I was sickened to hear about a former TSA staffer in Orlando who was recently arrested for lewd and lascivious conduct.
TSA takes allegations such as these very seriously and steps were taken to terminate this employee. Yesterday, the employee resigned.
TSA uses background screening and perpetual vetting to keep those with criminal records out of our workforce, but background checks are not a crystal ball and cannot predict what a person will do in the future.
Our officers are deeply saddened and disgusted that someone who wore the uniform could commit such an unspeakable act. TSA holds the highest standards for our workforce and this individual's actions do not reflect on the more than 50,000 men and women who work every day to keep the traveling public safe.
Blogger Bob
TSA Blog Team
158 comments:
Once again, Bravo to your high standards, quality employees, and high-quality management. Oh, I'm sorry I was being sarcastic. I really don't believe this agency can do anything right.
You should have addressed those morons with the "pickle smoker" scoreboard in the same post. As it is, it seems that this blog neatly alternates between posts expressing your disgust and disappointment with the idiotic/criminal acts of your employees and posts that ask us to believe that those same employees can be trusted with our security, let alone our nude images. l
Oh, look. A news item that alludes to poorly run background checks being done on prospective TSA employees. Now ask me why I am not surprised.
Love the blog, think it's a great idea. Was hoping you could clear something up for me. Why when the incident with the Officer in Philly scaring that woman, TSA claimed it could no disclose termination vs. resignation, only that employment had ended. But in this case, you announce that the officer was not fired and did resign. What's the difference between situations as to why you can elaborate on this and not on that one? Not looking to trick more info out on the Philly case, just looking for the differences in the cases.
DCO Bob,
More damage control, eh? Can't we start having more posts about stuff we care about rather than the latest bad press on TSA? The fact is that there are strange cats who work for each and every business and agency in the country; I'm not blaming TSA for this one. BUT, you said it yourself:
background checks are not a crystal ball and cannot predict what a person will do in the future.
People tend to have a warm fuzzy when background checks are done on people, as if it proves something. The so-called "vetting" you do is pretty much useless as far as keeping terrorists away from airplanes; because few terrorists actually have felony criminal records and you know it.
Love the blog, think it's a great idea. Was hoping you could clear something up for me. Why when the incident with the Officer in Philly scaring that woman, TSA claimed it could no disclose termination vs. resignation, only that employment had ended. But in this case, you announce that the officer was not fired and did resign. What's the difference between situations as to why you can elaborate on this and not on that one? Not looking to trick more info out on the Philly case, just looking for the differences in the cases.
----------------------------
You have to be something of a sovietologist to understand the TSA blog-- it's like reading between the lines of Pravda. I'll help you out.
The employee resigned=the employee resigned (as in this situation)
the employee is no longer working for us= the employee was fired (see Philadelphia incident)
privacy laws forbid us from saying anything whatsoever= the employee is still with the TSA (St. Louis).
And then you wonder why people don't want you taking naked pictures of their children. You're revolting.
In light of this grotesque violation of the public trust and the many, many other instances of TSA employees being arrested and charged with crimes, why is each TSO not screened each and every time they leave the "sterile area"?
What a sick joke.
So, Bob, will perverts like this guy be running the virtual strip search machines?
How will we know?
You mention that you run strict background checks and perpetual screening on your employees - yet this particular employee's screwed up fetishes were shown for the public on his MySpace page. This is something that is one of the first items to show in a Google search of someone. Can you clarify how you vette the backgrounds of your employees, yet so clearly missed this, one of the easiest examples.
I agree with you 100% on this, Bob: background checks are not a crystal ball and cannot predict what a person will do in the future.
But you use those same background checks to trust that TSA employees will not take anything dangerous into the secure area, instead of screening them as you do passengers.
So what you're saying is: you can't predict which of your employees are sex offenders, thieves, illegal drug users, drug smugglers or racists, but you think you can predict that they won't - knowingly or unknowingly - help terrorists. Sure.
And why didn't your highly trained BDOs suspect that this guy was a criminal?
Bob also said: TSA holds the highest standards for our workforce... You forgot to add "right up until they're convicted of a felony."
I see that TSA can't bother to screen your own employees for actual sexual predators, but your Orlando office has contests to see how many law abiding gay men and women you can detain?
How does this possible make us safer? How can you justify using our tax dollars this way.
Bob actually hasn't told u much.. A resignation is a voluntary separation and not the result of disciplinary action.
Bob cannot state the results of disciplinary action.
"TSA uses background screening and perpetual vetting to keep those with criminal records out of our workforce, but background checks are not a crystal ball and cannot predict what a person will do in the future."
.......................
That perpetual vetting doesn't seem to be working all that well.
Think perhaps it's the people hired by TSA and not the process?
Is Crabtree still on the payroll?
"Our officers are deeply saddened and disgusted that someone who wore the uniform could commit such an unspeakable act."
Bob, I know this is very difficult for TSA to understand but here in the US, someone is innocent until proven guilty. Until then, just an allegation.
Uh, we are still in the US, aren't we? Hello, anyone at TSA listening?
A thought for the TSA:
I agree with Bob that background checks cannot predict what a person will do in the future.
If that is indeed true, then why does TSA rely on the no-fly and selectee screening lists as a "layer" of security"? Such lists are essentially "background checks", after all (albeit a very primitive form).
So, what does the TSA do to prevent these things from ever happening again? What assurance do we have that our children are safe in the daily groping and in the WBI nude-o-scope scanning?
Talking about bad apples is a bad excuse. What do you do to the TSA to ensure that bad apples just DON'T EXIST?
Colyn TSO said...
Bob actually hasn't told u much..
..............
Now that is the overstatement of the decade.
Hundreds if not thousands of questions have been directed to Bob and the TSA via this blog and just a very few have ever been answered.
So are the WBI images posted on this blog the same size and resolution that WBI operators see when screening travelers?
It's a simple yes or no Bob.
Are you up to it?
All TSA News-All the Time
http://rebelmodel.com/news/latest.php
Actually, a resigned employee can say, "I resigned.", when asked about previous employment with TSA. Which is honest and better than, "I was terminated." And, it's soooo much easier on TSA managers than trying to fire someone. Everybody wins.
So look forward to "resigned" TSA people getting jobs driving school busses...
This is disgusting. You want us to be virtually strip searched by these same background checked individuals?
Your entire organization is unconstitutional, unAmerican, and unacceptable.
Shame on the TSA.
Colyn TSO said...
Bob actually hasn't told u much.. A resignation is a voluntary separation and not the result of disciplinary action.
Bob cannot state the results of disciplinary action.
----------------------------------------
While this may be the case, I would argue that he should be able to state the results. If American tax payers are paying all of the TSO's salary's, your disciplinary records should be a matter of public record.
Sadly, that's probably not the case with your gray area fascist operation.
Actually, a resigned employee can say, "I resigned.", when asked about previous employment with TSA. Which is honest and better than, "I was terminated." And, it's soooo much easier on TSA managers than trying to fire someone. Everybody wins.
So look forward to "resigned" TSA people getting jobs driving school busses...
February 3, 2010 10:12 AM
..............
Yeah everybody wins except possibly the next unwitting employer.
For everyone who is so quick to bash TSA for this, please note that this individual is a retired Marine who served 20 years in the United States Military. My point??? This can happen anywhere and you can't predict it.
This will give you chills.
Blogger Bob
TSA Blog Team
RB Said... Yeah everybody wins except possibly the next unwitting employer. February 3, 2010 11:26 AM
-----------------------
How so? This individual now has a record of being arrested and due to his confession, I'm guessing he will be convicted. Is it not the responsibility of other employers to check into his background prior to hiring?
Blogger Bob
TSA Blog Team
He "resigned"?
Not "fired"?
Not "fired and led away in handcuffs"?
What exactly does it take for the TSA to fire someone and charge them with a crime?
"What exactly does it take for the TSA to fire someone and charge them with a crime?"
Ummmmmmmmmmm he was arrested. He is in jail. Did you read anything or did you just decide to take a shot at TSA with a blind uninformed comment?
"For everyone who is so quick to bash TSA for this, please note that this individual is a retired Marine who served 20 years in the United States Military. My point??? This can happen anywhere and you can't predict it.
------------------------
Normally, I would agree. However, you seem to be forgetting something: you employ BDOs, who, after a few days of training, magically become human lie detectors. Why aren't you using them?
And you, Bob, are ignoring that fact that while employing someone like this to be a baggage clerk is bad, hiring them to look at naked pictures of people's children is orders of magnitude worse.
Say, I wonder if people like this are the reason Mikey keeps getting pat-downs.
For everyone who is so quick to bash TSA for this, please note that this individual is a retired Marine who served 20 years in the United States Military. My point??? This can happen anywhere and you can't predict it.
-----------------------------------
Good. Now why are you completely incapable of applying this logic to the risk of terrorist attack? There have been cases of doctors molesting patients since the beginning of medicine, but we don't strip-search physicians or demand that they be subjected to video surveillance. Why not? Why is TSA willing to accept that some of its employees are criminals, but unwilling to accept that air travel can never be 100% secure?
Some folks are acting like TSA is the only organization to employee child molesters in positions of trust. Can you say Catholic Church!!!
Come on people perverts like this are all around you stop blaming TSA.
Bob said...
RB Said... Yeah everybody wins except possibly the next unwitting employer. February 3, 2010 11:26 AM
-----------------------
How so? This individual now has a record of being arrested and due to his confession, I'm guessing he will be convicted. Is it not the responsibility of other employers to check into his background prior to hiring?
Blogger Bob
TSA Blog Team
February 3, 2010 11:45 AM
.............
He may convicted but of what is the real question.
If the person has no priors and pleads down to some low level charge it may not be apparent to another employer what has happened.
And I'm sure you didn't miss that I said "unwitting employer"!
So now that we know your really out there how about these WBI images?
Are the ones posted on this blog ( or linked to) of the same resolution and size that the operator of WBI systems see?
