Posted by Seth on June 15, 2011 under News | 
Want access to the priority security lines at the airport without elite status or buying a first class ticket? Looks like it is time to start flying JetBlue. The carrier announced today the 15 airports at which their new "Even More Speed" program will be implemented, allowing customers access to the "priority" line that other carriers afford to elites or premium cabin customers. With JetBlue this perk will be an additional benefit of the Even More Legroom seats which are being rebranded as well as part of the move.
The initial airports for priority screening are:
Priority screening is also coming to Boston in the next 4-6 weeks as the reconfiguration of the checkpoint there is completed.
In addition to the priority screening access the company is changing the Even More Legroom moniker to Even More Space. The impetus for this change is the addition of early boarding for those customers, providing them the first chance to get at the overhead bins. The early boarding benefit isn’t particularly new but the branding is. Maybe they got a bulk discount on trademark registrations with "Even More" in the name.
Overall this is a nice addition to the offerings that JetBlue has. Combined with the previous indications that some sort of "elite" program (though they refuse to use that word) is coming and that some of these benefits are likely to carry over, it seems clear that JetBlue is working hard to woo the business traveler segment more than ever.
Related Posts:
Tags: Boston, Chicago, elite status, JetBlue, Las Vegas, Los Angeles, New York City, Newark, San Francisco, Seattle, TSA, Washington DC
Posted by Seth on May 13, 2011 under News, TSA |
For a guy who sees so many of his constituents benefit from a program, New York Senator Charles Schumer doesn’t really seem to care too much for the organization. Indeed, the Senator has been making noise in the past couple weeks that will likely cause irreparable harm to Amtrak, destroying one of the few small advantages America’s national rail company has over air travel. Oh, and just for good measure, the rules he wants to apply are ridiculously unfair to all passengers.
The word is that, among other "security" efforts, Schumer wants to see the Department of Homeland Security expand their Secure Flight program to cover rail travel as well. Secure Flight is the rather un-American program that maintains a secret list of folks considered a threat to air travel. The people are never told that they are necessarily on said list. The details of how one gets listed or, more significantly, how one proves they should not be listed are not public and what little information is available suggests that the process doesn’t really work to help make anything or anyone more secure. Nonetheless Schumer wants to see the program expanded to cover rail travel as well as air travel.
Never mind that one of the justifications the TSA and DHS have used in the past to justify their overly-invasive passenger screening policies is that the passengers always could take a train if they didn’t like the rules. Never mind that the effort would essentially require the creation of TSA-like checkpoints at rail stations, increasing the boarding time and generally making a mess of the process. None of that is important because Schumer sees a potential threat that he believes can be exploited to drive both spending and fear, the latter being the more fun way for folks in charge to stay that way and screw over the public.
So instead of investing money where it can be used to help rail travel in the USA. Instead of working to increase high-speed rail for regional inter-city transport. Instead of investing in actually providing security to any part of the travel experience we have this ridiculous plan. Instead of identifying actual security threats we have this list of names that may or may not mean anything related to security, other than job security for the folks who compile, maintain and perform checks against the list. This plan that does nothing for security. This plan that doesn’t actually identify the people who are really threats because they might find out we know about them. This plan that unduly subjects citizens and visitors alike to a screening process that completely circumvents the principles of our justice system. This plan that will destroy the one last chance we have to make intercity rail travel a legitimate alternative to air travel in the United States.
Thanks, Senator Schumer. Thanks for distracting attention from the real problems. Thanks for fear-mongering instead of providing meaningful and functional plans.
In short, thanks for nothing.
Related Posts:
Posted by Seth on May 4, 2011 under Flying, Trip Reports, TSA |
Flying standby used to be a relatively simple endeavor: you showed up at the gate and if there was a seat you got it. Not too difficult to manage, really. Then the airlines realized that they could make money from folks who wanted to fly standby and things got way more complicated. But on my JetBlue flight from JFK to Boston yesterday I experienced the most interesting version of a standby policy I’ve ever seen.
I arrived at the airport expecting to just relax a bit before my flight, not even thinking about flying out early. That was before I got the notice that my flight was going to be an hour late and likely cause me to miss my dinner in Boston. With a bit of motivation and luck that the TSA line was pretty quick I was through to the gate 20 minutes prior to the earlier flight’s scheduled departure time. Surely it would be no problem to get myself on a standby list and, with any luck, up to Boston in time for dinner. The gate agent was busy so I stepped over to the service center right next to the gate.
