Submitted by Security Screeners, Feb 12, 2007 22:14

Regarding:

Manchester / Boston Regional Airport - Manchester New Hampshire
Transportation Security Administration -
Department of Homeland Security

4 Technology Drive Londonderry, NH 03053
Raymond A. Carolan FSD

TO: New York Sun

Please take the time to consider the information below, and respond. This is not just an isolated wrongful termination in a isolated state that doesn't affect everyone else. There are 45,000 Security Screeners who have been subjected to, or face the possibility of being subjected to wrongful termination, and denied unemployment benefits.

I have written to multiple political figures, trying to get their attention for just a brief moment, long enough to ask for someone to look into my wrongful termination, and request that I'd be reinstated as a Lead Security Baggage Screener at Manchester Boston Regional Airport

Just a few things:

The decision for me to not be part of the 100% DFS cross training at Manchester Boston Regional Airport was unfair, and based on my religious / strong personal beliefs. I was hired by the TSA / DHS. I applied for Baggage Security Screener, and I was Trained by Lockheed Martin as a Baggage Security Screener. This position did not

require Passenger check point duties...such as Full Body Pat Downs at that time.

This reason was firmly established when: AFSD Fred Aufiero asked me if my reason for not wanting to cross train due to medical or religious ? I replied that it was religious.

In truth, I did not refuse to cross train, and I did not refuse to go to the training for such. My only objection was to the one component of the cross training class that would force me to do a physical hand on demonstration of a pat down search. I ask for accommodations to assist me with this one element of the class that my beliefs would not allow, but was not offered any. Nor was I offered employee counseling, or any type of negotiation for my serious dilemma. Consequently I was not allowed to attend the classes for cross training, and was conveniently terminated under the unfair term of Insubordination.

Every TSA employee at our airport was made to believe that cross training was not an Option. Only to find out that there were Options within the scope of cross training that could have been implemented. If this options had been implemented, my beliefs would have been accommodated, and another 13 TSA employees would still have their positions as well.

Mr. Raymond A. Carolan held the reins of that Option MD 1900.8. He could have looked at the needs of the Security Screeners at the time, and not insist that 100% be cross trained without worry of setting a precedence.

Mr. Raymond A. Carolan, was able to provide an Option accommodation for my religious strong personal beliefs but chose to Terminate those that would not go along with 100% DFS cross trained workforce. I am asking how effective is it to lose that many already professionally trained TSA Screeners. I am asking for a fair review of this management judgment call.

My request for Optional consideration was requested long before my termination.

Numerous FSD's (Federal Security Director) have responded to my request for clarification of
TSA directive 1900.8 that was signed by Dr. Randal E. Null April 17, 2006. My employment was wrongfully terminate September 13, 2005. when I asked for reasonable accommodations that were denied.
Each Security Screener at Manchester Boston Regional Airport, has been Forced to participate in DFS cross-training, or have their employment terminated.
FSD Raymond A. Carolan has used TSA Directive 1900.8 to demand the cross-training of all TSA Security Screeners at Manchester Boston Regional Airport, or their employment was terminated.
DFS cross-training is a training program designed as a Option for TSA employees that request or volunteer to cross-train to other duties.

1. DFS cross-training was designed as a training implement for those Screeners wishing to transition to other details.

2. The FSD's mentions...DFS cross-training provided by the TSA for Screeners, worked really well in the environment where Passenger Screeners were just several feet from the Baggage Screening environment. Screeners requested to do each others position, so TSA went out of their way to develop a training program called DFS cross-training.
( These Screeners weren't forced, nor solicited, nor threatened with employment termination)

3. Human Resource points out...how LAS does not have a "requirement" for DFS cross-training.
The use of the word requirement lends itself to questioning the walkout of TSA employees in 2004 / 2005.
When a previous FSD decided that he was going to implement a forced DFS cross-training workforce.

The TSA, under the guidance of Dr. Randal E. Null who signed the TSA directive 1900.8 in April 17, 2006 just eight months before his departure back to the private sector, seemed to have signed it. He would have had to have been an instrumental catalyst to a document that was meant as a training guideline for the TSA, and it's employees.
However, Somewhere along the path of corruption ( perhaps due to the desire for an additional bonus )...a segment of that same guideline called DFS cross-training was extracted from the form of a training guideline, and transformed to a Forced Implemention at the hands of each Training Department, and each FSD, who wrongfully terminated many TSA trained employees at a very high cost.

So, lets look at this further:

1. TSA Screeners who were already trained at the expense of the programs were lost

2. New TSA Screeners who were again trained at the expense of the program were hired to replaced those who were forced out.

