Restaurant Refuses To Serve TSA Agents

from the seems-a-bit-extreme dept

Apparently, a Seattle area restaurant (right near the airport) has announced that it's refusing to serve TSA agents in protest of the way the TSA treats passengers who wish to fly. While I think the whole TSA security setup is terrible, an invasion of privacy and does little if anything to actually stop terrorism, I do think this is a bad move. The restaurant, obviously, is free to refuse service to whomever they choose (within the law, of course), but the TSA agents aren't the ones making the policies here. I'm really not sure what kind of statement this really makes. We've already seen that many TSA agents themselves are fed up with the new rules and are upset at the way people treat them. I'm not sure that treating those agents worse is really any form of a solution. The problem is the folks at the top.


Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

  •  
    icon
    Brendan (profile), Feb 25th, 2011 @ 2:27pm

    No way to affect the top

    So you have to work on the base.

    If it is made increasingly uncomfortable/undesirable to work for the TSA, to the point where it becomes difficult to hire people, then perhaps the "Top" will realize something needs to change.

    I've begun to take the same attitude with Bell in Canada. The employees need to be treated like outcasts from society until they quit, forcing Bell to cahnge tactics.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      HrilL, Feb 25th, 2011 @ 3:18pm

      Re: No way to affect the top

      This was my thought exactly. While It sucks for the people that work for the TSA if they don't like the way they are being treated then find a new job. As far as I'm concerned if everyone quit then the top would have no other choice but to change their policies. The top doesn't care already so its time to work from the bottom up.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        ChurchHatesTucker (profile), Feb 25th, 2011 @ 3:28pm

        Re: Re: No way to affect the top

        Shunning is an effective form of social discipline.

        On top of that, I'd be more inclined to eat at an establishment that had that as a stated policy. Even if I wasn't actually hungry at the time.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          identicon
          Anonymous Coward, Feb 25th, 2011 @ 3:32pm

          Re: Re: Re: No way to affect the top

          Shunning just means that on their next trip, the employees of the restaurant might be enjoying the rubber glove treatment, and perhaps a full and complete background check as a result of that weird stuff found in their bag (you know, clothes).

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            icon
            GeneralEmergency (profile), Feb 25th, 2011 @ 4:32pm

            Re: Re: Re: Re: No way to affect the top

            AnnoBiscuit...

            If you're -this- pissed off at the TSA, then you stopped flying last year.

            I applaud this move by citizens who have -had enough-.

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            identicon
            Anonymous Coward, Feb 25th, 2011 @ 5:27pm

            Re: Re: Re: Re: No way to affect the top

            So..... only slightly worse than most people are treated now.

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            identicon
            Anonymous Coward, Feb 25th, 2011 @ 5:47pm

            Re: Re: Re: Re: No way to affect the top

            Well, them the TSA agents could find themselves eating shit literally the next time they go to the restaurant, TSA agents could find themselves troubled by mysterious utilities troubles, sudden mechanic problems, they are not the only ones who can play hardball.

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            •  
              icon
              Phillip Vector (profile), Feb 26th, 2011 @ 10:23pm

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: No way to affect the top

              I am reminded of the great words of Tyler Durden...

              "Look, the people you are after are the people you depend on. We cook your meals, we haul your trash, we connect your calls, we drive your ambulances. We guard you while you sleep. Do not... fuck with us."

               

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            icon
            Dave Uh... Smith (profile), Feb 26th, 2011 @ 5:24am

            Re: Re: Re: Re: No way to affect the top

            Not true. At least not for the average TSA person who checks you out and looks through your suitcases. They have no control over who gets put on the enhanced list. If they recognized an employee of the restaurant who won't let TSA eat there, then they can individually give them a harder time going through security. And based on some of the TSA staff I worked with, I would imagine that will happen. Tit for tat.

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            icon
            CommonSense (profile), Aug 17th, 2011 @ 10:27am

            Re: Re: Re: Re: No way to affect the top

            Yeah, something tells me that they really don't fly enough to worry about that...

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            identicon
            Justin Alan Ryan, Dec 21st, 2012 @ 1:26pm

            Re: Re: Re: Re: No way to affect the top

            I'm sure the restaurant employees are common travelers..

            Frankly, I'm with the folks that say, maybe it would just be more pleasant to eat somewhere near the airport that doesn't have TSA agents sitting near you. They should have a private cafeteria.

            No terrorists in their cafeteria, noone profiting off the dissolution of our civil liberties in our restaurants..

            .. except for cops, of course, who will get a discount.

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          identicon
          PRMan, Feb 25th, 2011 @ 4:27pm

          Re: Re: Re: No way to affect the top

          Makes me want to fly^h^h^h drive up to Seattle just to eat there...

