted a drunk driver into the office of the president?
(And to keep this on topic) The president is the 'leader' responsible for the creation of DHS/TSA.
How many of you Republicans voted for the long list of sex criminals we have seen in the last few years?
Moderators: Please show some fairness. Some non-partisanship.
Please, either publish this post or remove the other prejudiced, hateful post.
Thank you.
October 9, 2008 12:50 PM
The TSA continues to operate without sufficient internal oversight or controls, and this type of problem will continue to occur as long as that holds true.
October 9, 2008 11:47 AM
Agree completely.
Kip Hawley is the responsible person and should be terminated today.
He has failed to lead TSA.
October 9, 2008 1:21 PM
Hey Bob, how's your week going so far?
Just wondering!
October 9, 2008 1:40 PM
What I find interesting is that when TSA post something which is challenged they just play Opossum.
Curl up in a ball and play like nothings happening.
Isn't that indicative of mental illnes, not knowing when something is wrong or self denial?
October 9, 2008 2:37 PM
Anonymous said...
Bob, how about a comparison of TSA vs other countries training programs?
Been asked, still waiting for an answer!
October 9, 2008 2:41 PM
So, yea, we cant deny our guys stealing what they did, but don't put blame solely on TSA.
Except that this kind of theft would be far less common if TSA didn't require that all baggage be unlocked (or locked with a TSA-approved lock to which TSA has the keys). TSA's policies helped to create an environment in which this dishonest activity was easier to perform. So TSA gets at least a little bit of blame.
***********************************
Jim;
the person to blame is the idiot who decided to steal in the first place. Couple things here, first of all, the ability to open a lock is imperative if a bag has to be searched and the passenger is not available to open the bag. Otherwise the lock gets cut, and most of you have gotten pissed off over that. I do however agree that some type of oversight, or means of identifying who searched a bag should be implemented. The offender in this case should be immediately terminated, prosecuted and sued. PERIOD.
October 9, 2008 3:54 PM
Either those numbers are wrong, or somebody needs a new calculator. 300 out of 43,000 is 0.7% -- more than two-thirds of a percent, not "less than a third." And 500 out of 43,000 is 1.2%, not "less than 1/2 of one percent."
Also, as someone noted above, that's the number who get caught.
October 9, 2008 4:12 PM
TSO Tom writes:
Jim, the person to blame is the idiot who decided to steal in the first place.
I agree that primary blame belongs to the thief. But the legal concept of "liability" allows blame to be spread among several parties. The fact remains that if I could lock my bags, it would be harder for a casual thief to steal something from my bags. (Not impossible, of course, but less likely.) TSA doesn't allow me to do this ... so TSA is partially to blame here as well. (Not to mention that TSA is partially to blame for not detecting the thefts, either.)
Couple things here, first of all, the ability to open a lock is imperative if a bag has to be searched and the passenger is not available to open the bag. Otherwise the lock gets cut, and most of you have gotten pissed off over that.
Agreed. So, let's talk about alternatives. Let's set up a system where passengers can be present for the screening of their bags, and can thus open their own locks if needed. Or, alternatively, let's set up a system where passenger bags are sealed with a strap by TSA at check-in, so that any tampering with the bag can be immediately identified (and hopefully traced). (Trollkiller ... can you repost the link to the luggage strapping system?)
Yes, those systems will cost money. But the current system costs money, too. It's just that in the current system, the cost is born by passengers who have their valuables stolen while the bags are out of their possession.
I do however agree that some type of oversight, or means of identifying who searched a bag should be implemented. The offender in this case should be immediately terminated, prosecuted and sued. PERIOD.
Agreed on both counts.
October 9, 2008 4:16 PM
All snarking aside I have a question.
Is there any time when a single TSO has access to a passengers baggage or is the inspection process conducted by more than one agent?
My question deals with opportunity for a person to do something wrong. Simular to leaving a door unlocked or when locking it would be the smarter choice.
The reason I ask is that the baggage xray stations I have seen have more than one agent present.
If this is the normal configuration then two agents must act together to pilfer luggage.
I am sure a review is underway to to understand how an agent can steal over a long period of time but it seems to me that it would take more than one TSO acting in concert.
TSA must ensure the safe and secure hanndling of our property the full time it is out of the passengers control. To do less is unacceptable.
October 9, 2008 4:18 PM
Jim;
the person to blame is the idiot who decided to steal in the first place. Couple things here, first of all, the ability to open a lock is imperative if a bag has to be searched and the passenger is not available to open the bag. Otherwise the lock gets cut, and most of you have gotten pissed off over that. I do however agree that some type of oversight, or means of identifying who searched a bag should be implemented.
Tom, thefts took a big jump when TSA mandated the unsecured security measure for checked baggage. The airlines caught on fast and now if anything and I do mean anything goes missing the airlines point the finger towards TSA while TSA points the finger at the airlines and the passenger is out whatever was taken. What to do? ID the TSO who inspected the luggage. I suggested that years ago when dealing with cut off locks and was IGNORED by TSA officials. TSA must take a significant share of the responsibility for this since they mandated the present scheme. Before I could beef up the container I wanted secure and that significantly slowed down theft.
You force the passengers to cede security to TSA then do nothing to provide security for their belongings. A rather lose-lose situation for passengers.
October 9, 2008 4:26 PM
I apologize for continuing to inflict blunt-force trauma on a previously deceased hooved ungulate.
As the general public perceives things, the TSA, by its very nature and existence, tacitly accepts responsibilty for the entire arena of air transportation security. And the TSA's own public-relations office claims this responsibility openly.
This means that the general population perceives that:
-1) The TSA is directly responsible for all on-duty actions of all of their employees, wether or not those actions are contrary to TSA policy.
-2) The TSA is directly responsible for the security of all checked baggage passing through their screening systems.
-3) The TSA is directly responsible for the security of all possessions passing through their carry-on screening systems.
Because of items 1, 2 and 3, any 'bad apple' TSO immediately tarnishes the TSA's image. Because of item 2, any missing items are immediately assumed to be missing due to direct action of the TSA. Because of item 3, any 'unapproved rules' that a TSO comes up with immediately tarnishes the TSA's image.
So, how can this be solved? I suggest end-to-end security management. Some acronyms/security concepts that could be forwarded to management:
- TPI
- C4I
- Trust but Verify
- Access Logging
- Chain of Possesion
- Penetration Testing
- Failure Analysis
- Destructive Rebuild
- Regression Testing
- Emergency Supercession
The TSA needs to start doing some serious re-thinking about their personell and procedural management practices because the implemented oversight procedures have failed.
October 9, 2008 4:32 PM
Anonymous wrote:
So Dean, he's been suspended pending investigation and once the investigation finishes he will be fired. In the mean time he continues to draw full pay? I really hope not especially since he's admitted to stealing the passengers belongings.
That's... what it sounds like, just from the outside. Obviously I'm not priviledged to his payroll information, and it's possible that the public-relations statement didn't make the distinction between administrative leave (which is paid) and suspension (which is not), but it's possible. I don't think it's proper, but that's an entirely different subject altogether.
The rest of your comment goes way outside my personal field of knowledge to even make a comment on :D
Another Anonymous wrote:
So "Terminated Instantly" is in fact not possible.
It is, but only in the context of having one offense before termination procedures get the greenlight, and not... like... three or four offenses, followed by retraining, followed by three or four more offenses.
Nowhere in the government that I am aware of, from the military to the USDA, can your supervisor or management simply say "You're fired, get out of here." There's always a lengthy process of paperwork that has to get done first.
October 9, 2008 4:53 PM
Nowhere in the government that I am aware of, from the military to the USDA, can your supervisor or management simply say "You're fired, get out of here." There's always a lengthy process of paperwork that has to get done first.
October 9, 2008 4:53 PM
............................
I agree that what you say is true in most cases but there are exceptions. I was involved in one where the process was very fast.
In this case this person should not any draw pay unless reinstated for some reason. I doubt that will happen but with TSA nothing would surprise me.
October 9, 2008 5:15 PM
While I agree that it is a good idea to have a way of knowing who searched a particular bag, there are a few inherrent flaws in the idea. One being that a TSO with bad intentions, or with a propensity to steal is probably not going to include his/her name on the tag, if he/she even puts a tag into the bag. A better system would be to have the baggage machines in public view so the passenger can be there to watch as his/her bag is screened, and searched (if necessary). The problem with this idea is space....airport space is sometimes limited and the availability of these machines in public is not always feasible. But YES I agree that something has to be done to stop this from happening, because it gives EVERY TSO a bad name! Not to mention what it does to the public's trust in our agency.
Note to Bob:
A little off topic here Bob, but I was wondering if anything came of the handout explaining TSA rules that I suggest should be made available at the checkpoint.
October 9, 2008 6:41 PM
TSO Tom said:
"I don't know where this is happening, but its not part of our operating precedures. First of all, we are required to make sure the pasenger has line of sight with his/her belongings, period."
I call BS on this. Several times I've had screeners attempt to block my line of sight to my belongings either by moving me or my bags. The most egregious instance was at BOS where I saw a screener grab my laptop bag off the outfeed belt and carry it away. When I said (in admittedly a loud voice), "either put it back through the x-ray or open it where I can watch," another screener jumped in and started distracting me by opening my other bag while the first guy got out of sight. Frankly I think the only reason I didn't have something stolen was: 1) I was loud, and 2) a LEO came over to investigate.
kellymay81 said:
"Beside the fact that we do the bag checks, airline employees have the bags in their possesion much longer than us and have more opportunities to get into a bag than we do. So, yea, we cant deny our guys stealing what they did, but don't put blame solely on TSA."
I've been traveling by air on business since 1975. Prior to the advent of TSA I never had anything stolen from my bags. Since TSA I've been a victim of theft twice and a potential victim an couple of other times (see above). Where would you think I should put the blame?
T-the-B at FlyerTalk
October 9, 2008 8:00 PM
Of course thievery is widespread in TSA. TSA maintains an adversarial relationship with the citizen. Any traveler has seen the intimidation, ill-manners, threatening done by the guards, reminiscent of Soviet petty bureaucrats. This culture of TSA only promotes the traveling citizen as victim. "Hey, I don't steal from people, I take from sheep."
Who's going to complain to TSA and risk getting on a list, ticketed and fined or arrested? TSA, for their part, isn't going to look for problems that create bad PR for the agency. A safe place to operate an illegal operation.
I'm sure crime pays well at TSA.
October 9, 2008 10:10 PM
Hows this for zero tolerance:
Passenger Allowed to Board Plane After Grenades Found in Luggage
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,434683,00.html
The port authority police union told the station that this was a “blatant disregard for public safety.”
October 9, 2008 10:26 PM
Anonymous wrote:
In this case this person should not draw any pay unless reinstated for some reason.
Oh, don't get me wrong, I wholeheartedly agree.
This man betrayed the public trust. He was given a position of sensitivity wherein his personal integrity was on the line, and he miserably failed the good faith placed in him; betrayed his oath of office; betrayed the essence of common decency and ethics, both basic human and professional; betrayed the precepts upon which the very nature of the agency is built upon, all in the name of making a quick buck for himself.
He should be crucified to the fullest extent of the law, and then kicked in the teeth for good measure for what he's done.
October 9, 2008 10:38 PM
You know, I am a TSO at Louisville International and I have to say that our staff is for the most part very professional and courteous. Yes, there are a select few who treat people wrong and have power trips and any time I personally see it, I call them on it. I am not like that at all and it makes me very uncomfortable to witness it b/c I think it is wrong and I don't want to be portrayed in that manner.
On the other hand, I know other airports are reportedly staffed with the worst TSOs and treat people very unkindly and I agree something should be done. I totally agree with cameras being at every station of bag checks and checkpoints and....I LOVE the idea of the personal ID# to place on the checked baggage slip once a bag is searched. I'm not sure who brought this up, but I am definately talking to my supervisors about this idea. Thankyou for a very workable and possible solution.
SDF TSO
October 9, 2008 11:16 PM
Maybe the TSA should be concerned about this as well,
Passenger Allowed to Board Plane After Grenades Found in Luggage
http://tinyurl.com/3ejopg
But once the TSA decided they were inert it was ok. Of course the real police disagreed; "The port authority police union told the station that this was a “blatant disregard for public safety.”
October 10, 2008 6:58 AM
Who said I'd do anything out of the norm? I just want to see one of those plates. I too have a sense of humor. Many of us think it's pretty funny.
By the way, neither I nor anyone I work with (to my knowledge) has stollen items from a passenger. Bag checks are conducted out in the open on a large table, under they watchful eye of the passenger. We are specifically told to wait until the passenger is observing before we start a bag check. I have never heard of someones bag being whisked away to a closed room and anonymous claims.
I would also like to say that I resent the implication that I am somehow 'unethical'. I don't think
doing my job to the best of my ability and keeping you safe qualifies as unethical.
