TSA mess and the police

[DMRick]

And I think that has been said over and over, that whatever is good for each person. I think there has been a large amount of respect on this board, and that's why we are one of the few threads on this still open. I have to admit I am getting tired of reading that we have to show respect, and I don't get why it's a lofty order, since I have seen the utmost in respect. Many have said they respect the reasons people can't fly. Many have said for them, they will continue to fly. Doesn't change that they respect those that have reasons not to. Can't get much better than that.

I am in 100% agreement.

All we have to do is respect each other and the dilemma is resolved, but that's a really lofty order isn't it

 

[Jennasis]

That choice sure sounds a lot like a choice under duress to me, and that doesn't quite make it the same thing. Duress nullifies many contracts and is the grounds for many a lawsuit

Maybe, but what contract?

And it isn't like he doesn't know about the travel security measures before he got to the airport or accepted the job to travel.

 

[LuvOrlando]

Maybe, but what contract?

And it isn't like he doesn't know about the travel security measures before he got to the airport or accepted the job to travel.

Employment is a contract.

There have been recent changes which were not present when he took the job

 

[OceanAnnie]

It leaves us using our own judgement. Why? Because for every reported problem there have been untold thousands of people who saw no such problem. We all view the world through a "colored" lens. Our world view is colored by our lives' experiences. Call it a built in bias that we don't even know exists, but changes the way that we see everything - including this stuff.

So, two people could get the same exact patdown. One feels "violated" while the other doesn't notice anything unusual. The fact that some people feel violated doesn't mean that the procedure is too anything. It just means that some people interpreted it that way.

Such is life. Some people will always find a way to be happy, some people will always find a way to be miserable.

True.

OTOH, two people can get a pat down and have very different experiences.
There are so many variables, in people, training, delivery of the pat down, as well as people's perceptions (of giving the pat down and receiving one).

So many ways to look at it.

 

[DisneyBamaFan]

True.

OTOH, two people can get a pat down and have very different experiences.
There are so many variables, in people, training, delivery of the pat down, as well as people's perceptions (of giving the pat down and receiving one).

So many ways to look at it.

Agreed - my only point was that we can't take the word of a stranger when they say that their pat down was inappropriate. That person might just be overly sensitive for some reason, or they might have a hidden agenda. We should use our own judgement based on our experience.

 

[C.Ann]

So I was right, about 100 pages ago. Personal experiences mean nothing to you. Now, if I had photographs of the supervisor's degree and resume, and placed them side by side with the stated job requirements, would that suffice? Or would you then claim that they were photoshopped? It is entirely inflammatory to directly accuse another poster of lying, and the only reason I'm not reporting it is because I'd rather the thread not get closed due to your behavior.

You want to disagree and share your personal experiences? No problem. But to dismiss my direct experiences with "anecdotal examples, which we cannot even verify" demonstrates your unwillingness to even entertain the possibility that your narrow view of the world might not be entirely accurate. Besides, how exactly are we to verify YOUR alleged experiences? Why should anyone take you at face value when you are unwilling to do the same with anyone else?

------------------------------

Excellent point.. (Bolding mine..) I've been on these boards a long, long time and usually when someone is so adamant about their opinion or position, posters will jump all over that and pretty much demand links (or some other hard evidence) to support a claim.. It's fine if one chooses not to provide that evidence, but on the other hand, such a person often loses all credibility and is no longer in a position to insist that someone else is "lying" (or whatever else you want to call it) when they themselves have no "proof"..

Probably best to just get back to the main topic at hand - the TSA and the new security guidelines - or start another thread in terms of the unrelated issues that are causing so much tension here..

 

[skater]

That choice sure sounds a lot like a choice under duress to me, and that doesn't quite make it the same thing. Duress nullifies many contracts and is the grounds for many a lawsuit

Exactly! People in Iran have choices too if someone want to be literal.

 

[skater]

Agreed - my only point was that we can't take the word of a stranger when they say that their pat down was inappropriate. That person might just be overly sensitive for some reason, or they might have a hidden agenda. We should use our own judgement based on our experience.

I know this is just my perspective, but I just have to look at the still picture of the tsa agent's arm sticking out from between someone's legs to feel like it can be inappropriate .

 

[DisneyBamaFan]

I know this is just my perspective, but I just have to look at the still picture of the tsa agent's arm sticking out from between someone's legs to feel like it can be inappropriate .

So you don't think that a TSA agent should touch the inside of the leg of someone being patted down? I only ask because this is part of the old pat down technique. In fact, it is part of every pat down that I have ever had, whether it be at customs, in an airport, when going into the White House tour - whatever. The pat down has always included a leg "rub".

 

[skater]

So you don't think that a TSA agent should touch the inside of the leg of someone being patted down? I only ask because this is part of the old pat down technique. In fact, it is part of every pat down that I have ever had, whether it be at customs, in an airport, when going into the White House tour - whatever. The pat down has always included a leg "rub".

It was how high (I could be wrong, but it appeared buried in the crotch) it was that bothered me .

 

[Jennasis]

Employment is a contract.

There have been recent changes which were not present when he took the job

Then he needs to sue his employer doesn't he?

 

[DisneyBamaFan]

It was how high (I could be wrong, but it appeared buried in the crotch) it was that bothered me .

They have always done that, at least for men. One hand on either side of the leg, starting at the top and going down, then the other leg. I have no experience getting patted down as a woman, so I can't speak to any possible changes there.

 

[DisneyBamaFan]

Then he needs to sue his employer doesn't he?

