TSA...Question...

[CarolA]

Our local news asked the manager of our local airport the question about liquid purchases on the other side of the security checkpoint. He stated that the items for purchase have already gone through a screening process and would be allowed.

Well what this proves is that your airport manager has common sense, but he apparently hasn't a clue what the TSA is up to.

(However it would NOT surprise me to discover that at SOME airports the TSA is allowing this. Consistency is NOT their strong suit. )


Bicker,
I am working with about 7 folks who flew to Birmingham yestereday. None of them coming from several locations had to check any electronics.

 

[bicker]

I'm just packing my carry-on now. Laptop, camcorder and digital camera.

 

[AdventureGuru]

(However it would NOT surprise me to discover that at SOME airports the TSA is allowing this. Consistency is NOT their strong suit. )

I couldnt have said this any better myself. You would think that the goverment would want this to be a little more consistant due to the nature of what TSA is doing.
It amazes me that they give Jo Blow Bystander an important title -it goes to their head....and others are "WOW Look at me I have a uniform and a badge and can tell you what to do-arent I cool?" kind of attitude and don't do their job...

*frastrating*

 

[CarolA]

And the airport manger was NOT entirely wrong. IF you are a FA or Pilot and you buy a beverage in the "sterile" area you can take it on. If you are passenger who pays the salaries of the TSA and the FA and Pilot that same beverage is a "Dangerous substance"

 

[bicker]

Crew is also allowed to bring all their toiletries on-board. They've always been exempt from requirements to check baggage.

 

[CarolA]

Crew is also allowed to bring all their toiletries on-board. They've always been exempt from requirements to check baggage.

I didn't care about that but I am FURIOUS that they can bring all this junke on board and I can't bring on water. This just proves that the liquid ban is a knee jerk reaction that is not proctecting you at all.

And yes, a FA might be a terrorist, it's not unheard of..... I posted a story yesterday where the FA started a fire on the airplane.....

 

[bicker]

I'm sorry you're furious.

 

[CarolA]

Also, in the past while the crew has been able to bring thier luggage, they were subject to the same security as you and I. (i.e., they could not bring on a knife) NOW, they have "special" security and they can be trusted to bring on things that YOU can't be....

As someone who deals with controls on a DAILY basis I can tell you that the "exception" control is pretty much worthless. If you have "special" exceptions the control is considered invalid and cannot be relied upon.

 

[ExPirateShopGirl]

For folks who have flown recently: I'm wondering about bringing my laptop. Did you see anyone forced to check their laptop?

You do not have to check your laptop. Simply remove it from its case before x-ray as they have been requiring passengers to do for the past several years.

 

[ExPirateShopGirl]

Also, in the past while the crew has been able to bring thier luggage, they were subject to the same security as you and I. (i.e., they could not bring on a knife) NOW, they have "special" security and they can be trusted to bring on things that YOU can't be....

As someone who deals with controls on a DAILY basis I can tell you that the "exception" control is pretty much worthless. If you have "special" exceptions the control is considered invalid and cannot be relied upon.

Uniformed crew-members are not allowed to bring along knives and other weapons in their carry-on baggage. They use a separate line in some airports so that they can prepare the aircraft for a timely departure. Yes, they are exempt from the current ban on liquids and gels. Certainly anyone who flies does indeed pay a portion of their salary. I would bet that if you agreed to guarantee their pensions they would be willing to leave liquids at home and check their bags just like you...

 

[CarolA]

Uniformed crew-members are not allowed to bring along knives and other weapons in their carry-on baggage. They use a separate line in some airports so that they can prepare the aircraft for a timely departure. Yes, they are exempt from the current ban on liquids and gels. Certainly anyone who flies does indeed pay a portion of their salary. I would bet that if you agreed to guarantee their pensions they would be willing to leave liquids at home and check their bags just like you...

Well, if the business travelers don't fly I can gurantee that's NOT going to help their pensions.

My brother has cancelled several "short haul" flights for example. If it's a four or five hour drive he plans to drive. He feels that by the time you add the earlier arrival to check luggage and spending half an hour to an hour waiting on the luggage there is no real time savings. And considering he was buying full fare Y class tickets that's a costly loss. A lot more costly to the airlines then the Disney traveler looking for the $59 each way ticket.

If the TSA drives off the "gravy" customers, pensions are not the only thing in trouble.