"Sorry, but you cannot be added to the standby list. The flight is closed."
Mind you they were still boarding the flight and they had a dozen or so folks standing around waiting to see who would clear off the standby list into one of the few empty seats still available, but they guy I was speaking with insisted the flight was "closed." I tried with the gate as well and couldn’t even get a word in before I was dismissed by the agent. At this point it was pretty clear I was not getting on the flight but I was also curious to see how the event would play out as there were a number of non-revenue passengers also waiting for seats and I was curious how many of them would get to fly ahead of a revenue customer. The answer was at least 5.
That number would have been lower as the gate agent was clearing all the standby customers into seats, including the non-revs who could ride jump seat. I give a lot of credit to the pilot who was flying as a non-rev who insisted that they put her in the cockpit for the sake of getting one more standby on the plane. The gate agent working the flight was actually annoyed by this as it meant more paperwork for her.
When I asked for an explanation at the gate I was told that there was nothing they could do for me there and that I should proceed to the Service Center for a supervisor to explain the situation to me. I walked the 20 steps back over there and asked the same guy I was speaking with earlier to speak with the supervisor as the gate agent instructed me. He picked up the phone and called the supervisor on duty. It was the woman working that gate who sent me away. Apparently she had no desire to explain what the policy was or why they were taking non-revenue customers over revenue ones so I was told I could wait a few minutes for another supervisor to show up.
I guess they figured I’d eventually leave as the supervisor I was promised never materialized. I waited 90 minutes and he never showed. He did call in at one point and I explained the situation to him so I believe he really exists, but I sat there for 90 minutes and he didn’t actually show up and answer the questions at hand. I also left my contact information so that he could call or email me once he did get an answer. Sadly, though not surprisingly that call never came. They did give me a $12 meal voucher for my trouble but that isn’t worth nearly the same as actually getting where I wanted to be when they should’ve been able to get me there. And the 90 minute wait for a supervisor because the other one couldn’t be bothered to explain the policy was pretty poor form.
The JetBlue website help page on the topic doesn’t have any more useful details. There is no mention of a cutoff time or anything else that suggests that non-revs should be seated ahead of revenue customers. And the conversation I had on the phone with the supervisor suggests that they screwed up but no one can confirm the actual policy for me. Even reaching out to a contact inside the company only got me some maybes and sortofs rather than a real policy. Really quite frustrating.
Will this stop me from flying with JetBlue in the future? Probably not. The product in the air is still probably the best coach flying available in the USA. But the inexplicable policy of restricting the waitlist so far in advance and taking non-revenue customers over revenue passengers is certainly that rubs me the wrong way and will certainly make me consider other options, particularly when I know that there might be some give in my schedule and that I might want to fly out a bit early. They may not charge, but the inability to actually get on the list within 30 minutes of departure makes that benefit rather less valuable.
Other than arrive 45 minutes late the flight was fine. No real complaints there. But the standby policy appears to have a rather notable problem.
Posted by Seth on April 25, 2011 under News, TSA |
Can you list every address you’ve lived at since birth? What about every employer – including the name of your supervisor and their phone number – you have ever had? Every school you attended, including address and phone number? If not, you might not be able to get a passport if the State Department has its way. And those are the easy questions on the newly proposed form DS-5513.
Here’s the justification for the new form as provided in the Federal Register filing:
The primary purpose for soliciting this information is to establish citizenship, identity, and eligibility for a U.S. Passport Book or Passport Card. The information may also be used in connection with issuing other travel documents or evidence of citizenship, and in furtherance of the Secretary’s responsibility for the protection of U.S. nationals abroad.
If you can demonstrate (arguably via a certified birth certificate) that you were born in the US then the above questions are the only ones you really need to complete. If not, however, the questionnaire gets way more detailed. Here are some of the specifics that are asked for:
- What type of document, if any, did your mother use to enter into the United States before your birth?
- Please describe the circumstances of your birth including the names (as well as address and phone number, if available) of persons present or in attendance at your birth.
- Was there any religious or institutional recording of your birth or event occurring around the time of birth? (Example: baptism, circumcision, confirmation or other religious ceremony. Please provide details including the name, location of the
institution, and date.)
