Slashdot Mirror

Is that a new kind of shaver?

I think that he's referring to the Remington Model 7600 pump-action rifle. It was called the Model 760 until 1981.

This model is very popular because it can be stored in the relatively safe Condition 3 (hammer down, full magazine, empty chamber), yet brought to Condition 0 (ready to fire) with one pump.

On the other hand, I think that guards at the kind of checkpoint that the AFGE (the TSA employees' union) envisions would be using auto/semi-auto carbines or SMGs, instead of a rifle more suited to deer-hunting.

Unfortunately, like most large bureaucracies, the TSA is self sustaining.

Worse. They're unionized now.

They're not going away anytime soon.

Yep. People in all sorts of fields are required to wear dosimeters, including working in a hospital, dentist's office, and so on. You can google for all sorts of information about TSA workers being denied the use of dosimeters, but I think the following pretty much says it all. It's directly from the TSA branch of the AFGE website (American Federation of Government Employees). If you get a private moment aside with a TSA security agent who works the floor, they tend to be fairly open about how concerned they are about the conditions in which they are forced to work and are not any happier about the concerns with these machines than you and I are.

source: http://tsa.afge.org/workerscomp.cfm
Radiation Exposure

TSA Union Calls for Immediate Radiation Monitoring at Agency - 03/22/11

In July 2010, AFGE Health and Safety Specialist Milly Rodríguez testified on behalf of AFGE before the House Subcommittee on Federal Workforce, Postal Service and the District of Columbia. While she testified on health and safety issues in the entire federal government, Rodríguez specifically discussed workplace exposure to ionizing radiation at TSA—which has been an issue since the agency's inception. TSA has held the position that there is no harmful exposure from radiation emissions from the X-ray machines used to view the contents of checked baggage as well as carry-on baggage. AFGE offered to conduct an independent study of radiation emissions, but TSA declined the offer. AFGE also offered to fund the purchase of dosimeters (which measure exposure to radiation) but TSA said TSOs are not allowed to wear dosimeters not issued by TSA, even though they refuse to provide them. TSA's position is that the agency has done the necessary testing and is not required by any applicable standards to issue dosimeters to its employees.

A full copy of the testimony can be found here.

We know TSOs continue to be concerned about radiation. The lack of information, the agency's refusal to provide dosimeters, and the unsafe work practices TSOs implemented by TSA, contribute to TSOs' fears about radiation and its health effects. This year, AFGE locals in Boston and San Juan raised concerns about cancer deaths and diagnosis of thyroid conditions that appeared to be higher than expected. Their actions lead to studies by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), and while the studies did not find excess cancers that could be attributed to radiation exposure, TSOs are still concerned about the effects of long-term exposures.

... next question, can the TSA require you, as an operator, to not wear your private one?

Yes.

http://www.afge.org/index.cfm?Page=PressReleases&PressReleaseID=1265&from=home

Yeah, it's a big waste, but guess what? Federal agencies don't go away. We've got the TSA now, in all its wasteful bloated glory. Once a bureaucracy starts up, it is self sustaining.

Well they definitely won't go away now that they're unionized.

The idea is that you check out marshals more thoroughly, both background and psychologically. Thus, the chances of one being a terrorist is very, very low. Much like actual airline pilots.

Still let's look at some numbers -
In August(2008), U.S. airlines operated 897,800 scheduled domestic and international flights, down 5.7 percent from the number of flights operated in August 2007 (Table 1). The number of domestic flights decreased 6.0 percent in August from a year earlier while international flights were down 2.4 percent (Tables 7, 13).

Call it 29k flights a day, 203k flights a week. Figure an AM does 2 flights a day, 5 days a week, 10 total. That'd mean that you'd need 20k air marshals to cover every flight. Probably closer to 22k, with leave, training and such. 14k if you figure on planning smart enough that the marshals average 15 flights a week. Looking further - in 2006 there were 599 airports 'certificated to serve commercial air carrier aircraft with nine or more seats'.

Now, my local airport probably employes around a dozen TSA workers - that'd be a minimun of 7.2k. Obviously large airports will have hundreds. However, I've seen some links saying things like 45k TSOs. Even assuming we PAY the marshals more, they'd have to earn far more than double(remember benefits!) to cost more.

Meanwhile we'd increase travel as we stop harrassing travelers and a few guns are far cheaper than x-ray machines.

In general, my experience has been that programmers tend to be in the elite group anyhow. They already have high salaries and they're protected from being arbitrarily replaced because they keep the arcane secrets of the company's application in their skulls. Admittedly, this is bound to change, offshoring and programming becoming more accesible and less black magic.

I worked for a quasi-government institution last year and didn't have to pay into Social Security.

They http://pacmed.org/were an independant clinic group in the puget sound which grew out of a WWI army hospital. Somehow, over the years, they were able to hold onto this exemption on paying Social Security, even though they were even less affiliated with the feds than a regular VA hospital.

I was a member of the http://afge.org/AFGE, even though I wasn't a government employee (!).

Anyway, it was sweet. We had to contribute at least 7% to a retirement fund (Lincoln Alliance) of which half had to be in bonds/stable investments, but other wise it was great. Eventually, they got rid of it, and we had to start paying in around late 2003. I left soon after just because at that point a major incentive had been removed.

I heard rumors while I was there though that the IRS doesn't have to pay in. Just rumors though...