It’s official: The TSA is going to unionize


PJ TATLER – As of Thursday, August 2, 2012, the Transportation Security Administration has agreed to unionize. The agency, best known for groping and offending Americans as we attempt to fly from one part of the country to the other, has agreed to allow the American Federation of Government Employees to unionize its workers.

The AGFE union, an affiliate of the AFL-CIO, announced the unionization agreement on its Facebook page.

“For 10 long years AFGE has fought hard so that Transportation Security Officers would have collective bargaining rights. We have often looked back and wondered why it was taking so long,” said AFGE National President John Gage. “Today we begin to look forward.”

When TSA was originally created in the aftermath of the 9-11 terrorist attacks, President Bush and the Congress agreed that the new agency should never unionize. That agreement lasted until 2011, when President Obama and the Senate Democrats pushed a unionization approval through.


Comment Policy: Please read our new comment policy before making a comment. In short, please be respectful of others and do not engage in personal attacks. Otherwise we will revoke your comment privileges.
  • Going in the WRONG direction. Privatize airport security!

    • Everything goes in the wrong direction with Obama. Everything.

  • Sober_Thinking

    There is nothing good about this. So much for flying commercial…

    • MiketheMarine

      I have refused to fly since the TSA started. I prefer to drive. Armed.

      • sDee

        Me too. Planning a trip gives one food for thought as to how even the most innocuous sounding local and state gun laws could dramatically restrict one’s movement.

        It is why the twisted “all is on the table” States Rights polices that we heard from the likes of Gov’s Perry and Romeny earlier this year are so dangerous.

        It does affect every citizen when states and cities restrict 2nd Amendment rights. …and why it is so important to support the NRA.

      • Sober_Thinking

        Brilliant. Safer than flying imo.

  • Army_Pilot1967

    Obama and unions = hand in glove!!!!!

  • badbadlibs

    If only one day unions could be out-lawed.

    • keninil

      Unions are needed! But the AFL-CIO tends to unionize where they are not needed. At Amazon warehouses you have the conditions that unions solved in the 30s
      Likewise the threat of unionization in a number of other areas keeps companies layoff/firing practices and work rules on the straight and narrow.

      Unions can be a good thing, but not for govt workers — and not when they use their leverage to destroy companies and industries like auto and steel. The Japanese would not have had a steel or auto industry if our unions had managed their demands.

      • Rshill7

        Unions are no longer needed. They ruin everything they sink their fangs into. They are vampire-like. There are no redeeming qualities in unions, none. They are also dinosaurs that need killing by an asteroid equivalent. That’s my considered opinion. Thanks for yours.

        “…on the straight and narrow.”…road to ruin.

        • keninil

          Having worked for a company that did all it could to skirt union rules regarding part time (no benefit) hires (I wrote computer scheduling programs to figure this out), I know there are a lot of companies out there who are not ethical in their business practices and need unions/labor laws to keep them from abusing workers who just want to work and need a “big brother” to see that they are treated fairly. Retail and restaurant businesses constantly play the part time (no benefit game).

          If you want to see how completely unregulated business environments treat their workers and customers, go to India or China — with luck you will live thru the experience without losing your life or all your possessions.

          • Rshill7

            Labor laws exist independent of unions. “Union rules” can kiss business owner’s butts. Security for the worker is in the ability to produce. Union workers are almost impossible to fire and are promoted based on longevity rather than performance.

            My father-in-law lived and worked in China for 20 years. He’s back and retired.

            I as a business owner will close before I would allow a union to touch my business.

            Unions brought about the changes workers needed decades ago. It’s time for them to go away and stop their legalized extortion. But just for kicks, let me ask you this. What is the business owners recourse to a strike? Is there one? He has no choice but to lose lots and lots of money until he bows to union demands.

            It’s extortion pure and simple. I despise unions with a passion…all of them.

            • keninil

              What is an employees recourse to limited hours, being laid off so less expensive workers can be hired, being laid off because middle management doesn’t like you, being laid off because you are overcome by technology? To me these are unethical reasons to lay folks off who have put in 10 years with a business to help it grow. I have been laid off for all the reasons above, tho with my technical skills I am able to find other employment. This is not true for the employee at the bottom of ladder. As a contract worker I did leave an employer who was employing me week to week when something better came a long. When he asked what about this project and that project. I gave him his week to week song back.

              I’m guessing then you follow the Amazon business model, hiring only contract employees or part timers, giving raises only when turnover gets obnoxiously high that newbies are not staying long to get trained and that management has a special benefit package way better than employees (like the difference between the benefits for Congressional “service” and military service.)

              • Rshill7

                I knew you couldn’t answer my simple little question. You can obfuscate like a champ though. Good for you.

                “Guess” all you want friend. You have obviously never owned or run a business.

                • keninil

                  Your answer is COMPROMISE!

                • Jay

                  You sound brainwashed. While there was a need for unions at one time there are plenty of laws to protect the worker these days. I’ve met some union business reps that act just like underworld thugs… imagine that.