Anonymous said... Why is TSA willing to accept that some of its employees are criminals, but unwilling to accept that air travel can never be 100% secure?
------------------------------
When has any official from TSA ever stated that air travel is 100%safe? Provide the link when you find it, please.
Look up the post on this blog describing our layers of security and you'll get a better understanding of how we approach security.
Blogger Bob
TSA Blog Team
Bob said...
For everyone who is so quick to bash TSA for this, please note that this individual is a retired Marine who served 20 years in the United States Military. My point??? This can happen anywhere and you can't predict it.
This will give you chills.
Blogger Bob
TSA Blog Team
February 3, 2010 11:35 AM
...................
So your saying that TSA BDO's can't identify these types of people?
Bob, I think you have been asked a perfectly valid question.
If background checks cannot predict what a person will do in the future, why are you still not screening TSOs when they arrive to their post or when they enter the sterile area?
X-Ray the shoes, no liquids over 3 oz (they can obtain more inside of the sterile area if needed,) metal detector, WBI.
Look up the post on this blog describing our layers of security and you'll get a better understanding of how we approach security.
Blogger Bob
TSA Blog Team
February 3, 2010 12:37 PM
..............
What layer of security is it that requires some TSA employee to hold some sort of test strip over a beverage already in the secure area that is being consumed by a person already in the secure area?
Fascinating that THIS is the post that makes Bobbo come out swinging at anyone who dares suggest TSA made a mistake or doesn't know what it's doing. Makes me wonder if he'll take a minute and say whether the virtual strip-search images he's posted are at the same size and resolution as those seen by the operator of the machine while he's at it.
Anonymous said... Makes me wonder if he'll take a minute and say whether the virtual strip-search images he's posted are at the same size and resolution as those seen by the operator of the machine while he's at it. February 3, 2010 1:00 PM
-------------------------------
You guys are killing me (and others) with this. These pictures were provided to TSA by the vendor. I have never claimed they are the exact size and resolution that our officers see. I have provided video examples showing what our officers see. I have requested the resolution and size and was told it was proprietary information that I could not release. I'm still looking into being able to get that info for you, but I can't promise anything.
Thanks,
Blogger Bob
TSA Blog Team
Many of you are assuming that our BDO's should have recognized that there was something up with this individual. How so? BDO's are not mind readers. They can't guess your weight or tell you which horse to pick. They're trained to recognize behaviors indicative of somebody who is in fear of being caught. I can anticipate your next question and the answer is that I don't know. You don't either, so please don't assume that he was afraid of being caught for anything at the airport.
Blogger Bob
TSA Blog Team
Look up the post on this blog describing our layers of security and you'll get a better understanding of how we approach security.
Blogger Bob
TSA Blog Team
------------------------
So will the TSA be adding another layer of security to sniff out the rest of the pedophiles and deviants that work for your Administration? How about making children exempt from the WBI screening process, if only to lessen the chances of our children being sexualized by TSA employees. And since you are in the mood to answer questions today:
Are the sample images provided by the TSA taken from the newest generation WBI machines, and of the same resolution and size the image screener sees?
I have requested the resolution and size and was told it was proprietary information that I could not release. I'm still looking into being able to get that info for you, but I can't promise anything.
Thanks,
Blogger Bob
TSA Blog Team
February 3, 2010 1:22 PM
.............
Why did it take a year for you to say just that?
So as it stands now we do not know if the images are safe for children to view claimed by Nico.
We do not know if the images are very detailed or not.
Every thing we've been told is supposed to be taken on faith.
From a previous TSA Blog posting dated 01/27/2010;
"Please take a look at this blog post to see larger versions of the images below and video of what AIT images actually look like."
My idea of what images "actually look like" would be those that show full detail.
It is apparent that TSA has intentionally engage in a campaign misleading the public so they can force through "TSA Porno-Vision Machines"
And TSA claims to have ethics!
Sorry TSA loses again!
Wow, Bob nearly answered a long-ignored question. Maybe he'll give us the name and number of his supervisor next!
Bob said:
You guys are killing me (and others) with this. These pictures were provided to TSA by the vendor. I have never claimed they are the exact size and resolution that our officers see. I have provided video examples showing what our officers see. I have requested the resolution and size and was told it was proprietary information that I could not release. I'm still looking into being able to get that info for you, but I can't promise anything.
Thanks,
Blogger Bob
TSA Blog Team
-------------------
I appreciate you answering what you're allowed to regarding the resolution & size of the images.
With that said Can you send an email to your bosses asking why the high resulution sample images provided by the manufacturer are proprietary when american tax dollars are paying for these machines? Thanks.
Anonymous said... So will the TSA be adding another layer of security to sniff out the rest of the pedophiles and deviants that work for your Administration? How about making children exempt from the WBI screening process, if only to lessen the chances of our children being sexualized by TSA employees. And since you are in the mood to answer questions today:
Are the sample images provided by the TSA taken from the newest generation WBI machines, and of the same resolution and size the image screener sees?
February 3, 2010 1:35 PM
-------------------------------
How are we to sniff out pedophiles and deviants? If they have no record, there is no way to sniff them out unless you catch them.
How are other organizations sniffing out their pedophiles and deviants?
What are your suggestions?
Based on your logic, how about not allowing children to see doctors?
The link I provided earlier points to an article about two pedophile pediatricians. They can see your children naked and touch them too.
I don't subscribe to that logic and there is no way I would judge the entire pediatric community on the actions of two pedophiles.
As far as the image question, scroll up to my comment at 1:22 PM.
Blogger Bob
TSA Blog Team
Bob said...
Many of you are assuming that our BDO's should have recognized that there was something up with this individual. How so? BDO's are not mind readers. They can't guess your weight or tell you which horse to pick. They're trained to recognize behaviors indicative of somebody who is in fear of being caught. I can anticipate your next question and the answer is that I don't know. You don't either, so please don't assume that he was afraid of being caught for anything at the airport.
Blogger Bob
TSA Blog Team
February 3, 2010 1:32 PM
...................
So how many terrorist (convicted) have these BDO's identified or caught?
When has any official from TSA ever stated that air travel is 100%safe? Provide the link when you find it, please.
Look up the post on this blog describing our layers of security and you'll get a better understanding of how we approach security.
Blogger Bob
TSA Blog Team
----------------------
Your entire approach suggests that you are chasing after the specter of 100% security. Look at it this way-- you take an activity that is 99.9% safe (hypothetically speaking of course-- in reality air travel is even safer than that.) Apparently 99.9% isn't enough, so you introduce technology that is extremely expensive and poses a real and immediate threat to our privacy. And for what? To make it 99.99% safe? It is painfully evident that you have no understanding of the notions of risk management or diminishing returns. All of your rhetoric essentially comes down to the same tired response: "If it can keep one plane from going down, it's worth it, regardless of the expense or inconvenience." So, Mr. Burns, it is clear to me that your entire paradigm is aimed at 100% security.
(By the way-- I haven't gone back and read your posts about "layers" again. I read them the first time. That was enough to convince me that your approach is absolute nonsense.)
Anon - does that mean that you couldn't find the link? :) hahahahaha
How are we to sniff out pedophiles and deviants? If they have no record, there is no way to sniff them out unless you catch them.
How are other organizations sniffing out their pedophiles and deviants?
What are your suggestions?
Based on your logic, how about not allowing children to see doctors?
The link I provided earlier points to an article about two pedophile pediatricians. They can see your children naked and touch them too.
I don't subscribe to that logic and there is no way I would judge the entire pediatric community on the actions of two pedophiles.
--------------------------------
Bob,
There is a reason that we take the calculated risk in allowing our children to disrobe in front of a doctor -- the very small risk that the doctor is a pedophile is far outweighed by the benefits of medical care. The problem (or rather, one of the many, many problems) with the strip-search machine is that the increase in security that is provided is so miniscule as to be completely statistically insignificant. Look at it this way: there is such a small chance of a brick falling off of a building and killing us that it would be absurd to wear a hard-hat every time we walk out the door. On a construction site, on the other hand, the risk is great enough that wearing protection is a reasonable measure.
BDO's are not mind readers. They can't guess your weight or tell you which horse to pick. They're trained to recognize behaviors indicative of somebody who is in fear of being caught.
---------------------
So what was the BDO in the youtube clip doing harassing a passenger who was openly filming TSA staff?
How are we to sniff out pedophiles and deviants? If they have no record, there is no way to sniff them out unless you catch them.
How are other organizations sniffing out their pedophiles and deviants?
What are your suggestions?
Based on your logic, how about not allowing children to see doctors?
The link I provided earlier points to an article about two pedophile pediatricians. They can see your children naked and touch them too.
I don't subscribe to that logic and there is no way I would judge the entire pediatric community on the actions of two pedophiles.
As far as the image question, scroll up to my comment at 1:22 PM.
Blogger Bob
TSA Blog Team
February 3, 2010 1:49 PM
..........
First off no parent should ever allow another person to be alone with their children.
It's called layers of security!
That is exactly what TSA wants with the WBI Strip Search Machines.
You are asking us to trust everyone in TSA with these images and the machine operator. Those harmless machines that have no network or storage capabilities yet have USB and Network support along with the ability to save images all mandated into the design specs.
Put the operator in view of the person being imaged. Use one way glass or whatever is needed to make it happen. Exempt minors unless additional screening is required.
Heck, with the billions of dollars TSA is using to buy this ineffective screening device why not give a little comfort to the public?
You guys are killing me (and others) with this. These pictures were provided to TSA by the vendor. I have never claimed they are the exact size and resolution that our officers see. I have provided video examples showing what our officers see. I have requested the resolution and size and was told it was proprietary information that I could not release. I'm still looking into being able to get that info for you, but I can't promise anything.
Thanks,
Blogger Bob
TSA Blog Team
---------------------------
By "killing me," I assume you are referring to the repeated requests to clarify this issue. Why would it have been so difficult to answer the question the first (or the tenth, or the fiftieth) time that it was asked? Given that there is a roughly year-long turnaround time between a question and a response, I will assume that we should be getting the name and contact information for your supervisor sometime around New Year's 2011.