They even ask for specific details regarding any medical professionals that may have been involved, including a history of appointment dates. Oh, and the mother’s profession, address and, because we don’t want to be particularly obvious that we’re discriminating against immigrants, "What type of document, if any, did your mother use to enter into the United States before your birth?"
In case you’re curious, they estimate that compiling all this information will take only 45 minutes on average. I only have to answer the easy questions and I’m not sure I can do it that quickly.
Sadly, this will almost certainly become the rule, just like all the other asinine things the government is doing to infringe upon our rights "out of an abundance of caution." Today is the last day to register a complaint to the appropriate officials. The easiest way to do so is to email GarciaAA@state.gov. You must include the DS form number (if applicable), information collection title, and OMB control number in any correspondence. For this particular abomination those details are DS-5513 and Biographical Questionnaire for U.S. Passport; there is no OMB control number currently assigned.
UPDATE (17:55 EDT 25 APR): This form is supposedly only to be used if the veracity of the initially supplied documentation is in doubt. So it probably won’t apply to everyone. Still, there is a TON of data in here way beyond what should be needed to establish citizenship and well beyond what the government should need from us.
Here’s the letter I’m sending. I encourage you to contact them as well. Oh, and the 60-day comment period started on February 24th so it is pretty much over so it is important to act quickly (i.e. TODAY) on this issue!
To: GarciaAA@state.gov
Subject: Comments on proposed rule for DS-5513 – Biographical Questionnaire for U.S. Passport
To whom it may concern:
I am writing to comment on the proposed rule change published in the Federal Register as Public Notice 7345 regarding form DS-5513 – Biographical Questionnaire for U.S. Passport; there is currently no OMB control number assigned to this document.
The proposed form is collecting an excessive amount of data, well beyond what is necessary to confirm citizenship and issue a passport for qualified individuals. The time burden suggested – an average of 45 minutes – is a gross underestimate of how long it will take to collect even the basic information; answering questions 5-12 will take significantly longer. As an adult in my 30s who is qualified to answer only the basic questions I found that it took me well over one hour to compile the information and it is still incomplete.
My schooling and job history have no bearing on my citizenship status, yet the form asks for full details of both. If I fail to provide it (and potentially if I miss something) the State Department can deny me a passport, even though I am a naturally born citizen.
The form show significant bias against home-birthed children, requiring them to complete extensive documentation as though they are an undocumented alien in this country. Similarly, the extensive details requested about the circumstances of the birth – names and phone numbers of everyone present, for example – are excessive and go well beyond what is necessary to document citizenship.
Travel is a wonderful thing. It provides education, experiences and perspective all at once, helping to better both the people doing the traveling as well as those whom they visit. It should be encouraged and facilitated by our government, not impeded. This form represents an excessive data collection against US citizens and is an undue burden for demonstrating citizenship. It is working against these goals, not towards them.
Thank you for your time.
Sincerely,
Wandering Aramean.
Posted by Seth on March 9, 2011 under News, TSA |
It is a bit complicated to fire someone that does not really work for you. Just ask Cosmo Kramer about getting fired from a job: "I don’t even really work here!" To which the boss replied, "That’s what makes this so hard." So when Amtrak‘s Police Chief John O’Connor caught wind of an apparent rogue screening checkpoint set up by the TSA at the Amtrak station in Savannah, Georgia, firing them was all that much more difficult. But that didn’t stop the Chief. Amtrak stations are currently off limits to TSA personnel until "a firm agreement can be drawn up to prevent the TSA from taking actions that the chief said were illegal and clearly contrary to Amtrak policy."
Apparently a TSA Visible Intermodal Protection and Response ("VIPR") team showed up at the Savannah Amtrak station, posted a note that anyone entering the building was subject to search and then proceeded to make good on that promise. Skipping over the fact that one can apparently board or depart trains in Savannah without ever entering the station, it is not clear who authorized or even requested the search. It is clear, however, that the actions were not in compliance with Amtrak’s policy regarding security.
“When I saw it, I didn’t believe it was real,” O’Connor said. When it developed that the posting on an anti-TSA blog was not a joke, “I hit the ceiling.”
The TSA’s comment on the event is, typically, a non-comment that avoids the issue. They actually come close to suggesting that they might have done something wrong, but do not go so far as to acknowledge that the VIPR action apparently violates Amtrak policies.
