Re: TSA Jobs

Have you considered the fact that the TSA may very well have certain minimum
physical standards, and that a person with a specified disability does not
qualify for that reason? There are plenty of other jobs in the government
which are given to people who are disabled.

--
Nigel Brooks


"meport" wrote in message
news:bdjkor$554$1@bob.news.rcn.net...
> I've heard that same complaint from several people. Vets with VA
> disabilities and x-government employees with disability pensions through
OPM
> are automatically excluded. There is no way to prove the contention that
> people with VA disabilities or persons with other disabilities are
> automatically excluded because the TSA is not required, by law, to
disclose
> why a person isn't hired,
>
> --
> If you get what you want, what's to stop you
> from asking for more?
> "Tom" wrote in message
> news:m_NKa.24003$0v4.1824186@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> >
> > wrote in message
> > news:lp8nfvc5rvq6mjb7jcme9su63tqlh9h1ms@4ax.com...
> > > One of the problems is that the (TSA) fired 1,208 screeners at ,
> > > including 85 convicted felons, after discovering the workers had
> > > questionable backgrounds. The number included 503 screeners who failed
> > > to notify the agency that they had been arrested, committed fraud or
> > > convicted of a crime. According to news sources the agency that
> > > oversees airport security discovered the workers' disqualifications in
> > > recent months. You better hope they don't hear about your fraudulent
> > > TDY Forms or your ass in the post office might be grass. Btw, how did
> > > you get Perry's SSN??
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, 26 Jun 2003 18:50:38 -0700, "©Old Sarge®2003?"
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > >-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> > > >Hash: SHA1
> > > >
> > > >Awhile back, a few people were discussing possible employment with
> > > >the TSA. Has anyone secured a position with them?? I find it
> > > >strange that after all the hiring, they now state they hired too
> > > >many and let a few go to include those they didn't do background
> > > >checks on or had dirty background check results. Now in Seattle,
> > > >the worst in the country, they are talking about hiring temps to
> > > >take the pressure off. Seattle wanted the cruise business and boy
> > > >did they get it. The airport cannot handle the heavy influx of
> > > >passengers and the standard wait time now just to get through TSA is
> > > >two hours at least. Forget about arriving two hours before your
> > > >flight. In Seattle it's more like three or four hours.
> > > >
> > > >Just wondering if anyone was lucky enough to get hired.
> > > >
> > > >-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> > > >Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.8 for non-commercial use

> > > >Comment: *PGP used to validate the REAL Old Sarge (RG)*
> > > >
> > > >iQA/AwUBPvui7aWwd94ur2ICEQL3TwCfaR0aNporFKxC7rLXajT+j7 uG6RoAoNbR
> > > >RaDrRnI2NDhL+18rMd6GOwqh
> > > >=FqsY
> > > >-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> > > >
> > >
> >
> > I applied and was ignored due to my VA rating. I received a letter
that
> I
> > passed all the tests but was then required to meet a HIGHER standard
than
> > general public applicants. I'm fighting it and they are dragging it out
> > still. I will have an ADR meeting then I will file a formal complaint.
> > With all this talk about screener backgrounds lacking you would think
they
> > would take a recently retired NCO whom had a security clearance within
the
> > last couple years.
> >
> > Tom
> >
> >
>
>

I met all the requirements but was put in a hold status because of my VA
rating. While their Dr took their time to clear me as well they continued
to fill positions. Then after all the positions were filled they lifted the
hold and said we have no positions available. So out the window goes that
retired Military pref the law said we would get. I also had demonstrated
and passed all the assessment tests administered to the general public
applicants and was given a statement that said that before the hold was put
on me this sucked.

I knew when they said we need to put you on hold due to your VA rating that
I'd never be offered a position.

