Slashdot Mirror
Homeland Security Cuts Causing Extreme Delays And Missed Flights (chicagotribune.com)
An anonymous reader writes: The Chicago Tribune reports on "a growing backlash over extremely long airport security lines," which the Transportation Security Administration is blaming on a loss of 4,622 screeners. "In the past three years, the TSA and Congress cut the number of front-line screeners by 4,622 -- or about 10% -- on expectations that an expedited screening program called PreCheck would speed up the lines. However, not enough people enrolled for TSA to realize the anticipated efficiencies."
Passengers in security lines waited one hour and 45 minutes at Chicago's O'Hare International Airport, with other airports reporting wait times of 90 minutes, and crowded lines "snaking up and down escalators, or through food courts, and into terminal lobbies." Some flights have even delayed their take-offs just to wait for more of their passengers to clear security. (One Dallas-Fort Worth flight waited 13 minutes, resulting in 23 more passengers who made it onboard -- while another 29 passengers still had to be rescheduled for later flights.) "We encourage people to have the appropriate expectations when they arrive at airports,â said Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson on Friday, saying the screenings were necessary to ensure passenger safety. "Contemplate increased wait times as you travel."
Johnson also said the TSA would increase the use of overtime, hire 768 new officers as soon as mid-June, and use more threat-sniffing dogs. Meanwhile, a TSA computer glitch caused 3,000 pieces of luggage to miss their flight in Phoenix, prompting city officials to investigate replacing the TSA with a private security contractor.
Passengers in security lines waited one hour and 45 minutes at Chicago's O'Hare International Airport, with other airports reporting wait times of 90 minutes, and crowded lines "snaking up and down escalators, or through food courts, and into terminal lobbies." Some flights have even delayed their take-offs just to wait for more of their passengers to clear security. (One Dallas-Fort Worth flight waited 13 minutes, resulting in 23 more passengers who made it onboard -- while another 29 passengers still had to be rescheduled for later flights.) "We encourage people to have the appropriate expectations when they arrive at airports,â said Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson on Friday, saying the screenings were necessary to ensure passenger safety. "Contemplate increased wait times as you travel."
Johnson also said the TSA would increase the use of overtime, hire 768 new officers as soon as mid-June, and use more threat-sniffing dogs. Meanwhile, a TSA computer glitch caused 3,000 pieces of luggage to miss their flight in Phoenix, prompting city officials to investigate replacing the TSA with a private security contractor.
I expect that the children playing security theater in the airport will grow up and go away. Maybe find something useful or meaningful to do with their time. Is that not an "appropriate expectation"?
This isn't trolling - it's truth. If enough people simply stop flying, it will change. Not only the airlines but mega corporations like Disney will have their way.
Last time I flew was - holy cannoli - 2002. I'm a little shocked at that because I really didn't think about it until I typed it. I still go on vacations, and even though I love the act of flying, Idon't miss the modern flying experience very much.
And it's pretty simple. If you still fly when you don't absolutely have to - you are okay with all of this.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
End the bullshit security theater. Do enough to keep serious explosives off (the crotch-bomber was no threat to the flight as a whole), basic metal detector.
People know now hot to cooperate with hijackers, and have started reacting appropriately (beating the fuck out of anyone attempting it). Cockpit doors are locked now. Those two changes alone were all that were really needed to improve airline security.
Taking away bottles of water and baby formula, stopping people with pocketknives, making everyone take off their shoes and gut half their luggage for the xrays are all a waste of time. They have caught NO THREATS yet. They have failed every single test to actually sneak stuff through.
End it.
100,000 passengers through screening, 0 found with contraban. If 99.9999999999% of passengers are just trying to get to their destination, is it really worth wasting everyone's time with screening? Is the fear of one guy with a bomb or nailclippers or a lighter really so great as to delay everyone? Sounds like the terrorists have won.
FTA:
"the screenings were necessary to ensure passenger safety"
I rather suspect the screenings are 'necessary' for two reasons having nothing to do with passenger safety:
-- To further grow the thriving empire that is government-mandated security theatre, so more people can draw bigger salaries and have better job security as they pretend to contribute to the good of society.
-- To expand and reinforce among the population the knee-jerk response of obedience to the dictates of authority, regardless of the pointlessness and impracticality of said dictates.