3. Bonuses were given for to the FSD for implementing this policy, again at the expense of the program

4. And since Baggage Screening, and Passenger Screening are vastly different they require separate expertise, so that the newly crossed trained Screeners cannot not search through both areas with the same speed...and if they do, it is not with the same accuracy.

The bottom line is simple: A lot of money was spent to reinvent an inferior wheel, while many good screeners were forced our, and terminated by this unfair abuse of managerial power.

Some responses:
******************************************************************************

L J-

I have forwarded all to the Office of Security Operations (OSO) who has responsibility for this area. They are compiling responses to your previous questions and should be responding to you this week.
Thanks so much,
Christine

*****************************************************************************

L J
Mr. Golden has asked me to assist you with your inquiries. Although the Management Directive 1900.8 was originally signed by the Office of Operational Process and Technology, operational training responsibilities have recently been moved under the Office of Security Operations. I have forwarded your questions to them for response. To assist us in responding to your questions and confirm your need to know for the information, please send us your full name, position, and airport location.

Thank you,
Christine Halfacre
Communications Branch Manager
Operational Process & Technology

********************************************

TSA Kip Hawley acknowledged that TSA has experienced higher turnover of part-time employees than he would like. That rate was 38.6 percent for fiscal 2006, compared to a rate of about 16 percent for full-time workers. High turnover amounts to a "bad deal," Hawley said, because the agency spends thousands of dollars to train workers who leave shortly after starting their jobs. Worker safety is another priority for TSA, Hawley said. Last year, lawmakers criticized the agency for having the highest injury rate of any federal agency. Hawley also expressed his displeasure at legislation passed last week by the House granting TSA employees collective bargaining rights.

**********************************************************************************

FSD's can deem it appropriate to require that a portion, or even all, of the Screeners at the airport become DFS-certified. This gives FSD's maximum flexibility to assign staff where it is needed most.
In general, FSD's have the duty to ensure effective management of the workforce at the airport. Each FSD must also ensure that those management actions are in accordance with applicable TSA policy and regulation.
Like any member of the TSA workforce, FSD's can receive bonuses if, in the judgment of their superiors, they demonstrate superior performance in the execution of their duties. Using DFS-certified Screeners as an effective management tool can certainly be a consideration in granting such bonuses.
Joyce DeMoss
Ombudsman
Transportation Security Administration
*******************************************************************************

As the FSD, I made the decision with the support of TSA HQ and TSA policy to implement an all DFS workforce in order to more efficiently and effectively manage our workforce. LTSO Coon refused to report for passenger screening training to become DFS. I made the final decision to remove LTSO Coon from the workforce for failing to follow instructions once it became clear he had no intention of ever attending and completing this required training.

Raymond A. Carolan

Questions:

TSA Directive 1900.8 mentions Training of TSA employees. One of the particular
Training groups mentioned is DFS (Dual Function Screening) / Cross - Training.

1. TSA Directive 1900.8 is a training directive. In its self, each category of training such as DFS cross-training was intended as an Option for FSD's. As for DFS cross-training each FSD could in fact cross-train
one Security Screener, two Security Screeners, a percentage of the total staffing, or 100 percent of the Airport Security Screeners. In fact MD 1900.8 leaves the DFS cross-training up to the FSD's. MD 1900.8 just outlines the facts for each training department intending to DFS cross-training, along with other types of training ?

2. The directive reads like the FSD could cross train one employee or as many as each FSD would want.

3. This is interpreted as Optional training then .

4. Many Directives such as 1900.8 has been misinterpreted as a Mandatory
national policy, in the past.
When in fact..this Directive may have been distributed nationally, but was meant as an Optional implementation for each FSD ?

5. It has been rumored. The FSD's receive a TSA bonus, should each FSD implement a DFS workforce.

6. FSD's are / have terminated any, and all TSA employees that are unwilling to be part of DFS cross-training, regardless of their request for accommodations.

7. DFS cross-training is not required at all Airports.
DFS cross-training was originally designed to offer training to those Screeners that wanted to cross-train into other positions.
DFS cross-training was NOT designed to demand that every Security Screener Shall be cross-trained or their employment will be terminated.

Respectfully

L J Coon

Raymond.Carolan@dhs.gov

fred.aufiero@dhs.gov
Contact:1-603-666-7420
1-603-305-3882

1-603-666-7439

Note: Comments are screened, and in some cases edited, before posting. We reserve the right to reject anything we find objectionable.