Posted on 02/06/2003 12:51:01 PM PST by mrustow
Toogood Reports [Thursday, February 6, 2003; 12:01 a.m. EST]
URL: http://ToogoodReports.com/
In response to columns I have written on the failures of the feds to make air travel safer, one reader wrote to me twice, telling me that I had underestimated just how bad things are. The reader, who had been "downsized" from his job, and applied for a federal airport lead security screener job, is a long-time correspondent who has proven to be a reliable informant. I have edited out only those facts which would aid in the identification of the writer, who as part of the application process, had to sign a release NOT to blow the whistle on the feds. (Whatever happened to federal whistleblower laws? I guess they're buried under John Ashcroft's house.)
My correspondent "wanted to find out if Tom Daschle's claim that federalizing airport screeners would, indeed, 'professionalize' this surly bunch." His conclusion? "It's worse than you thought."
What follows is an amalgam of the writer's two letters.
"Nicholas – Dead-on target again, my friend; the plain, unvarnished truth, and well-delivered!
"It occurs that I have a bit of info about the airport security screening fiasco that you may find interesting....
"Anyway, when I stumbled across 'Lead Airport Security Screener' at my local airport on Monster.com, I thought I'd see what the 'new' standards were. Well, to see what the requirements were, you had to complete an on-line application; no problem... I did it for 'Supervisor' and just plain 'Screener,' too. It's worse than you think.
"There is no question about or place to show previous military experience, or previous supervisory experience. In fact, 90% of the application consists of questions about 'trace explosive detection devices' and operating 'X-ray surveillance equipment', etc. Surprisingly, since I had no experience with any of the numerous screening equipment, the notice at the end of the application said I would be contacted.
"Amazingly, though, one week later I was contacted by phone and told to report for an assessment (two hours away, strangely, and not at the local airport), and to complete and bring two lengthy questionnaires that would be overnighted to me. That was on Wednesday night, and the assessment was on Monday. I never got the documents.
"Now, after four years in the military (eons ago) and over ten years in a quasi federal government agency [deleted], I'm well aware of the culture of federal employment and really wanted no part of it. But I talked myself into going anyway, figuring I'd easily get the job and would at least have a paycheck until something in my field [deleted] finally came along. So I drove up this morning, arriving an hour ahead of my 11 a.m. scheduled start time. to fill out the two forms they neglected to send, you see.
"But when I walked up, they said I'd be the last one taken that day, due to unexplained difficulties in the process. (The assessment was held in [deleted], but was for all airports in the central and eastern part of the state, so some people may have driven farther than I did. and to no avail.)
"They took me to a room where the first four people with whom I came in contact were: an Indian (Asian), a Pakistani, an Arab and an African (not African-American, just African). (I couldn't make this up!) After having me dump everything from my pockets, they patted me down, ran the wand over me, and confiscated my laptop bag (assuring me it would be safe).
"From that point on, it was as if I'd re-enlisted in the Marine Corps – not a smile or a pleasant word from any of the people from [contractor's name deleted, at correspondent's request], who were doing the processing. (Somewhere, someone in government has made the case for 'professionalism' as being cold, inhuman and downright robot-like!) We were placed in specific seats ('Sir, please sit right here.'), and then walked through the eight or ten documents, a line at a time. When the proctor saw I was getting ahead of him, he walked to my table, checked my papers, and unable to find a mistake, huffed away.
"An hour of this ordeal and then across the hall to a computerized test that was supposed to take four hours (I took about 50 minutes, cause I was very careful in the X-ray phase). It was English usage and grammar (about 30%), which I aced; a series of 'agree/disagree' questions (another 30%), which, recognizing the slant towards diversity, I answered accordingly; listening to recorded conversations between screeners and passengers at various checkpoints, then answering some simple-minded questions about those conversations (about 10%), which I also aced; and the X-ray portion (about 30%).