October 10, 2008 8:59 AM
Knowing who searched my bag would be good not only to control theft, but also for somewhat less serious complaints. My luggage has on many occasions arrived completely ruffled up and with liquid spills because containers were not properly closed and were left out of the second bag I had placed them in. I had clothes ripped because the zipper was closed on top of them, and other relatively minor, but still highly annoying and costly, incidents.
October 10, 2008 9:49 AM
kellymay81 said:
"Beside the fact that we do the bag checks, airline employees have the bags in their possesion much longer than us and have more opportunities to get into a bag than we do. So, yea, we cant deny our guys stealing what they did, but don't put blame solely on TSA."
Kellymae, I agree with your statement above.
do you see the security problem with that arrangement?
Everything else you do is negated by the way checked baggaged is handled.
TSA=No Security
October 10, 2008 10:15 AM
"Not to mention what it does to the public's trust in our agency."
The public has no trust in your agency because your agency does not deserve to be trusted. Trust must be earned, and TSA has failed to earn that trust.
October 10, 2008 10:50 AM
Anonymous said = "TSA what are you thinking? You put a thief on administrative leave while you make up you mind on if he should or shouldn't be fired? This shouldn't be rocket science.
FIRE HIM IMMEDIATELY."
The underlying reason for not immediately firing him is called "due process". According to the laws of this land, the person is innocent until proven guilty, if you fire him "for cause" or anything pertaining to the "alleged" crime, you open yourself up to a number of lawsuits (thank you to all the lawyers that further the litigious nature of our country...). By placing him on admin leave you cover your bases, "CYA" and place yourself in a defensible position. I thought this was common sense, it is done in the civilian world (not as often as government - local and federal) and it is a protective step for the organization. Now, that being said, IF CONVICTED, the individual should be sent to jail and forced to make restitution, period. He should be fired, and banned from federal service for the rest of his life. Just to give you an idea of what they were thinking with the admin leave deal.
October 10, 2008 11:23 AM
On the surface, placing the TSO's name on the inspection card sounds like a good idea, but...
1) If someone is dishonest enough to steal something, what makes you think they're going to put an inspection card in your bag with their name on it?
2) The honest TSO that inspected your bag would now be the prime suspect if a baggage handler stole something from your bag.
Bob
EoS Blog Team
October 10, 2008 11:53 AM
I once worked for a company that if you were arrested on Saturday and your name made the local newspaper that you would be terminated on Monday. Of course this was Texas.
Pythias Brown has confessed to the thefts. So fire him immediately.
October 10, 2008 11:54 AM
I'm not sure what airport the intimidation is going on at but i'm glad i don't live there. 10 years is not enough punishment for this guy. The TSA is a law enforcement agency put in place to keep us safe. Any individual that that goes to work for the TSA must be held to a higher standard, the same as any police officer. When i was in the military i was stationed in several places around the globe. During off duty time we were permitted to explore the community and experience the different cultures. Well one bad egg often ruined that for the whole bunch. Because of the bad decisions and actions of one person it made the whole branch of service look like monsters. Is this right? maybe not, but that is the way it is. Some fault does fall on the shoulders of TSA as a whole. Maybe we need to send the TSA to school in a Las Vegas casino. Now there is some top notch security and a little nazi like behavior.
I want to comment to everyone here, TSA and those putting their 2 cents in. Look at how many comments there are on every thread. Don't you think that using this forum for more than just venting (to use a nice word), like possibly creating solutions. With this many minds working together you can make the system work. Now some may say, wel the TSA doesn't care what we think. Well some do and that is why this forum is here. Alot of representatives for the TSA are pround of what they do. They are providing a public service to keep you safe. Maybe it is not perfect. Maybe it is not even good. Well lets fix that.
First off is accountability. We as Americans must be accountable for our actions. Too much i hear its not my fault.
The idea of a card or a sticker that has the inspectors badge or ID number in the bags that they search is an excellent idea. accountability. Higher security standards at the checkpoints to include face recognition software fro travelers and more cameras "eye in the sky" watching the TSA agents. OK i'm done "venting". create solutions not problems, we have enough of them already.
October 10, 2008 12:01 PM
By the way, neither I nor anyone I work with (to my knowledge) has stollen items from a passenger.
Ronnie, passengers look at TSOs as being liars, thieves, and bullies. Your organization earned the reputation and now must deal with it.
Bag checks are conducted out in the open on a large table, under they watchful eye of the passenger.
At more than one airport I've had bags go in opposite directions and it looks pretty funny to see a passenger attempting to keep track of both bags at once what with the head going from left to right and back again. That is unprofessional at best and makes the passenger wonder just what is up.
We are specifically told to wait until the passenger is observing before we start a bag check.
Good and do you repack the bag the same way it was given to you or do you shove it back to the passenger to repack?
I have never heard of someones bag being whisked away to a closed room and anonymous claims.
Nope me either unless its going through customs, but I have heard of bags being dragged out of view of the passenger, opened, and items removed by a TSO.
October 10, 2008 12:06 PM
nacsec:
First off is accountability. We as Americans must be accountable for our actions. Too much i hear its not my fault.
TSA and DHS answer to no one. They are accountable to no one and as such pretty much do what they want to do without any repercussions. Congress mandated air freight screening be done by a certain date. TSA is nowhere near being ready by that time.
October 10, 2008 12:24 PM
Bob said"
1) If someone is dishonest enough to steal something, what makes you think they're going to put an inspection card in your bag with their name on it?
2) The honest TSO that inspected your bag would now be the prime suspect if a baggage handler stole something from your bag.
Bob
EoS Blog Team
October 10, 2008 11:53 AM
I do now realize that it is a good idea, but has too many holes. So now we must improve on the idea. What I like about this blog is I actually feel like I am part of a brainstorming team b/c everyone here (passengers and TSA bloggers)have good ideas to share.
We, then, as TSOs can be part of future changes by sharing these ideas with our local supervisors and managers. I see good things that can happen with this blog if we take the time to actually listen to these passengers, but at the same time, asking some passengers not to use this SOLELY to complain.
October 10, 2008 12:42 PM
Quote from GSO TSO: "The underlying reason for not immediately firing him is called "due process". According to the laws of this land, the person is innocent until proven guilty, if you fire him "for cause" or anything pertaining to the "alleged" crime, you open yourself up to a number of lawsuits (thank you to all the lawyers that further the litigious nature of our country...). By placing him on admin leave you cover your bases, "CYA" and place yourself in a defensible position. I thought this was common sense, it is done in the civilian world (not as often as government - local and federal) and it is a protective step for the organization. Now, that being said, IF CONVICTED, the individual should be sent to jail and forced to make restitution, period. He should be fired, and banned from federal service for the rest of his life. Just to give you an idea of what they were thinking with the admin leave deal."
So what about the due process for those put on the No Fly List and SSSSelectee lists? They're put on there without trial, without notification. If they try to find out, they won't be told what they supposedly did. The redress is a joke as their name will likely never be removed from the list (this was flat out told to a Robert Johnson). So you have innocent people being harassed or denied their rights to travel without due process.
If due process is fine for a TSO that commits a crime, why can't the same be offered to passengers?
Think about that. You can't support due process for some and deny it others. Unless some people are more equal than others ...
Robert
Robert
October 10, 2008 12:56 PM
"2) The honest TSO that inspected your bag would now be the prime suspect if a baggage handler stole something from your bag. "
/(-o-;;) (since there are no pre-set smileys available I had to try to make a *facepalm* out of the letters available to me if you people are wondering what that is)
So you're saying that you don't check what the baggage handlers do? Security hole right there if you're saying this because the possibility exists that a baggage handler could sneak away some stuff post-check- if stuff can come out stuff can go in; if you do check the baggage handlers but still don't take responsibility for them that speaks for itself.
October 10, 2008 12:56 PM
TSO Tom writes:
A better system would be to have the baggage machines in public view so the passenger can be there to watch as his/her bag is screened, and searched (if necessary). The problem with this idea is space....airport space is sometimes limited and the availability of these machines in public is not always feasible.
This is just a question of money. Buy/rent the space from the airports so that the screening can be done publicly. Heck, you could probably even confiscate the space in the name of public safety.
Yes, it will cost money. But right now, it's costing taxpayers money anyways ... because we have to spend money to replace our stolen or damaged possessions. If I'm gonna lose that money either way, I'd rather lose it and keep my original stuff. (Some possessions can't be replaced.)
October 10, 2008 12:57 PM
Nacsec, those are some good thoughts. Let me address them.
"The TSA is a law enforcement agency put in place to keep us safe. Any individual that that goes to work for the TSA must be held to a higher standard, the same as any police officer."
TSA is NOT a law enforcement agency. They do not have LEO powers. I know, the badges and smurf outfits make them look like cops (and make some think they are), but they're just screeners.
If they had law enforcement powers, the airport PD would not be needed.
"I want to comment to everyone here, TSA and those putting their 2 cents in. Look at how many comments there are on every thread. Don't you think that using this forum for more than just venting (to use a nice word), like possibly creating solutions. With this many minds working together you can make the system work. Now some may say, wel the TSA doesn't care what we think. Well some do and that is why this forum is here. Alot of representatives for the TSA are pround of what they do. They are providing a public service to keep you safe. Maybe it is not perfect. Maybe it is not even good. Well lets fix that."
That's why many of us post here. We have proposed solutions. We've asked for justifications for why they do things. They don't seem interested in listening for the most part.
"First off is accountability. We as Americans must be accountable for our actions. Too much i hear its not my fault."
I agree. Problem is TSA is largely an unaccountable agency, much like it's parent DHS. Part of this is Congress's fault for not really holding them accountable when they've made Kippie testify about things. A lot of it is TSA's fault. They're very unresponsive to complaints, if the complaints make it to them at all. Failure is acceptable and even encouraged. After all, Kip said he's glad they fail the red team tests because they're hard. Supervisors blindly back up their underlings. Anecdotes of supervisors dealing with out of line screeners rather than backing them is, unfortunately, the exception rather than the rule.
TSA tries to hold passengers accountable thru fines, confiscation ... err voluntarily surrendering items, etc. Problem is there's no real means to hold TSA accountable. The best way we have is to embarass them when news comes out of a failure, arrest, or incident, but even then, they just spin their way out of it.
TSA and its parent DHS need real accountability. Maybe in the next administration.
Robert
October 10, 2008 1:07 PM
Bob said...
On the surface, placing the TSO's name on the inspection card sounds like a good idea, but...
1) If someone is dishonest enough to steal something, what makes you think they're going to put an inspection card in your bag with their name on it?
2) The honest TSO that inspected your bag would now be the prime suspect if a baggage handler stole something from your bag.
Bob
EoS Blog Team
October 10, 2008 11:53 AM
Bob, how can TSA claim that baggage is secure if it's accessable to anyone after it has cleared TSA inspections?
This is the real problem and must be resolved.
October 10, 2008 1:11 PM
"The TSA is a law enforcement agency put in place to keep us safe."
The TSA is not a law enforcement agency, and TSA does not keep us safe.
October 10, 2008 1:11 PM
NACSEC said...
I'm not sure what airport the intimidation is going on at but i'm glad i don't live there. 10 years is not enough punishment for this guy. The TSA is a law enforcement agency put in place to keep us safe.
...........................
TSA is not a law enforcement agency. Not even close to one.
TSA senior management seems to have little concern for public opinion. That impacts directly on the front line workers who for the most part are trying to do a good job.
I maintain that it will take change at the top before TSA can even start of the road to recovery.
If you have been reading this blog for awhile you know that many suggestions have been made and questions asked to only have TSA thumb their collective noses at the public.
October 10, 2008 1:19 PM
Posted by gsoltso:
The underlying reason for not immediately firing him is called "due process". According to the laws of this land, the person is innocent until proven guilty,
DHS/TSA doesn't grant due process to victims of the no-fly list. They won't tell you if you are on it, why you are on it, or if they have removed you. They stonewall all efforts to take them to court. The threaten/intimidate airlines who tell the truth about why passengers are delayed and detained.
There was no due process for the guy who had his custom-made battery pack confiscated and stolen by TSA. There's been little or no due process for the victims that have been harassed, disabled people made to disrobe or drop their pants, etc.
When TSA starts respecting due process for the public, then I'll worry some about due process for TSOs for on-the-job offenses.
And in terms of employee theft, IMO video evidence of them stealing or conclusive evidence that they posted stolen passenger property on ebay provide for plenty of due process. Due process can be fair and yet still happen very quickly--it only should take a few minutes to review the video of the theft, fire the TSO, and escort the scum to the nearest police station for booking. If the subsequent law-enforcement due process isn't as quick, that's OK.
October 10, 2008 1:20 PM
Blogger Bob said:
On the surface, placing the TSO's name on the inspection card sounds like a good idea, but...
