If you fly long enough, you will experience an airline flight that is far from perfect, so bad that you not only want to complain to the airline, but to also share your experience with the world. While all airlines get complaints, few airlines have had as many complaints as United Airlines. Years before their merger with Continental, a merger which many believe led to a significant drop in the quality and consistency of the customer experience, United was one of the leading airlines for complaints. In fact, there were so many complaints that since 1997, the web site Untied.com (untied as in shoelaces) has exclusively featured complaints about United.
The site is unusual in that it has been up for over 15 years, and has kept a laser-like focus on the problems at United. The site has been supported almost entirely by the efforts of its creator Jeremy Cooperstock, an engineering professor at McGill University in Montreal, who also has his own story to tell about how United Airlines has treated him. However, the unique resource that Jeremy has created is at risk of being destroyed.
Lawsuits against Untied.com Two recent lawsuits allege, among other things, that the site violates the airline's copyright and trademarks because it looks like the United Airlines website. The airline claims that it isn't trying to stop airline complaints from being publicized, but rather that they are trying to protect the airline' customers because they may confuse Coopperstock's site with the airline's site. Jeremy has a different interpretation, that the airline's suit is without merit, and that their goal goal is to put a strain on his time and money and to encourage him to shut down the site.
How to Help Untied.com Jeremy has started a legal defense fund for his site at http://www.untied.com/SLAPP. AirSafe.com encourages you to donate what you can to help Jeremy keep his site alive. You can also help by visiting untied.com and sharing any complaints you may have about United, or their merger partner Continental.
On November 20, 2011, Harold Glenn Rodman, a 52-year-old TSA employee who lives in Manassas, Virginia, was arrested and later charged with several felonies, including three sexual assault related charges (aggravated sexual battery, object sexual penetration, and forcible sodomy) and one kidnapping related charge (abduction with intent to defile). Details on these charges, which are based on a number of records from the Prince William County (Virginia) General District Court and the Prince William County (Virginia) Police Department, are available at http://www.airsafe.com/issues/security/tsa-rodman-charges.pdf
According to the Prince William County Police Department and several media reports, On November 20, 2011, at 3:25 am, police responded to a reported sexual assault of a 37-year-old woman in Manassas, Virginia. The victim and a friend were in a vehicle when they were allegedly approached by an unknown man, later identified as Rodman. The victim was allegedly assaulted after she stepped out of the car to talk with the suspect. The man was allegedly wearing a TSA uniform and displayed a badge before sexually assaulting the victim. Rodman allegedly fled the scene on foot, but was later arrested while coming out of his residence.
News report of the assault
These were serious charges, especially disturbing because it involves an alleged abuse of authority by an off-duty TSA security officer. The immediate TSA response indicated that the organization was addressing this recent situation appropriately. According to a TSA official, “This individual was immediately removed from security operations pending an investigation. The Privacy Act precludes the agency from disclosing additional information regarding personnel actions.” The official said that “TSA holds its personnel to the highest professional and ethical standards, and investigates all allegations of misconduct. TSA is working closely with local law enforcement on this matter...the disturbing allegations against this individual in no way reflect the work of the more than 50,000 security officers who every day ensure the security of the traveling public.”
This TSA response deals with the immediate situation with the one accused employee, but it does not address several key questions about what processes the TSA may have in place to prevent people with previous criminal convictions from entering the TSA workforce. In the case of the accused TSA employee Harold Rodman, his name did not come up in a search (conducted December 11, 2011) of either the Virginia State Police database of convicted sex offenders, or the US Department of Justice national database of sex offenders. However, for the other 50,000 TSA security officers, the Rodman situation brings up an issue previously discussed in a November 2010 AirSafeNews article, which asked whether the TSA was allowing convicted rapists to perform pat-down searches of airline passengers.
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the parent organization of the TSA, hinted that potential employees with serious criminal convictions may have made it through TSA's employee screening process. In 2004, the DHS released a report that specified 28 kinds of felony convictions that would have disqualified an applicant for a TSA screener position, including rapes or crimes involving aggravated sexual abuse, but only if those convictions had occurred in the previous 10 years. The report implied that a person convicted of rape, attempted rape, child molestation, or similar crimes may not be required to report such convictions during their background check if those convictions were more than 10 years old, or if the convictions were less serious than a felony.
Are there sexual predators at the TSA? The key issue, then and now, was whether the current TSA screening process would prevent the hiring of anyone who has been found guilty of any crime that involves rape or some similar criminal act, or if already an employee, if that employee would be kept away from direct contact with passengers. Most passengers may want to know if the TSA officer who could be conducting an intimate pat-down search or who may have access to images from advanced screening devices has a record of inappropriate, abusive, or illegal sexual conduct. The TSA's public statements on the screening process for TSA's employees don't indicate if this is something that is done for all employees. Also, the TSA doesn't make it clear what kind of conduct or convictions would either keep someone from being hired or would prevent them from having personal contact with passengers after they have been hired.
Is the TSA protecting the public from predators? If the TSA could answer the following questions, questions taken directly from the November 2010 article, it would go a long way toward reducing the risk the public would face from sexual assault by TSA employees:
Are there any current TSA employees who are convicted sex offenders (either for a felony or lesser crime, either as an adult or juvenile), even if the conviction occurred more than 10 years before joining TSA?
If the answer to the first question is yes, are any of these employees acting as security screeners who have direct physical contact with the flying public?
If the answer to the first question is no, have all TSA employees, as part of their background check, been asked if they have been convicted of rape or some other sexually based crime, whether it were a felony or lesser crime, either as an adult or as a juvenile, even if the conviction occurred more than 10 years before joining TSA?
If the first question can't be answered for a TSA employee because of inadequate information, would this employee be restricted from working in a position that involves direct physical contact with the flying public?