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Tom Landry (profile), Feb 25th, 2011 @ 4:01pm

      Re: No way to affect the top

      yes, because its easy to demand OTHERS change by sacrificing their ability to feed their families as you sit comfortably in the glow of your monitor.

      You know full well a large government agency isn't going to give a shit about its employees or their perception in the public eye. If they did their reprehensible policies would've changed a year ago. Taking it out on the people caught in the middle is cowardly and smacks self congratulatory ego stroking public grandstanding. How about taking time out of work to go down to TSA headquarters and picket the ones who are to blame?

      Oh wait, you've gotta feed YOUR familes....

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        el_segfaulto (profile), Feb 25th, 2011 @ 4:05pm

        Re: Re: No way to affect the top

        Relying on performing a vile act to feed your families does not change the fact that you're performing a vile act. Most of the TSA agents I've met have no humor and treat passengers like cattle. Maybe they've been treated badly, and maybe there's an innate part of human nature that doesn't like to be treated the way the TSA treats all passengers and responds to the bullies in kind.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        Brendan (profile), Feb 25th, 2011 @ 4:09pm

        Re: Re: No way to affect the top

        They don't need to give a shit about their employees.

        If it really gets so bad that your hyperbolic "ability to feed their families" begins to be affected, they leave the job for another.

        If it becomes too difficult for TSA to hire/retain employees, they will be forced to change policy.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        Rose M. Welch (profile), Feb 25th, 2011 @ 4:13pm

        Re: Re: No way to affect the top

        So we should have left the Nazis alone because they were just doing what Hitler told them to, right?

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          icon
          ChurchHatesTucker (profile), Feb 25th, 2011 @ 4:29pm

          Re: Re: Re: No way to affect the top

          Hey, think about the Nazi children.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          identicon
          Anonymous Coward, Feb 25th, 2011 @ 4:51pm

          Re: Re: Re: No way to affect the top

          For once, a *meaningful* invocation of Godwin's law. Well done.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          icon
          Tom Landry (profile), Feb 27th, 2011 @ 9:18am

          Re: Re: Re: No way to affect the top

          The fact that you bring up a Nazi analogy completely negates any credibility you may have had. Congrats, stupid.

          I'm saying that most of you are attempting to paint TSA agents with a single broad brush as if they have a say in the final outcome of the law. Should they simply just up and leave their jobs? How about a TSA officer with 12 years into a 20 year career after which he draws a pension? Also, sorry about "feeding their families" bit, what was a I thinking? a man should just up and leave his job based on a law that isn't exactly directing people into a fucking gas chamber and hope that his rent, utilities, kids college tuition, etc will come from some vague benefactor. Because God knows that the law can't be tweaked to be less invasive, that'll never happen. Best quit now to appease the rich suburban white-breads who have time to monday-morning quarterback.

          This whole thread reminds me of the level discourse you'll see on a youtube video comment thread when a cop does something construed as invading someones rights. Suddenly the entire profession of law enforcement are filled with overcompensating jack-booted racist thugs who should locked up. For site that usually has reasonable intelligent people frequenting the comments, some of you seem to lose all sense of logic.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            identicon
            Anonymous Coward, Feb 27th, 2011 @ 5:46pm

            Re: Re: Re: Re: No way to affect the top

            The fact that you bring up a Nazi analogy completely negates any credibility you may have had. Congrats, stupid.

            Heh, Nazi types hate to have people reminded of their past.

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            identicon
            Anonymous Coward, Feb 27th, 2011 @ 5:51pm

            Re: Re: Re: Re: No way to affect the top

            Should they simply just up and leave their jobs? How about a TSA officer with 12 years into a 20 year career after which he draws a pension?

            He must have gotten a really early start: The TSA is only 9 years old.

            Also, sorry about "feeding their families" bit, what was a I thinking?

            You were probably thinking about all the career criminals that are also just "feeding their families".

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            identicon
            chris, Feb 27th, 2011 @ 10:08pm

            Re: Re: Re: Re: No way to affect the top

            Oh really? I've never heard of this "Nazi analogy logical fallacy" you speak of.

            I recall something that goes like "those who fail to learn from history...".

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            identicon
            HrilL, Feb 28th, 2011 @ 11:35am

            Re: Re: Re: Re: No way to affect the top

            You sir are delusional. If the TSA agents all quit we wouldn't have this problem and the law would have to be changed. Even if they strike for a day a week or so the law will be changed. It comes down to economics. If no one could fly the economy would start to drop and the impact could be far reaching. Comparing them to Nazi's while at face value seems harsh I find it completely appropriate. If you were a Nazi you'd be shot or put in jail and the public backlash against someone at that time for not supporting the war effort would have been extremely large. This is different because they're currently getting public backlash for not standing up for our human rights. Its a job that they can quit at any time and should.