1) If someone is dishonest enough to steal something, what makes you think they're going to put an inspection card in your bag with their name on it?
2) The honest TSO that inspected your bag would now be the prime suspect if a baggage handler stole something from your bag.
I disagree. A name on a baggage inspection slip assures accountability. The fastest way to catch a baggage thief is for another screener to be wrongly accused. I'd be willing to bet that the wrongly-accused screener would lead the charge to find the real bad guy. Screeners would be watching each other and reporting incidents quickly -- this type of mutual distrust would do a heck of a better job deterring theft than any multimillion dollar camera system. Making theft in the baggage areas too difficult would move theft to the checkpoint, where a screener's actions are much more visible.
You people operate under the assumptuin that we are all terrorists until proven otherwise. So, I don't have any problem at all with the occasional screener being wrongly accused of theft.
October 10, 2008 1:21 PM
Ronnie said...
Who said I'd do anything out of the norm? I just want to see one of those plates. I too have a sense of humor. Many of us think it's pretty funny.
By the way, neither I nor anyone I work with (to my knowledge) has stollen items from a passenger. Bag checks are conducted out in the open on a large table, under they watchful eye of the passenger. We are specifically told to wait until the passenger is observing before we start a bag check. I have never heard of someones bag being whisked away to a closed room and anonymous claims.
I would also like to say that I resent the implication that I am somehow 'unethical'. I don't think
doing my job to the best of my ability and keeping you safe qualifies as unethical.
October 10, 2008 8:59 AM
Regarding the baggage check issue, I think the issue being discussed deals mostly with checked baggage. That is the big security hole.
Regarding your comments about wanting to be the one to get the metal sign in a bag. It sounded to me and others that you would conduct a screening that would cause the traveler to regret placing one of these things in their baggage. You have to be careful with your words. It really came across badly and that generated a bunch of comments.
October 10, 2008 1:41 PM
Bob said...
On the surface, placing the TSO's name on the inspection card sounds like a good idea, but...
1) If someone is dishonest enough to steal something, what makes you think they're going to put an inspection card in your bag with their name on it?
2) The honest TSO that inspected your bag would now be the prime suspect if a baggage handler stole something from your bag.
Bob
EoS Blog Team
***********************************
Bob;
if there were a requirement to include a name or badge # on the inspection tag, it would put the dishonest TSO's on the spot and make the honest TSO's feel more confortable about what they are doing. I have had people that I know tell me that stuff was stolen from their checked baggage items. So as a TSO, although i am a checkpoint TSO, I believe this to be an excellent idea for accountability. Granted the honest TSO who does put his name on the tag, MAY be a prime suspect if an item is stolen, he will be the loudest voice of all, and those who are quiet about something are probably the ones you should be looking at. We had an incident at my airport not long ago with some items that went missing out of checked baggage, I won't give details but it was indeed a mess, and made it very difficult for some of us to do our jobs to the fullest. I think this is a great idea and should be put into place soon. The problem that I have personally, is that when I check a bag, the passenger knows who checked his or her bag, in baggage often times this is NOT the case. So when things go missing from checkpoint, the passenger says "Tom checked my bag" but when they're missing from baggage, the passenger has no idea who checked their bag. Its not fair to the passenger or to fellow TSO's. I for one would love to be able to say that the job I do is respected by the public, unfortunately, it is not, thus the high turnover rate that TSA currently suffers from.
October 10, 2008 2:50 PM
Bob said
"1) If someone is dishonest enough to steal something, what makes you think they're going to put an inspection card in your bag with their name on it?
2) The honest TSO that inspected your bag would now be the prime suspect if a baggage handler stole something from your bag."
Bob, haven´t you learned that it is all about layers? What about accountability? What about damage incurred by honest but improper handling? This is a great idea and should be implemented immediately.
October 10, 2008 2:53 PM
Kellymae81 writes:
I see good things that can happen with this blog if we take the time to actually listen to these passengers, but at the same time, asking some passengers not to use this SOLELY to complain.
I'm guessing you weren't around at the start of this blogging experiment. Some bloggers here started out being very patient, and trying to offer lots of suggestions. Unfortunately, those suggestions tend to fall into three categories:
* Those accepted in full. The number of those seems fairly small, but there have been some, and in all fairness, TSA should get some credit for taking those actions.
* Those summarily dismissed. Ok, some of them weren't smart ideas if you work out the implications. Some of them might've been ok, though, but cost too much.
* Those simply ignored. Quite a few people have made suggestions which generate no replies. And silence is hard to interpret; no-one knows if silence means acceptance, rejection, or simply that no-one noticed it. (But if you repeat your suggestion, becuase you're afraid it got missed, then someone yells at you for not making original contributions.)
What's missing from this list?
The most important category: suggestions which won't work, but could be modified. So, Trollkiller (say) suggests a new procedure, Dean points out a problem and makes a counterproposal, Neil points out a new flaw, Bob proposes a remedy, and so on. Eventually, a refined idea emerges that passes muster from all perspectives.
I don't think I've seen that sort of dialog here at all. What passes for dialog here on the blog tends to be much more binary ... either "you're right", or "you're wrong", but nothing much in-between.
I don't know ... maybe TSA's internal Idea Factory actually has better dialog and synthesis of ideas. I don't have access, so I'll probably never know.
But to get back to the original point ... some people who seem to do nothing more than complain are doing so because no-one has seen fit to acknowledge their legitimate questions. Not every question that is posted here is legitimate, of course. But being continually ignored can make anyone grumpy.
October 10, 2008 3:40 PM
The 0.5% may be correct. If there are ~40,000 TSA employee on the front lines now with an average turnover of two years, ~100,000 will have been employed since May 2003. 500 terminated would then be ~0.5%
October 10, 2008 3:51 PM
Abelard, while I see what you're saying... don't you think that bait luggage would be pointless.. obviously TSO's aren't stealing every camera that passes by, just something occasional not to get caught... I'm sure that many thieves are not as foolish and greedy as this one and what's stolen is pretty minimal.
October 10, 2008 4:26 PM
Jim,
I completely agree with you that TSA has ignored most issues brought up. I agree there is no point for passengers to remain completely calm if none of their issues are responded to. But it has gotten to the point where travelers hate TSA and TSA is tired of disgruntled passengers. Negativity is not responded to positively (for either party).
It's like the chicken and the egg controversy. Passengers say they act this way or that way b/c of what TSA did and TSA says they act this way or that way b/c they are tired of being yelled at by the disgruntled passenger. It could go back and forth all day long.
I understand TSA doesn't have the best reputation but what is going to get accomplished if everyone (TSA included) responds negatively? Nothing. Two wrongs don't make a right. Nothing will get better if we keep this attitude. It may be hard, but everyone could adjust their attitude just a little to help improve the quality of this blog.
October 10, 2008 4:44 PM
tso tom:
"first of all, the ability to open a lock is imperative if a bag has to be searched and the passenger is not available to open the bag. Otherwise the lock gets cut, and most of you have gotten pissed off over that."
I've had a TSA-approved lock cut and taped to the "we opened your bag" card that was placed in my bag - interestingly enough, I had 2 bags on that trip and only one lock was cut. Go figure.
I'm enough of a realist to know that any lock can be thwarted, if not by use of a master key than by cutting it open - however, I look at them as a way, no matter how slight, to reduce the chance of a "crime of opportunity."
I buy my TSA-approved locks from Brookstone as they will replace a cut lock if you have the TSA card to go with it.
Those of you who travel with laptops should look into theft detection software, especially the apps that can use a laptop's built-in webcam to take pictures of the thief when they try to use it. I use Undercover but there are other programs out there - even LoJack makes one.
October 10, 2008 4:50 PM
Let me ask a question DIRECTLY related to the loss of critical items from checked baggage - and see if maybe I can get an answer.
First off, when I travel I often travel with firearms. This is legitimate and not subject to discussion, as it is allowed and there are established methods to handle it.
Since a firearm must be in a locked hard-side case, could I resurrect one of my old hard-shell, mil-spec, equipment cases, pack my belongings, including a firearm and appropriately packaged ammunition in the case, have it hand inspected by TSA in my view, then locked with a substantial (non-TSA) lock and have the TSA place their inspected seal on the case?
Would this help prevent theft further along the line, or would some TSA TSO/TSI decide that they needed to cut the lock off or destroy the case opening it because it didn't have a TSA Approved Toy Lock on it even though already inspected, passed, and locked under TSA supervision?
Second question: IF I am able to do this with checked baggage that has a firearm inside, is there some way to do the same with checked baggage that has something ELSE valuable inside that for whatever reason cannot be in one's carry-on? (Size, weight, blade, expensive liquor/wine, etc.)
The reason I ask is that travelers need some way to assure that checked items they turn over to the TSA actually arrive at the far end intact, and this recent theft problem (and those by 500 or more TSA employees before this) shows that we need protection not just from "the airlines" but from "the government," too.
Thanks in advance for providing answers to these two questions.
Tom (1 of 5-6)
October 10, 2008 5:39 PM
1) If someone is dishonest enough to steal something, what makes you think they're going to put an inspection card in your bag with their name on it?
2) The honest TSO that inspected your bag would now be the prime suspect if a baggage handler stole something from your bag.
Bob
Why not randomly assign inspection numbers to each person checking bags and put that on the slips? Randomize the slips every day and sign that random number to a specific TSO for the day. They are then responsible for signing out a stack of slips at the beginning of their shift and signing in the the remainder, if any.
If you keep it random and assign only at the onset of a shift, you keep the person off balance who wants to use them as a ruse.
However, that being said, I still think "bait luggage" would do quite nicely.
October 10, 2008 9:55 PM
Yeah the TSA sucks. Make a better one. The agency didn't even complete background checks before hiring because they needed uniform fillers so bad. A lot of the good people left in the first year because the TSA lied about the level of pay. They also had no way to implement all the changes to come. It took years to get up to the level it is now. Starting over would be a good/bad idea, because the government still isn't taking this serious enough. The TSA should have started off as an arm of the FBI, or at least Federal marshals. This job needs to be done by well trained professionals, with complete background checks. But then even some cops are theives. The security level of everyone working at the airport needs to be checked. The trouble is the pay scale would need to be much higher than it is now. This is not going to happen because the congress esatablished us at the lowest end. The overworked TSO is probably making much less than most of the passengers, so the average hire is someone who will work at his level. I agree, reform the TSA, raise the training level, the pay scale, and make it a professional career. Who will pay for it? Someone organize a pretion to do this. Complain to the Reresentitives who can actualy do something not BOB.
October 10, 2008 11:53 PM
Abelard, while I see what you're saying... don't you think that bait luggage would be pointless.. obviously TSO's aren't stealing every camera that passes by, just something occasional not to get caught... I'm sure that many thieves are not as foolish and greedy as this one and what's stolen is pretty minimal.
No, I don't think it is pointless. The fact that a TSO bag searcher will never know if the item inside the luggage is bait or not is an inducement not to steal.
Your argument was the same that was used when Phoenix PD started using bait cars. People said it was pointless and wouldn't succeed and yet the program is a big success.
Besides, what would be the harm in trying it out? It would be of minimal cost and you could easily buy replica jewelry or have fake laptops, etc in the luggage.
And so what if the items stolen are minimal. The person that takes it is a thief and should be fired and barred from working for the TSA.
It reminds me of the old story about the man who approached a woman in a bar and asked, "If I gave you a million dollars, would you go to bed with me?"
"Of course!" the woman said.
"Well, how about if I just give you $20?" the man countered.
The woman became upset and said, "What? $20? What do you think I am?"
The man responded, "Well, I know what you are. Now we are just haggling over price."
October 11, 2008 1:51 AM
I kind of like the idea of having a card to hand to a traveler after I check their bag. I think it would go a long way to putting a face on us and helping people to see we are just regular folks doing our job to keep them safe. I think this would work really well at the checkpoint. It may be cost prohibitive though since we would all be giving out hundreds of cards a day...
I dont know how well it would work for the baggage area though. Could a baggage TSO please post here a brief outline of what happens down below? I do know that there are many people besides TSO's who have the oportunity to get inside bags when they go on as checked baggage.
I'd like to offer a suggestion...
Before you leave the checkpoint, take a few minutes to check to be sure you have ALL your belongings. I realize this would be easier if the area at the end of the checkpoint was larger and better lit (and that needs to be addressed as well but that is another post) I often take items to the lost and found and you would be AMAZED at the number of small electronics that are taken to lost and found every day. Many times people just walk off w/o them. You got thru the WTMD and alarm then figure out your phone was in your pocket, put it in another bin and go thru...only now your phone is now 6 bins away from your other stuff and you are in a hurry to run off...thats the way it usually happens. Every day we take phones, I-pods, cameras, coats, glasses, wallets, drivers licenses, even lap-tops as well as a multitude of other items down to the L&F. Usually the items are taken at least once a shift, maybe more if they pile up quickly. At the end of the checkpoint, make sure you have all your items. If later you find you are missing something, try calling the L&F of the airport you just flew out of. Often times you will have a happy result.