How are we to sniff out pedophiles and deviants? If they have no record, there is no way to sniff them out unless you catch them.
How are other organizations sniffing out their pedophiles and deviants?
What are your suggestions?
------------------------
Here's my suggestion, Bob: just use LAYERS. It's that simple!
"They can see your children naked and touch them too."
Thank you for admitting that your strip-search machines create nude images of children. Now, why does TSA want to create nude images of children, Bob?
Bob has answered this question many times over. Why is it so hard to look at the videos?
>>>Bob has answered this question many times over. Why is it so hard to look at the videos?
Because, respectfully, the videos do not show us what the maximum resolution is, it only shows us what is on the screen.
To put this in computer vernacular, for all we know, they have the screens set at 800x600 when they are capable of 1280x1084 or greater.
As the great Ronald Reagan said: "Trust but Verify"
Anonymous said...
Bob has answered this question many times over. Why is it so hard to look at the videos?
February 3, 2010 2:07 PM
.........
No he has not!
I can't say that I blame Bob for not poking his head out more often.
Anon: Asks Bob to answer question
Bob: Answers question
Anon: Calls Bob a liar and twists words
Bob: No response
Anon: Asks Bob to answer question
Bob: No response
Anon: Asks why Bob won't answer questions?
SCREEN THE TSO'S!!!
Bob, another person brought up a very valid question.
If TSA background checks, continous vetting and the inability of BDO's to identify certain behaviors are so lacking then why are TSA employees exempted from routine screening as they enter or leave the secure area?
Don't they present a degree of risk to the sterile area?
You know as TSA likes to trumpet, with an abundance of caution.....
I can't say that I blame Bob for not poking his head out more often.
Anon: Asks Bob to answer question
Bob: Answers question
Anon: Calls Bob a liar and twists words
Bob: No response
Anon: Asks Bob to answer question
Bob: No response
Anon: Asks why Bob won't answer questions?
------------------------------
Bob's responsibilities include communicating with passengers. If Bob cannot respond to even a fraction of the inane, repetitive, and/or unanswerable questions that every single customer service representative has to deal with on a daily basis, he should look for a new line of work.
This case is an excellent example of why TSA must screen EVERY SINGLE ONE OF ITS EMPLOYEES, EACH AND EVERY TIME they enter the sterile area of an airport.
Bob's responsibilities include communicating with passengers. If Bob cannot respond to even a fraction of the inane, repetitive, and/or unanswerable questions that every single customer service representative has to deal with on a daily basis, he should look for a new line of work.
___________________________________
Bob does respond to questions. And I am suprised this blog is still active! The questions and comments on this page are so asinine and repetative that I don't feel that Bob should have to bother with a lot that comes through this blog! I am sure that he has another job besides this blog. And I couldn't imagine that half this crap is as important as other things that he does. And once he answers a question there is no reason for him to keep repeating and repeating the answers.
Bob does respond to questions. And I am suprised this blog is still active! The questions and comments on this page are so asinine and repetative that I don't feel that Bob should have to bother with a lot that comes through this blog! I am sure that he has another job besides this blog. And I couldn't imagine that half this crap is as important as other things that he does. And once he answers a question there is no reason for him to keep repeating and repeating the answers.
=========================
I see. Please refer me to the post where Bob provided the name and contact information for his supervisor. This is about the most basic responsibility of anyone who works in customer relations. I have had some galling experiences with customer relations types, but I have never had anyone refuse to give me contact information for their supervisor.
RB said...
Bob, another person brought up a very valid question.
If TSA background checks, continous vetting and the inability of BDO's to identify certain behaviors are so lacking then why are TSA employees exempted from routine screening as they enter or leave the secure area?
Don't they present a degree of risk to the sterile area?
You know as TSA likes to trumpet, with an abundance of caution.....
---------------
Interesting point I would like to make here. We practice pat downs all the time, to keep us sharp and good at what we do. I pat down 1-2 co-workers a day and so do the other tsa officers I work with. We get screened very well even though we don't realize it.
RB said...
Anonymous said...
Bob has answered this question many times over. Why is it so hard to look at the videos?
February 3, 2010 2:07 PM
.........
No he has not!
February 3, 2010 2:14 PM
-------------
He has answered to the best of his ability, which is all we can ask of him.
TSOWilliamReed said...
RB said...
Anonymous said...
Bob has answered this question many times over. Why is it so hard to look at the videos?
February 3, 2010 2:07 PM
.........
No he has not!
February 3, 2010 2:14 PM
-------------
He has answered to the best of his ability, which is all we can ask of him.
February 3, 2010 3:15 PM
.........
Reed, being silent on a subject is not answering.
Saying I tried to get the information and I cannot get it or my superiors will not release that information is an answer.
Bob never did either.
He did say the images posted were images that actually looked like the images of WBI output.
And again, to my way of thinking that was an attempt to mislead the public into believing those images were exactly what the WBI operator was seeing even while it was pretty clear that they could not be the same size or resolution in use.
If this WBI is suppose to not show bodily detail then just post the images. It's not that hard.
The only reason it hasn't happened already is because TSA knows the outrage that would ensue when the real deal was known.
A Congressman has seen the real images and flatly stated he would not allow his family to be screened in that manner.
TSA can easily prove that he misspoke!
"He has answered to the best of his ability, which is all we can ask of him."
No, we can also ask him to answer legitimate and reasonable questions in a timely and professional fashion, instead of ignoring them for, what, a year? More?
Bob said...
I have requested the resolution and size and was told it was proprietary information that I could not release. I'm still looking into being able to get that info for you, but I can't promise anything.
If you had told us that little detail months ago we would have stopped asking months ago.
This guy was a former Marine NCO, and had letters of recommendation for his TSA job (which I didn't even know were required). On paper he was probably a model citizen and zero security risk.
The CIA has had employees selling secrets to our enemies, the FBI had Hansen, I would suspect every major federal agency has at least one employee committing some type of crime. That's why agencies have Inspectors General.
I can't blame this one on TSA or DHS.
Why are TSA employees exempt from WBI screening before starting their shift? Is the TSA worried about long term health concerns from repeated exposure to the radiation emitted by these machines? Also is the TSA currently doing any studies regarding long term repeated Backscatter or MMW radiation exposure to humans? Or are you guys just waiting for passengers to start dropping dead so you can say "OSHA said it was harmless".
I should pay through the nose to fly my family somewhere in the US when I am yelled at by uniformed people, run the risk of having contraband stuffed in my baggage, threatened with arrest if I carry cash, have the family photo'd naked or groped, just to travel by air?
Not me. My heart goes out to those that have to fly.
I see. Please refer me to the post where Bob provided the name and contact information for his supervisor. This is about the most basic responsibility of anyone who works in customer relations. I have had some galling experiences with customer relations types, but I have never had anyone refuse to give me contact information for their supervisor.
I had that happen once with an EDS employee. Contacted EDS and that employee eventually quit under pressure.
"Also is the TSA currently doing any studies regarding long term repeated Backscatter or MMW radiation exposure to humans?"
Well, the only way to test that would be to take a bunch of humans, and expose them, for long terms, to the radiation. I am assuming you will be the first to volunteer?
Of course, we don't actually have to do that. We can determine the external dose of radiation a person receives from one of these machines, then, using established radio-epidemiology tables and formulas, establish the health risks to humans from these doses.
From what I have read, you are talking about doses that are equivilent to what one receives in a few minutes while in the air in a plane. In other words, if you are that concerned about radiation exposure, you can stop worrying about the x-ray machine, and simply not get on the plane!
RB said...
TSOWilliamReed said...
RB said...
Anonymous said...
Bob has answered this question many times over. Why is it so hard to look at the videos?
February 3, 2010 2:07 PM
.........
No he has not!
February 3, 2010 2:14 PM
-------------
He has answered to the best of his ability, which is all we can ask of him.
February 3, 2010 3:15 PM
.........
Reed, being silent on a subject is not answering.
Saying I tried to get the information and I cannot get it or my superiors will not release that information is an answer.
Bob never did either.
He did say the images posted were images that actually looked like the images of WBI output.
And again, to my way of thinking that was an attempt to mislead the public into believing those images were exactly what the WBI operator was seeing even while it was pretty clear that they could not be the same size or resolution in use.
If this WBI is suppose to not show bodily detail then just post the images. It's not that hard.
The only reason it hasn't happened already is because TSA knows the outrage that would ensue when the real deal was known.
A Congressman has seen the real images and flatly stated he would not allow his family to be screened in that manner.
TSA can easily prove that he misspoke!
February 3, 2010 3:30 PM
--------------------
Any congressman would say anything to help his political career no matter what he saw. Bob never lied to anyone, he retrieved the only information he could and put it out there for everyone to view but just happened to not mention that was all he could get. And on one note who ever said the images that were origionally posted could not be the actual images? We don't need to see the details of your body just things strapped to your body. Even if the images were as large as a 5x7 it would not matter because you can zoom in. If TSA made the detail higher it would serve no purpose because a gun is still gonna be a huge gun shaped thing strapped to your waist and a chunk of explosive is going to look like a tumor sticking out of wherever it is under your clothes. I work for TSA and I have never seen a WBI. However I believe 100% that the image of the WBI viewing station in the news reports is the actual viewing station because I know how TSA operates and that is as legitimate as you can get. But your not going to take my word for it because I work for TSA right? I could just be some TSA sicko that will tell you whatever I can to see you naked right? That is not how it is, TSA is not some giant sick conspiracy bent on seeing the US populace naked we are trying to make air travel safer with as little inconvenience as possible.
Bob, how long does the redress program take to work if for example a child has their name on the no fly list?
Good job putting the "former" in the first sentance. Did he resign before he was caught? Or was he, as your headline implies, still an officer and not yet a 'former' staffer when he was arrested,
Ayn R. Key said...
If you had told us that little detail months ago we would have stopped asking months ago.