            While feeding your family is important it doesn't take precedence over the fundamental human rights every person deserves to be respected. They have a moral responsibility that they are not upholding. If they wanted to keep their jobs and all stood united against taking away our rights the law would be force to be changed. The TSA can't fire everyone. If even a 3rd of their workforce stood up for our rights the TSA would be crippled and a statement as such would have profound meaning.

            Our founding fathers are probably rolling over in their graves at what we Americans are forced to endure in our modern lives.

            "Those who give up their liberty for more security neither deserve liberty nor security." -Benjamin Franklin

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            icon
            Rose M. Welch (profile), Mar 1st, 2011 @ 8:49pm

            Re: Re: Re: Re: No way to affect the top

            The fact that you bring up a Nazi analogy completely negates any credibility you may have had.

            Yes, because no one can ever be like Nazis, ever. /sarcasm

            Congrats, stupid.

            The fact that you called me stupid for making a particularly apt analogy completely negates any chance you had at gaining credibility.

            I'm saying that most of you are attempting to paint TSA agents with a single broad brush as if they have a say in the final outcome of the law.

            We're not discussing the law. We're discussing TSA policies.

            Should they simply just up and leave their jobs?

            That's one option. Striking is another. If most TSA agents refused to complete unconstitutional searches for a day, that would pretty much lay this shit to bed right there.

            How about a TSA officer with 12 years into a 20 year career after which he draws a pension?

            What about a career soldier with no other marketable skills or options? Should he have refused to loan Jews onto trains? I mean, it's not exactly directing people into fucking gas chambers and, dammit, a man needs to feed his family! /sarcasm

            Best quit now to appease the rich suburban white-breads who have time to monday-morning quarterback.

            Wow, so you're upset that I made a Nazi analogy and yet you think it's okay to spew racism and classicism all over the thread? What was that you said about credibility earlier?

            This whole thread reminds me of the level discourse you'll see on a youtube video comment thread when a cop does something construed as invading someones rights.

            Yes, your comment is reminiscent of that level of discourse.

            For site that usually has reasonable intelligent people frequenting the comments, some of you seem to lose all sense of logic.

            It's not logical to ask that TSA workers - who hate these policies just as much as we do - fucking do something? When they're in the best position to effect a change? Seriously?

            And you think I'm stupid? Wow.

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            •  
              identicon
              Chris Forsyth, Dec 17th, 2012 @ 7:35pm

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: No way to affect the top

              Actuially, I think you're pretty clueless myself--if nothing else, you seem to think the *entire* German Army was involved in the concentration camps, and that there were none of them who *were* simply doing their jobs as plain foot soldiers, MPs, and the like, with no connection to the atrocities being carried out. Then again, I wouldn't be surprised if other contries of the world had the same view of the US Armed Forces these days, given some of the foreign occupations the government has them involved in.

               

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            icon
            CommonSense (profile), Aug 17th, 2011 @ 10:42am

            Re: Re: Re: Re: No way to affect the top

            The agents don't need to quit, they could strike, stage a walk-out, any number of things that show their discontent and don't involve quitting. Sure, they may sacrifice their paycheck temporarily, but maybe they should look for other jobs instead of just quitting and sitting around waiting for that benefactor you mention who will never come. The fact that you can't see the clear connection between this situation and the Nazi analogy, well, completely negates any credibility YOU may have had.

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        Anonymous Coward, Feb 25th, 2011 @ 5:31pm

        Re: Re: No way to affect the top

        Your argument also works to exempt Hitler's army from any retaliatory action. "I had to torture people to feed my family", "I had to kill jews to feed my family", etc.

        You might think this is falling down the slippery slope, but there's no reason your argument should be applied to TSA agents and not to Hitler's army. Your argument puts no limit on how unethical an action can be before feeding your family fails to justify it.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        FuzzyDuck, Feb 26th, 2011 @ 6:51am

        Re: Re: No way to affect the top

        I agree, it's easy for people to sit on the side-lines and ask others to give up their jobs. It's like those SS officers, they had to feed their children too, was it their fault that it was their job to throw in the Zyklon-B?



        Seriously man, if your job involves violating other people's fundamental rights or human dignity you should quit.

        For instance all the guards involved in the current mistreatment of Private Bradley Manning are morally guilty of complicity in Human Rights violations. If they don't care that their job is to mentally destroy this person, then they're a bunch of sick f*cks, no better than the Nazi prison guards were.