Ronnie DEN TSO
October 11, 2008 8:53 AM
Kelly:
I completely agree with you that TSA has ignored most issues brought up. I agree there is no point for passengers to remain completely calm if none of their issues are responded to. But it has gotten to the point where travelers hate TSA and TSA is tired of disgruntled passengers. Negativity is not responded to positively (for either party).
So passengers hate TSA. I wonder why. Could it be the way TSA has dealt with passengers since day 1 of TSA's existence? Could it be the way that TSA deals with elderly and the handicapped? Could it be the way TSA deals with the passenger's luggage?
Kelly, TSA is in a position of authority and they abuse that authority. DO YOU WANT TO FLY TODAY? Ever heard one of your coworkers utter that phrase? If you want to fix the situation then take a long look in the mirror because this issue won't go away until TSA fixes their own public relations problems. The passengers won't fix it. They can't fix it.
Let's do a little bit of hypothetical situation playing. You go to your local plumber to have your plumbing fixed. The plumber arrives two days late, makes a big mess, doesn't fix the original problem, and creates several new problems. You talk to your friends about the plumber and tell them about the problems you had with that particular plumber. When you are dissatisfied you talk to more people than you would if you are satisfied. TSA, is that bad plumber and people do talk about their bad experiences with TSA much, much more than they do their good experiences.
Upper level DHS/TSA management can't issue edicts to make the public like them as much as they might want to do so. Upper level management must change the situation themselves.
October 11, 2008 9:37 AM
Here are a couple simple questions:
How ensure that my luggage will arrive secured (don't bother to talk to me about TSA approved locks as they fall apart)?
If my luggage gets pilfered who is responsible for making the loss good if I gave my luggage to TSA secured?
Both those questions I've asked to TSA directly and received nothing but 'use TSA approved locks' which fail during handling.
Those questions are fundamental questions that really require a good, working answer and not political fluff. So Bob are you up to answering those two pretty simple questions or getting someone on line who can answer those questions?
October 11, 2008 10:01 AM
Brian;
While I understand that your TSA approved locks have been cut, I can assure you its NOT policy, but laziness that has caused that to happen. I do recommend the use of locator software for laptops and highly suggest www.locjackforlaptops.com
Tom
October 11, 2008 10:41 AM
Ok, another serious question that has been asked and not answered.
This question concerns checked baggage only so;
Do TSA procedures permit any one TSO to have access to checked baggage at any time. Is opportunity created by TSA procedures that would allow a TSO working alone the time needed to remove something from a bag?
If so should this weakness be resolved?
Why is TSA unwilling to take the steps needed to ensure the integrity of our property?
October 11, 2008 10:44 AM
Abelard wrote:
Why not randomly assign inspection numbers to each person checking bags and put that on the slips? Randomize the slips every day and sign that random number to a specific TSO for the day. They are then responsible for signing out a stack of slips at the beginning of their shift and signing in the the remainder, if any.
Incidentally, HSV has already instituted this on a local level, though the numbers aren't randomly assigned. According to the official policy here on how it's supposed to work, after we finish inspecting the interior of the passenger's suitcase, we write two things on the inspection notification paper - one is "HSV" and the other is our inspection number. It has no other functions or purposes besides that; it started at 10 and worked it's way up alphabetically by last name, and once a number is used it's not used again (even if the person retires, quits, or is terminated). That way, for example, the number "25" always belongs to "John Doe," and even if "John Doe" quits and we pick up a part-timer to replace him, the part-timer would be given "26" and not "25."
However, it should obviously go without saying that if someone were to steal something from someone's suitcase, they wouldn't put in personally-identifying information about themselves. The randomly-tagged lovenote (as we call the inspection-notification slips of papers here in HSV) likely wouldn't find itself in the bag no matter what you do.
I personally think bait bags would be an inefficient way of trying to ferret out thieves. Personally, despite the initial cost of installing the system, I lean more toward the camera method - not only for catching bad guys, but for exonerating the innocent.
For instance, I was once accused of stealing a pair of womens underwear out of a passenger's bag some years ago. After a brief investigation that, naturally, turned up nothing, the woman was probably just convinced that TSA was "taking care of their own" and shafting the citizen, just like "TSA always does."
...At least she had the decency to call back about a month later and told management that she simply forgot to pack it in her suitcase in the first place, and found them in her home.
October 11, 2008 11:24 AM
To the blog team -- apologies for the long post...
Kellymae said:
"I understand TSA doesn't have the best reputation but what is going to get accomplished if everyone (TSA included) responds negatively? Nothing. Two wrongs don't make a right. Nothing will get better if we keep this attitude. It may be hard, but everyone could adjust their attitude just a little to help improve the quality of this blog."
Hi Kelly --
Point well taken, but there's one point that I continually come back to in my own thought process and in my posts -- the TSA is in charge, and thus sets the tone. IOW, the TSA needs to take the high road in this situation. They also need to take the lead in problem solving. On top of that, the TSA needs to establish some sort of blog section to catalog the various suggestions and what is being done with the suggestion. A lot of us have offered very specific, actionable suggestions that have been dismissed or ignored.
FWIW, I've followed the blog from the beginning, lurked a lot, posted anonymously from time to time, and just recently gotten a Blogger id. I've noticed over time that a lot of problems with obvious solutions don't get addressed at all, or receive a token solution that really doesn't get to the heart of the matter. Also, the TSA is reactive instead of proactive.
For example, take theft from baggage. The proactive approach is the one I suggested a long time ago that any checked bag that is searched be closed with an official TSA-logo zip tie, and the card inside should have the screeners name and badge number, plus the date, time and location of the search. Also, baggage search stations should have the same sort of video monitoring and recording as you'd have in a casino. This "eye in the sky" approach would not only be a theft deterrent, but would also help with complaints of liquid containers left open, rough handling of belongings, etc.
IMO, instead of aggressive, systemic action to work on the this problem, the TSA prosecutes the people it does happen to catch, but doesn't work to tighten the baggage security situation as a system. This reactive approach allows the problem to continue. If this particular thief hadn't been so brazen as to sell things on eBay, who knows how long this would have gone on?
Moving on to the atmosphere at the checkpoints, a common complaint in the early days of the blog was attitudes among the screeners. Posters used words like angry, negative, hostile, threatening, intimidating, bully, LEO wannabe, drill instructor wannabe, etc. to describe the screeners. There were a lot of references to yelling, barked orders, threats of arrest and DYWTFT. They also referred to the experience as being treated like cattle, criminals, prisoners, terrorists, and (my personal favorite) "self loading freight".
The TSA response was the "checkpoint evolution", with its soothing colors, piped in music, new screener uniforms and badges, plus "recomposure benches".
While this makes for a good press release, I'm not convinced that it really solves the problem. I don't recall a single complaint about the color scheme at the checkpoints, or the lack of music. As I pointed out, this new style checkpoint didn't address the screener behavior problem, because it primarily addressed the decor. Yes, it did mention some interpersonal skill training for the screeners, but didn't address how interpersonal skills would be implemented or evaluated in the real world. I find it ironic that a major driving force behind the new checkpoint was to make the BDO's job easier, rather than simply treating people with civility.
Different ones of us have suggested "secret shopper" missions as a tool to covertly test the screeners for how they treat people. The TSA response was the "Got Feedback" site. While this is better than nothing, it's another purely reactive approach, instead of nipping problems in the bud.
I've gone on long enough this sunny Saturday morning, but want to close with this final thought. Here are my expectations, as I stated them long time ago:
- Professionalism, ordinary civility, and common courtesy.
- To be treated the same way the TSA expects me to treat their personnel.
- Basic operational competence.
- Realistic, common sense rules, clearly stated.
- To be treated as a law abiding citizen until my actions prove criminal intent.
- Accountability for actions and for failures to act.
- To have my belongings treated with due care and respect.
- To have means of redress if the above items don't happen.
- To be offered assistance when needed.
If the TSA would implement proactive measures to implement these basic expectations, life would be a lot easier for us all.
It's a shame that the TSA really didn't look into the overall situation until that infamous survey that tied the TSA with the IRS in citizen dissatisfaction, and only FEMA scoring worse. Talk about reactive instead of proactive!
Have a good weekend...
October 11, 2008 11:47 AM
Tomas said:
First off, when I travel I often travel with firearms. This is legitimate and not subject to discussion, as it is allowed and there are established methods to handle it.
Since a firearm must be in a locked hard-side case, could I resurrect one of my old hard-shell, mil-spec, equipment cases, pack my belongings, including a firearm and appropriately packaged ammunition in the case, have it hand inspected by TSA in my view, then locked with a substantial (non-TSA) lock and have the TSA place their inspected seal on the case?
Would this help prevent theft further along the line, or would some TSA TSO/TSI decide that they needed to cut the lock off or destroy the case opening it because it didn't have a TSA Approved Toy Lock on it even though already inspected, passed, and locked under TSA supervision?
***********************************
Tom, I'll attempt to answer this question, based on what I know, keeping in mind that I work checkpoint not baggage.
1. The firearm must be declared as you know.
2. As long as a public inspection area is available, I don't see why this would be a problem. Once the baggage is screened, there would presumably be no reason to further inspect the bag or its contents. I don't see any TSO/TSI wanting to open the bag because of the type of lock it has on it.
October 11, 2008 6:58 PM
Blogger Bob:
2) The honest TSO that inspected your bag would now be the prime suspect if a baggage handler stole something from your bag.
AHA!!!!! A TSO who now feels like the American general public, each one of us who travel labeled a prime suspect for as-yet-uncommitted acts of terrorism; that is, according to the TSA.
Bravo, Bob, you hit the nail on the head!
October 11, 2008 9:12 PM
"Zero tolerance" in force would, in reality, require an investigation of every single reported theft, NOT JUST THOSE THAT CONSTITUTE A PATTERN.
I would applaud your zero tolerance policy if you actually had one!
October 11, 2008 9:14 PM
Tomas said
Let me ask a question DIRECTLY related to the loss of critical items from checked baggage - and see if maybe I can get an answer.
First off, when I travel I often travel with firearms. This is legitimate and not subject to discussion, as it is allowed and there are established methods to handle it.
Since a firearm must be in a locked hard-side case, could I resurrect one of my old hard-shell, mil-spec, equipment cases, pack my belongings, including a firearm and appropriately packaged ammunition in the case, have it hand inspected by TSA in my view, then locked with a substantial (non-TSA) lock and have the TSA place their inspected seal on the case?
Would this help prevent theft further along the line, or would some TSA TSO/TSI decide that they needed to cut the lock off or destroy the case opening it because it didn't have a TSA Approved Toy Lock on it even though already inspected, passed, and locked under TSA supervision?
Second question: IF I am able to do this with checked baggage that has a firearm inside, is there some way to do the same with checked baggage that has something ELSE valuable inside that for whatever reason cannot be in one's carry-on? (Size, weight, blade, expensive liquor/wine, etc.)
The reason I ask is that travelers need some way to assure that checked items they turn over to the TSA actually arrive at the far end intact, and this recent theft problem (and those by 500 or more TSA employees before this) shows that we need protection not just from "the airlines" but from "the government," too.
Thanks in advance for providing answers to these two questions.
Tom (1 of 5-6)
October 10, 2008 5:39 PM
Bob, I don't know if I'm discussing SSI or not. If I am I will understand if you don't post this.
Tom you asked a very important question. Let me see if I can answer this with out discussing SSI. You are correct about firearms needing to be locked in a hard sided case. When you travel with a firearm, no matter what kind of set-up TSA has for screening of checked baggage the Airline should explain to you that you need to be available in case TSA should have to check your bag. The reason, if TSA does have to go in your bag they will need the lock opened. If you're not available the lock will need to be cut. Without the lock your firearm will not be allowed to go. With that principleI would encourage you to stay at the ticket counter if screening is done in a back room and have the airline check with TSA to ensure the bage is cleared. This next answer should answer the rest of the first question and the second. You and anyone else can lock your bag. If the screening is done in a lobby area you have the right (and I would encourage you to use that right) to wait until your bag is completely screened and placed on the Airline's baggage system. Once that is done it is completely out of TSA control. If anything should end up missing from that point you will know it is the airline. TSA never touches your bag after that to include transfering flights at other airports. (I'm not sure about customs for passengers traveling overseas). The only problem with locks are airports that do their screening behind the scene. At the airport I work at, when we have a locked bag that needs to be opened for any reason, the first thing we do is to contact the airline and ask for the passenger to return. Since our screening area is a secure area we allow the airline supervisor to bring the key back to us and they watch us clear the bag and relock it, then place it on their baggage system. Unfortunately sometimes, airline representatives tell us to just cut the lock and don't want to bother with calling the passenger back. To alleviate claims against us we placed cameras directly facing the check area to observe all TSO's actions while opening and checking the bag. Our camers system also records the bag from the time the airline's place it on their belt from the lobby and until it reaches airline control again. We also went one step further, we record the bagtag number, the type of bagcheck, time, officers name and any anomolies in the bag. If the passenger has a complaint, we are able to go directly to the time on the video and review the entire process. I hope this helps.