Unless he has a very narrow employment contract, that wouldn't be possible. We changed the job of one of our employees a few years ago. The change was not minor, but it was necessary. The girl got very upset and stormed out of the building. When she came back a few hours later, she had been terminated for job abandonment. She sued and lost - and was forced by the judge to pay our legal fees.

 

[skater]

They have always done that, at least for men. One hand on either side of the leg, starting at the top and going down, then the other leg. I have no experience getting patted down as a woman, so I can't speak to any possible changes there.

You could be right. Its hard to tell from a still picture - it looked like his arm was way up there and half of it sticking through his legs. I didn't know their arms have always rested on the private area though.

 

[LuvOrlando]

Then he needs to sue his employer doesn't he?

Not so sure how this will all play out. Certainly some people will not be able to endure these new measures for various reasons. Consider someone with PTSD due to abuse or some other form of trauma. Will he or she be entitled to Workman's Comp if the distress of an 'on the job event' such as this renders them unable to proceed with the terms of their employment? Disability Insurance? What if someone with PTSD got fired because of an inability to comply, could they sue for wrongful termination? What about the Americans with Disabilities Act? I don't really know how all the variables will play out in the end but there are certainly some people who won't be capable of simply 'sucking it up' and I'm genuinely worried for them. Lots of variables

 

[C.Ann]

Not so sure how this will all play out. Certainly some people will not be able to endure these new measures for various reasons. Consider someone with PTSD due to abuse or some other form of trauma. Will he or she be entitled to Workman's Comp if the distress of an 'on the job event' such as this renders them unable to proceed with the terms of their employment? Disability Insurance? I don't really know how all the variables will play out in the end but there are certainly some people who won't be capable of simply 'sucking it up' and I'm genuinely worried for them

Interesting aspect I never thought of.. I wonder how that would play out? I know that people can get SSD for PTSD - don't know about Workman's Comp though..

 

[Jennasis]

Not so sure how this will all play out. Certainly some people will not be able to endure these new measures for various reasons. Consider someone with PTSD due to abuse or some other form of trauma. Will he or she be entitled to Workman's Comp if the distress of an 'on the job event' such as this renders them unable to proceed with the terms of their employment? Disability Insurance? What if someone with PTSD got fired because of an inability to comply, could they sue for wrongful termination? What about the Americans with Disabilities Act? I don't really know how all the variables will play out in the end but there are certainly some people who won't be capable of simply 'sucking it up' and I'm genuinely worried for them. Lots of variables

Certainly will be interesting to see how it all plays out.

 

[chicagodisneyfan]

Not so sure how this will all play out. Certainly some people will not be able to endure these new measures for various reasons. Consider someone with PTSD due to abuse or some other form of trauma. Will he or she be entitled to Workman's Comp if the distress of an 'on the job event' such as this renders them unable to proceed with the terms of their employment? Disability Insurance? What if someone with PTSD got fired because of an inability to comply, could they sue for wrongful termination? What about the Americans with Disabilities Act? I don't really know how all the variables will play out in the end but there are certainly some people who won't be capable of simply 'sucking it up' and I'm genuinely worried for them. Lots of variables

Former VP of HR here -
No to workers comp - there is no injury/incident that occured
Nope to wrongful termination - the company has not changed any rules - the government did
ADA - what would that matter?
(now of course I am speaking broadly and cannot account for the laws/regs of every state)

Again there is NOTHING stopping any person with a disability from flying. The TSA has not banned flights by the handicapped - have they?

The only thing stopping the disabled from traveling is themselves. And it is simply a falsehood to claim otherwise.

I am flying to Nassau next week and considering it was snowing this morning am thrilled to do so. If selected for extra security - eh - so what.

 

[DisneyBamaFan]

Former VP of HR here -
No to workers comp - there is no injury/incident that occured
Nope to wrongful termination - the company has not changed any rules - the government did
ADA - what would that matter?
(now of course I am speaking broadly and cannot account for the laws/regs of every state)

Again there is NOTHING stopping any person with a disability from flying. The TSA has not banned flights by the handicapped - have they?

The only thing stopping the disabled from traveling is themselves. And it is simply a falsehood to claim otherwise.

I am flying to Nassau next week and considering it was snowing this morning am thrilled to do so. If selected for extra security - eh - so what.

We had a number of employees who never returned to work after 9/11. I worked in the WTC on the 97th floor - lost hundreds of friends. Eventually, those employees who could not return to work were terminated (our company was very patient, but had to let them go so we could move forward).

Years later, some were still collecting long term disability for the mental trauma. So, I could see a similar thing here. If a person experiences a severe enough mental trauma, they could collect long term disability (assuming they have an LTD policy - I don't think that Social Security would deem the inability to fly because of a phobia a disability). But the burden of proof would be on the person making the trauma/disability claim.

 

[Jennasis]

We had a number of employees who never returned to work after 9/11. I worked in the WTC on the 97th floor - lost hundreds of friends. Eventually, those employees who could not return to work were terminated (our company was very patient, but had to let them go so we could move forward).

Years later, some were still collecting long term disability for the mental trauma. So, I could see a similar thing here. If a person experiences a severe enough mental trauma, they could collect long term disability (assuming they have an LTD policy - I don't think that Social Security would deem the inability to fly because of a phobia a disability). But the burden of proof would be on the person making the trauma/disability claim.

Oh my sweet Lord, tell me you are not comparing the horror of 9/11 to being frisked in an airport...PLEASE.

The straws being grasped at are mind boggling here.