--------------------
No Ayn, you would not have, RB is the perfect example of that. He has been give the answers to many of his questions, yet he still asks them, over and over and over again.
I'm glad Bob has jumped in here to answer a few questions, needed to be done some time ago. Some things he just will not be allowed to give you, so accept those he can with grace and appreciation instead of scorn and accusations.
Quote from Anonymous: "This guy was a former Marine NCO, and had letters of recommendation for his TSA job (which I didn't even know were required). On paper he was probably a model citizen and zero security risk.
The CIA has had employees selling secrets to our enemies, the FBI had Hansen, I would suspect every major federal agency has at least one employee committing some type of crime. That's why agencies have Inspectors General.
I can't blame this one on TSA or DHS."
The FBI, DoD, CIA, etc also have much more invasive background checks that go much deeper and provide a much stronger foundation for that trust. They're also selective about who will work for them to begin with. Considering how much they spend on background checks (average is about 20k per person last I heard for a TS), they are VERY good at identifying risks and picking things out. It's not foolproof, but it's a much more stringent process. Furthermore, there are much more severe penalties for violating that trust - ones that only the boldest and perhaps stupidest would push.
On top of that, there are periodic reinvestigations and other reviews (my agency requires financial disclosures of a certain amount of employees and contractors each year) to identify these things. As far as we can tell, TSA isn't doing things like this to catch things that may have evolved over time or were missed the first time.
TSA has a very low bar for hiring, has a very high turn over, and only does a cursory background check. The individuals in question have done nothing to show that they're that trustworthy to be trusted to the same degree. That should be abundantly clear with how many times TSA employees are in the news for bad things compared to other agencies.
It's pretty simple really. Screen TSA employees and keep an eye on them - if SPOT's good enough to be used to find drug runners and other criminals in the public (not arguing whether they should or not, and Lord knows they haven't found a terrorist with it), surely it can find a pedophile who's hoping not to get caught. Or is it just a case of being comfortable around those one works with and not paying attention?
The greatest threats come from insiders. Turning a blind eye to that fact and focusing everything on the passengers is just an accident waiting to happen.
Robert
Anonymous said...
I can't say that I blame Bob for not poking his head out more often.
Anon: Asks Bob to answer question
Bob: Answers question
Anon: Calls Bob a liar and twists words
Bob: No response
Anon: Asks Bob to answer question
Bob: No response
Anon: Asks why Bob won't answer questions?
It goes more like this;
Anon: Asks Bob to answer question
Bob: Sends question up the chain for permission and guidelines to answer question
Anon: Asks Bob to answer question
Bob: Still waiting on permission and guidelines
Anon: Asks Bob to answer question
Bob: Still waiting on permission and guidelines
Anon: Asks Bob to answer question
Bob: Still waiting on permission and guidelines
A bunch of Anons: Asks Bob to answer question
Bob: Gets orders to greatly side step question by giving a non-answer answer
A bunch of Anons: Asks Bob to answer question
Bob: Sends question up the chain for permission and guidelines to answer question
A bunch of Anons: Demands of Bob to answer question
Bob: Still waiting on permission and guidelines
Meanwhile Gale sends a letter to TSA employees telling them
"to feel pride in yourselves, in your teammates and managers, and in your homeland security colleagues. The vast majority of the traveling public respects the work you do. The families of 9/11 are your greatest supporters. By your performance, you make my job of championing TSA an honor, and I am humbled and proud to serve with you."
Bob: Still waiting on permission and guidelines
Finally when the noise level is way beyond reasonable discussion due to the frustration of waiting for an answer, the higher ups decide this won't go away and give a permission for an answer.
The best thing to do is to really apply a strict rule to the workforce for them to comply and avoid doing stupid things that could affect the companies reputation.
TSOWilliamReed said...
Any congressman would say anything to help his political career no matter what he saw. Bob never lied to anyone, he retrieved the only information he could and put it out there for everyone to view but just happened to not mention that was all he could get. And on one note who ever said the images that were originally posted could not be the actual images? We don't need to see the details of your body just things strapped to your body. Even if the images were as large as a 5x7 it would not matter because you can zoom in. If TSA made the detail higher it would serve no purpose because a gun is still gonna be a huge gun shaped thing strapped to your waist and a chunk of explosive is going to look like a tumor sticking out of wherever it is under your clothes. I work for TSA and I have never seen a WBI. However I believe 100% that the image of the WBI viewing station in the news reports is the actual viewing station because I know how TSA operates and that is as legitimate as you can get. But your not going to take my word for it because I work for TSA right? I could just be some TSA sicko that will tell you whatever I can to see you naked right? That is not how it is, TSA is not some giant sick conspiracy bent on seeing the US populace naked we are trying to make air travel safer with as little inconvenience as possible.
February 3, 2010 6:41 PM
..................
OK, you seem to believe that what the Congressman reported in not factual. I believe he told it like it is, that TSA Porno-Vision Machine images show detailed body images.
TSA has engaged from the beginning in a campaign to mislead the public.
That is what is so important about the statements Nico made so many months ago. If these images are safe enough for a young child to view then the public probably doesn't have many concerns.
Yet TSA has trotted out any number of images trying to prove a point of view that is apparently not supportable by the real TSA Porno-Vision Machine images.
That is why the call for real images has been going on and I think will continue.
If you want to scan me or my family then I have an absolute right to fully understand what I giving TSA permission to do. No real images, no scan! Period.
Now you say you have never seen the TSA Porno-Viewer. So you really do not know what the images actually look like either. So what value does your description of what the images provide?
As far as not trusting you that is not the case at all. The problem is who within TSA to trust.
You tell me how I can identify the thieves, drug dealers, perverts and other bad actors?
TSA background checks don't do it.
TSA continuous vetting doesn't do it.
TSA BDO's can't do it.
Apparently TSA Management can't do it.
So either post the images and prove they are safe for school children or admit the images are very detailed revealing detail that many would find troubling.
For me it is a line in the sand!
Interesting. When it comes to hiring clunkers like this guy, the TSA essentially throws up their hands and says, "Well, no background check is perfect, you're going to get that occasionally. Oh well."
But that c'est la vie philosophy goes out the window when it comes to their primary mission. "Someone might possibly use four ounces of liquid explosive to bring down a plane, so we have to treat every single toiletry as potentially hazardous!!!! Gotta stop every single threat every single time!!!!"
Bob sez:
"TSA uses background screening and perpetual vetting to keep those with criminal records out of our workforce"
Uh huh.
http://www2.wsls.com/sls/news/state_regional/article/tsa_orders_richmond_airport_to_give_security_clearance_to_felon/79015/
Oh, look. A news item that alludes to poorly run background checks being done on prospective TSA employees. Now ask me why I am not surprised.
So, Bob. In the middle of this issue, the Richmond International Airport has been “threatened by the TSA” for refusing to give a security clearance to a known convicted felon, violating RIC's own TSA approved security policy.
RIC’s CEO has some very harsh words for the TSA after this episode.
If the TSA can’t police its own, but refuses to allow others to do so, who’s watching the hen-house?
http://www2.wsls.com/sls/news/state_regional/article/tsa_orders_richmond_airport_to_give_security_clearance_to_felon/79015/
The U.S. Transportation Security Administration insisted that Richmond International Airport issue its highest-level security clearance to a TSA security officer with a felony conviction for robbery.
The current employee was 17 years old when he committed the crime and 18 when convicted.
The TSA said such juvenile adjudications do not bar people from employment.
The airport would not identify the TSA employee nor reveal his age. The employee did not divulge on his application—though a records check last fall did—that he had been found guilty of robbery within the past 10 years.
The federal agency’s demand that RIC issue the “security identification display area” badge came despite the fact that Richmond International’s TSA-approved security program prohibits issuing security badges to people convicted of any disqualifying crimes.
“It is unconscionable . . . that a 17year-old person, who committed and was found guilty of a terrible crime, would be hired and works the front line of airport security,“ said Jon Mathiasen, RIC’s president and CEO, in a letter to the TSA on Jan. 18.
… The Transportation Security Administration threatened the airport with unspecified consequences, Mathiasen said, unless RIC agreed to issue the badge to the employee.
Faced with the TSA’s demands “and against its own prudent judgment,“ the Capital Region Airport Commission, which owns and operates RIC, issued the access credentials to the federal employee late last year.
… The Transportation Security Administration threatened the airport with unspecified consequences, Mathiasen said, unless RIC agreed to issue the badge to the employee.
Faced with the TSA’s demands “and against its own prudent judgment,“ the Capital Region Airport Commission, which owns and operates RIC, issued the access credentials to the federal employee late last year.
February 4, 2010 12:03 PM
...............
What can you say?
Even though this guy committed a crime at a young age he did not disclose that on his employment application with TSA.
He is a felon according to the story.
TSA accepts felons and gives a pass on background checks to same.
Who wants to bet that this guy has a family connection directly to some TSA honcho?
And we should trust TSA for what reason Bob?
Yeah, Bob, I don't want that fella in Richmond taking naked pictures of children, either. Why does TSA want a criminal taking naked pictures of children so badly, Bob?
Maybe you should rethink the whole "taking naked pictures of children" thing.
Bob, how many felons are on the TSA payroll?
Bob,
You just led off this blog entry with "TSA uses background screening and perpetual vetting to keep those with criminal records out of our workforce."
Will you please explain how the TSA can reconcile this quote with the Richmond convicted felon news story?
You allow spammers to post comments.
Now you allow spammers to post copy and paste comments that are not even relevant.
"The best thing to do is to really apply a strict rule to the workforce for them to comply and avoid doing stupid things that could affect the companies reputation"
Company? TSA is unfortunately a government agency.
RB said...
… The Transportation Security Administration threatened the airport with unspecified consequences, Mathiasen said, unless RIC agreed to issue the badge to the employee.
Faced with the TSA’s demands “and against its own prudent judgment,“ the Capital Region Airport Commission, which owns and operates RIC, issued the access credentials to the federal employee late last year.