'The Economy' is a giant Ponzi scheme whose most pitiable suckers are the youngest among us and the yet-unborn.
how much longer are we going to put up with this ineffective security theater (search security breach TSA) that is but a total waste of time?
ELOI, ELOI, LAMA SABACHTHANI!?
9/11 happened because the standard reaction at that time was to let the hijackers have control. They were just going to fly and then land somewhere you weren't planning on.
Now people know better and anyone trying to hijack a plane will likely end up dead before they can do much of anything.
The security used to be private, and let through 9/11. That's one of the basis of the TSA, though there was nothing let through that wasn't on the government's allowed list.
That's EXACTLY the point. The hijackers used box cutters which weren't on the list of prohibited items. 9/11 was NOT the result of a failure of airport security personnel. There is thus no rational basis for the existence of the TSA. Pre-9/11, I don't recall any significant security lines. The biggest worry was the line at the ticketing desk if one needed to check luggage. (Otherwise, back then, you could just check in right at the gate. No boarding passes were necessary to get through security.) Now, you need to get the the airport hours ahead of time (even for a 1 hour flight) to make sure you get through security in time to catch your flight. I didn't realize airports were allowed to fire the TSA and go back to their own security, but I don't understand why all airports don't do this right now!
If I can be modded down for being a troll, can I be modded up for being an orc, or a balrog?
You forgot the extra 500 deaths due to people driving rather than flying, which is more dangerous on average.
I don't read AC A human right
I used to spend almost half my time on the road. I used to have nightmares about air travel, but it was never about plane crashes, it was about horrible mess-ups on the ground -- delayed or canceled flight causing me to miss my connection. That kind of thing.
Then a funny thing happened: sooner or later all of my nightmares ended up coming true.
I've missed key meetings with clients because the airlines couldn't get me to my destination on the appointed day. I've spent the night trying to sleep sitting up at Chicago Midway. I once spent 23 hours and 53 minutes in the loving embrace of the air travel system, just to cross the continental United States. I've flown across the continent sandwiched between two sweaty three hundred pound men, and I'm no lightweight myself. I've flown to Chile on a ten hour flight that allowed smoking. I was supposed to be on the flight that flew into the South Tower of the WTC on 9/11, but my trips was cancelled at the last minute so I could attend a bullshit meeting at Oracle in Nashua NH, which of course didn't happen because we spent the whole day glued to the TV in the conference room.
After having had almost every kind of bad air travel thing that can happen short of a crash or a hijacking, and having dodged one very major bullet, I just take all the crap air travel throws at me in stride. Flying will always be unreliable and inconvenient. Oh, you can learn the tricks of the trade, like "Never book an itinerary that involves Newark in any way," but there's no way to get around the fact that flying will always be inconvenient and unreliable, because the airlines will always promise more than they can deliver. So you show up ridiculously early in case of security snafus, bring plenty of stuff to read, and roll with the punches. It's like Hamlet said: there is nothing either good or bad but thinking makes it so. A screwed up itinerary is just an opportunity to catch up on my reading.
The poster is right: if you have any option other than flying, choose that instead. I'll even take a four hour bus ride over a one hour flight, provided it's a non-stop bus. But if you have to fly, you just have to put up with it, because it'll never get much better than it is now. Sure, the TSA should fix their manpower problem, but even if they do flying will never be like what airlines promise it will be.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
The problem here is simply that the TSA and the Unions are attempting to blackmail the public for more funding. Just like when President Obama had the National parks shut down, and his was successful.
Want to fix the disease? Start canning Government officers by any and all possible means and ban the ability for Government positions to be unionized. Everyone and their brother warned about the dangers of letting public servants unionize.
It was not too long ago that Public Service was just a job, often requiring sacrifice to fulfill. Today, it's like hitting the frigging Lottery.
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
I don't know; competition very often produces much better results for a better price.
The ground reality is that there will be very little competition for such contracts - the TSA replacement initiative will be created/overseen by politicians (the airlines/airports can't arbitrarily decide to switch to private providers, as far as I know), and they are going to write language/requirements so that only one (or at most a few) companies are capable of handling the project. There will be very little true competition - it basically will look like the US internet situation today. If more than one company can meet the requirements, they'll divvy up the market between themselves (mostly geographically) to avoid directly competing.