This past week, TSA agents in Lubbock, Texas made a set of decisions on how to implement the rules regarding customers who set off screening devices. Clearly a debate can be had about how the front-line TSA agents translated and handled the situation. That is often where organizations care to focus when things go wrong: How the people at the front translated the rules and regulations they have to follow.
As many news outlets have reported like this report from CBS, passenger Mandi Hamlin was given no choice but to painfully remove her nipple rings with a pliers before she could clear security.
Here’s the explanation that the TSA put forth on the TSA official website:
March 28, 2008
“TSA has reviewed the circumstances related to the screening of a passenger with body piercings that occurred recently in Lubbock, Texas. It appears that the Transportation Security Officers involved properly followed procedures in that incident. They rightly insisted that the alarm that was raised be resolved. TSA supports the thoroughness of the Officers involved as they were acting to protect the passengers and crews of the flights departing Lubbock that day.
TSA has reviewed the procedures themselves and agrees that they need to be changed. In the future TSA will inform passengers that they have the option to resolve the alarm through a visual inspection of the article in lieu of removing the item in question. TSA acknowledges that our procedures caused difficulty for the passenger involved and regrets the situation in which she found herself. We appreciate her raising awareness on this issue and we are changing the procedures to ensure that this does not happen again.”
And then there’s this statement from the TSA blog:
3.28.2008
TSA and Piercings
“Your questions and comments on the incident in Lubbock, Texas have not gone unnoticed. Yesterday, as soon as TSA became aware of the situation, people in our Security Operations office looked into it. They interviewed the four Security Officers who at one point or another, screened or spoke to the passenger – two men and two women (if a passenger requests private screening, they must get an officer of the same sex to screen them there). TSA has also been in touch with the passenger’s lawyer on several occasions.
The bottom line: the security officers followed the procedures for when someone alarms the metal detector and did nothing wrong. But, after looking at the procedure the officers followed, it was determined that the procedures should be modified. An official statement has been posted on our website here.”
What is Sorely Missing In Both of These Statements are Three Things:
1. An Apology
Both of these carefully worded statements go out of their to defend the actions of the TSA agents and the procedures. I could imagine the legal coaching that went into crafting these responses. This statement is as far as they would let themselves go in an apology: TSA acknowledges that our procedures caused difficulty for the passenger involved and regrets the situation in which she found herself. “Regrets the situation in which she found herself?” This feels way too much like the back-handed apologies I got from my brothers when I was growing up. You know, the ones where your mom was glaring and demanding that an apology be delivered…and what came out was something like, “Sorry you’re so stupid that I had to hit you!” All customers need to begin to warm up is a simple “we’re so sorry about this experience.”
2. A Human Touch
This situation involves a woman having to pry a piece of jewelry from her nipple. The TSA has said that the screening process was handled “properly.” But where is the “proper” way to maintain a person’s dignity while still enforcing the rules? Many reports have said that the male agents were snickering while she was struggling to remove the piercings. I’d ask them, if this was your wife or daughter, would you want them treated this way? And what of a touch of human kindness in these follow-up missives from the TSA? Does empathizing somehow imply guilt?
3. More Than a Vague Promise to Reform
Surely these new policies will have to go through multiple review committees and whatever happens to make changes to the current process. It is great that it was acknowledged that changes need to be made, but we need more than that. By when and by whom?
What do you think about this most recent incident? Did you have an emotional reaction to how Mandi Hamlin was treated? How would you grade the response and the unfolding aftermath of action by the TSA?
This incident was handled with all the warmth, grace, intelligence, and efficiency that can be expected of a government agency.
I hate to say it, but this sort of thing was predictable the moment airport security was nationalized.
(How often do you get a warm, fuzzy feeling from an agent of the IRS? From a postal worker?)
The trusty TSA hasn’t let us down, since.
None of this is to disparage the character of the people who are doing their best to do their jobs, but the bureaucratic process that is supposed to serve the people is fundamentally flawed.
I’m just not sure that the lawyers and politicians will ever allow it to be anything else.
TSA’s new motto
“You fly…we pry”
Cam,
Thanks for your response.
What you say is so true. The conditions for “customer focus” are not working in our favor in a government agency. They don’t abide by classic models to track and manage customer loyalty or profitability. They manage for the profitability factor related to cost management. And their process is about imposing and enforcing rules and regulations. These two components create combustible customer situations as we have seen this past week.
It would be interesting to know the enforcement process to manage and screen the frontline’s behaviors and interpretations of all of the rules and regulations. Of course, we’ve all experienced our share of TSA “policy cops” who enjoy their power over us. But I have seen glimmers of humanity in the process too. My hunch, like yours is that good performance ratings for TSA agents are most highly correlated with the robotic actions and enforcement of the rules we experience most of the time.
Thomas,
Hah! You know, maybe they should wear that on buttons on their uniforms. That way, any time we start to wander back to thinking “service” we can be constantly reminded otherwise.
Jeanne
Loving the slogan Thomas posted. Interesting that “apology” was truly no apology at all and obviously a not so subtle way to shut people up after so much publicity. Ridiculous!