February 4, 2010 12:03 PM
...............
What can you say?
Even though this guy committed a crime at a young age he did not disclose that on his employment application with TSA.
He is a felon according to the story.
TSA accepts felons and gives a pass on background checks to same.
Who wants to bet that this guy has a family connection directly to some TSA honcho?
And we should trust TSA for what reason Bob?
February 4, 2010 12:51 PM
-------------------
I can say a lot about this. For one I don't believe felons should work for TSA. Two, I know many people that were not hired by TSA in our little town for reasons as small as DWI's or bad credit histories and people with felonies generally don't have a chance. This is why I believe there may be more to this story. Now, it says the act was committed at the age of 17 and the employee was convicted at the age of 18. If the employee is 38 years old then he has had a lot of time to make up for it and become a better person. This employee may have done something stupid in his youth but for the past 20 years of his life, hypothetically, he has lived a good clean life with no convictions or problems that would prevent him from gaining employment from TSA. Now each airport is different. I can tell you my airport does not take my finger prints for a SIDA badge. All TSA employees are hired the same way yet they work in airports that each have their own different specific rules and managment. This employee could probably have recieved a SIDA badge in many other different airports without a problem. I believe the managers could have handled this a lot better but a lot of the story could be steam and smoke from both parties. Our managers here, tsa and airport, butt heads all the time. It took about 4 years for us to get a new baggage x-ray because the airport wouldn't allow us to have one unless TSA purchased them a new conveyor belt. What I am trying to get at here is TSA and the Airports do not mesh well with each other all the time even though they should and it causes a lot of unnecessary problems and I believe that is what this story is truly about.
"What I am trying to get at here is TSA and the Airports do not mesh well with each other all the time even though they should and it causes a lot of unnecessary problems and I believe that is what this story is truly about."
What the story is "truly about" is TSA demanding that it be allowed to put a convicted felon in a position of public trust.
Mr. Reed, why do you think TSA would want a convicted felon to take naked pictures of children?
What I am trying to get at here is TSA and the Airports do not mesh well with each other all the time even though they should and it causes a lot of unnecessary problems and I believe that is what this story is truly about.
February 4, 2010 2:46 PM
.....................
What does all of that have to do with TSA hiring a felon?
RB said...
OK, you seem to believe that what the Congressman reported in not factual. I believe he told it like it is, that TSA Porno-Vision Machine images show detailed body images.
TSA has engaged from the beginning in a campaign to mislead the public.
That is what is so important about the statements Nico made so many months ago. If these images are safe enough for a young child to view then the public probably doesn't have many concerns.
Yet TSA has trotted out any number of images trying to prove a point of view that is apparently not supportable by the real TSA Porno-Vision Machine images.
That is why the call for real images has been going on and I think will continue.
If you want to scan me or my family then I have an absolute right to fully understand what I giving TSA permission to do. No real images, no scan! Period.
Now you say you have never seen the TSA Porno-Viewer. So you really do not know what the images actually look like either. So what value does your description of what the images provide?
As far as not trusting you that is not the case at all. The problem is who within TSA to trust.
You tell me how I can identify the thieves, drug dealers, perverts and other bad actors?
TSA background checks don't do it.
TSA continuous vetting doesn't do it.
TSA BDO's can't do it.
Apparently TSA Management can't do it.
So either post the images and prove they are safe for school children or admit the images are very detailed revealing detail that many would find troubling.
For me it is a line in the sand!
February 4, 2010 7:31 AM
-------------------------
What I believe is that congressmen will say anything to gain an edge on their political career. I also believe one persons definition of graphic and anothers are completely different.
I believe the images that the congressman saw were the same ones in the booth that was shown in the news video.
I also believe that there is no reason for the images to be more graphic then they already are.
I also believe that it doesn't matter how large of a screen or image you have because we have advanced zoom tools for every kind of x-ray technology on the market.
The value of my beliefs are backed by the fact that I know TSA better than you since I actually work for TSA and those images are very accurate.
I have only ever seen one type of image posted that was the WBI scanner image and they have all been the same just some larger than others.
I can't tell you how to identify the thieves, drug dealers, and perverts that are working in the workforce of america. The reason I can't is because no one has found a way to do so that is legal and effective. A person can be the golden employee of the ages and still become addicted to drugs 2 years later, you can't predict it.
The images are posted here on this blog with no age warning or censorship which means children are allowed to view them. The WBI scanner computer has been shown on public television news casts without censorship therefore children can view them.
You still feel uncomfortable with it then that is ok because you can still submit yourself and your family for alternative screening procedures that may involve pat downs and bag checks.
Will TSA make it mandatory for only WBI screening to take place? NO because we have the same procedures in place already without the WBI for people that feel uncomfortable with our technology.
Bob said...
Anonymous said... Makes me wonder if he'll take a minute and say whether the virtual strip-search images he's posted are at the same size and resolution as those seen by the operator of the machine while he's at it. February 3, 2010 1:00 PM
-------------------------------
You guys are killing me (and others) with this. These pictures were provided to TSA by the vendor. I have never claimed they are the exact size and resolution that our officers see. I have provided video examples showing what our officers see. I have requested the resolution and size and was told it was proprietary information that I could not release. I'm still looking into being able to get that info for you, but I can't promise anything.
Thanks,
Blogger Bob
TSA Blog Team
February 3, 2010 1:22 PM
--------------
I would like to point something out to everyone here please. Please read the above post from Bob very carefully. He says that the IMAGES he has posted are not the exact resolution and size that the officer sees. Why would that be, probably because in order to get said images they had to print screen + copy/paste the image of the consol then photo shop all the tool bars out of the image. and changed the size to a better format for posting.
HOWEVER
Bob states that the VIDEOS he has posted ARE THE IMAGES THE OFFICERS SEE WHILE SCANNING. If you wan't to see the screen watch the videos and there it is in full resolution and size like we have been saying for a very long time.
TSOWilliamReed said...
I can say a lot about this. For one I don't believe felons should work for TSA. Two, I know many people that were not hired by TSA in our little town for reasons as small as DWI's or bad credit histories and people with felonies generally don't have a chance. This is why I believe there may be more to this story. Now, it says the act was committed at the age of 17 and the employee was convicted at the age of 18. If the employee is 38 years old then he has had a lot of time to make up for it and become a better person.
*****************
Article said... The current employee was 17 years old when he committed the crime and 18 when convicted. … The employee did not divulge on his application—though a records check last fall did—that he had been found guilty of robbery within the past 10 years
*****************
Blogger Bob said… TSA uses background screening and perpetual vetting to keep those with criminal records out of our workforce
*****************
Something is not adding up here.
Article says he was convicted at 18 and did not disclose conviction (within 10 years) on his application
Airport says the “security identification display area” badge came despite the fact that Richmond International’s TSA-approved security program prohibits issuing security badges to people convicted of any disqualifying crimes“security identification display area” badge came despite the fact that Richmond International’s TSA-approved security program prohibits issuing security badges to people convicted of any disqualifying crimes”
I understand your sympathy about a past criminal history affecting someone for the rest of their lives.
However, the airport voiced a strong argument that this was a disqualifying crime that violates their own security program.
There are many jobs that do not require a security clearance; unsupervised access to travelers’ bags; viewing of travelers’ identification, passports, credit cards, and other personal information; searching and patting down adult and child passengers, and potentially utilizing WBI scanners to view passengers in the nude.
The TSA already has an theft and image problem with some of its employees. The airport had clear badge issuance rules. TSA trumped them.
Why would they choose this hill to defend?
On February 4, 2010, at 2:46 PM, William Reed posted a diatribe to which I am obligated to respond. Someone on Flyertalk.com posted the text from the form government employees fill out in order to start a background investigation before being hired into critical sensitive positions. I assume the position of a screener with unescorted access into a secure area of an airport qualifies as one of these positions.
If this is the case, the Richmond screener falsified his investigation form, which clearly requires listing all of one's felony arrest -- not arrests leading to conviction -- any arrests, even if the charges were dropped. There is also no age limit or period of time limit.
It's all there. it doesn't matter if the guy was 17 or 97 when he was arrested on a felony charge. According to the instructions on the form, he must report it.
Let's hear your explanation, Bob. Francine's deputy tried and failed miserably.
TSOWilliamReed said...
"I know many people that were not hired by TSA in our little town for reasons as small as DWI's"
TSOWilliamReed what other ignorant, reckless, unlawful acts that endanger innocent people do you consider "small"?
Why does the TSA allow people to perform training and screening functions before their background check comes back clear?
TSOWilliamReed said...
"I can say a lot about this..."
You say a lot about a lot of things.
"I know many people that were not hired by TSA in our little town for reasons (like)..."
How do you know why they were not hired?
The TSA told you?
You only know what you heard from them.
And you tell us these people are irresponsible drunks and people with money problems.
I would like to say that the charging and subsequent prosecution of this guy is a blessing. It removes someone from the TSO ranks that should be gone. I hate that the person(s?) he molested had to go through what they have, and I wish them best paths in the rest of their lives. I wish this guy would get a corner cell with no windows and limited time outside. It is disgusting that people molest others in this way, it is worse for me personally when it is one of the people that worked for my agency. I hope he is prosecuted, and if found guilty sentenced to the maximum limit.
West
TSA Blog Team
TSOWilliamReed said...
"For one I don't believe felons should work for TSA."
I agree. I have zero tolerance for felons. I don't want any felons at any level of TSA. Government positions, public trust, and felons do not mix. I would never trust a felon to screen my family, me, or any member of the good traveling public.
Tim
TSA Blog Team
90 comments bashing the TSA because they unwittingly hired a scumbag who worked there for a few months.
Why is nobody bashing the Marines? He worked there for 20 years. Oh, I know why, because all you have is red herrings.
GET A LIFE!
regarding the convicted felon being hired by the TSA,
TSOWilliamReed said...
" This employee may have done something stupid in his youth but for the past 20 years of his life, hypothetically, he has lived a good clean life "
You say IF this happened 20 yrs ago... please read the article, which states
"he had been found guilty of robbery within the past 10 years."