Are TSA security screeners who are convicted of rape or another sexually based crime, no matter how minor, immediately removed from any position where they may have physical contact with the traveling public?
Share your ideas on making TSA better Any screening process, no matter how rigorous, is perfect. Any organization as large as the TSA will have a few people who do not measure up to a reasonable standard of competence or excellence. However, that is no excuse for the current situation where the average passenger is unsure if the person wearing the uniform can be trusted. While the questions listed above are a good start, there is room for improvement. Please feel free to add your suggestions as to how this current TSA situation should be addressed.
Early responses
Full Federal & State record searches back to when the applicant reached majority. No 'sealed records' applicants need apply. Zero tolerance for any type of assault. I want to be safe, not assaulted. Slightly off-topic-yet-related... Perhaps the TSA should begin their focus on passengers as they arrive for booking / enter the terminal very similar to El-Al's approach. Look for someone acting suspicious instead of reacting to an out-of-date threat.
(Do) The same thing they do for convicted drug dealers.
(Do) Nothing, it's never been a problem.
What keeps someone from committing the first sexual assault ever as a TSA employee, just because someone does not have a record doesn't mean that some day they wont be arrested for sexual assault, it is tough if not impossible to screne.
The TSA should be closed and the security should be turned back over to the airlines.
Disband. If having naked pictures taken of you and/or being groped by a stranger aren't violations of the "unreasonable search and seizure" ban in the U.S. Constitution, then what is?!?!?!?!
Earlier this week, federal prosecutors in Colorado charged a former Transportation Security Administration employee with attempting to sabotage TSA computer systems, including one that contains key terrorist watch lists.
The former employee, Douglas Duchak, 46, of Colorado Springs, faces two charges of attempting to damage protected TSA computers. From August 2004 to October 2009, he worked as a data analyst at the TSA's Colorado Springs Operation Center where the government maintains computer systems that contain among other things the government's no-fly list. He allegedly tried to send a virus into the computer system's servers in late October 2009, after learning he would be terminated.
The computer system includes the government's no-fly list.
In the federal indictment, prosecutors stated Duchak failed in his attempt to introduce a virus into the computer system. Had he been successful, prosecutors claimed that his actions "would have caused damage affecting a computer used by the United States government in furtherance of national security."
Duchak was informed on October 15, 2009 that his employment would end on October 30th. In the indictment, he is accused of having introduced malicious computer code into the system on October 22nd and October 23rd. The indictment implied that his employment was terminated on October 23rd, a week before his employment was originally scheduled to end.
Duchak entered a not guilty plea during a hearing in Colorado and was released on a $25,000 bond. If convicted of both counts, he faces up to 10 years in prison and a fine of $500,000.
Rep. Peter King of the US House of Representatives recently sent a letter to Secretary Janet Napolitano, head of the Department of Homeland Security (which oversees TSA), and among other requests asked DHS how it was addressing the repeated posting of the security manual on other web sites and "what legal actions, if any, could be taken to compel its removal."
AirSafeNews.com is not one of those sites that has posted copies of the unredacted security manual. However, it has provided links to both the redacted and unredacted versions of the document that are hosted by its partner site AirSafe.com.
However, by the time AirSafeNews.com first wrote about this document, it was already available in a wide variety of places, including major US media organizations like ABC News, and CBS News; and also at document sharing sites like Scribd.com. The document is also available at sites the specialize in releasing secret and restricted government and corporate documents such as Cryptome.com and Wikileaks.org. A search on Google or Bing would quickly reveal many other sites that have either the document or links to the document.
Even if all online copies were to disappear from the web tomorrow, it has likely already been downloaded millions of times around the world. The unredacted copy hosted at AirSafe.com was downloaded over 4,000 times in the first two days that it was available. The reality of the Internet is that it is an international enterprise, and no single nation, not even the United States, can eliminate access to a document. Once a document is available online, it is very, very difficult to make it unavailable online. Using legal means to remove the TSA document from the Internet would be at best an exercise in futility.
Survey Responses Earlier this week, we put out a survey asking three questions about this latest TSA scandal. The survey in the article asked three questions, and 21 members of the AirSafe.com audience responded.
The the first question asked for a yes or no response. The second question had as response choices Yes, No, Maybe, and Other. The third question asked for a general response. The questions and their responses were as follows:
1. Did you download and review the TSA report? Thirteen had downloaded the document, and eight did not.
2. Should the head of the TSA resign? Nine believed that the head of the TSA should not resign, seven thought the head should resign, four said maybe, and one did not respond.
3. Tell Us What You Think About this Situation The responses are included below with only slight editing for spelling and grammar:
No-one should be exempted from screening now that we know who has been allowed in without a check.
Whoever is in charge of the section responsible for dissemination of documents.
It's unfortunate maybe the guy who didnt black out the areas correctly should resign.
I do not care about very strict screening, it has to be, what matters to me is security.
I downloaded the manual but did not review fully. Yes he should resign, same with the fellow that made the document public. TSA should learn from this and ensure they do not create additional work for themselves and avoidable delays for the rest of us at the airports.
This was an accident; not so serious one, in my opinion.
It puts the traveling public in danger.
I think that if this is typical of how our government functions, then it's no wonder half of Americans have no faith in the ability of the government to run things like health care. Whoever is responsible for this error should be fired and steps should be taken to be sure this doesn't happen in the future. First of all they need a competent IT person to do this sort of thing.
Absolutely unacceptable and sooooooo stupid!!
Really? You people (presumably those behind AirSafeNews.com) are just feeding the fire and all of you who keep circulating this information should be tried as traitors to the US Constitution.
Typical no-brainer attitude. Shouldn't try something unless you know what you are doing.
I don't feel safer.
Use it to prevent other occurrences...firing only encourages cover ups.