"This consisted of 30 seconds to view six on-screen objects – first was knives; later it was guns, tools, pens, kitchen utensils (?), calculators, watches and shoes (but of course!). Then a series of about 12 or 15 photos of actual X-rays of luggage were displayed, and we had 15 seconds to look at each and indicate whether one of the six knives was in the bag or not. Then on to guns for 30 seconds, another 12 to 15 photos, etc. I picked out quite a few, but honestly can't tell how I did on this part. But since those selected would receive training in this, I didn't sweat it.
"Then, back to a 'holding pen,' where there were signs that you couldn't leave once the process started, etc. I'm telling you, it was Parris Island all over again. At one point, a young girl (about 20, tops), stepped to the front of the room where about 50 or so of us were seated and announced, 'Anyone who needs to go to the restroom, line up right here'...and six or seven grown men actually lined up, in single file, and followed her down the hall!! After about twenty minutes, one of the drones called a bunch of names, mine among them, and we dutifully followed her to a room.
"There, she announced that we 'did not qualify' for the positions for which we had applied. Now, Nicholas, I've never failed a test in my life, especially this aptitude/general knowledge kind of thing, which I usually ace. So I asked who to see to discover what part we'd failed, and received this unsmiling reply, 'Sir, we don't have that information.' Excuse me, we just took the test across the hall, waited for them to grade it ... and you don't have that info? 'No, sir; that information is in Virginia, at headquarters.'?! Recognizing that she was doing exactly what she'd been told, I signed the paper acknowledging I'd been told I'm an idiot and escaped.
"Now, I'm no genius, but have a near-bachelor's in ... have been an instructor in ... for ... years, and for the past ... a [high-tech job]. I served four years active duty in the Marine Corps. I have no arrest record or outstanding tickets, etc. I'm in reasonable shape for a [middle-aged man], and am extremely personable...but I 'don't qualify.'
"I laughed halfway home! Thank you, Lord, for not letting me subject myself to that idiocy daily! That's not rationalizing, my friend, that's relief! I think you get the idea. Some of the people still sitting there when I left couldn't find their own butt with a roadmap and both hands... but I 'don't qualify'? I wear that as a badge of honor, by the way; not being qualified for work in the federal government may just be what I'll start putting at the top of my resume! I still smile when I think of it... until I think of flying again. Then I shudder.
"... I thought you'd appreciate the farce they're conducting, given your print comments today and previously. With the idiocy that we've read about in airport screening, and all across the country, they're rejecting people like me, yet accepting some who... well, I wouldn't let most of them wash my car!
"Nicholas, it's actually WORSE than even we thought!
"Warm regards..."
(Name Withheld)
To comment on this article or express your opinion directly to the author, you are invited to e-mail Nicholas at adddda@earthlink.net .
Stories like this fill me with all sorts of warm fuzzies. /sarcasm
On the other hand, as an old Viet Nam boy who has listened to endless prattle about "the lessons of Viet Nam", I know what the lesson of Viet Nam is. The lesson is that the people of America have too much faith and trust in the Federal Government.
That's funny, but in what Johnny Carson used to call a "cerebral" way.
It’s hard to say based only on this article, but you may be correct.
Everybody wants to scream that you won’t hire someone that is smart, but when Mr. Smarty-pants bails out two months later because of boredom or a better offer a replacement will have to be recruited and trained.
When it happens in large numbers you have a problem.
I think this:
But I talked myself into going anyway, figuring I'd easily get the job and would at least have a paycheck until something in my field [deleted] finally came along.
Pretty much sums up his intentions.
Our company used to figure that for each new-hire we were out $1800 - $2000 on day one – depending on the position. Those figures were for part-time positions. It included stuff like advertising, resume processing, initial screening, interviews, background checks, uniform ordering, documents that had to be signed and verified and filed, training - it’s not a cheap process. It takes up a lot of time and energy. You hope they stay around long enough to recover the money you’ve spent to hire them.
I wasn't contacted and, like this man, I'm grateful I wasn't.
But I don't get your reasoning, re the guy not having a record.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.