For all you know he could have been found quilty last year. Don't try to spin the story by saying he had potentially 20 years to lead a good life.
Screener At LAX Accused Of Possessing Child Porn
Yep, these are the kind of people I want locked alone in the peepshow room looking at images from the Nude-O-Scope.
The TSA seems to drawn a disproportionate number of criminals. Why hasn't the TSA done a study to figure out why this is and how to eliminate the threat?
TSA claimed it could no disclose termination vs. resignation, only that employment had ended. But in this case, you announce that the officer was not fired and did resign. What's the difference between situations as to why you can elaborate on this and not on that one?
I want to throw something out there. As a government employee I can tell you that I had to go through a rigorous background check that includes a 10 year history and an annual requirement to give a financial disclosure report, and an in person interview with an investigative team on an annual basis. Now, that being said, I am not a TSA Officer and I have a Security Clearance and TSA officers only have a background check and no clearance. Maybe with a more stringent requirement, to include a clearance level, we could weed out some of these Officers that have issues in their background that are not caught by the SSBI that TSA Officers receive now.
Maybe if we took the time to scrutinize each applicant prior to employment as happens in some offices of TSA/DHS, we could get a more thorough understanding of who is being hired. I don't think that the American Taxpayer would be too upset to know that TSA/DHS was spending the time and money to scrutinize all employees at a higher level in order to ensure that the workforce as a whole was as thoroughly checked as possible.
How about the new pervert at LAX? How many are there in the TSA? How are we supposed to feel comfortable letting ourselves be seen naked when there seem to be so many of them in your organization?
Want to talk about your California TSA pervet today?
HappyToHelp said...
TSOWilliamReed said...
"For one I don't believe felons should work for TSA."
I agree. I have zero tolerance for felons. I don't want any felons at any level of TSA. Government positions, public trust, and felons do not mix. I would never trust a felon to screen my family, me, or any member of the good traveling public.
Tim
TSA Blog Team
February 4, 2010 7:19 PM
............
I agree with you Tim. But that does give everyone a major quandry.
We now know that TSA hires felons.
Travelers cannot trust any TSA employee since we don't know which ones are the felons.
Goes double for using the TSA PRONO-VIEWER anyone, in particular children.
TSOWilliamReed said...
"I can't tell you how to identify the thieves, drug dealers, and perverts that are working in the workforce of america. The reason I can't is because no one has found a way to do so that is legal and effective. A person can be the golden employee of the ages and still become addicted to drugs 2 years later, you can't predict it."
------------------------------
Gee, Will, maybe you could start by following Federal law and TSA policy by not hiring FELONS!
What does this guy's arrest have to do with the fact that he was employed by TSA? Unless he did this while in uniform and on the job, then it shouldn't matter who his employer is/was. Also, how is a BACKground check supposed to predict the future? Can we use some common sense? This is just another overblown story for people to use to attack TSA, probably because they're mad they had to surrender their 6 oz lotion or bottle of water because they were too ignorant to know the rules in the first place.
Also-all the comments calling this guy a "pervert" and "criminal", but he hasn't been tried and convicted yet. All of you purporting Constitutional rights should know this.
BLOGGER BOB wrote:
"background checks are not a crystal ball and cannot predict what a person will do in the future."
A-HA-HA-HA
HEE-HEE-HEE
Oh Bob, please stop!
My sides are hurting from laughing so much!
The irony is too delicious...
.
Wouldn't you figure with over 50,000 employees there would be a few bad apples? 50,000 is larger than the population of many towns in America! Besides, was he conducting his illegal behavior on the job or on his own time?
There is some type of corruption in every agency or company.There are even police that get into trouble.Things like this happens all the time because no one is perfect.were only human and everybody has some issues, so take a look at your own lives before you bash some one else.Do not let all of those skeletons pop out of the closet all at once.
I have heard of some members of the United States Marine Corp who raped some teenage girl at a party and some others who got busted for sexual assault in Japan. With all these perverts running around should we disband the Marine Corp? No, nor should we drive ourselves to madness when law enforcement spots a few bad apples in TSA.
I would strongly suggest that TSA do extensive, security level, background checks on its employees. This would alleviate some, not all, of TSA’s bad apple problems.
ANON SAID
Some folks are acting like TSA is the only organization to employee child molesters in positions of trust. Can you say Catholic Church!!!
Come on people perverts like this are all around you stop blaming TSA.
*************************
Agreed and i would also add... how many TEACHERS have been jailed for molesting children in the last few years but ppl dont bash all over the entire school system and still send their kids to school...
You guys are right I misread the article. But in my defense I did state that I believe felons should not work for TSA I was just trying to make sense out of the situation. TSA wouldn't make a mistake like that easily and I was trying to use the example of the "small" things others I know have done to not get hired (by small I mean smaller than a felon). A felony would be very difficult to miss even on purpose. I know these things because when you don't get hired by TSA the equal employment act makes it required for TSA to send the person a letter stating why they were not hired. So yes TSA told them and they told me.
As usual, there's a lot of back-and-forth on questions answered vs. not answered. I see this exchange (on this subject or any other) as a manifestation of the TSA's general lack of credibility.
Consider this recent example of an unanswered question that many of us posed -- if the airlines don't "de-select" an eight year old from additional screening, why can't the TSA recognize the error and skip giving a child the third degree? After all, we've been assured there are no children on the watch list.
We weren't asking for a "comprehensive list of all the rules" -- just a single question on a single subject that should have a straightforward answer. However, the answers provided danced all around did not address this particular question. The only answer provided was that the child's parents use the redress process. The question didn't get answered -- it got side-stepped.
It's not wonder there's a lack of credibility on the more controversial questions with complicated answers.
Mark
Anon said:
You should have addressed those morons with the "pickle smoker" scoreboard in the same post. As it is, it seems that this blog neatly alternates between posts expressing your disgust and disappointment with the idiotic/criminal acts of your employees and posts that ask us to believe that those same employees can be trusted with our security, let alone our nude images.
We're not all the same, yes we do share similar beliefs & maybe do follow the same protocol & proccesses. However we're not clones of each other.
An by you're standards, I don't know you, I don't know who you are, & I think wherever you work is a waste of taxpayers dollars. You are not helping a cuase that can be helping America.
Anonymous said...
This case is an excellent example of why TSA must screen EVERY SINGLE ONE OF ITS EMPLOYEES, EACH AND EVERY TIME they enter the sterile area of an airport.
February 3, 2010 2:39 PM
HOW? HOW? HOW? HOW? DIRP
Anonymous said...
This case is an excellent example of why TSA must screen EVERY SINGLE ONE OF ITS EMPLOYEES, EACH AND EVERY TIME they enter the sterile area of an airport.
February 3, 2010 2:39 PM
-----------------------------------
Exactly how is screening each and every TSO each and every time they enter the checkpoint going to root out a pedophile?
All that will do is slow down the checkpoint operation while each and every TSO removes their shoes, badge, belt, and change each and every time they leave the sterile area to use the restroom or take their lunch break. In the quest to discover criminal perverts this won't help a bit! Think before you post!
The managers are as bad with the staff forcing them to do lewd acts with the promise of a promotion. I worked for TSA for 8 years until I could not take it any more. But managers are allowed to resign an not get fired-ah the double standard. and to think we are told that the Feds can take care of healthcare like they have for air travel. Think about it if two fake airmarshalls can get thru the checkpoints how easy will it be to scam the federal health care syatem.
To answer Steve TSA screwed up, they are not suspose to reveal the out come of any action by an employee so if someone with TSA revealed this the employee can sue because if he resigned because of this it will still have implications on futer employment. But the question is why wasn't he fired and prosucted. That is another reason everyone including TSA employees from the highest to the lowest should be screened. The metal badge issue is an excuse. There is tighter security at many of our schools than at our airports. We are no safer than 9/11/2001. I have tried to talk to cogress and they don't care either.
I didn't hear if they got a raise even though the elderly didn't.
NYPD police officers need to pass a psychological exam before they are able to serve and protect the public. The TSA should institute this practice to help weed out the undesirables that seem to comprise a good portion of its employees. Also, maybe the TSA should stop relying on employment agencies (who get paid based on a commission for the amount of people they refer) to hire Americas last line of defense, and start taking a closer look at its candidates personally.
This whole TSA is just a joke of how much double standard the goverment has with its hiring practices. In today economy and struggle no one is able to secure a job based on their knowledge and experience but rather a you have a clean credit history but be able to sell drugs on your off time. For all that we may know this TSA agent may have been promoted for their actions verses penalized.
Bob said...
For everyone who is so quick to bash TSA for this, please note that this individual is a retired Marine who served 20 years in the United States Military. My point??? This can happen anywhere and you can't predict it.
This will give you chills.
Blogger Bob
TSA Blog Team
***********************************
Retired US Marine with over 20 years in the US military....I'm sorry Bob, as a TSO that doesn't make much difference to ME. Let me clarify something for the many readers who want to know how this happened, I work along side some of the nicest people you ever want to meet, and some of the not so nicest people you ever want to meet. Fact is, practically anyone who can pass the computer assessment and background investigation which could take up to 8 months to complete (meanwhile pervy is working) can get a job with TSA. The standards are NOT as high as they should be. Sorry Bob, its true.
Also true however is that those standards are being raised, and have been raised over the past several months. So the quality of employees coming in now, SHOULD be a little higher than they have been. I know, still doesn't make much difference in this case.
truth wrote:
"90 comments bashing the TSA because they unwittingly hired a scumbag who worked there for a few months.
Why is nobody bashing the Marines? He worked there for 20 years. Oh, I know why, because all you have is red herrings.
GET A LIFE!"
Why, truth? Because Marines aren't patting people down or viewing naked images for their paychecks, that's why.
That's where the great divide lies between perverts in the general workforce and perverts in the employ of the TSA. We, the taxpayers, are paying these people to practice their deviant behavior on unsuspecting travelers.