Also, I read earlier about someone having a problem where a TSO would not allow him to watch until his bag was cleared and relocked. If this happens, have the airlines call for a TSA Manager. As a manager If you called me and told me the TSO would not allow you to wait, I promise I would discipline that person. If you would like to respond to me respond to anon 101.I will give you the most correct answers I can without releasing SSI. One poster also stated that some answeres are ignored. It's not that they are being ignored, either they can't be answered because of SSI or the answers just aren't the ones people are looking for. It's kinda like shopping for the answer you want instead of the real answer. BOB I encourage you and the rest of the blog team to answer the questions you are able to by policy, even if it's not what they want to hear. The real answer is better than no answer.
Sorry for taking up so much space.
October 12, 2008 9:07 AM
At our airport we do have our EDS machines out in the front and passengers can stick around and watch. Most choose to go on their merry way to get on their planes but some do stay and watch and those with firearms are required to stick around. I agree that having the inspection area out in front does limit or alleviate the opportunities for the dishonest tso to steal. But we do send the bags back to the airline backrooms and don't watch them until they are on the plane, nor fly with the bag and watch them when removed to insure nothing is stolen. Our airport is small and we do screen airline employees albeit somewhat randomly, but the opportunities for them to steal are somewhat limited as well. They do make less money than us and have longer access to bags than us in areas without as much public view so the likelyhood at our airport that it's a tsa employee that steals is slim.
One thing that I read in a few of the posts here were complaints about handling of bags and that property is damaged. We really have nothing whatsoever to do with that. Passengers should realize that their bag could be on the very bottom under thousands of lbs of other bags after making it to the airplane by being tossed around. Their bottle of wine if not packed well could be broken and spill all over their clothing, or their laptop placed in their check baggage in the very top and not insulated can very easily be broken. Besides that the airlines won't pay for your damaged laptop.
We watch how bags are treated and cringe at the breakables and expensive items we find inside.
October 12, 2008 10:55 AM
I guess my post got delete-o-metered for mentioning Mr. B____ by name.
Essentially, I was trying to point out that if 0.5% of thieving TSA officers is a tiny insignificant fraction, and this particular thief repeated the behavior 100 times over months went undetected by the BDOs and the Office of Inspection, how can we trust the TSA to do a reasonable job on their stated mission of thwarting an even tinier and more difficult to detect 1-in-a-billion terrorist?
The answer is that it is impossible to do it effectively. TSA is mis-managed security theatre.
October 12, 2008 3:40 PM
"Among the items seized were 66 cameras, 31 laptop computers, 20 cell phones, 17 sets of electronic games, 13 pieces of jewelry, 12 GPS devices, 11 MP3 players, eight camera lenses, six video cameras and two DVD players, the affidavit said."
...........................How could this much stuff be stolen by your baggage screener without complaints from travelers or your on internal controls not bringing to light that something was wrong? Is this another case of TSA blaming someone else, passing fault to the airline baggage handlers?
What controls does TSA have in place to protect a travelers checked belongings?
Does any one TSO acting alone have access to a travelers checked belongings.
You people are suppose to have a concept of security yet this example says a great deal about the lack of security provided by TSA.
As has been said many times, if something can be removed from checked baggage then something can as easily be placed in checked baggage.
It is very clear that TSA internal controls and procedures do not protect the public from this avenue of risk mitigation.
Who within TSA is responsible for internal agency security procedures? Probably won't get an answer to that question but whoever it is should be fired today!
October 12, 2008 5:55 PM
Jim Huggins said...
(Trollkiller ... can you repost the link to the luggage strapping system?)
Strapping machines are fairly generic in design so the TSA won't be locked into an overpriced solution.
For those that missed the idea on the first go around, here is a review.
Once your check in luggage has been screened, the TSA places a logo strap(s) across it the bag so it can't be opened without removing the strap.
Doing this should help to eliminate molestation of the luggage after screening. If the bag arrives with the straps broken you automatically know there is a probable chance that your bag was tampered with.
This will also deter sticky fingers at the screening stations because if the bag arrives with the straps intact but items missing it points directly back to the TSOs that screened that luggage.
The straps will also increase security by giving a visual indicator that a bag has remained unmolested since the TSA screened it.
What the TSA seems to forget is any bag that something can be taken out of is a bag that just as easily something could have been put in.
Before anyone goes Hollywood, we have already had TSOs and airline employees CONVICTED of smuggling fake drugs. (sting operation) What would have happened if the "drugs" were explosives instead?
October 13, 2008 8:42 AM
Investigation by a Seattle TV station on airport thefts revealed "Our undercover videotape proves employees, like Cross, would have no trouble getting stolen goods out of the airport. Near carousel number 8, employees routinely enter a secure area, carrying backpacks, coolers, and hockey bags. There are no metal detectors; no hands-on security checks. Employees can leave whenever then choose - with whatever they can carry."
http://www.kirotv.com/airports/14295025/detail.html
When will this security hole be closed since they've done the investigative work for you?
October 13, 2008 10:46 AM
You people depress me! If you're travelling with a soft sided bag it doesn't matter what kind of lock you put on it. It can be sliced open easily. If you have a bag with a zipper closure it can be opened with a ball point pen and then zipped back up again and you will never know. Get over yourselves.
October 13, 2008 1:45 PM
Mikado said...
TSA-approved locks all have a common master key, which is not hard to acquire. There are thousands of those keys in circulation, with no guarantee that they can all be kept in authorized hands. Therefore, TSA-approved locks provide no security whatsoever.
October 8, 2008 1:31 PM
are you mentally challenged? They have TSA locks so that when you lock your bag up and run to catch your flight, that youre almost late for, TSA wont have to page you to come unlock your bag. That, or they wont have to cut your lock off. Is there anything else you dont understand?
October 13, 2008 3:35 PM
...and another part of my delete-o-metered post was about how "less than 1/2 of one percent of all officers." being a "tiny fraction" is much more than "Zero Tolerance".
If you are serious about detecting terrorists in the haystack of 2,000,000 passengers daily, you need a better understanding of the difference between "zero" and 1/2%.
October 13, 2008 3:35 PM
Bob, how can TSA claim that baggage is secure if it's accessable to anyone after it has cleared TSA inspections?
This is the real problem and must be resolved.
October 10, 2008 1:11 PM
Thats why TSA screens airport employees too. You think they didnt think of this before?
October 13, 2008 3:47 PM
Having a blog that is rarely updated makes no sense.
October 13, 2008 5:28 PM
Zero Tolerance? That's hard to believe considering he stole hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of goods.
Why are TSA officers not asked to remove their shoes and nipple rings when leaving work each day? Why are they given a higher level of trust than me?
And why is the TSA washing their hands of this person? This is as much the TSA's fault as it is the employee -- even more so, as he apparently had ample opportunity to take off with CNN's video camera, among hundreds of other stolen items. For once, take some responsibility for your employees.
October 13, 2008 6:17 PM
Isn't this a old problem? Wasn't there reports on TSA hiring felons some time ago? I would expect a higher rate of theft and other crimes with a workforce of known felons.
The good in this is that TSA is providing employment for people that would otherwise be out of work. TSA is allowing these people to redeem themselves.
Good job TSA!
October 13, 2008 7:33 PM
you've made it sound as though you're claiming victory for this arrest. Why did you not mention that it took a private citizen's vigilance and searches on eBay to get the ball rolling on this? If this was allowed to continue for months, how can you suggest this event is rare? It might as well be happening at airports nationwide. I think it is time for your agency to admit that it was asleep at the wheel and will start to be more proactive in its investigations. This is an egregious and flippant violation of the American taxpayer's trust.
ND
October 13, 2008 9:02 PM
You didn't catch him - CNN did. They found one of their cameras on Ebay. Just 'cause you caught around 400 thieves doesn't mean there aren't more. In fact, I'd say this story proves that there are. The guy got out of the airport with around $200k worth of travelers' things. Who's screening the screeners? Are the immune? I mean, I know they went through a two week training program and all (which is equal to that required to work in a Home Depot for the record) but how about keeping tabs on them afterward?
October 13, 2008 9:31 PM
Happy Tuesday! After the long weekend I have a bunch of blog comments to moderate. I’m going to get cracking in a few minutes.
Bob
EoS Blog Team
October 14, 2008 11:27 AM
What I find interesting is that when TSA post something which is challenged they just play Opossum.
Curl up in a ball and play like nothings happening.
Isn't that indicative of mental illnes, not knowing when something is wrong or self denial?
October 14, 2008 1:31 PM
This does not have anything to do with TSA thieves, but I´ll post it here anyway (Bob permitting) so it gets read.
This is one of my favorite articles on airport security, comparing it to medical screening procedures:
http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/335/7633/1290?maxtoshow=&HITS=10&hits=10&RESULTFORMAT=&fulltext=airport+security&searchid=1&FIRSTINDEX=0&resourcetype=HWCIT
Some snippets:
"Since 1969, only 2000 people have died as a result of explosives on planes, yet the US department of homeland security spends more than $500m annually on research and development of programmes to detect explosives at airports. Even the devastating 11 September 2001 attacks caused around 3000 deaths, which is similar to the number of deaths attributed to high blood glucose each day or the number of children dying of the human immunodeficiency virus every three days worldwide."
"Furthermore, the cost of airport security ($9 per passenger) is 1000 times higher than for railway security ($0.01 per passenger), even though the number of attacks on trains is similar to that in planes. This is analogous to committing mammography resources to screening only the left breast, and ignoring the right side, even though cancer can affect both breasts."
(Note: the TSA is responsible for train security too.)
"We systematically reviewed the literature on airport security screening tools. A systematic search of PubMed, Embase, ISI Web of Science, Lexis, Nexis, JSTOR, and Academic Search Premier (EBSCOhost) found no comprehensive studies that evaluated the effectiveness of x ray screening of passengers or hand luggage, screening with metal detectors, or screening to detect explosives. When research teams requested such information from the US Transportation Security Administration they were told that evaluating new screening programmes might be useful, but it was overshadowed by "time pressures to implement needed security measures quickly.""
October 14, 2008 1:49 PM
carrot top said...
You people depress me! If you're travelling with a soft sided bag it doesn't matter what kind of lock you put on it. It can be sliced open easily. If you have a bag with a zipper closure it can be opened with a ball point pen and then zipped back up again and you will never know. Get over yourselves.
exactly! I also wonder if ramp agents make less than tso's, wouldnt that give them a reason to snoop in your bags? seeing how THEY are the last ones to touch your bags...
October 14, 2008 2:45 PM
Anonymous said...
Bob, how can TSA claim that baggage is secure if it's accessable to anyone after it has cleared TSA inspections?
This is the real problem and must be resolved.
October 10, 2008 1:11 PM
Thats why TSA screens airport employees too. You think they didnt think of this before?
October 13, 2008 3:47 PM
Are you willing to say that all airport employees are screened each and every time the enter or leave the secure area of the airport?
Are they even screened each time they enter the airport secure areas?
October 14, 2008 3:03 PM
whatthegeek said...
You didn't catch him - CNN did. They found one of their cameras on Ebay. Just 'cause you caught around 400 thieves doesn't mean there aren't more. In fact, I'd say this story proves that there are. The guy got out of the airport with around $200k worth of travelers' things. Who's screening the screeners?
............................
TSA has decided that Screeners require no screening. See, they passed a Background Check and can be trusted for the rest of their lives.
October 14, 2008 3:09 PM
An anonymous person (presumably a TSA employee) writes:
Our airport is small and we do screen airline employees albeit somewhat randomly, but the opportunities for them to steal are somewhat limited as well. They do make less money than us and have longer access to bags than us in areas without as much public view so the likelyhood at our airport that it's a tsa employee that steals is slim.
Sorry ... but that doesn't cut it. TSA is supposed to be upholding a much higher standard.
After all, if you were to say that "the odds that a weapon gets through screening is slim", everyone would be screaming in protest. The standard that TSA has set for itself is zero faults, period.
If you can strive for zero prohibited items past the checkpoint, you can strive for zero thefts of passenger items as well.
Because, as someone else has said, if someone can take an item out of passenger baggage without being detected, then someone can put an item into passenger baggage without being detected, either. And that is a security threat.
[Aside to Trollkiller: thanks for the link.]
