Former AA employees should be considered # 1 for future TSA jobs.

[AAquila]

While many former LLCers and newly minted unemployed at AA struggle for money to pay their bills the TSA filled it''s ranks with x-convicts and the like.

Write to your Congressmen and insist that these jobs go first to former Airline personnel.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/artic...7-2003Jun3.html

 

[Oliver Stone''s Apprentice]

If anyone deserves preferential consideration, it would be people who are being furloughed from the TSA this week. They''re also laying off a couple thousand screeners who have clean backgrounds.

 

[LaBradford22]

And the overriding question is...what the heck was the TSA thinking hiring thousands more screeners than it was authorized by Congress to hire? That move by the TSA top brass smacks of either arrogance or stupidity, or both. At any rate, I do feel bad for the TSA screeners with clean backgrounds who are already getting pink-slipped, but it''s a move that had to be made. After all, if you''ve been to virtually any domestic airport lately, you know that TSA stands for "Thousands Standing Around".

 

[xsqueezeme]

----------------
On 6/4/2003 9:29:56 AM LaBradford22 wrote:

And the overriding question is...what the heck was the TSA thinking hiring thousands more screeners than it was authorized by Congress to hire? That move by the TSA top brass smacks of either arrogance or stupidity, or both. At any rate, I do feel bad for the TSA screeners with clean backgrounds who are already getting pink-slipped, but it''s a move that had to be made. After all, if you''ve been to virtually any domestic airport lately, you know that TSA stands for "Thousands Standing Around".

----------------​

well if in case you did not notice, 9/11 happened two years ago so why should screeners, TSA, and the government give airport security any priority? come on now, it''s happened, it''s been two years, who cares....it''s time to revert back to the apathetic ways of pre-9/11, well of course until something that tragic should happen again. Then we''ll just stare with open mouths as we once again watch the government do something about our security on our shores. The important issue right now is RE-ELECTIONS, forget the rest...forget homeland security, forget unemployment, forget WMD, forget Afghanistan & Iraq, forget Al-Qaeda and Osama Bin Laden. let''s put all our energies back to more important stuff like getting Bush re-elected, just so we can have another 4 years of life as we know it today. Hey, after all, he did "free" Iraq and Afghanistan.

 

[rampguy]

----------------
On 6/4/2003 9:29:56 AM LaBradford22 wrote:

And the overriding question is...what the heck was the TSA thinking hiring thousands more screeners than it was authorized by Congress to hire? That move by the TSA top brass smacks of either arrogance or stupidity, or both. At any rate, I do feel bad for the TSA screeners with clean backgrounds who are already getting pink-slipped, but it''s a move that had to be made. After all, if you''ve been to virtually any domestic airport lately, you know that TSA stands for "Thousands Standing Around".

----------------​

I''m going to take a stab at this. Just a quess why over hiring but prior to TSA taking over, baggage screeners positions were low pay menial jobs with high turn-over rates. I would suspect that some over hiring occured with the anticipation of a high failure rate once the background checks started. Just a guess on my part.