On February 6, 2010 at 8:12 AM, Greg said...
I have heard of some members of the United States Marine Corp who raped some teenage girl at a party and some others who got busted for sexual assault in Japan. With all these perverts running around should we disband the Marine Corp? No, nor should we drive ourselves to madness when law enforcement spots a few bad apples in TSA.
Greg,
Once again you are one of those posters who likes to compare the TSA screeners with the U.S. military, which can't be farther from reality.
As an Air Force retiree with a long active duty career, Let me put your example into perspective: Under the Uniformed Code of Military Justice, which applies to every active duty military member (including reservists and NG troops), the maximum allowable punishment for the sex crimes you cited is the death penalty (Look it up if you don't believe me). The Orlando screener's punishment was that he was allowed to resign. Don' even go there, Greg.
@Anonymous: "HOW? HOW? HOW? HOW? DIRP"
Actually, TSA wastes plenty of resources harassing people with gate gropes and waving magic paper over drinks purchased in the sterile area. Put those people to work actually doing some real security of those who work there rather than for theater. It's not hard. You have the resources. It's not our fault TSA can't manage them properly.
Earl
Bob -
You're doing a great job, keep it up. Don't let some of these posts get you down - they are few and far between and judging by some of the posts on this subject, grasping for straws and blatantly just trying to push your buttons (No critically thinking person really believes that BDOs should be able to spot a child molester or that our officers actually enjoy patting people down...).
Actually, this particular story and it's responses prove that you really can't please everyone all the time, especially when it comes to your job - which, let's face it - is damage control most of the time.
Keep your chin up, keep on trucking - you've done an excellent job representing those of us on the front lines at TSA. You keep it real; you're not condescending or robotic and it's noticed and appreciated.
Thank you Bob!
To those of you who have statements/questions on this topic, I have a few short answers:
To think that any TSA officers get this job to grope people or look at WBI images, the answer is a definitive NO. Not even the man in question. There is nothing sexy or sexual about any of those duties. Nothing. At. All.
To think that Behavior Detection Officers can read minds is just silly. If they could do that:
A: They would have to be paid in gold bullion
B: We wouldn't need any other technology or officers.
C: We probably wouldn't need airplanes either because the BDOs could just use their minds to teleport everyone.
I rarely post on this blog but I think that some of you who are clearly never satisfied with anything (I say anything because there's no way that it's just the issue of TSA and security that you're involved in) might want to do some soul searching.
What makes you so angry? What can any of us do to make ourselves happier people? I'm being serious - I'm not questioning your right (and duty) as an American citizen to protect your rights - I just think it's important to shed some of the vitriol every once in a while, take a step back and realize that while you may see TSA as being a giant 9 headed monster, there are A LOT of really good people trying to do their best job (one of those is certainly Bob) and in the end we are all just individuals, trying (or not) to be good people.
Bob, Thanks for providing an answer to the question about the resolution of images. Could you please push harder to publish the real images? It is important that people understand exactly what they are consenting to. Please keep us updated!
TSOG wrote:
"To think that any TSA officers get this job to grope people or look at WBI images, the answer is a definitive NO. Not even the man in question. There is nothing sexy or sexual about any of those duties. Nothing. At. All."
Are you the "man in question"? If not, you cannot speak for him.
Unfortunately, there ARE many people who practice deviant sexual behaviors who would get pleasure from having a job that allows them to touch other people or to satisfy their voyeurism by looking at scans of naked bodies. The term is paraphilia. Look it up and learn something.
And each and every person who is seen or touched by these people is a victim of a sexual assault.
Individuals with such proclivities often go to great lengths to find jobs, such as school bus drivers/attendants or crossing guards, or volunteer positions, coaching sports teams, etc. that will bring them into close proximity to their victims. The same is true of TSA screeners.
That is exactly what makes the whole idea of WBI or extremely invasive pat downs so abhorrent to so many thinking people - not people who accept the TSA line that WBI/gropes are for their safety but to people who truly think things through.
So before you go ahead and make more blanket statements, you'd better think through those statements before you post them.
Sandra said in part:
Why, truth? Because Marines aren't patting people down or viewing naked images for their paychecks, that's why.
That's where the great divide lies between perverts in the general workforce and perverts in the employ of the TSA. We, the taxpayers, are paying these people to practice their deviant behavior on unsuspecting travelers.
***********************************
Come on Sandra, you can't say that based on one arrest, or even a few arrests, that every TSO is a deviant. Nor can you say that one marine who rapes someone makes all the marines rapists. I'd like to point out to all the TSA nay sayers on this blog, we are working for a pay check just like you, and just like you we pay taxes too. In fact, I'm willing to bet that a few police officers frequent this blog, by which I could say I pay thier salary with my taxes....firefighters....politicians, etc. But I'm off topic right now, Sandra I'm a decent family guy who's making a living like everyone else, and the insinuation that I'm guilty by association is quite insulting. Here's something for ya, if you don't want to be patted down, or go through the WBI, then perhaps you should exercise one of the following choices:
1. Stay home
2. Take a bus
3. Drive
4. Take a train
Yes I'm being sarcastic, because I'm getting really tired of the BS complaints on this blog. If you don't like it, you DO have a CHOICE..you just choose not to exercise your rights under that choice, which means, you will be patted down and/or you will go through the WBI machine. End of story Sandra. :-) See you at the airport.
Your friendly neighborhood TSO inferred that I believe all TSO's are perverts. Please point out to me exactly where that inference was made.
Your friendly neighborhood TSO said...
Sandra said in part:
Why, truth? Because Marines aren't patting people down or viewing naked images for their paychecks, that's why.
That's where the great divide lies between perverts in the general workforce and perverts in the employ of the TSA. We, the taxpayers, are paying these people to practice their deviant behavior on unsuspecting travelers.
***********************************
Come on Sandra, you can't say that based on one arrest, or even a few arrests, that every TSO is a deviant. Nor can you say that one marine who rapes someone makes all the marines rapists. I'd like to point out to all the TSA nay sayers on this blog, we are working for a pay check just like you, and just like you we pay taxes too. In fact, I'm willing to bet that a few police officers frequent this blog, by which I could say I pay thier salary with my taxes....firefighters....politicians, etc. But I'm off topic right now, Sandra I'm a decent family guy who's making a living like everyone else, and the insinuation that I'm guilty by association is quite insulting. Here's something for ya, if you don't want to be patted down, or go through the WBI, then perhaps you should exercise one of the following choices:
1. Stay home
2. Take a bus
3. Drive
4. Take a train
Yes I'm being sarcastic, because I'm getting really tired of the BS complaints on this blog. If you don't like it, you DO have a CHOICE..you just choose not to exercise your rights under that choice, which means, you will be patted down and/or you will go through the WBI machine. End of story Sandra. :-) See you at the airport.
February 10, 2010 4:39 PM
....................
I don't think Sandra said any such thing.
But, TSA apparently thinks everyone is a shoe bomber since only one known case of using a shoe as a weapon has been reported but treats and requires all to remove their shoes to clear a TSA DRAGNET CHECKPOINT.
Your friendly neighborhood TSO said...:
1. Stay home
2. Take a bus
3. Drive
4. Take a train
Yes I'm being sarcastic, because I'm getting really tired of the BS complaints on this blog. If you don't like it, you DO have a CHOICE..you just choose not to exercise your rights under that choice, which means, you will be patted down and/or you will go through the WBI machine. End of story Sandra. :-) See you at the airport.
So what if your job requires you to fly? Quit because of the gross incompetance at the checkpoints?
Really tired of getting treated like a criminal, having my belongings tossed around, having to deal with your snotty coworkers just because I need to fly.
Your friendly neighborhood TSO, you forgot choice 5: Speak up against WBI and other invasive and ineffective technologies so we can travel without being treated like prisoners.
Sandra's inference:
We, the taxpayers, are paying these people to practice their deviant behavior on unsuspecting travelers.
Your friendly neighborhood TSO said...
Yes I'm being sarcastic, because I'm getting really tired of the BS complaints on this blog. If you don't like it, you DO have a CHOICE..you just choose not to exercise your rights under that choice, which means, you will be patted down and/or you will go through the WBI machine. End of story Sandra. :-) See you at the airport.
--------------------------
If you are tired of passengers voicing legitimate concerns then exercise your CHOICE and stop reading this blog. This type of arrogance is the very same "I am TSA, I am God" mentality that makes people frustrated and treat you guys like jerks. Since its inception the TSA has not stopped 1 bomb from getting on a plane nor caught 1 terrorist at the checkpoints!
TSOG said...
“C: We probably wouldn't need airplanes either because the BDOs could just use their minds to teleport everyone.”
West, I will be expecting a teleport ride next summer. The wife wants to go to Disneyland this year for the family vacation.
Great post TSOG.
Tim
TSA Blog Team
You must have failed reading comprehension, NHTSO. Why are you so defensive?
H2H sez - "TSOG said...
“C: We probably wouldn't need airplanes either because the BDOs could just use their minds to teleport everyone.”
West, I will be expecting a teleport ride next summer. The wife wants to go to Disneyland this year for the family vacation.
Great post TSOG.
Tim
TSA Blog Team"
Hey man, I want in on this too, I want to go to Oktoberfest in Munich this year and all the fall festivals in and around Miesau Germany! Mmmmmmm, schnitzel.....
West
TSA Blog Team
Its quite simple really, your complaints are petty at best. There's nothing to prove that the WBI machines are invasive...like I said, if you don't like the procedures, its real simple...DON'T FLY....you're the same type of people who would moan and complain if something terrible happened on a plane, "where was security?" Just like after 9/11....its never good enough, no matter what or who..if it were private companies with the same procedures put in place by none other than the airlines, you'd still be complaining. GROW UP already, and act like adults, instead of 6 year olds....actually, I've seen 6 year olds at the checkpoint who act better than adults. GET OVER YOURSELF. You want someone to hear your complaints? Write to Congress.
