91–100 of 117 posts
While I'm not a fan of the TSA as an institution, I'm certainly sympathetic to them being in a situation of essentially unpaid servitude. Nobody deserves that, no matter how shitty or unimportant you think their job is.
According to Webster: "a condition in which one lacks liberty especially to determine one's course of action or way of life"
This is false. They have an option (leave) and can execute on it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The TSA has never found a bomb.
I don't think that statement, by itself, tells us much about the TSA's efficacy. Because their mere presence could be an effective deterrent.
ATC staff, inspectors -- I get that, they're useful TSA?? They're not doing anything of value, for the most part. Three quarters of them could probably be let go. We're not losing much here.
TSA is a case where the government nationalized a thing (airport security) that was sufficiently handled by the private sector. A centralized regulating agency for transportation security makes sense, but heres what I don't get: what was the argument for also creating/hiring a literal army of guards to replace the private force that existed before? It seems unprecedented considering everything else in the post-Reagan…
SFO is still private. Their version of security is not the TSA, they are Covenant Aviation Security. [0]
While I'm not a fan of the TSA as an institution, I'm certainly sympathetic to them being in a situation of essentially unpaid servitude. Nobody deserves that, no matter how shitty or unimportant you think their job is.
> essentially unpaid servitude According to Webster: "a condition in which one lacks liberty especially to determine one's course of action or way of life" This is false. They have an option (leave) and can execute on it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We know at least two made it through. Underwear bomber, shoe bomber. We also know pre-9/11 how common it was (non-existent). We also know that they consistently fail audits. Though they've gotten better! Most recently they only failed ~75% of the time at detecting things auditors were trying to smuggle in, instead of the prior 95%! So, yeah, by itself it doesn't. But we have enough data to make a pretty solid eval.
Both the underwear bomber and shoe bomber boarded flights overseas (Amsterdam and Paris respectively) -- so no TSA involvement.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
this is my point - don't you think it a salient fact to inform the reader that these employees will in fact be paid for the work they perform....at some point
The point is that they won't be repaid for the costs incurred from being without any income for months. These include late fees, high interest rates on loans, long-term damage to their credit, etc.
TSA is a case where the government nationalized a thing (airport security) that was sufficiently handled by the private sector. A centralized regulating agency for transportation security makes sense, but heres what I don't get: what was the argument for also creating/hiring a literal army of guards to replace the private force that existed before? It seems unprecedented considering everything else in the post-Reagan…
If it was truly about security, then it would just be a regulatory and enforcement agency like the EPA. But nope, gotta get those dollars!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
We know at least two made it through. Underwear bomber, shoe bomber. We also know pre-9/11 how common it was (non-existent). We also know that they consistently fail audits. Though they've gotten better! Most recently they only failed ~75% of the time at detecting things auditors were trying to smuggle in, instead of the prior 95%! So, yeah, by itself it doesn't. But we have enough data to make a pretty solid eval.
Both the underwear bomber and shoe bomber boarded flights overseas (Amsterdam and Paris respectively) -- so no TSA involvement.
If they see a country isn't up to their standard, I think they either show up to implement it for flights headed to the US or at least consult with the nation.
The system whereby the government is "shutdown", forcing all its employees to become creditors, but at the same time everyone is expected to treat it as mere theatre where they eventually will be paid, is absurd. If it was France everyone involved would be in the street throwing road flares at the police. They should at the very least be starting to talk up the threat of going on strike - or action short of a strike.…