I’m digging Thomas’ slogan too! And you are right…the TSA’s inability to apologize is just nuts. Too much “lawyering” I surmise.
I don’t know if you’ve had a chance to take a look at the new TSA blog, which is http://www.tsa.gov/blog/, but that too feels like a “one way” conversation. It feels more like “we talk – you listen” rather than the other way around – which is what you’d think the blog was supposed to be.
It is unfortunate that they couldn’t say sorry however it’s a sign of the times for large organisations and especially governmental ones.
To say “sorry” is to almost open the flood gates to litigation. If our society wasn’t driven by such legal attitudes then I’m certain large organisations would perhaps do things differently.
As most people have already pointed out (and I’m in the UK) this is the same the world over regarding these types of Organisations.
We should get more people talking about this as I think that’s the only way to extract an apology from them without using pliers ourselves!
Mike Ashworth
I had a TSA screener literally pry my toes apart to inspect between them. Her explanation was to ensure that I didn’t have any sharp objects imbedded between my toes. I told her that I thought blood filled shoes and my inablilty to walk would be a sure sign? Who does that anyway? Yet they never questioned the Doctor behind me that refused to take of his shoes for fear of catching a foot fungus from others bare feet. It is beyond ridiculous now when boarding a plane.
Great conversation, especially from a general perspective. But as a more specific incident, I think the TSA response was sufficient. While I have no personal opinion one way or another on body piercings, I am a little surprised no one has had the courage to say that if you choose to introduce metal into any area of your body, especially the more private areas, you can expect some interesting interaction with security agents. We are all aware of current procedures and this passenger should have anticipated that she was stepping into a situation.
To apologize would mean that they would have to admit that they were wrong. This is not in the equation for organizations like this or governments, cults, etc.
amanda
So if you ‘choose’ to have corrective surgery that includes metal being implanted into your body, then you should also be accepting that you may not be able to fly again. I realize that I’m not stating your case exactly as you made it, but it brings up an interesting dilemma and I’ve been waiting for my jaw reconstruction to be a problem (metal used). I’m just wondering how I’ll “prove” at the time that I’m not harboring dangerous substances in my mouth.
Amanda, I agree with you and am actually glad airport security is so strict. Gail, I haven’t researched the subject, but I believe you’re supposed to carry x-rays and/or a doctor’s statement with you when flying. That could keep you from getting pulled aside, or at least make the search quicker. But again, I would rather our airport security err on the side of caution.
This is ridiculous. If in my job I’m 5 minutes late, I apologize. For them to cause a woman to miss her plane in this extremely embarrassing situation is horrible. To not apologize is simply inexcusable.
This however is what you get when you have a monopoly. There is no way to fly without supporting TSA and that is the government’s fault because they gave the contract to a single vendor.
Though I blame TSA’s PR for this specific incident, I place the blame for my inability to choose another vendor upon our government.
I blogged a reply and threw you a link.
Just a note: your trackbacks don’t work with Haloscan. Here’s the URL of the post.
http://ktcatspost.blogspot.com/2008/04/copping-attitude-while-wetting-your.html
Thanks all for your impassioned points of view on both sides of this debate. I had a chance to suss this out with some TSA folks in my travels this week. As you could imagine, they’re pretty sick of hearing about it! The grades they gave their colleagues are:
Following the process: A
Being human and kind about it: D (especially the guys snickering)
KT,
O-U-C-H!!! I am definately NOT (as you wonder in your post) wearing an MGB cylinder head stud. Ouch again just thinking about that.
knowhow
Well I won’t disagree that the whole situation could have been dealt with differently, however……. Even my ten year old son whom has never flown before knows about the airport security restrictions from the news and passing conversations. So while everyone is complaining about the end results, I put the blame on the passanger in question. If he or she wants to wear jewelry in private settings, then he or she should have taken them out before attempting to board an airplane,DUH! Just think this would have avoided the entire problem. Once again blame some body else for your own inabilities to think ahead!
I believe this matter is all in the fault of the women involved; the women had to assume that her stainless steel jewelry would trigger the metal detector yet did nothing to take precautions.
I assume she thought she could just explain her situation and be on her way. Gone are the days of airport security just taking your word for it. Was there ever a time for that?
This is the world we live in, these are the lengths that we are going to …. to ensure everyone’s safety.
The part that I still don’t get is why she had to remove them with pliers? Body jewelry couldn’t be easier to get off– On a barbell one end screws off and you slide it out. For a hoop, the metal bead pops out and u slide the hoop out. Its far from difficult and equally as far from painful.
People need to think and not be so sensitive.
These are the rules you voted for …. This is the world we live in.
Here is the facts, in order to be safe you have to go through these measures. TSA is not selling you anything, they are trying to keep you safe. An other point, the screeners didn’t make the policy and procedures they are just doing what they are told to do, in order to keep you safe and ALIVE. TSA isn’t selling you service they are protecting you while you conveniently have the luxury to fly state to state or country to country.