Why are so many TSA agents abusing there power? this clip is so disturbing i bet you guys don't even post it!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i-jdDE6bFow&feature=related
Anonymous said...
Your friendly neighborhood TSO said...
Yes I'm being sarcastic, because I'm getting really tired of the BS complaints on this blog. If you don't like it, you DO have a CHOICE..you just choose not to exercise your rights under that choice, which means, you will be patted down and/or you will go through the WBI machine. End of story Sandra. :-) See you at the airport.
--------------------------
If you are tired of passengers voicing legitimate concerns then exercise your CHOICE and stop reading this blog. This type of arrogance is the very same "I am TSA, I am God" mentality that makes people frustrated and treat you guys like jerks. Since its inception the TSA has not stopped 1 bomb from getting on a plane nor caught 1 terrorist at the checkpoints!
February 11, 2010 12:27 AM
It's hilarious to read all these comments and complaints.
Annonymous; do you realize you will not hear about every incident that happens in TSA. Are you sure there hasn't been terrorists or bombs caught at US airports? You're not going to hear about it!
I understand people are voicing their opinions about the WBI, but everyone needs to understand those airports that don't have them yet cannot answer much about them since we haven't seen them. It is something new that everyone will learn together. I think people are making it out to be much more then it is. I heard that it will just be a generic body on the screen and then any prohibs will be seen on that. Not the persons body. I'm not sure of this, but I'm hoping that's what it will be.
Also, this isn't something that airports themselves can change, it is a much bigger picture that the higher ups decide on. So attacking those who are working at the airports isn't helping.
Also, if most of the passengers realized what TSA employees had to deal with while at work they would think twice about some comments. There are wonderful passengers and their are just plain rediculous ones. Maybe think of which one you are next time you come through. We are trying to help you. I'm sorry if you have come across a TSA employee who had no customer service, but make sure you take the time to find the supervisor while at the airport and report it. Don't complain about it years later.
Take care and I hope that things will improve on all ends.
Anonymous said in part:
Think about it if two fake airmarshalls can get thru the checkpoints how easy will it be to scam the federal health care syatem.
***********************************
Are you referring to the two Private Investigators who told the airline rep they needed to fly armed, got all the appropriate paperwork, presented themselves at the exit lane, were cleared by the supervisor, because they had authentic looking badges and the proper paperwork (from the airline), but then the airline rep "didn't feel right" so she told the local airport Police and they were stopped at the gate. Is that what you're referring to? This happened a few years ago, at my airport. The thing is, the airline rep issued the paperwork even though "she didn't feel right" about it. Real simple solution here, "Would you wait just a few minutes while I check on your credentials with local police?" Had the airline rep had the guts to do that, they never would have made it TO the checkpoint! Bad example anonymous.
The better question is when you'll address this story, as reported in the L.A. Times: TSA arrests a student for having Arabic flash cards.
It is a sad state of affairs when a student of Arabic, hoping to enter the diplomatic service, is detained for carrying study aides. I’m not here to cast blame, or rant, but to sadly observe. TSA staff are only following security guidelines and it seems are given no latitude whatsoever to make a judgment call as situations arise. I am glad that my 85 year old father is too old and senile to witness the rise of the TSA and what has happened to his country. I hope one day we will have no need for the TSA and students will only know of it from history books and once again Americans can travel, unrestricted, around the United States.
Anonymous said...
It is a sad state of affairs when a student of Arabic, hoping to enter the diplomatic service, is detained for carrying study aides. I’m not here to cast blame, or rant, but to sadly observe. TSA staff are only following security guidelines and it seems are given no latitude whatsoever to make a judgment call as situations arise. I am glad that my 85 year old father is too old and senile to witness the rise of the TSA and what has happened to his country. I hope one day we will have no need for the TSA and students will only know of it from history books and once again Americans can travel, unrestricted, around the United States.
February 17, 2010 9:31 AM
***********************************
Security personnel are indeed given leeway to make judgement calls, as appropriate. With that said, there are certain things that MUST be referred to a supervisor, and/or law enforcement officials. The mention of the word "bomb" or anything that indicates such, is one of those things that must be referred. Keep in mind the media doesn't tell everything, they rarely tell anything close to what actually happened. Something happened to make PHL officials react the way they did...we'll never know what that was. Let me call your attention to a similar incident that occurred ON A PLANE which was diverted to Philadelphia....a Jewish teen had a device that was attached to his head, it was used in his religios studies, not sure what its called. The flight crew became nervous and suspicious, diverted the plane to PHL, where the teen was interviewed by PHL police and TSA officials, and was later put back on his flight with no further incident. The point is, stuff happens, and unfortunately we are in a society where bad things have occurred, and bad things will occur again. We're trying to prevent that, but sometimes things can get handled inappropriately. My apologies to George, since he receive none from the officials who questioned him.
Anonymous said...
Anonymous said...
Your friendly neighborhood TSO said...
Yes I'm being sarcastic, because I'm getting really tired of the BS complaints on this blog. If you don't like it, you DO have a CHOICE..you just choose not to exercise your rights under that choice, which means, you will be patted down and/or you will go through the WBI machine. End of story Sandra. :-) See you at the airport.
--------------------------
If you are tired of passengers voicing legitimate concerns then exercise your CHOICE and stop reading this blog. This type of arrogance is the very same "I am TSA, I am God" mentality that makes people frustrated and treat you guys like jerks. Since its inception the TSA has not stopped 1 bomb from getting on a plane nor caught 1 terrorist at the checkpoints!
February 11, 2010 12:27 AM
It's hilarious to read all these comments and complaints.
Annonymous; do you realize you will not hear about every incident that happens in TSA. Are you sure there hasn't been terrorists or bombs caught at US airports? You're not going to hear about it!
I understand people are voicing their opinions about the WBI, but everyone needs to understand those airports that don't have them yet cannot answer much about them since we haven't seen them. It is something new that everyone will learn together. I think people are making it out to be much more then it is. I heard that it will just be a generic body on the screen and then any prohibs will be seen on that. Not the persons body. I'm not sure of this, but I'm hoping that's what it will be.
Also, this isn't something that airports themselves can change, it is a much bigger picture that the higher ups decide on. So attacking those who are working at the airports isn't helping.
Also, if most of the passengers realized what TSA employees had to deal with while at work they would think twice about some comments. There are wonderful passengers and their are just plain rediculous ones. Maybe think of which one you are next time you come through. We are trying to help you. I'm sorry if you have come across a TSA employee who had no customer service, but make sure you take the time to find the supervisor while at the airport and report it. Don't complain about it years later.
Take care and I hope that things will improve on all ends.
February 12, 2010 4:48 PM
***********************************
As I said in a previous post, I work with some of the nicest people you want to meet, and some of the not so nicest people you want to meet. I can't change anyone I work with, but hopefully, the way i conduct myself at the checkpoint will impress upon the traveling public, MY level of professionalism and MY commitment to the safety of those who come through my checkpoint. The rude ones will eventually either be weeded out by management or will leave on their own because they can't handle the job. Sometimes they will be replaced by other rude ones, sometimes they will be replaced by professional ones, its common to any line of work, some people are idiots while others are not.
As I said in a previous post, I work with some of the nicest people you want to meet, and some of the not so nicest people you want to meet. I can't change anyone I work with, but hopefully, the way i conduct myself at the checkpoint will impress upon the traveling public, MY level of professionalism and MY commitment to the safety of those who come through my checkpoint. The rude ones will eventually either be weeded out by management or will leave on their own because they can't handle the job. Sometimes they will be replaced by other rude ones, sometimes they will be replaced by professional ones, its common to any line of work, some people are idiots while others are not.
February 17, 2010 1:45 PM
..................
Do you report to superiors when another employee steps out of line?
If not your part of the problem.
It's bound to happen in any industry. You can't let one isolated case ruin the reputation of the hundreds who protect millions of travelers each and every day.
RB said...
As I said in a previous post, I work with some of the nicest people you want to meet, and some of the not so nicest people you want to meet. I can't change anyone I work with, but hopefully, the way i conduct myself at the checkpoint will impress upon the traveling public, MY level of professionalism and MY commitment to the safety of those who come through my checkpoint. The rude ones will eventually either be weeded out by management or will leave on their own because they can't handle the job. Sometimes they will be replaced by other rude ones, sometimes they will be replaced by professional ones, its common to any line of work, some people are idiots while others are not.
February 17, 2010 1:45 PM
..................
Do you report to superiors when another employee steps out of line?
If not your part of the problem.
February 23, 2010 4:43 PM
***********************************
If it warrants reporting to a supervisor, yes, otherwise I just straighten it out myself. By that I mean, i will approach an employee and make suggestions, especially new employees, but some TSOs are not approachable, and if the situation is one that calls for a supervisor intervening, then so be it.
"but some TSOs are not approachable"
Interesting description of your team members.
No try to imagine what they act like to us PAX/SLFs.
Anonymous said...
"but some TSOs are not approachable"
Interesting description of your team members.
No try to imagine what they act like to us PAX/SLFs.
March 2, 2010 12:05 PM
***********************************
Whis is exactly why I would notify a supervisor if I had to. Thanks for your input anon.
Ranger said
"Maybe with a more stringent requirement, to include a clearance level, we could weed out some of these Officers that have issues in their background that are not caught by the SSBI that TSA Officers receive now. "
TSA Officers do not go through a SSBI (Single Scope Background Investigation). They must pass a simple background investigation.
To everyone: As we've read about TSA employees being arrested, now know that you can threaten them with arrest if they start doing their usual version of customer service (treating a person like dirt, sexually assaulting them, etc.)
Being a TSA security officer is a tough job and the improtant thing is to hire the right people, taht thise who have an aptitude for this job. One selection technique is the Security Inspection Aptitude Test, this will make sure people are not forced to do the wrong thinh.
Pretty good posting here,I never thought about that I will catch any information like that,but your post really help me.Awesome things are sharing here.I like your post ,Now I am waiting for your next post.So keep writin
Post a Comment