To Be or Not to Be?

Well, that is the pressing question for DFOs right now. Herr Filbert sent out a memo stating that they will be inquiring as to whether or not DFOs would like to go back to single function. Apparently they're looking for a certain number to go one way or the other. But the more pressing question is why the change of heart?

For years it was all you ever heard from Jeff Pugh, our dear leader from the former regime: Dual Function this, dual function that. I swear the guy had dreamt sweet nothings whenever the topic of dual function came about. In fact, Pugh stated that as long as he was working at CAS, there would never be another CTX person hired.

Well, as we know by now, about a year and half after Pugh's forced departure, Filbert has a different opinion. I always theorized that the reason Pugh got such an erection about dual functions was because CAS somehow got TSA to pay more for dual functions. When you look at coverage and bodies, it never made any sense to have that many dual functions. So if that theory was correct, why would they have a change of heart all of a sudden? That's anyone's guess. I have my theories, but we can save that for another time.

So now that they're going to finally follow the SOP and require all baggage certified persons to be OSARP trained there is something that our 9000 Specialists need to be concerned about, and that is being out of a job. Well, they won't terminate you, but the need for your specialized position must certainly be in play.

Once they accomplish the training of all baggage certified persons, there will be approximately 200+ that will be OSARP certified. That is in addition to the 50 or so 9000 specialists SFO currently has. If I were a 9000 specialist, I would be looking for another job (hey, shouldn't we all be doing that anyway?) or see if you can somehow manage with an $8 an hour pay cut. And don't look for the union to protect you either. CAS is well within their rights to eliminate a classification. Also, don't forget that this is the last year of our current CBA and negotiations for the next contract will be starting again sometime this year.

Back to the original question of this post. If you're a DFO and considering going single function you do have to weigh some things. Keep in mind that most of the CTX TSOs are plank owners. So unless you're a plank owner yourself, you will be near the bottom of the seniority of the CTX classification. If you opt to go checkpoint, your seniority will certainly increase over time due to the inevitable attrition at checkpoint. Then again, would you really want to stay checkpoint every day where you're treated like children or stay in the bag room where you're treated as an adult? There is a reason why the churn over rate is so much higher at checkpoint than it is in the bag room.

I can't answer the question for you. In all honesty, you're probably better off not going single function for the time being and see how all of this plays out. If CAS gets to a point where they force you to choose, then you will have to weigh your options.

It's too bad that CAS is putting the DFOs through the same chaos that they put the CTX community in for the last couple of years. Keep your chin up, they're liable to change their minds again in another couple of years.

Please remember to recycle...

In this politically correct world of calling on the public and corporations to be green, it's nice to know that Covenant Aviation Security is all about the recycling effort. Recycling of ideas, that is.

First there were part-timers. Then no new part-timers. Now there are part-timers again.

First there were CTX and Checkpoint TSOs. Then there were DFOs and CTX folks became the red-headed step children. Now CTX folks are loved again. Not so much for the DFOs.

They tried hall passes, sorry, Terminal Movement Tracking Cards years ago. Then they gave up on it. Now it's back again. Or is it?

They lose a Terminal Manager, then that Terminal Manager comes back again, this time as an Assistant Terminal Manager.

Now the latest are Bin Loaders. We had Bin Loaders years ago and except for a handful in CTX, they were eliminated when Covenant got busted by TSA on an audit. The Bin Loaders were listed on the books as TSOs. For those that aren't paying attention: That meant that Covenant was billing TSA for these "TSOs" but paying them at Bin Loader wages. I wonder how much of that revenue the SFO Airport Commission received in that deal?

So it's not much of a surprise that Covenant is bringing back the Bin Loaders. Except this time, they're coming back in a slightly different capacity. They are presumedly being tasked as Divestiture Officers (DO) and Travel Document Checkers. I wonder how the DO is going to work at checkpoints that have the Naked Body Scanners....oops sorry, what was the less offensive acronym TSA drummed up? Oh yes, Advanced Image Technology. Hmmm....AIT sounds so much nicer, doesn't it?

Anyway, these positions are being hired supposedly for the Holidays and as part-timers. So our only advice for those future employees that decide to take the job is beware. They could eliminate the position at anytime. Perhaps after Covenant signs their new contract, when they don't have TSA on their backs? Oh wait, that would actually require local TSA to give a damn, when we know none of them do!

Another Failed Experiment

We've been reporting on the DFO situation for sometime now. The latest news is that DFOs are being offered the chance to go CTX, Checkpoint, or to remain as a DFO. We can't imagine too many DFOs wanting to go up against the CTX seniority, then again, working at the checkpoint is no picnic either.

So the question is this: Is Donnie Filbert eliminating DFOs because of some TSA requirement or is this just his way to separate himself from his predecessor? Since Jeff Pugh got such a hardon whenever DFOs were mentioned, this might be the reason. Or it could simply be because TSA has determined we have too many DFOs. Either way, it is a huge turn of events.

For the longest time, DFOs were the only way to go. Those that had any sense of staffing knew that it really didn't make any sense to have such a large number of DFOs. Covenant Aviation Security's argument has always been that you get more flexibility with DFOs than you do with single function Officers. This argument doesn't stand up to scrutiny when you look at head counts and where help is needed.

For those of you that are a DFO, do you plan on switching or remaining, and why?

Checkpoint Lead Interviews have begun

For those of you that applied for the Checkpoint Lead position, we here at Security First @ SFO wish you all the very best. Let's just hope that they make a similarly wise choice for this position as they did with the recent Checked Baggage STSO position.

To those DFOs that were flat out denied an interview because you either made the mistake of going Dual Function or were drafted against your will in to the classification, we can only off our deepest empathy. It's a hard road to follow, but just remember that our CTX brethren were denied virtually any promotion for the last three years.

This current regime won't last. And then things will change, and then they'll change back to the way they were. The more things change, the more they stay the same. So just wait it out. Perhaps in due time, you will become loved again.

One last thing

We just got confirmation that the new hire CTX TSOs will in fact be part time. They will be utilized to fill in the gaps as we previously reported. The bad thing about this is that this will not help the full time CTX TSOs in terms of schedule selection, but it will help for the work load.

There will also be opportunities for full time CTX and DFOs to go part time once the part timers have been hired. This coincides with the recent CAS Infos offering people the opportunity to go part time. This is a 180 from not that long ago when no one could change their full time status.

And as Donnie Filbert has been heard saying about DFOs, "we have filled our quota". This confirms it. So much for Filbert being completely behind the DFO program.