I'm willing to bet you and I both blew the psych profile. And of course, the really fucked thing about it is I'll be good and god damned if I could tell you what it is they want to hear, so we could go back and deliberately skew our answers....
(She's big into games that include putting Uff-uff places...sometimes I'll "tape"him to her head. She'll go "Untapeuntape...tape Uff-uff to your head!" and so on. For an invisible puppy, that dog gets around. *Grin*)
That sucks. I have two friends who work for the TSA. They're security personnel. I've been told that the powers-that-be also do a deep background check.
I have talked at length with a security manager who used to run a checkpoint at an international airport.
It sucks. The security is still the lowest-paid employee in the airport. The government, by making it a civil service position, has increased the stress level and the turnover rate without a corresponding increase in effectiveness.
Everything bad for security comes from the airlines. They want convenience for their passengers, minimum costs, and only the real and immediate threat of FAA (and now TSA) fines keeps them from opening the floodgates wide open.
The next time you fly, ask if the aircraft has an armored cockpit door. If it doesn't, REFUSE TO FLY THAT CARRIER. This is the only way that security is going to get better.
As for the psych profile for a screener, you want a specific type of personality. Meticulous but phlegmatic. The kind of person who wants a ham and cheese sandwich with three pieces of shaved ham and exactly two slices of cheese. But if they don't get it, they are calm instead of freaking out. (Basically, an accountant with improved social skills.) Anyone deviant enough to be into scifi is unlikely to match this profile.
As for the background, they shouldn't really care. As long as there are two or more checkers at each decision point, and persons are directed randomly into checkpoints, there's no way for just one dirty TSA employee to let a tango "friend" skate past.
This would be an ideal job for certain categories of probationer and paroled felon, actually. And if your mind boggles, consider that even violent criminals disapprove of asshats who blow up jetliners and buildings.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
momijizukamori and
no subject
Date: 23 Oct 2004 02:02 (UTC)no subject
Date: 23 Oct 2004 02:03 (UTC)no subject
Date: 23 Oct 2004 09:51 (UTC)no subject
Date: 23 Oct 2004 03:09 (UTC)Gessi
no subject
Date: 23 Oct 2004 03:11 (UTC)As Sammy would say, "Un-hug!"
(She's big into games that include putting Uff-uff places...sometimes I'll "tape"him to her head. She'll go "Untapeuntape...tape Uff-uff to your head!" and so on. For an invisible puppy, that dog gets around. *Grin*)
Gessi
no subject
Date: 23 Oct 2004 03:14 (UTC)no subject
Date: 23 Oct 2004 07:41 (UTC)no subject
Date: 23 Oct 2004 08:13 (UTC)It sucks. The security is still the lowest-paid employee in the airport. The government, by making it a civil service position, has increased the stress level and the turnover rate without a corresponding increase in effectiveness.
Everything bad for security comes from the airlines. They want convenience for their passengers, minimum costs, and only the real and immediate threat of FAA (and now TSA) fines keeps them from opening the floodgates wide open.
The next time you fly, ask if the aircraft has an armored cockpit door. If it doesn't, REFUSE TO FLY THAT CARRIER. This is the only way that security is going to get better.
As for the psych profile for a screener, you want a specific type of personality. Meticulous but phlegmatic. The kind of person who wants a ham and cheese sandwich with three pieces of shaved ham and exactly two slices of cheese. But if they don't get it, they are calm instead of freaking out. (Basically, an accountant with improved social skills.) Anyone deviant enough to be into scifi is unlikely to match this profile.
As for the background, they shouldn't really care. As long as there are two or more checkers at each decision point, and persons are directed randomly into checkpoints, there's no way for just one dirty TSA employee to let a tango "friend" skate past.
This would be an ideal job for certain categories of probationer and paroled felon, actually. And if your mind boggles, consider that even violent criminals disapprove of asshats who blow up jetliners and buildings.
no subject
Date: 23 Oct 2004 11:52 (UTC)