"Perry" wrote in message
news:e816gvsotjou9thp8mkn6t206i7oid1plq@4ax.com...
> it's not discrimination if you don't meet the physical requirement of
> the Job, or am I missing something here.
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, 02 Jul 2003 14:56:04 GMT, "Tom"
> wrote:
>
> >Had an ADR this morning with TSA. Their HR position is that since I was
> >placed on a medical hold and they would do that to anybody that the end
> >result was not discrimination. Sure feels like it when you are singled
out
> >and then they hire all the positions out and then they say your hold is
> >lifted but we have no job for you.
> >
> >I guess what they meant was they discriminate equally against all
disabled.
> >
> >I will continue with the formal complaint but I get the feeling that all
> >I'll get is a warm feeling like pissing into the wind.
> >
> >Tom
> >
> >"meport" wrote in message
> >news:bdu97k$6dp$1@bob.news.rcn.net...
> >> The TSA will not disclose it's standards. They come right out and tell
> >you
> >> that they will not disclose to anyone why they were hired or not hired.
> >> They tell you right from the onset that they don't have to disclose and
> >will
> >> not disclose.
> >>
> >> As to other agencies, all you have to do is ask them. For example, and
I
> >> know this personally, ATF tells an applicant exactly what the standards
> >are
> >> or aren't. When I was going through the ATF hiring process, all I had
to
> >do
> >> is ask and I was told exactly what the standards were, TSA refuses to
do
> >> this. In fact, they will tell you outright that they don't have to
tell
> >you
> >> and they won't.
> >>
> >> --
> >> If you get what you want, what's to stop you
> >> from asking for more?
> >>
> >> "Nigel Brooks ²°°³®©" wrote in message
> >> news:bdsmlq$vul1d$1@ID-74999.news.dfncis.de...
> >> > "meport" wrote in message
> >> > news:bdrvf1$t7f$1@bob.news.rcn.net...
> >> > > What you said is true, but it's not the point.
> >> > >
> >> > > The point is the fact that they won't disclose what their standards
> >are
> >> so
> >> > > someone can meet them. They've publicly said they don't have to,
and
> >> they
> >> > > won't.
> >> >
> >> > Could you provide a cite for the TSA refusing to disclose standards?
> >> >
> >> > If you're talking of medical or physical standards - of course they
> >> > disclose them. Once an applicant has been accepted as a potential
hire
> >> they
> >> > have to provide the applicant's doctor with a list of things that the
> >> > applicant should be capable of doing. Other standards would be the
lack
> >> of
> >> > a criminal record, and ability to pass a background investigation,
and
> >> > other things listed in the job announcement.
> >> >
> >> > It is entirely possible that if the applicant applies on line, the
> >initial
> >> > screening might exclude him or her based on the answers provided. It
is
> >> > also quite possible that any kind of disability compensation is
> >> > disqualifying.
> >> >
> >> > Is there a requirement that any agency publicize their standards or
> >> disclose
> >> > the reason for not hiring? I doubt it - just as during the first
year
> >of
> >>
> >> > employment witht he federal government and agency can let you go
without
> >> any
> >> > reason whatsoever.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > > Reminds me of the KBG or the Iraqi secret police. You know, the
> >> agencies
> >> > > that we "defeated" in wars (cold and hot) because they were so bad
and
> >> so
> >> > > intrusive?
> >> >
> >> > I don't see how the hiring practices of the federal government even
> >> remotely
> >> > relate to what you describe.
> >> >
> >> > Brooks
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >
>

Wonder what the stats are on the hiring of retired Military and disabled
retired vets??? Seems like what Congress intended and what they did was 2
different things. Wonder if that information is available Under FOIA and
the Privacy Act ????