No, FAs and Pilots can't bring on knives but to hear the TSA that water bottle is just as dangerous So I will continue to protest to my elected officials and the TSA the "selective" enforcement of something that is "required to gurantee my safety" It's either dangerous or it's not... The TSA acting like it's "kinda dangerous" Any security expert will tell you that "selective" enforcement is risky....

 

[ExPirateShopGirl]

Well, if the business travelers don't fly I can gurantee that's NOT going to help their pensions...

Business travelers will always fly. It's when people have to pay out of their own pockets that a cost/time/annoyance benefit analysis becomes a real consideration.

Peace out...

 

[CarolA]

Business travelers will always fly. It's when people have to pay out of their own pockets that a cost/time/annoyance benefit analysis becomes a real consideration.

Peace out...

Yes and no. The USAToday has an article today on this. Basically they are saying that thier survey of business travelers found the same thing my brother says and I tend to agree..

I will continue to fly, but next week when I am going to Nashville instead of flying I am driving. There is no longer a time saving fllying (DL in Nashville has the WORLD"s SLOWEST baggage service) By the time you add in the "hassle" factor it wasn't worth it to me and I really don't like to drive.... DL charges around $600 for that round trip, and they just lost that.....

I have a trip to Boston coming up and yes I am going to fly.

However, over the next few weeks that's a 50% reduction in my business flights (Y fares once again)

 

[2Princes2Princesses]

I think the TSA should be completely consistent: Nothing allowed on the plane with you except your body, your clothing, your ID and your boarding pass.



THAT is consistent.

 

[seashoreCM]

The break even in time consumed between driving and flying is on average approximately 300 miles. Give or take depending on additional hassle factors.

That said, once I proposed to drive on a business trip just over 200 miles expecting it would cost the company less also. My supervisor insted that I fly which I did. This was before "9/11". The trip was (Boston area) to central Long Island NY. I didn't realize that there was an airport five miles from my ultimate destination, I was comparing driving with flying to LaGuardia and renting a car for the last 30 miles, but even with the closer destination (Islip) airport driving would have been competitive time wise.

Disney hints:
http://members.aol.com/ajaynejr/disney.htm

 

[ExPirateShopGirl]

Yes and no. The USAToday has an article today on this. Basically they are saying that thier survey of business travelers found the same thing my brother says and I tend to agree..

I will continue to fly, but next week when I am going to Nashville instead of flying I am driving. There is no longer a time saving fllying (DL in Nashville has the WORLD"s SLOWEST baggage service) By the time you add in the "hassle" factor it wasn't worth it to me and I really don't like to drive.... DL charges around $600 for that round trip, and they just lost that.....

I have a trip to Boston coming up and yes I am going to fly.

However, over the next few weeks that's a 50% reduction in my business flights (Y fares once again)

Personally, I think short trips for business should be driven, not flown. Spending $600 for a roundtrip like that is wasteful. A lot of business travelers don't care because the money isn't coming out of their own pockets. It's too bad that it takes a TSA advisory to get business travelers to be fiscally responsible.

 

[bicker]

Well, if the business travelers don't fly I can gurantee that's NOT going to help their pensions.

Evidently, even if the business travelers do fly, that's not going to help their pensions. In reality, without them, the business travelers wouldn't fly. And if they have to spend more time to placate what you're trying to say they should be doing in this case (what is that, by the way?), the business traveler will pay for it, just as much as anyone else, one way or another.

If the TSA drives off the "gravy" customers, pensions are not the only thing in trouble.

TSA has better not be putting commercial interests ahead of safety. That's one reason why they took security away from the airlines!!!!!!!

If safety means that we cannot have commercial aviation in this country, then so-be-it. However, I believe there is a lot of hot air being blown in that regard: I suspect that we ingenious and adaptable Americans will find a way to look past our frustrations with reality and continue flying, complying with the security regulations.

 

[AdventureGuru]

WOW I didnt mean to start such a hot debate...However, since I can be pretty opinionated I'll throw this out there....

I guess there is consistancy in people being inconsistant...I guess that makes them consistantly inconsistant....consistantly...

I find the whole "sterile" area thing a HOOT! Why? Has anyone taken a chemistry class before? Nevermind looking up on the internet how to make something go boom-de-boom....mix enough stuff together and KABAMO! I believe in the words of Beavis & Butthead "FIRE FIRE!!!"