October 14, 2008 4:14 PM
Annon:
are you mentally challenged? They have TSA locks so that when you lock your bag up and run to catch your flight, that youre almost late for, TSA wont have to page you to come unlock your bag. That, or they wont have to cut your lock off. Is there anything else you dont understand?
Uh, I've had TSA locks cut off. Others have TSA locks cut off and have commented on this thread about finding their ruined locks taped to the we searched your bag card. Read some of what the posters say before hitting them with the ad hominem attacks. I've even given TSA the bag with the locks unlocked and after they searched the bag, relocked it, had the locks cut off by another TSO (Newark). So even doing what they want is no guarantee that your luggage will arrive secure.
I witnessed a gun smith brining a customized automatic weapon through the airport to deliver to a government agency get grief about opening the hard cover gun case and relocking it. It was one of those weapons you look at and say wow.
October 14, 2008 5:20 PM
whatthegeek said:
Who's screening the screeners? Are the immune? I mean, I know they went through a two week training program and all (which is equal to that required to work in a Home Depot for the record) but how about keeping tabs on them afterward?
I really wish that bloggers who think they know everything would REALLY watch what they say unless they DO know everything. In this case, whatthegeek knows nothing. Your little parenthesis remark about us going through 2 weeks of training is equal to that of home depot is completely false.
1st of all, it took me 11 months to actually start at TSA b/c of all the background checks they do and all the requirements met by me. Then once you start, there is 2weeks of "classroom" training in which we sit for 8 hrs a day for 2 weeks and go through slide after slide learning SOP procedures. During this 2 weeks, we also do x-ray tutors over and over again in hopes that we pass in order to even get to the on the job training.
Once we get there, we have several weeks in which we have to complete several hours on each position with a trainer glued to our hip. X-ray alone is 20+ hrs to complete. Then, we have to pass certification for each position and pass another x-ray test. Besides all that, we have continual training constantly plus recertification every year which is nerve racking beyond belief.
Now I am one of the TSOs who IS here for flying public and not so I can go off on some power trip. I treat every person with respect and I do my job professionally. So when people (whatthegeek, for example) speak disrespectfully about what I do when they dont even have the right information, I WILL defend myself to the fullest. In this case, I'm defending all TSOs.
SDF TSO
October 14, 2008 5:53 PM
Our airport is small and we do screen airline employees albeit somewhat randomly, but the opportunities for them to steal are somewhat limited as well. They do make less money than us and have longer access to bags than us in areas without as much public view so the likelyhood at our airport that it's a tsa employee that steals is slim.
***********************************
Anon;
Theft by ANY TSA employee, no matter how slim or unlikely, is stil unacceptable! We should be held to a higher standard, and we should hold ourselves and EACH OTHER to a higher standard as well. No excuse for theft of any kind by a TSA employee, period.
October 14, 2008 6:25 PM
Maybe if they paid decent wages to the TSA officers this kind of thing would not happen. Our government will throw out billions to other countries but not even take care of those of us here protecting our own nation.
October 14, 2008 9:05 PM
"I think it would go a long way to putting a face on us and helping people to see we are just regular folks doing our job to keep them safe."
Ronnie, you have never done anything in your capacity as a TSA employee to keep ANYONE safe. And you never will.
October 14, 2008 10:40 PM
Trollkiller,
The strapping idea is perfect.
Bob,
Adopt the straps and the personalized TSA card in the luggage and you will get many brownie points from me.
October 15, 2008 6:11 AM
I have no doubt that TSA policy is "Zero Tolerance".
The problem is that TSA enables it's employees to steal by not implementing strong internal security procedures. In fact TSA has weakened security by not screening all all people each and every time when they enter the secure areas of airports. It would also appear that screening should be done when exiting secure areas also. Especially anyone who might have access to others property.
Any number of simple changes could be made that would protect travelers checked belongings.
One, complete video surveillance of all screening areas.
Two, no single person access to baggage, ever.
Three, maintain chain of custody after baggage is screened.
Four, some version of seal after baggage is screened.
Five, owning up to the fact that TSA has an internal security problem and must take steps to resolve the problems.
Now TSA is suppose to be Security Experts, yet they cannot or will not provide internal security to protects property of travelers.
If this area of security is so out of control then how can we believe that any other aspect of TSA is any better managed?
I suspect that the whole organization is rotten to the core!
October 15, 2008 10:10 AM
Anon;
Theft by ANY TSA employee, no matter how slim or unlikely, is stil unacceptable! We should be held to a higher standard, and we should hold ourselves and EACH OTHER to a higher standard as well. No excuse for theft of any kind by a TSA employee, period.
TSO Tom I wasn't excusing theft and never would. I'm just saying that the opportunities in some airports for theft to occur would be very limited. That's probably why I've not heard of anyone fired for theft in our small airport. We'd get fired for digging something out of the trash and taking it home let alone stealing from someones bags.
October 15, 2008 11:06 AM
"It’s a kick in the gut for each of the 43,000 officers who are honest, hardworking, and take pride in their mission of keeping passengers safe."
I think you may have overstated that number a bit as well.
October 15, 2008 11:06 AM
Here's a story for you! Back in August I was just about to leave my house for a flight from Newark Airport to LAX. Upon lifting my camera bag I decided I just couldn't handle the weight this time because my back giving me problems. So I quickly opened my son's bag and stuffed one lens in each of his sneakers and buried them deep in his suitcase. We checked our bags curbside and were at the airport 1 /12 hours before the flight. We arrived in LA and only my bag came off the conveyor. I reported to Continental and was told the second bag was arriving on the next flight. 22 hours later the bag was delivered to my sisters home. Upon opening the bag I found the sneakers right on top and empty of the lenses. I immediately contacted Continental to file a claim and Continental also suggested I contact TSA. I did both, copied serial numbers, receipts, baggage claim tickets, flight tickets and sent everything off to the two agencies. I must say that TSA was the most efficient in contacting me all along the way whereas Continental either didn't respond or if I tracked a rep down they were quite short bordering on nasty. Ultimately both denied my claims (it took about 8 weeks). It was quite apparent that they were blaming one another, neither admitting any responcibility. I believe it was Continental's denial letter on the last line said that I should file with my homeowners and TSA essentially suggested if I'm unhappy I should take them to court. I was just about to file with New Jersey Man homeowners when 2 days ago my co-worker asked if I had seen the news about the TSA screener @ Newark. I quickly printed every news article I could find to build up my ammunition. I finally got through to a TSA agent and told her that I believed my lenses were part of the seizure. She put me on hold for quite awhile, came back on and gave me instructions to FAX TSA with big letters RECONSIDERATION and the control # on my claim. To back up for a moment, when all of this had initially happened I was contacted by a Homeland Security Agent on my home phone. (He was the one who told me that there was an ongoing investigation at Terminal C at Newark Airport.) I emailed him 2 days ago and retrived the phone message yesterday and called only to find out the number had been disconnected. Arriving home last night I found a message from him to call today, which I did. He told me that my lenses were not part of the recovery but that he had NO DOUBT my equipment was stolen by this screener and had been sold. He also said this investigation had been going on since March and that he was finally caught because someone who had a camera stolen early in the summer had gone onto Ebay to buy another. He purchased this "used" Nikon and when he received it it still had his memory card with his photos on it! Then TSA bought a Hasselblad (10,000 worth), from the same seller, being the highest bidder. The rest we all know pretty much. So right now I will submit for reconsideration and my "friend" at Homeland has given me some pointers on resubmitting my claim and he seems to think I may have some compensation coming. So I thank you for making this information and blogs available.
Janet
I let you know what eventually happens.
October 15, 2008 3:32 PM
TSA Week at a Glance (October 6, 2008 - October 12, 2008)16 passengers were arrested due to suspicious behavior or fraudulent travel documents
24 firearms found at checkpoints
1 artfully concealed prohibited items found at checkpoints
13 incidents that involved a checkpoint closure, terminal evacuation or sterile area breach
/////////////////////////
When will you guys start adding things like,
Another TSO thief identified to your weekly stats?
Seems only fair!
October 15, 2008 10:16 PM
markvii I love your comment about how TSA should employ secret shoppers. I know in my business we do that to our stores all the time. We take customer complaints very seriously. I've often thought TSA should do this but I never posted anything on this. It seemed to me that it was to simple and effective of a tool for a federal agency to even remotely consider. There are a few times I've stuck up for TSA because 20 years ago fresh out of High School I did their job at minimum wage for 3 months before starting college. Yes there are some very real reasons for some of what they do but I only sympathize to a point. There is simply no excuse for some of the behavior I have personally experienced from TSO's. The very first one I ever met after the creation of the TSA was so verbally abusive to me the airport authority wanted to speak with me afterward. If the airport authority forwarded any concerns on this matter to the TSA I'd bet good money the TSA never responsed. The only responses I have ever gotten from posting feedback on the TSA website are automated replies that my concern is under review. I have never ever gotten more then that from TSA. When I called TSA to express concern about a later incident I mentioned I was writing my Congressman about it. The agent told me there was nothing my Congressman could do for me. I said something like, "are you telling me that your agency is not answerable to Congress?" Then the phone call was immediately terminated and not by me. I know my company would never tolerate this kind of behavior from its employees. That's not to say it would never ever happen but it becomes obvious to us when we have bad apples. Federal employees are simply never held to private industry accountability standards. That's not to say there aren't good people at TSA, I know there are. I've even had several pleasant experiences with TSA. The bad times I've had though are simply ignored when brought to their attention. I'm prepared to be surprised but I think its a safe bet we'll never see a secret shopper program. By the way I've caught now former employees selling things on eBay stolen from our company. Beyond sad TSA investigations couldn't catch someone this bold. I probably don't even want to know if he's on paid leave pending trial.
October 16, 2008 4:05 AM
OK,
For those who complain that we only complain and never propose solutions, there are two very simple and functional solutions that came up in this thread: TSA cards in checked inspected luggage which identify the officer responsible and sealing inspected luggage.
I dare the TSA to implement them immediately!
In fact, I also dare the TSA to show us one single POLICY that has changed as a result of passenger feedback. I am not talking about individual complaints about rude officers or improper activities. I am talking about a change in policy.
October 16, 2008 1:45 PM
It is beginning to look to me like there is a Jedi (tm) somewhere in TSA's administration constantly doing the 'These good ideas from outside are not the solutions we are looking for' hand-wave gesture.
I'm seeing a lot of 'For Want' signs in the the TSA's record.
For the want of a screened employee, something was smuggled.
For the want of positive control, baggage was tampered.
For the want of a secured cargo, something was added.
For the want of training, an aircraft was damaged.
Does the TSA actually need something to go wrong before they realize they must fix the real problems instead of continuing their theatrics? Or will there be another line reading 'For the want of real security, the TSA fails.'
October 16, 2008 7:06 PM
Thanks Anonymous, I hadn't considered it that way.
500 officers in 8 years is about 5 thieving officers terminated per month. That is directly comparable to statistics like your "1 artfully concealed prohibited item" found at the checkpoint in the Oct 6 week.
How much of a security risk are thieves discovered on a weekly basis?
October 16, 2008 10:27 PM
TSA Response to Inspector General Report on Badges, IDs and Uniforms
“While TSA has more than 43,000 security officers in airports nationwide, each airport has teams and shifts of employees working regular shifts who trained to look for threats and things that don't look right.”
TSA, Police Cooperation Leads to Capture of Alleged Criminals
"Our officers do much more than what you see at the checkpoints," said FSD Lee Kair. "We have officers all over the airport, at the curb, in the secure areas, doing random gate checks, even searching aircraft. We partner with law enforcement and members of the Central Florida intelligence community to keep travelers safe."
……………………………………………………………………………………………
So are these some of the TSA people who should have prevented a screener from stealing from passengers bags and selling the items for months on EBay?
So how’s that working out for ya?
October 17, 2008 9:48 AM
Tomas said
"Would this help prevent theft further along the line, or would some TSA TSO/TSI decide that they needed to cut the lock off or destroy the case opening it because it didn't have a TSA Approved Toy Lock on it even though already inspected, passed, and locked under TSA supervision?
Second question: IF I am able to do this with checked baggage that has a firearm inside, is there some way to do the same with checked baggage that has something ELSE valuable inside that for whatever reason cannot be in one's carry-on? (Size, weight, blade, expensive liquor/wine, etc.)"
Tomas, you are absolutely correct about the procedure for checking a firearm. Once the items is screened and secured, there should not be a reason for any TSO / TSI to re-open the case without attempting to identify and locate the owner. Additionally, yes, if you were checking another type of valuable item you could request to be present for the search of your bag to ensure that it is handled properly and that the bag is locked. Because every airport had a different baggage configuration, how this would be accomplished may vary; however, supervisors (and I am one so I can vouch for this) are supposed to honor requests for this type of screening IF there is an area that is accessible to passengers available for the screening. If the TSO says that it is not allowed, ask to speak to a supervisor to explain why you need to be present for the screening of your fragile, high value, etc item and they will accommodate your requeset IF it is feasible. I personally have screened religous items, military swords for ceremonies, etc for just the reasons you suggested. But be advised that some airports may not have the ability to do so and if that is the case, the supervisor will (or at least should) try to address your concern as best they can.