                • Rshill7

                  In other words give in or shut down, much like you “compromise” with your basic extortioner who has a gun crammed up against your temple…or a democrat. You give in give up and give out.

                  Is this how you compromise: “OK dudes and dudettes, you stop striking, go back to work and we’ll bend over to all of your demands.”

                  Imagine all of those empty factories who “compromised” right into Chapter 7. That’s what comes before chapter 8 I guess. Same old story, different chapter. The company sheds millions or sheds millions, got it!

                  Doesn’t sound like compromise to me. Sounds like legalized extortion. It sounds like the usurpation of private property by goons.

                • keninil

                  You have been listening to Harry Reid’s version of the definition too long.

                • Rshill7

                  Have I? Or could it be from living in Michigan for 20 years and observing these things up close? In other words, from facts on the ground. Thanks again for supporting democrats with your money.

                  Unions are just as bad if not worse than Harry Reid. I can’t decide who are the pimps and who are the whores in the democrat/union marriage. Both however are thugs and goons.

                  I now see a bit of why your business ownership is in the past tense. You’re schizophrenic in your thinking.

                • keninil

                  Yes I have owned a business.

      • Nukeman60

        Too many people mistake public sector unions with private sector unions. Every time there is an argument about public sector unions and someone claims unions have done something good, they recite facts from the private sector. Public sector unions have done nothing for the populace. All they have done is destroy and bankrupt our local, state, and federal governments.

        There was a time for private sector unions, but that time is gone. There is no place for the parasitic public sector unions that keep bleeding you and me dry year after year.

      • sDee

        Yes, it is crucial to differentiate public sector unions from labor unions in this debate. They are two similar but essentially different arguments – and dangers.

        • Rshill7

          Who both suck. Unions are legalized extortion. You cannot sugarcoat or put enough lipstick on any of them to make them of value to anyone other than themselves. why is the protection racket from the mafia illegal but what unions do legal. They extort, they run roughshod over private property, and they were founded and still run by commies.

          If you have some nice things to say about either public or private unions, I’m all ears.

          Maybe you can answer the question that ken cannot. What is a company’s recourse to a general strike, other than giving in, shutting down, or shedding mountains of money waiting them out, which eventually leads to shutting down anyway?

  • keninil

    Has the TSA found any terrorists in 11 years? It seems actual(?) terrorists get permission for an intelligence agency to get on the planes with their makeshift bombs that don’t quite work. (I think the govt should fix their bombs and let them explode them in a empty field so the bombers can die with some success.)

    We should put the TSA to work where we need them:
    — on the southern US border, or
    — in bars to drive drunks home (no more DUIs, or DUI deaths),
    — maybe they can drive commuters to work so the commuters can text or email safely.

    These options would definitely save US lives. (another option is for them to keep US air traffic controllers awake!)

    • Sandra123456

      That’s an interesting question, “Has the TSA found any terrorists in 11 years?”

      Or has 11 years of groping found any terrorists?

      How many weapons has 11 years of groping found?

      If the answer(s) are none, then get rid of the TSA or at least privatize it.

      • jaybenson

        In that sense… if military sentries at the entrance of a military compound hasn’t stopped a terrorists in 10 years, then the solution is to remove them and let everybody come on unchecked.

        Searches are a deterrent. I agree methods are flawed but to claim they shouldn’t exist is a bit off.

        • MiketheMarine

          You are a bozo. Military bases are guarded by military and ruled by the UCMJ. Airports are an entirely different animal. When you board a military base you are surrendering your rights as you know them. At an airport you are still covered by the bill of rights. That is, you used to until Maobama became the messiah.

          We should be profiling. PC is going to kill more Americans before they figure that out.

          • Sandra123456

            Profiling should be done like the Israeli’s do. Profiling is not a bad word.

            But since we have government in our airports now, we will never get them out.

            “TSA Arrests Raise Questions Of Who Screens The Screeners”

            The TSA has 62,000 employees now. 62,000! How many private businesses have 62,000 employees? This is just one Federal Agency.

          • jaybenson

            A bozo? Why is that? My point was that just because a terrorist wasn’t caught or weapon found the conclusion isn’t that the searches don’t work. Searches are a deterrent and shouldn’t be eliminated completely. I also went on to say I agreed the methodology used was flawed, but we don’t throw away the baby with the bath-water. To clarify my point with another military example; should a Provost Marshall discontinue using RAMs because they don’t result in any terrorist catches? The obvious answer is no.

            Since I’m a bozo, I’ll also point out that military bases aren’t ruled by the UCMJ as you infer (as applying to all who enter). If a civilian is on a base and commits a crime, they are not subject to UCMJ. UCMJ only applies to service members. Also, a civilian does not “surrender your rights as you know them” when they enter a military post, as neither do service members.

            Private and public entities require us to forego “rights” every day. Amusement parks don’t allow you to bring in weapons, restaurants won’t serve you if you aren’t wearing a shirt, and airports/airlines won’t let you bring weapons onto an airplane and will search you before you enter the plane.