I'm sorry but if we have to change our culture b/c liquids and gels...as well as lighters/matches etc...then there can be no exceptions. No "sterile areas." No its ok for you b/c you work for an airline. NO EXCEPTION.
Obviously, this statement will lead to "well FA & Pilots need to have their toiletries on board." OK fine-make every fa and pilot subject to having their bag searched-by an FBI official or someone from goverment....everything in original bottles...in seperate baggies-provided by goverment agent to show that they have been checks...label the bag with the color of the day. They should need to be checkd once a day and have their bag tagged in the color of the day and that is it bottom line.
Should you purchase something at a Clinique shop in the airport...the only way to get it out of the airport would be to mail it to your destination overnight. Thats it bottom line no exceptions...

IMHO-there shouldnt me "acceptions" for anything or anyone. I dont care if I pay their salary...their job-and they choose to accept it IS to make sure that they get me from point A to point B safely. And when it comes to my safety or the safety of my loved ones then there is no compromise in that.

It is sad to see that they put the safety of all of us in the hands of someone who has a high school diploma and has taken a security guard class...they don't have the same presence that a police officer has-or the training...not only to deal with the seraching of bags and people...but dealing with difficult people as well. (again MY OPINION-dont flame me for that)

Honestly, I plan on wearing pants with out metal, a bra with no underwire and my tevas-again no metal...I only wear 1 piece of jewlery that I know wont set off the metal detector. I will pack light...instead of packing my purell-I have kleenex handi wipes (sorry but I have to wash my hands before I eat) a book or 2 and an empty travel coffee mug for BF so that when the pass out coffee on the plane he can get a good size one and be happy -it will be finished before we get onto our connecting flight and we will be all set for him (this is the equivelant to his sippy cup)


Thanks for listening to me rant and I hope I didint stir the pot too much...

 

[CarolA]

Evidently, even if the business travelers do fly, that's not going to help their pensions. In reality, without them, the business travelers wouldn't fly. And if they have to spend more time to placate what you're trying to say they should be doing in this case (what is that, by the way?), the business traveler will pay for it, just as much as anyone else, one way or another.

TSA has better not be putting commercial interests ahead of safety. That's one reason why they took security away from the airlines!!!!!!!

If safety means that we cannot have commercial aviation in this country, then so-be-it. However, I believe there is a lot of hot air being blown in that regard: I suspect that we ingenious and adaptable Americans will find a way to look past our frustrations with reality and continue flying, complying with the security regulations.

Bicker.
Do you honestly think that this "liquid seive" is making you safer? Let's start with the fact that they are allowing some folks on the planes to bring on liquids. At that point whatever enhanced Saftey you had just went RIGHT out the window.....

Do you really think that the banning of chapstick is going to deter a terrorist? I can think of several ways a terrorist can get stuff thur secuirty in spite of the "liquid ban" (Not to mention that in the UK one of the guys worked at the airport, if you have a buddy in catering just ask him to stick your explosives on the plane for you!)

I am all for Saftey. I am not for "knee jerk" reactions that do NOT IMHO make you any safer.

If the "ban" was consistent maybe I would feel better, but it's not. Go read www.flyertalk.com It's hysterical how much stuff folks are carrying on. One guy flew SW. They checked A's and B's for liquids at the gates, but let the C's walk on carrying coffee cups...

Sorry, I dont think we are any safer today then two weeks ago, but as usual we are more harrassed.

I will be honest, it's the ban on water and beverage purchased at the gate area that really burns me up. That may not be logical, but there you have it.

So as long as the TSA continues to act in what I consider to be an inconsistent and irrational manner I will drive more then I fly and that will hurt the airlines. (And if the airlines thought this was a real danger why were they pushing the TSA to give THEIR employees the premission to violate the ban? Didn't the TSA in that case put the WANTS of the airlines over YOUR saftey?)

 

[AdventureGuru]

Bicker.
Do you really think that the banning of chapstick is going to deter a terrorist? Sorry, I dont think we are any safer today then two weeks ago, but as usual we are more harrassed.

Funny you should mention this...didnt they bring down a plane into Logan today with a woman carrying vasaline, a screwdriver and a set of matches...OH and the letter that had something written about Al-quaida (sp?)...hmmm..how did that get past our precious tsa?

Again, it doesnt take a genius to mix a little of this and some of that...but now...explain to me how she manage to walk thru the security gates with a SCREWDRIVER???? last I knew they weren't plastic and were pretty easy to spot...someone wasn't paying attention....