October 17, 2008 10:43 AM
Anon said:
TSO Tom I wasn't excusing theft and never would. I'm just saying that the opportunities in some airports for theft to occur would be very limited. That's probably why I've not heard of anyone fired for theft in our small airport. We'd get fired for digging something out of the trash and taking it home let alone stealing from someones bags.
***********************************
Yes i agree in some instances, at least on checkpoint, the opprotunity to steal is minimal at best. But it is still there, and much more prevalent in checked baggage then on checkpoint. If there is a way to steal something, a determined thief will find it, which is why as TSO's we need to man up and speak up when we see something happening that should not happen. I have had passengers tell me to take something home with me, but the truth is we are not allowed to take stuff home with us. And i tell the passengers this, they get upset that an expensive bottle of liquor will be thrown away. Sorry folks, nothing I can do about it, I can't take it with me.
October 17, 2008 12:44 PM
In fact, I also dare the TSA to show us one single POLICY that has changed as a result of passenger feedback. I am not talking about individual complaints about rude officers or improper activities. I am talking about a change in policy.
The same number of policies have been changed as have terrorists who've been caught by TSA. Sadly both numbers are zero. DHS appears to have a very strict 'not invented here' policy which invalidates any idea coming from outside of DHS even though some of the outsider/alien ideas are pretty good.
Security in airport luggage areas often suffers because the airlines are prevented from installing video cameras by the unions representing the employees. Blindsided by workplace T&Cs that give both TSA and the airlines a walk on items stolen from luggage by either TSOs or airline employees. Why don't they both split the difference since neither wants to admit to responsibility for the loss of passenger's belongings?
So Bob, what does it take for a person to have their luggage arrive at the destination intact and secured?
Who is responsible for luggage contents being replaced when passengers are prevented from properly securing their luggage from baggage thefts and the government denies passengers basic security measures to secure their luggage?
Two simple questions that NO ONE at TSA has been able to answer without saying "use TSA approved locks" which we know are not the best in the world for securing luggage.
Still no answer on who paid for the aircraft repairs on aircraft damaged by a TSI.
Still no answer on why is TSA allowed to begin searching well outside of the entrance to the concourse?
Still no answer to the questions dealing with the secret rules and regulations that we, the passengers, are held to but can't see because those regulations are SSI.
Still no answer to why fines are doubled when we opt to protest those same fines.
Still no answer to why the war on liquids still rages on while TSA managed to redefine liquids to include some soft solids.
Still no answer why we still wage the war on shoes while everyone else gave it up as a lost cause. Does DHS often tilt at windmills as well?
TSA demands respect from passengers, but currently denies fundamental human rights to the elderly, children, and disabled. TSOs may, and often do address passengers with a less than professional manner and do so without any repercussions or logical consequences. We are not terrorist suspects just because we want to travel anymore than all TSOs are closet baggage thieves.
Bob, your organization has some serious public relations issues to deal with before telling us how we should treat TSA employees. Should we stand there hat in hand, looking at the floor, gaze averted so we show the proper respect to the bullying TSO? Going to begin issuing fines to those folks who 'dis' one of your out of control TSOs? Perhaps a beating for the passenger who doesn't jump either fast enough or high enough?
October 17, 2008 9:01 PM
I wonder how much of the thefts by PB had the victims filing claims against the airlines and TSA? I wonder how many of those claims were denied by both the airlines and TSA?
So when do the victims of this mess either get their stuff back or be fully compensated for their loss?
October 17, 2008 9:15 PM
Additionally, yes, if you were checking another type of valuable item you could request to be present for the search of your bag to ensure that it is handled properly and that the bag is locked. Because every airport had a different baggage configuration, how this would be accomplished may vary; however, supervisors (and I am one so I can vouch for this) are supposed to honor requests for this type of screening IF there is an area that is accessible to passengers available for the screening.
The supervisors get around this by saying "that area is off limits to passengers" and you may not witness your luggage being searched. I've had that discussion with several TSA types at different airports. Unlock the luggage and hope that it gets relocked is the best you can hope for.
October 17, 2008 9:20 PM
What this Theft Servicing Officer did was beyond deplorable. So how about this, when I was in the Air Force, working around Nukes, we were REQUIRED to have a No Lone Zone - a place where under NO uncertain circumstances were we to be able to be alone. Any place were you could be in contact with nuclear weapons, coding keys and control documents, and places like that were declared NLZs.
There were signs all over the place - SAC TWO MAN RULE IN EFFECT, NO LONE ZONE, and the like. ANY person in those areas alone was considered to be a security breach, if even for a moment, and the Security Police were called, even if the lone individual was a known person, and would have, if he had an escort, proper access into that area. There were some areas were you couldnt be under observation, such as doing some mechanical work, such as on a missile, but your team member was still very close - you were never truly alone.
It sounds like baggage makeup rooms, at least the areas were the TSOs work, need to be no lone zones.
Pretty sad when we need security to protect us from "security".
October 18, 2008 5:53 PM
I wonder if he could be charged on a per count basis instead of just one count. 100+ counts at 10 years each means he would need to have daylight piped in.
October 18, 2008 8:58 PM
It's good to know that steps have been taken by the TSA to try to prevent their employees from stealing, and it's good to know that they deplore the actions of their employee Pythias Brown.
But the TSA's anti-theft measures did not prevent Brown's year-long, $200k theft spree, and this failure, together with the failure of more than 400 other incidents of theft, is a failure of the TSA in their duty to protect the American public. We should not need to fear theft by TSA employees.
Because responsibility for their employees extends to responsibility for the actions of their employees, theft by a TSA employee is theft by the TSA.
We have not heard an apology from the TSA, only attempts to attribute all blame to Brown. The failure of the TSA to apologize is a further failure of their duty and responsibility.
October 19, 2008 3:31 PM
How about mandating that all unwitnessed searches be videotaped, the owner of the package notified, and the videotape archived? The only way to seriously deal with this sort of thing is to have someone watching the watchers.
October 19, 2008 5:00 PM
My ambien disappeared after my carryon was searched and you guys took my nearly empty toothpaste.
Chicago O' Hare Flight from Chicago to Madrid.
Really wanted to sleep but someone else took little baggie with 3 pills. Thanks a lot. Try negotiating trans atlantic with no sleep.
October 19, 2008 5:41 PM
Here are a few answers to your questions.
Q: Will passengers receive compensation for property stolen by the Newark TSO?
A: Whenever stolen property is recovered, TSA will attempt to get it back to its owner. If that’s not possible, the Claims management Branch evaluates loss claims in accordance with the Federal Tort Claims Act.
Q: Do TSOs work alone?
A: The checkpoint or checked baggage areas are staffed based on available resources and security. The minimum number of TSOs working in these areas is 2. This is not a written directive, but due to safety reasons, most airports will not allow a TSO to work alone. We have airports with hundreds of flights a day and some with as few as four, so that affects how officers are scheduled and placed.
Q: Are there cameras at every airport’s checkpoint and checked baggage area?
A: Cameras are our TSOs best insurance policy if they’re ever accused of theft and the passenger’s best policy if anything is ever stolen from them. While many checkpoint and checked baggage areas have cameras, they are not all equipped yet for monetary and logistical reasons.
Q: Could the TSA implement a policy that would require an officer to place an inspection card with their name and serial number in a bag after each bag search.
A: On the surface, placing the TSO's name on the inspection card sounds like a good idea, but...
1) If someone is dishonest enough to steal something, what makes you think they're going to put an inspection card in your bag with their name on it?
2) The honest TSO that inspected your bag would now be the prime suspect if a baggage handler stole something from your bag.
Thanks,
Bob
TSA EoS Blog Team
October 20, 2008 1:22 PM
Let me help you Bob.
Simple questions, simple answers!
Bob said...
Here are a few answers to your questions.
Q: Will passengers receive compensation for property stolen by the Newark TSO?
..... NO ......
Q: Do TSOs work alone?
........YES..........
Q: Are there cameras at every airport’s checkpoint and checked baggage area?
............NO.........
Q: Could the TSA implement a policy that would require an officer to place an inspection card with their name and serial number in a bag after each bag search.
........Yeah, Right!........
Thanks, TSA SPIN Machine.
October 20, 2008 1:37 PM
Bob,
You state that it is TSA policy that TSOs never work alone in baggage screening. How is it, then, that this TSO in Newark was able to achieve this massive level of theft?
Was he working alone, in violation of TSA policies, or was someone else assisting him in these thefts?
October 20, 2008 2:33 PM
Bob, you and yours(TSA) killed the blog.
Good job!
October 20, 2008 10:32 PM
You all seem to be missing an important point. The TSA doesn't care about theft. Their mission is to react to 9/11, to the possible London liquid explosive plot, and to any other threats that involve terrorism using airplanes. Because the TSA exists only as a bureaucratic reaction to a systemic security failure that allowed 9/11, their definition of "security" is a very narrow one. Theft isn't part of that definition. It doesn't matter if their screening of checked luggage for explosives encourages and promotes theft (whether by TSA screeners or others in the chain of custody). It doesn't matter whether the process of separating carry-on belongings for screening at checkpoints facilitates thieves while passengers are distracted. Theft isn't the TSA's problem, since it's not related to their mission of reacting after the fact to specific security breaches involving terrorism.
So of course they don't subject their screeners to basic security protocols such as video surveillance or checkpoint inspections. That's not part of the mission. Nor do they make any effort to investigate their screeners for theft, unless the evidence of TSA theft is so overwhelming that they need to react in a posterior-covering fashion (remember, the TSA's motto is "React!"). Theft isn't their problem. It's not their mission. And when thefts occur, someone else is responsible.
It's just another example of how the TSA is a failed bureaucracy. They don't provide much "security" if their approach to preventing rare acts of terrorism encourages and promotes common acts of theft.
October 21, 2008 8:18 PM
Bob said:
Q: Could the TSA implement a policy that would require an officer to place an inspection card with their name and serial number in a bag after each bag search.
A: On the surface, placing the TSO's name on the inspection card sounds like a good idea, but...
1) If someone is dishonest enough to steal something, what makes you think they're going to put an inspection card in your bag with their name on it?
2) The honest TSO that inspected your bag would now be the prime suspect if a baggage handler stole something from your bag.
Your argument makes superficial sense, as far as it goes. However, just as the TSA is fond of its "layered" approach to checkpoint security, different ones of us have suggested additional layers of baggage security, to wit:
Cameras This measure is not in place 100% for "logistical and financial reasons", and this needs to change. As has been pointed out more times that I can count, if you can't prevent theft, you can't prevent the introduction of dangerous items. Also, even if labor agreements at some airports prohibit cameras in baggage handling areas, federal law and regulation trump labor agreements. As much as I hate to proliferate mandates, I see this one as a necessary evil.
A closure with a TSA seal is applied to a bag after it is searched Make it an offense for unauthorized personnel to break one of these seals. Coupled with cameras, this would add a layer of deterrence. It might also make the screener less reluctant to put the card with their serial number in the bag in the first place.
Address the issue of the "toy" TSA approved locks The TSA approved locks are only useful to "keep honest men honest", and to keep a bag from opening inadvertently. Establish procedures at all airports to allow passengers to use a more robust lock. This is conceptually and logistically no different from the existing procedures for dealing with checked firearms.
Another aspect of "if the screener had to place an inspection card with their name and serial number in a bag after each bag search" is accountability. A screener might be be more inclined to treat a passenger's belongings with respect if they knew that sloppy handling could be traced back to them. Consider the complaints of containers of toiletries opened and not resecured, leading to a mess in the bag and ruined clothes. Also consider luggage searched and the bag not reclosed, which has happened to me.
October 22, 2008 9:13 AM
A screener might be be more inclined to treat a passenger's belongings with respect if they knew that sloppy handling could be traced back to them.
In other words, you're asking for accountability. Unfortunately, the TSA is just a very visible example of the Bush Administration's approach to "Homeland Security" (and to governing in general). The Homeland Security bureaucracy was specifically designed from the outset to avoid all accountability! It's a realization of Dick Cheney's dream of a Unitary Executive that empowers itself to do whatever it wants, however it wants, without oversight and without constraint, accountable only to itself and to its major donors. Terrorism has been the ideal excuse for realizing this dream, since it allows the Executive to shroud itself in secrecy to "protect intelligence and national security," and wave the flag to distract from its abuses and failures.