        One must know when to say "no". The current trend of obeying orders can only lead to one thing: fascism.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          identicon
          Jose_X, Feb 26th, 2011 @ 7:30am

          Re: Re: Re: No way to affect the top

          From a taste of the experience, I think that if you are accustomed to being around people (or even books, TV, etc) so that those experiences form a significant part of your reality, it can be mentally very unstabling to have that "reality" become a fiction because no one answers any more.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          identicon
          Anonymous Coward, Feb 26th, 2011 @ 7:46pm

          Re: Re: Re: No way to affect the top

          The SS officers are even less guilty IMO. No one is threatening the TSA agents with death if decide to quit their jobs.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          icon
          Tom Landry (profile), Feb 27th, 2011 @ 9:24am

          Re: Re: Re: No way to affect the top

          Its amazing you guys who keep falling back on the Nazi analogy as if pre-flight body searches are in-line with Nazi Germany. Truly rational.


          wow.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            identicon
            Anonymous Coward, Feb 27th, 2011 @ 10:02pm

            Re: Re: Re: Re: No way to affect the top

            I think you missed the analogy; no one said that. This is about whether low level TSA agents can be blamed for following bad policies.

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            icon
            Rose M. Welch (profile), Mar 2nd, 2011 @ 1:55am

            Re: Re: Re: Re: No way to affect the top

            Its amazing you guys who keep falling back on the Nazi analogy as if pre-flight body searches are in-line with Nazi Germany. Truly rational.

            No, it's amazing that no matter how often it's explained, you still don't get the analogy.

            TSA agents are just following orders, even though those orders are unlawful and contribute to a police state.

            Nazis were just following orders, even thought those orders were unlawful and contributed to a police state.

            If you still don't understand how TSA agents are like Nazis, then you need to sign up for literacy classes.

            wow.

            My sentiments exactly.

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Feb 25th, 2011 @ 5:44pm

      Re: No way to affect the top

      And that observation will come when and if they found themselves in a position where it is difficult to find people to work for them.

      This reminds me of the BP spind doctors using the gasoline stations owner as folder, showing how it affected them because they were chained to a 10 year contract and couldn't just drop BP.

      At the time my thought was "why do those people keep signing exclusive contracts for 10 years?".

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        Nastybutler77 (profile), Feb 28th, 2011 @ 2:17pm

        Re: Re: No way to affect the top

        This reminds me of the BP spind doctors using the gasoline stations owner as folder, showing how it affected them because they were chained to a 10 year contract and couldn't just drop BP.

        At the time my thought was "why do those people keep signing exclusive contracts for 10 years?".


        I'd say it's a calculated risk. You get a franchise license to sell one of the largest oil producers in the world's fuel, and hope that the oil producer doesn't have a PR catastrophy in that time period. Usually it works out for you, but every now and then you roll snake eyes.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Michael Kohne, Feb 25th, 2011 @ 6:42pm

      Re: No way to affect the top

      Unfortunately, treating the guys at the bottom of the tree badly will NOT ever have any impact on the TSA (or Bell Canada) brass. In a small town of a few hundred people, you could possibly make this strategy work. In a nationwide setting (especially in a recession) there's far too many people who are perfectly willing to take ANY job, just to have one.

      Abusing the low end guys isn't going to fix anything.

      I'm sad about this, because I really LIKE the idea of abusing the low end guys as a way to fix things (after all, they are the ones abusing us!), but it's NOT going to change anything! All it's going to do is make the TSA guys at the gate even grumpier and less helpful than they were to start with.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        Anonymous Coward, Feb 26th, 2011 @ 1:54am

        Re: Re: No way to affect the top

        ...there's far too many people who are perfectly willing to take ANY job, just to have one.

        Yeah, some people will do anything for money: Lie, cheat, steal, sell drugs, torture, kill, even work for the TSA.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Feb 26th, 2011 @ 7:35pm

      Re: No way to affect the top

      I agree. It is difficult enough to inspire change without artificially limiting yourself to "official" channels. When you want a change in policy, you don't just right a kindly worded letter to the person in charge. You boycott, protest, rip them apart through the media, make it so they can't ignore you. Otherwise they will.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    el_segfaulto (profile), Feb 25th, 2011 @ 3:16pm

    I don't like the idea of refusing service to anybody outside of the drunk and belligerent. A good compromise is to have a giant radiation machine and an artist whose job it is to draw TSA agents naked. Make them take off their shoes before they enter the restaurant and make sure to rummage through all of their purses/European man-bags before they're allowed entry. Who can blame the restaurant owner for screening for terrorists. What's good for the goose...

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Michael Long (profile), Feb 25th, 2011 @ 3:56pm

      Re:

      Just require a full-body pat down on entry AND exit. Got to make sure they're not pilfering the silverware.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Feb 25th, 2011 @ 5:20pm

      Re:

      hahaha! but fitting! :)

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        Jose_X, Feb 25th, 2011 @ 8:41pm

        Re: Re:

        Pat them down when they are done ordering to make sure they brought enough tip, and serve the water in papercloth wrappings.. shaped for 1oz fill.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Jose_X, Feb 25th, 2011 @ 8:56pm

      Re:

      And make sure to sell them the tickets with the fine print right as they walk in.