However, after looking into it further, we learned that this particular VIPR operation should have ended by the time these folks were coming through the station since no more trains were leaving the station. We apologize for any inconvenience we may have caused for those passengers.
Chief O’Connor is on record as believing that the TSA’s intrusive searches are excessive for his organization’s needs and possibly unconstitutional. The VIPR searches in Savannah affected all passengers, not a random sampling as Amtrak policy dictates. The VIPR searches also included the "wanding" of passengers and isolation of "sterile" and "non-sterile" environments, a policy that Amtrak does not implement at any of their stations.
It looks like the TSA has once again messed up. Not really much of a surprise there, but certainly depressing. Watch the video. And cry a little. Next time the TSA agent groping you at the airport suggests that you have other options if you do not want to fly, remember that you really do not.
Related Posts:
Posted by Seth on March 3, 2011 under News, TSA |
Sure, there was tremendous uproar when Spirit Air announced their plan to charge passengers to have larger carry-on bags on the plane. But what if the TSA, the idiots charged with securing our transportation infrastructure, suggests something similar? Will the same congress-critters who displayed outrage maintain it or will they roll over to the "anything for security" mantra?
It looks like we are all going to find out soon enough. The Secretary of Homeland Security, Janet Napolitano, testified to congress this week that the costs related to carry-on bags are in the range of $260MM annually because of the need to have TSA agents screening those bags. These are the same agents who are great at spotting bottles of water and apparently not so much at spotting things that are actually arguably dangerous, but that’s a whole different rant.
The Secretary conveniently managed to skip over the part about how there are other agents who are inspecting all the checked baggage; if the bags are checked instead of carried on someone is still going to have to check them. Then again, the checked baggage systems (particularly the new ones) are much more automated and faster, in part because there is more space to work with in those sections of the airport and in part because they’re actually looking for dangerous goods instead of extra large tubes of toothpaste or sunscreen.
The statement from the Secretary was in response to a rather leading question from Senator Mary Landrieu:
Checked bagged fees are increasing, it looks like, the cost to TSA because people don’t want to pay the fees so they are not checking bags and putting more on the planes. My question is, do the taxpayers have to pick up this fee? Or should we be looking at the airlines for some of the profits that they make from these fees to offset the cost the taxpayer.
The Secretary is trying to convince Congress to increase the fees paid by passengers to the tune of $600MM annually. No word yet on what other wasteful projects the spare $340MM will be earmarked for. Apparently the Senator is just looking for a cash-grab.
Our government, hard at work.
Related Posts:
Posted by Seth on January 27, 2011 under News, TSA |
The Department of Homeland Security is finally going to get rid of their Rainbow Brite security system according to published reports. The system, established to aid in fear-mongering in 2002, was pretty much a waste of time and energy. Now it is being retired.
The system will be replaced in April during a presentation by DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano. The details will be included as part of the first annual "State of America’s Homeland Security" address. Get ready to hear the DHS brag about how they’ve spent billions upon billions and not actually improved security all that much. Should be a great time.
Seriously, though, I’m glad to hear that the DHS is moving towards a system that identifies specific real threats and reacts to those. Here’s hoping they can manage to do it without only being the reactionary fiasco that they have been to date. Deciding 3 days later to ban whatever last month’s attack du jour was doesn’t say much for their foresight.
Related Posts:
Posted by Seth on November 23, 2010 under News, Screening Management SOP, Trip Reports, TSA |
Part of me says that I should have seen this all coming. The TSA has been pretty good about demonstrating just how incompetent they are and their latest moves really are just a continuation of that trend. Still, I’ve found myself so completely dumbfounded over the past 3 weeks that I’ve not been able to form a coherent set of thoughts about just what specifically I find so objectionable. As National Opt-Out Day approaches tomorrow, however, I’m going to try.
It was about 50 weeks ago that I posted what I thought was a relatively tame post here on this blog: The TSA makes another stupid move. Just another example of the TSA being stupid, right? Actually, this one was worse then most. The story got some legs and before I knew it there were congressional hearings where I was excoriated as part of the problem (“Rest assured that we will hold the department to account”) while the Acting Director of the TSA sat there, smiled, declined to actually answer any of the questions posed and then went back to running the circus that is the TSA. Congress promised changes but no oversight of the agency materialized.