"©Old Sarge®2003?" wrote in message
news:bdvs3u$cd$0@pita.alt.net...
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Tom, if I were you, I would just chalk it up. I don't think you
> would be happy working for them. There are horror stories coming
> out of Airports on how they treat their employees. They need Union
> representation and don't have any yet. They let a bunch go and
> didn't replace them, therefore, involuntary overtime is the norm at
> some airports. It was thought in Seattle that the employees did a
> work slowdown as the lines were winding outside the facility, but
> TSA said it was due to a heavy influx of summer travelers and the
> cruise ship crowds. I don't buy that one. While I personally want
> a safe flight environment, I also would like to process through
> security quicker without some of the rinky dink bullshit that goes
> on. I think you will find that TSA will be letting more people go
> as I understand they employed more than they were supposed to.
>
> Seattle brought in some temporary employees to help process the
> crowds here. Don't know if those temps will become regulars or not.
> I don't know of any disabled veteran that got on with them.
>
> "Tom" wrote in message
> news:8oCMa.33009$0v4.2422399@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> > Had an ADR this morning with TSA. Their HR position is that since
> > I was placed on a medical hold and they would do that to anybody
> > that the end result was not discrimination. Sure feels like it
> > when you are singled out and then they hire all the positions out
> > and then they say your hold is lifted but we have no job for you.
> >
> > I guess what they meant was they discriminate equally against all
> > disabled.
> >
> > I will continue with the formal complaint but I get the feeling
> > that all I'll get is a warm feeling like pissing into the wind.
> >
> > Tom
> >
> > "meport" wrote in message
> > news:bdu97k$6dp$1@bob.news.rcn.net...
> > > The TSA will not disclose it's standards. They come right out
> > > and tell
> > you
> > > that they will not disclose to anyone why they were hired or not
> > > hired. They tell you right from the onset that they don't have
> > > to disclose and
> > will
> > > not disclose.
> > >
> > > As to other agencies, all you have to do is ask them. For
> > > example, and I know this personally, ATF tells an applicant
> > > exactly what the standards
> > are
> > > or aren't. When I was going through the ATF hiring process, all
> > > I had to
> > do
> > > is ask and I was told exactly what the standards were, TSA
> > > refuses to do this. In fact, they will tell you outright that
> > > they don't have to tell
> > you
> > > and they won't.
> > >
> > > --
> > > If you get what you want, what's to stop you
> > > from asking for more?
> > >
> > > "Nigel Brooks ²°°³®©" wrote in message
> > > news:bdsmlq$vul1d$1@ID-74999.news.dfncis.de...
> > > > "meport" wrote in message
> > > > news:bdrvf1$t7f$1@bob.news.rcn.net...
> > > > > What you said is true, but it's not the point.
> > > > >
> > > > > The point is the fact that they won't disclose what their
> > > > > standards
> > are
> > > so
> > > > > someone can meet them. They've publicly said they don't
> > > > > have to, and
> > > they
> > > > > won't.
> > > >
> > > > Could you provide a cite for the TSA refusing to disclose
> > > > standards?
> > > >
> > > > If you're talking of medical or physical standards - of
> > > > course they disclose them. Once an applicant has been
> > > > accepted as a potential hire
> > > they
> > > > have to provide the applicant's doctor with a list of things
> > > > that the applicant should be capable of doing. Other
> > > > standards would be the lack
> > > of
> > > > a criminal record, and ability to pass a background
> > > > investigation, and other things listed in the job
> > > > announcement.
> > > >
> > > > It is entirely possible that if the applicant applies on line,
> > > > the
> > initial
> > > > screening might exclude him or her based on the answers
> > > > provided. It is also quite possible that any kind of
> > > > disability compensation is disqualifying.
> > > >
> > > > Is there a requirement that any agency publicize their
> > > > standards or
> > > disclose
> > > > the reason for not hiring? I doubt it - just as during the
> > > > first year
> > of
> > >
> > > > employment witht he federal government and agency can let you
> > > > go without
> > > any
> > > > reason whatsoever.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > Reminds me of the KBG or the Iraqi secret police. You know,
> > > > > the
> > > agencies
> > > > > that we "defeated" in wars (cold and hot) because they were
> > > > > so bad and
> > > so
> > > > > intrusive?
> > > >
> > > > I don't see how the hiring practices of the federal government
> > > > even
> > > remotely
> > > > relate to what you describe.
> > > >
> > > > Brooks
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.8 for non-commercial use
> Comment: *PGP used to validate the REAL Old Sarge (RG)*
>
> iQA/AwUBPwNzxaWwd94ur2ICEQKvCACfSwqVToLOwhZz7unu2lFPpP 9hOp4AnRFq
> W5U3G/fhWuxmK3ReorhVPuT1
> =vR5n
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
>

"©Old Sarge®2003?" wrote:
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Al, ????. Rephrase your post. I don't understand what you just
> said. If I read it like it's written, you said Liberals wanted to
> Federalize the airports. Do you have a reference for that??
>
Federalize the airport security- which they did. Remember it was
originally done by private companies. Liberals think that only the
government can do things like airport security, road maintenance,
deliver letters, etc.

>Al

meport wrote:
>
> The gestapo in gremany "protected" the "populace". The kgb in the soviet
> union "protected" the "populace". The iraqi secret police "protected" the
> "populace". Want me to go on and on and on naming the "secretive"
> government organizations that "protect" the "populace"?
>
Beside making no sense, you haven't named one group that is designed to
protect the people. The KGB, Gestapo, etc were designed to protect the
government, not the people.

Al Zeller

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

I'm with you now Al. As for "letters", well I can speak of that
part. It won't be long before the USPS will go totally private.
It's being done already piecemeal. We are losing our Postal Police
force in a few months. Those fellas either have to find another
position in the USPS or be out ont he street. In light of 911 and
all the anthrax threats, it's a bad time for us to lose our
security. They are going to get Burns Security to take over. Talk
about going Postal.