      When their table is ready, show them instead to the radiation room. The bypass option is that the head cook prods their loins with his special cutlery.

      "MARVIN! We have a good one!"

      Inevitably, they will strip to undergarment in order to be escorted out properly by the 70 or so ex green barets.

      And that's when you hit them with the $10K charge clearly marked in their entrance ticket!!!

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Feb 25th, 2011 @ 3:21pm

    We could have a discussion of business models, say like Radiohead's choices with their new albums. Instead we get a sort meaningless poke at the TSA, almost astroturfing.

    Impressive.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      ChurchHatesTucker (profile), Feb 25th, 2011 @ 3:36pm

      Re:

      The frak?

      Feel free to talk to yourself. I'll try to scare up an old cell phone so you don't look quite as crazy as you are.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Feb 25th, 2011 @ 3:37pm

      Re:

      You visit Techdirt. You comment on Techdirt. Techdirt supports piracy, ergo, you support piracy.

      Why do you hate artists so much?

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Cynic (profile), Feb 25th, 2011 @ 4:02pm

      Re:

      "We could have a discussion of business models, say like Radiohead's choices with their new albums. Instead we get a sort meaningless poke at the TSA, almost astroturfing."

      I rather think this is exactly a business model analysis (well, maybe not an analysis, but certainly a discussion). Here we have a monopoly, much like the old telephone and electric utilities with which a statistically large number of [flying] consumers must interact on a regular basis without a competitive option or alternative, other than to not fly. Management does not take into account customer satisfaction or treatment, which by significant accounts, is pretty awful.

      So now the question becomes what tools at hand does the consumer possess to effect change or bring in competition besides finding an alternative mode of transportation or not traveling (not practical for many)? Although I tend to believe exploding bags of itching powder would prove personally satisfying, social ostrasization and thus employee exodus seems like a viable (but not likely widely adopted) tactic and thus worthy of discussion as a consumer tool. If it actually works (and I don't believe it will), *that* would be impressive.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        Anonymous Coward, Feb 25th, 2011 @ 4:17pm

        Re: Re:

        Umm, not flying?

        The rest of it is petty and childish.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          identicon
          Anonymous Coward, Feb 28th, 2011 @ 8:36am

          Re: Re: Re:

          Wow, really??!!!?!?!?!

          I had no idea there were other modes of travel.

          Hey, everybody, this guy figured it out. He figured out how to get places without going through the TSA!!!


          Speaking of petty and childish, I think that pretty much sums up your entire presence here.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Mark Talmadge, Feb 25th, 2011 @ 3:37pm

    I actually support this action by this restaurant. Every business has the right to refuse to serve or do business with anyone they don't wish to.

    This happens everyday where businesses refuse who do business with people. Where is the outrage where it concerns normal citizens? The only reason everyone is outraged is because this time Federal employees are being targeted.

    The TSA is going to be forced to change its policies when more businesses start acting this way.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Tom Landry (profile), Feb 25th, 2011 @ 3:50pm

    Thats it, make the people who have to carry out their superiors idiotic rule-set suffer.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Brendan (profile), Feb 25th, 2011 @ 4:12pm

      Re:

      So then refuse to carry out the stupid rules. Nobody is forcing them to abide.

      If your employer told you to go sneak into womens changerooms, would you?

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Rose M. Welch (profile), Feb 25th, 2011 @ 5:12pm

      Re:

      Yes, exactly. When they've had enough, they can strike. One day of a TSA strike should result in some damned changes. :)

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Dennis S. (profile), Feb 25th, 2011 @ 4:04pm

    This may actually be a hoax but it still hasn't been confirmed one way or another.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Mark Gisleson, Feb 25th, 2011 @ 4:11pm

    I've worked with TSA agents

    Before giving up my resume business (burn out brought about by Bush-Cheney anti-merit hiring policies) I did some work for TSA agents seeking promotions in the Twin Cities region. Both clients were highly qualified but both ended up quitting the TSA because the promotions went to agents who belonged to the same church as the administrator charged with selecting the new supervisors.

    TSA agents behave like asses because they report to asses who were hired by asses. That restaurant has every right to refuse service to the people who've made air travel intolerable.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Jose_X, Feb 26th, 2011 @ 7:47am

      Re: I've worked with TSA agents

      >> Both clients were highly qualified but both ended up quitting the TSA because the promotions went to agents who belonged to the same church as the administrator charged with selecting the new supervisors.

      >> TSA agents behave like asses because they report to asses who were hired by asses.