            What in the Bill of Rights was taken away when George W. Bush created HLS and the TSA as we know it (although you seem to blame Obama)? I can’t seem to find the part where searches were made unconstitutional.

            • MiketheMarine

              The entire process and the rules they are operatiing under is a scam. The only people they pull out of line are veterans, grand mothers and little caucasian girls. It is just another means this administration uses to terrorize anyone who doesn’t agree with him. It has nothing at all to do with our protection.

              Bush attempted to ensure that the TSA could not unionize. Maobama guarantees that they will unionize just like Maobama withdrew the working requirement for wellfair.

              • jaybenson

                Mike, That I can agree with. I know government enough that I don’t believe it is a huge conspiracy but instead pure laziness. For simplicity and speed HLS/TSA took the age old waiting in ques and getting the pat down as the method to deter 21st Century terrorism. To make it look like they were using modern technology they brought in the fancy-dancy scanners. What they failed to do and what they should have done was start outside the box and totally revamp how they do security. Unfortunately, as another person stated, now that it is in place there is little chance it will be changed. That is probably the biggest advantage of privatization. Privatizing not only brings innovation but also a higher level of accountability.

  • GetWhatYouPayFor

    This Administration seems to love the “Brotherhood” both here and abroad.

  • 911Infidel

    Fire the TSA. We don’t need people in our airport security apparatus that continue to show willful blindness to the real threat posed by the maniacs in Islam. The American people aren’t the enemy. Islam is the enemy.

    • p m

      And wilful blindness to the Constitution.
      Federal civil servants swear loyalty and allegiance to the Constitution of the United States i.e. to the source of its authorities as identified in its first seven words: ”We the People of the United States. . . . “

      How’s observance of the 4th Amendment coming along? TSA behaviours and edicts are incompatible with the Constitution. ‘Just obeying orders’ is the invariable excuse when TSA excesses are publicized. The only orders these public servants should be obeying are those in the Constitution whose tenets they have sworn to uphold.
      The TSA should be abolished in favour of Israel’s profiling system.
      As you say, the enemy is islam, even if we aren’t allowed to say so.

      • 911Infidel

        “The TSA should be abolished in favour of Israel’s profiling system.”

        That’s what I have been advocating as well. Well said.

  • Rshill7

    Hey, it’s parasite appreciation day !

  • Freempg

    What an unmitigated disaster.

  • Nukeman60

    This just shows how much Obama is in the pockets of the Unions. Private sector Unions are only 6% of the workforce and public sector Unions are only 6% of the workforce. Why does this 12% have so much power over the 88% of the rest of the country? Just consider political donations to Democrats and you have your answer.

    Obama is just a pawn once again.

    • Rshill7

      In his mind though, he’s King…but he’s moving into check. Checkmate is scheduled for November. Then it’s game over for Mr. Commie-pants.

      He should stick to checkers. Once given the bums rush out of office he can hopscotch all over the board, froggy-style.

  • KM

    Hey, let’s vote for a “community organizer”.

  • HopeHeFails

    Next up:
    Marijuana legalization policy right before the election.

    Followed by:
    Mormon Theology expose’ from Axlerod…

  • HopeHeFails

    One good ‘ol passenger travel strike for two or three days would stop this nonsense.

  • Don’t trust a man with blue hands.

    • Suzyqpie

      Or a man wearing a blue helmet.

  • sDee
  • p m

    So the TSA is to be unionized – what a disaster. Unionization will further entrench another hostile layer of bureaucracy, while increasing its inefficiencies. Government employees should not be allowed to unionize and congress needs to get off its rear and stop them from doing so. Labour laws are such that unions are not required. Except by democrat politicians.

  • nibblesyble

    disaster!! Can this be reversed: if Romney wins?


    One more step in forming Obama’s army. Early in the campaign he talked about a national army that will be funded as our military. Just follow the steps that this group has taken. Look at the expansion of their coverage. Its special police like uniforms and badges that give them authority, weapons training, etc. This could end up being a national police force. God help us. Soon they will be in your 7-11. Now the real anchor – unionize them. They basically will be able to cripple the country if we do not yield to their demands. This is big. This is dangerous.

  • B-Funk

    Hasn’t Florida already kicked them out?

  • PAWatcher

    The new and better House and Senate 2012 will defund and put obama’s private army out of business along with him and his czars! November is almost here, get ready for the biggest, bestest tidal wave to hit DC… God help US.

  • aZjimbo

    Work less, get paid more. Union rules in USA.

  • Patriot077

    Remember Jim DeMint putting a hold on the nominee for head of the TSA. It was because the guy was pro-union. Exactly what a security program doesn’t need – their hands tied by union rules to the point they can’t react to new and developing threats.

    DeMint took a lot of heat over his position and stood pretty much alone, but he was so right. I hope Romney recognizes what a disaster this is and forces privatization of TSA.

  • The only gripe about this from the righties is the fact that they are unionized. Otherwise,there would be no compalints about the TSA. How many planes have been hijacked, Republicans, since the TSA was formed? Now, pipe down.