Shortly after 911, I said in this forum that a National ID Card
isn't far away. Most just shrugged it off as bullshit. SURPRISE.
It's on the table now and probbly won't be long before we will all
have one. Then we will most likely have to report all of our moves
to the Government so they can keep track of us. In 10 years, this
country will be on total lockdown and freedoms as we knew them will
be half of what we have today. The Government is getting frustrated
because they cannot fight terrorism like a convential war and it's
totally new to them. It's going like the drug war, in circles.
Their Intel isn't as reliable as they thought it was and we are just
as vulnerable today to a 911 like attack as we were on 9/11/2001.

So, off the top I feel your statement fits, however, I object to
using a political party term as an excuse. One of the problems with
this newsgroup has been separating people by political affiliation
without giving people credit for their own thoughts and feelings,
regardless of how right or left they may seem. I remember when we
didn't use the terms liberal or conservative here at all. We are
all retirees and individuals. This country would be in bad shape if
everyone thought the same way. Rather boring.

"Al Zeller" wrote in message
news:3F040A58.8A042DF5@nscl.msu.edu...
>
>
> "©Old Sarge®2003?" wrote:
> >
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> > Hash: SHA1
> >
> > Al, ????. Rephrase your post. I don't understand what you just
> > said. If I read it like it's written, you said Liberals wanted
> > to Federalize the airports. Do you have a reference for that??
> >
> Federalize the airport security- which they did. Remember it was
> originally done by private companies. Liberals think that only the
> government can do things like airport security, road maintenance,
> deliver letters, etc.
>
Al

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.8 for non-commercial use
Comment: *PGP used to validate the REAL Old Sarge (RG)*

iQA/AwUBPwQYwaWwd94ur2ICEQIDAACggEtukgRfnG1BIY8+RCqTZ6 gmRLUAoOS1
5fJL1/AUYwKdXVsZlLhLwtqQ
=pR37
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

>using a political party term as an excuse. One of the problems with
>this newsgroup has been separating people by political affiliation
>without giving people credit for their own thoughts and feelings,

I will be damn if we will give credit your comments that you respect
the Vietcong and that they are braver than Americans. If you want
credit for that you better not hold your breath ... All you have done
lately is mock our soldiers who fought bravely as those Vietcong
Cowards performed illegal acts. You call them brave - we call them
cowardly. I don't care what you say, or how you try and spin it now
that you once again put your foot in your mouth. Now you attack
disabled veterans and make fun of their illnesses and capabilities.
You want be a sideline doctor and render a medical opinion on disabled
Veterans yet you can't even manage a check book. You have no respect
for those who have sacrificed for our country so that you can be free.
It is not our fault that you failed in the Military and were court
martialled, cheated on TDY Forms to sucker the tax payers out of
monies you were not entitled to. You blame honorable veterans for your
wrongful conduct and have a personal problem with anyone who out ranks
you. You even badmouthed your subordinate because the Army decided to
promote him to MSG instead of you ... Did you ever stop and think
that just maybe he is qualified and you were not? You are just as
disgruntled now as you were when you were in the service. Take
responsibility for a change and quit attacking those who sacrificed
for their country! If you like the Vietcong so much go live with them.

you don't but if you hide a disability that disqualifies you for a job
that is grounds for immediate termination, Heaven't seen a job
description for a airport screener but I'm willing to bet it has some
type of physical requirements. like standing for long periods, etc.



On Thu, 03 Jul 2003 0750 GMT, "fob" wrote:

>I well recall you NEVER had to tell anyone of VA ratings
>or Comp. I collected Unemployment while on 100%.
>I just wonder when all this changed ?
>
>"Tom" wrote in message news:a2OMa.33866$3o3.2458105@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
>> I met all the requirements but was put in a hold status because of my VA
>> rating. While their Dr took their time to clear me as well they continued
>> to fill positions. Then after all the positions were filled they lifted the
>> hold and said we have no positions available. So out the window goes that
>> retired Military pref the law said we would get. I also had demonstrated
>> and passed all the assessment tests administered to the general public
>> applicants and was given a statement that said that before the hold was put
>> on me this sucked.
>>
>> I knew when they said we need to put you on hold due to your VA rating that
>> I'd never be offered a position.
>>
>> "Perry" wrote in message
>> news:e816gvsotjou9thp8mkn6t206i7oid1plq@4ax.com...
>> > it's not discrimination if you don't meet the physical requirement of
>> > the Job, or am I missing something here.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Wed, 02 Jul 2003 14:56:04 GMT, "Tom"
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> > >Had an ADR this morning with TSA. Their HR position is that since I was
>> > >placed on a medical hold and they would do that to anybody that the end
>> > >result was not discrimination. Sure feels like it when you are singled
>> out
>> > >and then they hire all the positions out and then they say your hold is
>> > >lifted but we have no job for you.
>> > >
>> > >I guess what they meant was they discriminate equally against all
>> disabled.
>> > >
>> > >I will continue with the formal complaint but I get the feeling that all
>> > >I'll get is a warm feeling like pissing into the wind.
>> > >
>> > >Tom
>> > >
>> > >"meport" wrote in message
>> > >news:bdu97k$6dp$1@bob.news.rcn.net...
>> > >> The TSA will not disclose it's standards. They come right out and tell
>> > >you
>> > >> that they will not disclose to anyone why they were hired or not hired.
>> > >> They tell you right from the onset that they don't have to disclose and
>> > >will
>> > >> not disclose.
>> > >>
>> > >> As to other agencies, all you have to do is ask them. For example, and
>> I
>> > >> know this personally, ATF tells an applicant exactly what the standards
>> > >are
>> > >> or aren't. When I was going through the ATF hiring process, all I had
>> to
>> > >do
>> > >> is ask and I was told exactly what the standards were, TSA refuses to
>> do
>> > >> this. In fact, they will tell you outright that they don't have to
>> tell
>> > >you
>> > >> and they won't.
>> > >>
>> > >> --
>> > >> If you get what you want, what's to stop you
>> > >> from asking for more?
>> > >>
>> > >> "Nigel Brooks ²°°³®©" wrote in message
>> > >> news:bdsmlq$vul1d$1@ID-74999.news.dfncis.de...
>> > >> > "meport" wrote in message
>> > >> > news:bdrvf1$t7f$1@bob.news.rcn.net...
>> > >> > > What you said is true, but it's not the point.
>> > >> > >
>> > >> > > The point is the fact that they won't disclose what their standards
>> > >are
>> > >> so
>> > >> > > someone can meet them. They've publicly said they don't have to,
>> and
>> > >> they
>> > >> > > won't.
>> > >> >
>> > >> > Could you provide a cite for the TSA refusing to disclose standards?
>> > >> >
>> > >> > If you're talking of medical or physical standards - of course they
>> > >> > disclose them. Once an applicant has been accepted as a potential
>> hire
>> > >> they
>> > >> > have to provide the applicant's doctor with a list of things that the
>> > >> > applicant should be capable of doing. Other standards would be the
>> lack
>> > >> of
>> > >> > a criminal record, and ability to pass a background investigation,
>> and
>> > >> > other things listed in the job announcement.
>> > >> >
>> > >> > It is entirely possible that if the applicant applies on line, the
>> > >initial
>> > >> > screening might exclude him or her based on the answers provided. It
>> is
>> > >> > also quite possible that any kind of disability compensation is
>> > >> > disqualifying.
>> > >> >
>> > >> > Is there a requirement that any agency publicize their standards or
>> > >> disclose
>> > >> > the reason for not hiring? I doubt it - just as during the first
>> year
>> > >of
>> > >>
>> > >> > employment witht he federal government and agency can let you go
>> without
>> > >> any
>> > >> > reason whatsoever.
>> > >> >
>> > >> >
>> > >> > > Reminds me of the KBG or the Iraqi secret police. You know, the
>> > >> agencies
>> > >> > > that we "defeated" in wars (cold and hot) because they were so bad
>> and
>> > >> so
>> > >> > > intrusive?
>> > >> >
>> > >> > I don't see how the hiring practices of the federal government even
>> > >> remotely
>> > >> > relate to what you describe.
>> > >> >
>> > >> > Brooks
>> > >> >
>> > >> >
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >
>> >
>>
>>

In message Perry
wrote:

>Heaven't seen a job
>description for a airport screener but I'm willing to bet it has some
>type of physical requirements.

They should have a mental requirement, too. Like having an attention
span the exceeds a gold fish's. It's amazing to watch some of these
people mindlessly go through the motions of "screening"...amazing that
there hasn't been more hi-jackings, that is.

On Thu, 03 Jul 2003 0927 -0400, Dewight Fry
wrote:

>In message Perry
> wrote:
>
>>Heaven't seen a job
>>description for a airport screener but I'm willing to bet it has some
>>type of physical requirements.
>
>They should have a mental requirement, too. Like having an attention
>span the exceeds a gold fish's. It's amazing to watch some of these
>people mindlessly go through the motions of "screening"...amazing that
>there hasn't been more hi-jackings, that is.

they use to work at the pickle factory checking the jars of pickles
that went by on the line, Takes the same kind of mentality I guess
.