      "It is said that power corrupts, but actually it's more true that power attracts the corruptible. The sane are usually attracted by other things than power." - David Brin

      http://abazoo.angelfire.com/quotes32.html

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      abc gum, Feb 26th, 2011 @ 7:49am

      Re: I've worked with TSA agents

      Asses, all the way up

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    xman2, Feb 25th, 2011 @ 4:17pm

    No way to affect the top

    This is how a "free economy" is supposed to work.

    apart from monopolistic practices, Fascism, and bad laws to protect the big guys only from competition.

    we have the right to disagree... we have just been spoon feed for so long we tend to forget at times.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Feb 25th, 2011 @ 4:25pm

    big whoop

    They should backscatter the TSA employees on the way in and out. Don't like it? What, are you a terrorist?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Feb 25th, 2011 @ 4:49pm

    TSA agents really have no complaint here.

    They CHOSE to work for the TSA. They CHOSE to invade the privacy of their fellow citizens. They CHOSE to violate their Constitutional rights. They CHOSE to make travel less secure. They CHOSE to implement policies that anyone with any intelligence whatsoever knows are completely braindead. They CHOSE to humiliate the public.

    To quote an articulate character, "What you want is irrelevant, what you have chosen is at hand."

    It'd be great to see every restaurant, every shop, in every airport follow suit. Maybe then it would dawn on them that "just following orders" hasn't been considered a valid excuse for a long, long time.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Feb 25th, 2011 @ 5:04pm

    Even if one is not responsible for creating a bad policy, I do think there is a degree of moral culpability in following it regularly. It's for that reason I despise TSA agents. If they don't believe their actions are just, they should quit, and if they do, they deserve my scorn.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Chuck Money, Feb 25th, 2011 @ 6:13pm

    Someone has probably said this already, but...

    Since I'm on my phone and Brad Paisley is about to take the stage, I'll risk a potential repost.

    The proper thing to do to send the right message is to refuse service to every congressman and senator who voted for either the TSA regulations, or in a broader sense, the Patriot Act in general, since only via the suspension of all rights via the Patriot Act is any of this even possible.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Feb 25th, 2011 @ 6:19pm

    The issue is getting press. Isn't that the purpose of a statement?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    James Bishop, Feb 25th, 2011 @ 6:23pm

    Their defence

    'Ve ver onli following orders.'

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Feb 25th, 2011 @ 7:02pm

    So will the restaurant later change its mind under the pretext that it was just a paperwork problem?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Feb 25th, 2011 @ 9:05pm

    THIS needs to be extended to every person who has a hand in the problem... Stop serving the corrupt politicians and stop serving the government employees... Let them all starve naked in the streets!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Feb 25th, 2011 @ 9:14pm

    I await the "performance art"

    Where someone uses biometrics + credit cards + the consumer databases to deny 'the right of commerce' to a class of people.

    Buy some veggies at the wholesaler, set up at a farmers market in New York near Wall Street and don't sell to people in, say banking or with a net worth over X million.

    Oh the youtube views of such 'art'.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Beta (profile), Feb 25th, 2011 @ 9:20pm

    unintended consequences

    Ground-level TSA agents have two choices: A) acknowledge that these scans and searches are a pointless indignity, and feel deep embarrassment, or B) convince themselves that they are the Good Guys protecting the people, and that those who disagree are Bad Guys.

    The second option is stupid, but much more comfortable, very appealing to idiots, bullies and would-be police.

    Do we really want to torment the A group and provoke the B group until the checkpoints are staffed by nothing but hardened B's?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Feb 26th, 2011 @ 2:09am

      Re: unintended consequences

      Ground-level TSA agents have two choices: A) acknowledge that these scans and searches are a pointless indignity, and feel deep embarrassment, or B) convince themselves that they are the Good Guys protecting the people, and that those who disagree are Bad Guys.

      Third choice: Go on strike.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Atkray (profile), Feb 25th, 2011 @ 10:41pm

    Re: following orders

    Some members of the military in Lybia have been joining those seeking to overthrow the government, while others have opened fire on civilians.

    Kind of shines a different light on the poor helpless TSA workers.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Laurel L. Russwurm (profile), Feb 26th, 2011 @ 12:13am

    Nero Wolfe was careful who he broke bread with....

    This is perfectly understandable and also eminently reasonable.

    Just because it is done legally, these so-called screening procedures constitute assault. Before or after having to be "pornscanned" or grope searched by TSA officers, I certainly wouldn't want to eat with them.

    For much the same reason, executioners used to wear hoods.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    el_porko (profile), Feb 26th, 2011 @ 1:18am

    They are trialling these vile backscatter machines here in New Zealand. I've already given up flying to the US. If they use them for all international flights I'll have to give up holidaying overseas.

    But then again I'll have lots of spare money to frequent restaurants that don't serve our Airport security staff.

    Buildings can be toppled when pushed from the outside, but if the base/foundation has rot too they will collapse so much faster.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    CF Oxtrot, Feb 26th, 2011 @ 7:45am

    Nice misread of human nature/psychology, Tech Dorks

    If you're "fed up with the rules" but keeping your job with TSA, you're a freakin' hypocrite.