The ability of TSA screeners to make whatever rules they want and to avoid all accountability for damaging the property the screen is just a small visible example of how the Bush administration has exploited the very real threat of terrorism. There is at least the hope that the next administration will respect the Constitution and civil liberties and will work to restore what the Bush administration has eviscerated. And there's the hope that the next administration will appoint TSA and Homeland Security officials based on competence rather than mere loyalty, who also respect the Constitution and civil liberties and are committed to effective security measures rather than the current security theater that mistakenly equates inconvenience and indignity with effectiveness. Unfortunately, it's a slim hope. Once we have lost rights and liberties (and sanity) it's usually very difficult to get them back.
October 22, 2008 4:49 PM
Was the person who stole the $5 souvenir Texas magnet from my checked bag fired? Probably not.
October 22, 2008 4:59 PM
So Bob, what is being done to protect the passenger's luggage from TSOs stealing items from it or doesn't this even warrant a blip on the security radar?
October 27, 2008 7:56 AM
Come on Bob, how is TSA protecting a passenger's luggage from theft by TSA employees?
October 28, 2008 8:14 AM
Good morning Bob. So what is TSA doing to protect the contents of luggage against thefts by TSOs?
October 29, 2008 8:01 AM
Good morning Bob. So would you tell us what measures TSA/DHS are taking to make sure that our luggage doesn't get pilfered by a rouge TSO? We know about the airline baggage thieves and pretty much know how to deal with them. How do we deal with TSOs who have access to our luggage in the name of security?
October 30, 2008 8:28 AM
Good morning Bob. Before TSA began inspecting checked luggage a person could secure their luggage against all but the most determined thieves. Now TSA employees engage in stealing from luggage as well as the usual airline suspects. How are you going to stop TSA thievery? You can't possibly call the passengers luggage secure when you allow TSOs to use it as a second income.
October 31, 2008 8:29 AM
Robert Johnson said "So what about the due process for those put on the No Fly List and SSSSelectee lists? They're put on there without trial, without notification. If they try to find out, they won't be told what they supposedly did. The redress is a joke as their name will likely never be removed from the list (this was flat out told to a Robert Johnson). So you have innocent people being harassed or denied their rights to travel without due process.
If due process is fine for a TSO that commits a crime, why can't the same be offered to passengers?
Think about that. You can't support due process for some and deny it others. Unless some people are more equal than others ...
Robert"
I do not have anything to do with the redress process. I have never been involved with that aspect of the organization and have no experience to draw from. I know there is a redress process, and I know that people can petition for removal, but I have no knowledge of that particular program. There are reasons for the names (some REALLY good, some NOT so good...), and there should be a way for the ones that are not a security risk to be removed. That being said, I am not privy to their information sources as well. I am no help on that subject, sorry.
October 31, 2008 10:03 PM
Jeez Anon is cranky on this post. I agree with the idea of accountability. I think when we make mistakes we should do a better job of admitting the mistake and moving to a resolution or another action to remedy the error (on a personal note, my Supe hears "uhhhhhh...... Nope, I did not get that done, but I am on it right now" when I mess up). I think that the video in all areas would be a great addition to two things -
1. Prevention, it would stop a great deal of less than savory people taking advantage of there not being cameras around.
2. Protection for those of us that don't take things or do the wrong things.
That being said.... do you realize the cost that would be incurred to vfeed all baggage areas nationwide? Holy crap that would be cost prohibitive in the extreme! However, if we are going to vfeed the TSA Officers, what is good for the goose is good for the gander! We would also need to vfeed the baggage handler areas, the belt lines (every square foot of them as a lot of the belt systems have access areas away from the baggage handling zones), the outgoing baggage transport vehicles, the cargo areas of the planes, the jetways, the controlled areas out around the.... See where this is headed? I agree 100% with accountability, and as a TSO I would love to be on vfeed the entire time I am working. I would also like to have the baggage handlers on vfeed the entire time they are working. The problem is the cost and logistics (jeez, a place like LAX would require 1000's of employee installation hours to vfeed their baggage areas for TSA alone! Not to mention the persons needed to monitor the feeds....). we are lucky here at GSO, we have vfeed in our areas and our management uses it when there is a question. I like it, but it seems a bit ex$pensive to initiate on a national level. Sorry for wrinting a Ludlum novel on ya Bob.
October 31, 2008 10:31 PM
Good morning Bob, any news on how passengers may secure their luggage against thieves? TSA locks don' work.
November 1, 2008 9:41 AM
Good afternoon Bob. Any chance that TSA would close the massive security gap in passenger luggage TSA opened when passengers couldn't properly secure their luggage against thievery?
November 2, 2008 2:55 PM
Gsoltso writes:
That being said.... do you realize the cost that would be incurred to vfeed all baggage areas nationwide? Holy crap that would be cost prohibitive in the extreme!
Passengers are already spending that money right now. Because passengers are the ones who end up losing money because of theft of their personal items from their unsecured baggage.
So, either my stuff gets stolen, and I have to pay after the fact to replace those items (if they can be replaced at all), or I pay more in taxes up-front and I get to keep my stuff. Either way, I have to pay. But given a choice between paying and losing my stuff, and paying and keeping my stuff, I'm gonna choose to keep my stuff.
November 3, 2008 9:44 AM
Bob, trying to have a dialog here and you're not talking. Is this going to get swept under the rug as well? That lump keeps getting bigger and bigger as nothing is addressed.
November 3, 2008 10:28 AM
Good evening Bob. Any news on how passengers may protect their belongings from TSOs who have sticky fingers? We used to be able to secure our luggage. TSA made that impossible.
November 4, 2008 8:31 PM
Wow... I find it hard to believe that TSA is the only employer who has ever had a theif. Yes, they are under public scrutiny, but the 99.5% of the honest employees should NOT be harrassed for the mistakes of others. Just like each of you, they have a job to do and would very much like to have pride in their job - but bloggers like most of you make that impossible. I would like to find some dirt on the companies some of you work for and pubicize it so you can feel the public hatred and harrassment. Human behavior is unpredictable. Employees steal from casino's all of the time but people still love to go to them. Most airports have cameras in the screening areas and it might surprise you to know that when a lot of passengers yell "theif" and the police are summoned to review the video footage, they suddenly say forget it, they don't want to wait, or say they must have left the item in their car, or even leave before the police arrive... So, like television, don't believe everything you hear!!!
November 5, 2008 4:06 PM
1) Do you realize HOW MANY people have access to your check baggage? When using a TSA approved lock at least to can BLAME TSA for something missing. Without that lock anyone will have access into your bag after TSA has to cut your lock off because something alarmed the machine. And YES people do try to fly with chemicals that are explosive. (Forgetting about the guy to Jamacia from Orlando?)
2) And TSA has done it's job. I just wish they would give examples of the REAL threats that are found. Just recently the pipe bomb that was in a carry-on bag in Long Island. (Go look it up!)
3) I personally never check baggage. Unless you are going somewhere for more than a week you can fit it in a carry-on. I pack my little travel size bottles and I'm good to go. If you actually READ tsa.gov and follow the simple rules than getting through security is fast and easy. (except for the 25 people in front of you who didn't want to educate themselves!)
4) As for the "no screening of screeners", who takes that baton from the passenger? Who takes the cap gun from the kids? Who takes the samari sword that that college kid bought? I can promise you this, with how many idiots fly NOT following the rules or thinking they are special and expemt from weapons not allowed, TSO WILL get their hands on the stuff AFTER they would have been screened. These are people who are professionally trained to find IEDs and prohibated items, they can very easily find ways to get it in otherwise.
5) As for you WHINING about your liquids again, I'm fine with a bomb maker being on YOUR plane after isserting the liquid explosive into an unopened bottle. As long as it's just you and everyone else who doesn't want to be screened because they think they are special. STOP thinking you are the special one, because I can promise you this, that bomb maker thinks he's special also! It's not that hard to fill an unopened bottle. You can easily empty a bottle and refill it without opening it. This March someone leaving another country tried to light gasoline on the plane. So should TSA let everyone's liquids go? And if not and you want them tested, are you willing to wait 3 hours in line JUST to have EVERYONE's liquids tested? Which will also cost ALOT more tax dollars because more TSOs will be needed.
Think that about covers the basics.
READ before you fly...
tsa.gov
November 6, 2008 11:33 AM
Whatever,
Do a google search on Pythias Brown. TSA does have thieves working for it. Not all TSOs are thieves, but there exist enough thieves that a passenger takes a risk in checking any luggage with a valuable in it.
As to not checking any luggage that is nice for you. Impossible for me because I must carry 7 days worth of clothing for business travel and don't want to repurchase toiletries every time I fly. Often my one week out turns into a two or three week trip. What do you suggest I do? Purchase new clothing? Ever tried to reliably wash clothing at a strange hotel? Good luck with the washers (don't fully drain) and non working driers which you find out about when you've waited for two hours to get dried clothing for the next day.
I've had TSA approved locks cut off by TSOs too lazy to find the keys. How do I know the locks were cut off by TSA? Lock remains taped to the TSA greeting card.
TSA leaves much to be desired for both efficacy and efficiency.
November 6, 2008 10:02 PM
our websites is an professional store for runescape,warhammer online,mabinogi,dofus games gold,items,money,accounts,powerleveling,questqoint,runes and some other goods with fast delivery and world class service
November 6, 2008 8:33 PM
..................................
Perhaps I'm dense but how did this post make it past the censors when I post ontopic items that continue the discussion and yet my post are censored?
Bob are you afraid of frank discussion of the topics here and prefer to let commercial post go through?
Seems so!
November 7, 2008 11:25 AM
TSA CENSORSHIP ON THIS BLOG
TSA CENSORSHIP ALERT
OVER three hundred million dollars STOLEN baggage at LAX. More arrests to follow:
"Major arrests today of TSA employees caught stealing in a THEFT ring that has been running for TWO YEARS AT LA International AIr port. SIX detectives from the LAPD are working undercover to catch the thieves. SEE CBS NEWS LOS ANGELES Google: these key words:
TSA THEFT LAX ARRESTS CBS2.com
Lets see if this TRUE post gets censored?
November 7, 2008 12:05 PM
Undercover detectives learned that within days on the job that organized theft rings of TSA agents, screeners and baggage handlers are stealing passenger baggage. Over $100,000 cash laptop computers, jewelry, expensive items found at the homes of two TSA employees who were arrested today at LAX.
November 7, 2008 12:10 PM
More arrests of TSA agents today at LAX. Google CBS2.com news for information that the TSA blog refuses to post. 300 million dollars over 7 years stolen property under the watchful eye of TSA. TSA denies theft claims. LAX employees complain to TSA about thefts. Thieves promoted.
November 7, 2008 12:14 PM
I disagree with post of yesterday 6pm: TSA a is VERY efficient at allowing its employees to steal. Its one of the main fringe benefits advertised in their employee recruitment. They show a dumb looking air traveler and valuables inside an UNLOCKED BAG. The caption under the photo says:
"Keep your eyes on the contents" and you will have a rewarding career. What else could that mean when TSA targets its hiring to thieves, dope acddicts and the homeless. They even have TSA recruitment posters at the county jail. Who else will apply but thieves?
November 7, 2008 12:20 PM
SPAM from ptenjoy deleted...
November 7, 2008 2:16 PM
Hello poster of many names. As I said in the other post where you accused me of the same thing:
Anon,
This is a moderated blog. Your comments won't be published right away. All of your so called "censored" posts were sent in a 10 minute time frame. We didn't censor anything.
Also, you should actually listen/read to the news story next time. Nowhere does it say that TSA is responsible for all of the theft. They also mentioned baggage workers and passengers. They even showed video evidence of a passenger stealing jewelry.
Bob
EoS Blog Team
November 7, 2008 3:07 PM
Hello poster of many names. As I said in the other post where you accused me of the same thing:
Anon,
This is a moderated blog. Your comments won't be published right away. All of your so called "censored" posts were sent in a 10 minute time frame. We didn't censor anything.
Also, you should actually listen/read to the news story next time. Nowhere does it say that TSA is responsible for all of the theft. They also mentioned baggage workers and passengers. They even showed video evidence of a passenger stealing jewelry.
Bob
EoS Blog Team
November 7, 2008 3:08 PM
$300,000,000 taken from passengers at LAX? That is some serious baggage thieves working there. So what other than next to nothing (includes suggesting we use TSA approved locks) is TSA doing about this issue? We already know that the vast majority of claims against TSA get denied. We want to secure our luggage against both airlines employees and TSOs who deny us the ability to secure our luggage
November 8, 2008 6:31 PM
Now that TSA bars passengers from securing their checked luggage, how does TSA ensure that items are not stolen from checked luggage after it is out of passengers' sight? How does TSA ensure that contraband is not inserted into checked luggage after it is out of passengers' sight?
--
Phil
Add your own questions at TSAFAQ.net
November 12, 2008 12:31 PM
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home «Oldest ‹Older 1 – 200 of 203 Newer› Newest»