Fast forward 11 months and we’re dealing now with outrage and near revolt on the part of the passengers in many camps. The Director of the TSA has made statements effectively blaming us, the passengers, for causing the problems and reminding everyone that if they are delayed at security and miss their flight on Wednesday it is because other passengers have decided that being strip-searched was simply too much, not because the searches are happening.
I hear people say “Well, as long as it makes us safer,” as a justification for the searches. They do not. These searches are not based on any actionable intelligence report. They are based on random reactions to previous events and to extensive lobbying on the part of former DHS employees to score huge contracts to sell the strip-search machines.
I hear people suggest that doing it “Israel-style” will make us safer. Probably not, and even if it would our society is not willing to accept the costs – time or dollar – to go there. And we shouldn’t. The threats and the infrastructure being secured are very different.
Some airports (Orlando and Colorado Springs are the two most recent to suggest such) want the TSA out and replaced with private screeners. Sadly, however, the screening policies are still set by the TSA and ultimately it is these policies that cause the problems. Having transited security at SFO several times in the past couple years I can safely say that the private contractors performing the unreasonably invasive searches are no better than anyone else performing the same.
When I can walk through the checkpoint and see a document out in plain view labeled “Unpredictable Screening Checklist” complete with the details on what types of events are considered “unpredictable” and how often each TSO is expected to perform such there is something VERY wrong with the SOP. When I explain to the folks running the checkpoint that they probably shouldn’t have those documents in plain view they generally shrug and move them somewhere else that is still in plain view of the passengers.
Lots of people suggesting lots of things, except the obvious solution: hold the TSA accountable. Elected officials are only just now starting to consider suggesting that the TSA isn’t perfect. Doing so when it was not clear that the public was opposed to the TSA was political suicide as their opponents would campaign against them on that front. But now that there is some political cover – hard for their not to be as the TSA is groping passengers, adult and child alike – the politicians are finally starting to speak up. Not enough, yet, but the movement is afoot.
Here’s hoping the uproar continues. Here’s hoping that passengers see the TSA for what they really are. Here’s hoping that our country can finally choose to not live in fear. These will be my thoughts as I travel this week, knowing that I have the right to not be strip-searched just to get on an airplane.
I will fly proud, not afraid. I will not let anyone terrorize me, including my own government.
Related Posts
Posted by Seth on April 22, 2010 under Trip Reports |
Dear woman at JFK T7 this morning:
Thank you for coming back at the very last minute and claiming the random black carry-on bag that had been sitting unattended near the TSA lines. I was particularly impressed with the remorse and fear you showed to the Port Authority PD officer who was busy roping off the area and moving people away from the bag. But next time, don’t wander off from the bag for 10 minutes. That really isn’t cool.
To the TSA folks, thanks for mostly just standing there and staring at the bag and not dumping the terminal. I’m quite happy that I didn’t have to miss my flight.
The whole incident does raise an interesting point, though. Having a bunch of people just standing around 15 feet from a potential danger isn’t really all that helpful. Better than 5 feet, I suppose, but still not great. Then again, odds of such a scenario actually playing out are low enough that I don’t mind at all that we didn’t all have to clear the building.
Posted by Seth on April 5, 2010 under News |
Why, oh why, do the airlines make it so hard to figure out the pricing for a ticket? Yes, there are rules about what does and does not have to be included, but even that doesn’t seem to be enough to make things easy in most cases. I was doing some research on a flight recently and was presented with this fare display:
Yes, I picked the “$243” ticket but, no, none of the prices I was then presented actually were that number. The ticket is actually either $226.05 or $253.70, not $243. But that’s the advertised price. What gives?
Sadly, I actually know the answer. It has to do with which fees do and do not have to be included in the initial advertised fare since they can vary depending on the airports traversed in the USA. These Passenger Facility Charges are levied by the airports and used to help fund their operations and capital improvements. There are also the “September 11th Security Fee” that goes to pay for having the TSA harass passengers randomly and a per-segment flight tax that also goes to the federal government. Without knowing the final routing the PFCs and per-segment taxes cannot be reasonably computed.
But it still is ridiculous that airlines can have so many different “prices” when the only thing that customers really care about is the amount they pay out the door. It is a shame that the US-based carriers aren’t required to simply share the full price and that the US government actually makes it more complicated with the fees they charge rather than enforcing simpler rules.