    Either live out your values, or don't have values. It's really quite simple.

    Why are tech-geeks so incredibly stupid about everything outside the world of "technology"? Especially human nature and psychology... ATTENTION GEEKS: simulated emotional responses due to the quasi-orgasm you feel at spying the latest iTampon or iCondom, that's not understanding human interpersonal exchange.

    If people don't live according to values and quit jobs where they are asked to do inhumane things, we become destructive robotic slaves.

    I guess that's enticing to a tech geek though. Kinda sounds like a shitty Robert Sawyer novel.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Oz, Feb 26th, 2011 @ 9:46am

    Simple answer- Boycott the machine.

    This new device is nothing more than an invasive abuse of our privacy. What is it meant to stop? Guns? Existing metal detectors get those. Knives or maybe scissors? Security inside the airplane makes a knife-armed takeover difficult, as do checks of suspicious persons. Bombs? Luggage x-ray is more important here, and the chemical sniffing machines that blow air on you are just as effective while being far less invasive. Furthermore, I suspect that checked luggage is the attack vector most likely to succeed.

    So why do we have this damned machine? I blame the company, their lobbyists, and their semi-immoral connections among top decision makers within the TSA and other government departments. But that doesn't really help us- after all, there's a reason it's called "business as usual". And blaming the TSA employees doesn't help- they're hardly to the level of the SS, and probably feel pretty shitty. Plus, America's a pretty fat, ugly nation. For ever "7+" they end up inspecting, there are gonna be dozens of ugly guys and gals.

    SO WHAT SHOULD WE DO? Simple. If everyone were to demand a full body check, the policy would have to be revisited within days. The airports don't have the number of staff on hand to perform full checks on every person, which means these checks are threat to keep us sheep in line. Call their bluff. Also, the machines are expensive. No one can justify buying one if it won't get used. So, take the pat-down option.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Dawger (profile), Feb 26th, 2011 @ 10:54am

    I suggest a full body search before and after the meal.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Lynne, Feb 26th, 2011 @ 12:06pm

    It's a Hoax

    Paul Constant at the Stranger blog(Slog) got an e-mail reply from the supposed restaurant employee who started this story: "On mid winter break. Will be back next week". Coincidentally, the Seattle school district is on mid winter break this week. What does that tell you? Link to Slog - http://tinyurl.com/4cl6byd

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Feb 26th, 2011 @ 4:32pm

    Big rule of thumb Mike - 85% of people are stupid. These restaurant owners must be amongst that. I work in retail, and am amazed at the number of morons who go off at me over policies that I clearly didn't set myself and were set by head office in Sydney

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Feb 26th, 2011 @ 5:56pm

      Re:

      I think you are among them also, because what people are doing is venting their frustration at the representative of the head office in Sydney.

      Or are you saying you don't represent the head office in Sydney?

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        Anonymous Coward, Feb 27th, 2011 @ 12:28pm

        Re: Re:

        No their not just venting their frustration. They want me - ME - to change the policy and give them a refund for a product they bought that isn't faulty and that they don't have the receipt for; Give them a 25% discount because they're the son/daughter/mother/father/sister/brother/etc of a "very high level person within the company" but they have no ID; Or that I don't give them free home delivery; Why do you have chocolates in the checkout lanes; You should have public toilets; etc.

        What am I supposed to do? Complaining to me about the policy after I explain it to them it is policy is the most pointless thing on the planet, and all they're doing it making fools out of themselves. They go on and on and on. Yesterday some woman went on at me for 20 minutes about public toilets, then another 30 at the manager - To show her stupidity she was already finished shopping, so if she walked out of our store and about 10m in the centre she could have found public toilets. That was explained to her, but she wanted to use OUR toilets, not the centre ones.

        Anyone that thinks employees will put in a request for policy change for every idiot that comes to the counter is a moron, especially since the same 20-30 things are said about 100 times a week. In fact, it's company policy (and industry standard, not just us) that employees aren't permitted to go to head office with policy changes unless they believe there is a legal issue with the current policy.

        As our store manager says such a shame we can't ban people for being morons.

        If you want to complain about company policy then write to head office. Pretty simple. We have no power. Head Office can (and has before) changed policy from complaints from the public. Complaining to the employees in the store is idiotic.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Feb 27th, 2011 @ 11:15pm

    To show her stupidity she was already finished shopping, so if she walked out of our store and about 10m in the centre she could have found public toilets. That was explained to her, but she wanted to use OUR toilets, not the centre ones.


    Did you ask why?
    Could you have not accommodate that one lady? why not? every single customer of yours get in in your store and ask to use the toilet and don't want to use the public one?
    Is the public one offered by the centre not clean? if not it is not in your interest to keep it clean so you don't have those kind of problems?

    Heck once in my youth I remember going to a parlor just to use the bathroom that was nicer than the one I had at home LoL

    If you want to complain about company policy then write to head office. Pretty simple. We have no power. Head Office can (and has before) changed policy from complaints from the public. Complaining to the employees in the store is idiotic.


    And how would they do that? do you give a card or something, do you have complaint forms available? would you give them the head office email, fax or website?

    What do you do to make that easier? it is not in your best interest to make it so? why?

    Do you catalog and maintain a database of complaints to see which ones are most common and can be addressed?

    I highly doubt every customer you have gets in the store and starts the high people places routine, beside those are not honest people, so to say that you are saying the majority of people are dishonest which I doubt it is true.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Chris Becke, Feb 27th, 2011 @ 11:47pm

    I am going to commit the ultimate cardinal sin of Internet forums and compare TSA agents to guards at Nazi death camps.
    It is extreme and unfair: but it clarifies the point: the guys at the bottom should not be able to say "I am just following orders" to absolve themselves from the sins of the guys at the top.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    BBT, Feb 28th, 2011 @ 5:28am

    I don't understand how the distinction that the folks at the top are the ones making the policy should matter. The people at the bottom are choosing to go along with it. Nobody is forcing them to work with a gun to their head. It is their free choice, and I fully support any efforts to punish them for making that choice.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anon41, Feb 28th, 2011 @ 3:08pm

    TSA

    I think this point has been made before. If TSA agents know that people don't appreciate their tasks, they themselves will communicate this with their supervisors, and thus change can happen.

    If we do no form of criticism or protest, none of us wins.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    okwhen (profile), Feb 28th, 2011 @ 4:55pm

    Restaurant Refuses To Serve TSA Agents

    The author Mike Masnick reminds me of the same people providing excuses for war crimes by stating, I was ordered to do it. My orders was to torture and kill the prisoners though I despised the acts. If no one is willing to abuse others for a price then the so called higher powers could not abuse others because they are gutless cowards. These self proclaimed people of God or ethical people preform screening or extra screening by groping adults as well as children. If anyone touched a child in this manor before 9/11 a prison sentence would soon follow. People with Mike's views is precisely what is wrong with America today. No one is willing to take a stand they merely irresponsibly transfer blame.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Curtis Spang (profile), Feb 28th, 2011 @ 5:30pm

    Restaurant Refuses To Serve TSA Agents

    I agree with you most of the time and think your analysis is spot on, however I think you are off base here. The restaurant owner will never ever get the opportunity to express his views to the tools at the top and if he did they would simply be ignored.

    He is using his only tool to protest and make a difference. If EVERYONE would speak up and act up at every instance of fascism, America would be better.

    People are timid, afraid and won't stand up unless everyone else does also.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    B, Mar 1st, 2011 @ 2:37pm

    I don't really have to deal with TSA, however whenever I read one of these topics it reminds me a lot about some of those Border Services Agents. I totally understand they are doing their jobs, and I get that they are following policies, but some of those guys just make it worse.

    I remember one time I was crossing the border to pick up car parts, and the border agent asked me what I was picking up. Starting listing off... brake parts, clutch, flywheel, etc. and he asked me "No guns or anything like that?". I started laughing thinking he was joking... but the look he gave me... well I thought he was getting ready to arrest me.

    If you ask me, although some of the policies are questionable, I'm sure some of the TSA agents make the situation worth. Its only a matter of time before more and more people start doing this.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Glenn Gould (profile), Mar 22nd, 2011 @ 10:44am

    I would agree with you Mr. Masnick, but

    I would agree with you Mr. Masnick, but you can't help get the impression that TSA agents, in general, enjoy making us do the obnoxious things we are forced to do (think power trip). Additionally, as a private business, the restaurant should be allowed to do legally whatever they want to do. That is America.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Dec 18th, 2012 @ 2:09pm

    it all depends doesn't it i mean if your a prostitue its money over your so called civilrigts as to whitch all gov. feels if your to big to prosicute your an insider and the rest of you are dung so called public at large that acually think they have voice

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Faceless Minion, Dec 19th, 2012 @ 3:25pm

    Personally, I think that this is a wonderful idea. If the TSA agents don't like it, they can always quit. Sure, they won't find jobs that pay the same easily, but there's always openings at, say, McDonalds.

    And at this point there's a lot more pride to be found in working at McD's then working for the TSA.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Save me a cookie
  • Note: A CRLF will be replaced by a break tag (<br>), all other allowable HTML will remain intact
  • Allowed HTML Tags: <b> <i> <a> <em> <br> <strong> <blockquote> <hr> <tt>
Follow Techdirt
A word from our sponsors...
Essential Reading
Techdirt Reading List
Techdirt Insider Chat
A word from our sponsors...
Recent Stories
A word from our sponsors...

Close

Email This