The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has announced that it’s ending collective bargaining for the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), in order to “enhance safety, efficiency, and organizational agility.”
In this post:
TSA losing collective bargaining power
The DHS will be forcing the TSA to abolish its union, “making American’s transportation networks resilient again.” The DHS claims that it’s “fighting for TSA workers” by abolishing their union, because “Transportation Security officers are losing their hard-earned dollars to a union that did not represent or protect their interests,” and “the union has hindered merit-based performance recognition and advancement.”
The DHS claims that “gaps in benefit programs, including non-verifiable Family and Medical Leave, are being exploited by a select few poor performers, placing greater burden on TSOs at the expense of American travelers and taxpayers,” and that “this includes instances, where a TSO requested sick leave seven months in advance.”
The DHS also argues that the TSA has more people doing full-time union work than it has performing screening functions at 86% of airports. Of the 432 federalized airports, 374 airports have fewer than 200 TSA officers performing screening functions, yet nearly 200 TSA officers are paid by the government but work full-time on union matters.
The DHS also claims that in a recent TSA employee survey, 60% said that poor performers are allowed to stay employed, and to continue to not perform.
Here’s what a DHS spokesperson had to say about this decision:
“Thanks to Secretary Noem’s action, Transportation Security Officers will no longer lose their hard-earned dollars to a union that does not represent them. The Trump Administration is committed returning to merit-based hiring and firing policies.”
“This action will ensure Americans will have a more effective and modernized workforces across the nation’s transportation networks. TSA is renewing its commitment to providing a quick and secure travel process for Americans.”
Union responds, calls decision retaliatory
TSA employees who participate in the union are represented by the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE). The union points out that joining the AFGE is voluntary, and isn’t a requirement of working at the TSA or any other federal agency. The union also points out that official union work makes up less than 0.5% of total TSA work hours performed.
In response to this decision, Everett Kelley, the President of the AFGE, put out the following statement:
“47,000 Transportation Security Officers show up at over 400 airports across the country every single day to make sure our skies are safe for air travel. Many of them are veterans who went from serving their country in the armed forces to wearing a second uniform protecting the homeland and ensuring another terrorist attack like Sept. 11 never happens again.”
“Today, Secretary Noem and the Trump administration have violated these patriotic Americans’ right to join a union in an unprovoked attack.”
“They gave as a justification a completely fabricated claim about union officials – making clear this action has nothing to do with efficiency, safety, or homeland security. This is merely a pretext for attacking the rights of regular working Americans across the country because they happen to belong to a union.”
“Our union has been out in front challenging this administration’s unlawful actions targeting federal workers, both in the legal courts and in the court of public opinion. Now our TSA officers are paying the price with this clearly retaliatory action.”
My take on the TSA’s union being abolished
Obviously unionization and anything political right now is polarizing. So I’m not looking to debate the general merit of unions, or Trump vs. whatever. But it does feel to me like if you’re going to make the argument for abolishing the TSA’s union, you could do better than this, no?
The DHS argues that TSA employees “will no longer lose their hard-earned dollars to a union that does not represent them.” But TSA employees don’t have to join the union or pay dues if they don’t want to.
So it seems the argument against the union comes down to around 0.5% of TSA work hours being used for administrative union functions, as well as wanting to bring back “merit based hiring.” Historically the requirement to become a TSA agent has been that you’ve needed to be at least 18 years old, a US citizen, and have a high school diploma. No disrespect to TSA employees, but historically, getting a job with the organization hasn’t been all that selective.
Is the DHS making one of those DEI arguments, and claiming white men are being rejected from the job, or where is there not merit-based hiring?
Let me simply say this… if you ask me, the TSA has come a long way over the years, in terms of service and reliability. TSA employees are much friendlier, on balance, than in the past. And as much as we’ve so many issues with staffing shortages across the economy, the TSA has done a remarkably good job being there for the traveling public, and managing wait times, even with the huge swings we’ve seen in travel demand. Let’s see what impact eliminating the union has on both morale and staffing levels.
Bottom line
The DHS is forcing the TSA to abolish its union, arguing that this is going to enhance safety and efficiency. This is hardly the most shocking thing to happen in the past several weeks, so what can really be said?
If the DHS is to be believed, it sounds like the traveling public has a lot to look forward to with the TSA. Personally, I can’t imagine this is good for morale and staffing levels, but I guess we’ll see…
Logically, one would think this introduces the possibility of privatization of the airport screening process. The organization that offers more efficient as well as worker motivating processes will likely succeed, be it government or private enterprise. I would presume private enterprise would allow a union upon its property if workers deem it necessary. REGRETFULLY change is difficult sometimes but with change also often comes opportunity and many times financial advancement. A robust passenger screening system...
Logically, one would think this introduces the possibility of privatization of the airport screening process. The organization that offers more efficient as well as worker motivating processes will likely succeed, be it government or private enterprise. I would presume private enterprise would allow a union upon its property if workers deem it necessary. REGRETFULLY change is difficult sometimes but with change also often comes opportunity and many times financial advancement. A robust passenger screening system at airports is the goal and what ever competitive designs may come, we must ensure passenger screening does not become a soft spot for illegal activities or potential terrorists to creep through and past these highly important, valued, and watchful eyes.
There are already private contractors doing the security screening at many airports across the US with the Screening Partner Program (SPP). Airports can put their security screening out for competitive bid, if they wish. It is an outside contractor at MCI (my home airport). The screening process is the same as any other US airport, but the agents are uniformly pleasant to deal with in my experience.
https://www.tsa.gov/for-industry/screening-partnerships
SFO, MCI, and 20 other US airports do not have TSA. They have privatized screening. All airports should have privatized screening. The TSA should be limited to oversight.
The overpaid mall cops in the airport are unhappy??? What a surprise.
Check out how many security audits they've failed.
It's amazing.
And appalling.
Awesome. F government unions. Period.
Government service (remember what this is supposed to be about- the word "service"?) is a very well paying, secure job with retirement benefits those in private industry can only dream about.
U don't like it be a mall cop.
And you can thank unions for why the government jobs have good pay, job security, and retirement benefits. Hope this helps!
Hey terrorists - please don't take this completely avoidable drama as an excuse to try another 9/11. Pretty please?
You really think a serious terrorist organization is intimidated by the TSA?
As someone who relies on TSA regularly & would be hampered by collective action, they should walk off en masse and bring back corporate’s fear of work stoppage. Would bring this nonsense to an abrupt end or otherwise provoke retaliatory action so ridiculous the public would take notice & on the strikers’ side
Wrong.
For federal employees, joining the union is optional. They are not your typical union. They do not have the ability to negotiate many of the items or concerns that one thinks of with a traditional union, like the teamsters, AFL-CIO, etc.
The federal employee unions do not negotiate pay raises, the President and the Congress decide that. They do not negotiate days off, health benefits, layoffs, or pensions. They do not have the ability...
For federal employees, joining the union is optional. They are not your typical union. They do not have the ability to negotiate many of the items or concerns that one thinks of with a traditional union, like the teamsters, AFL-CIO, etc.
The federal employee unions do not negotiate pay raises, the President and the Congress decide that. They do not negotiate days off, health benefits, layoffs, or pensions. They do not have the ability to strike.
The unions negotiate items such as the use of seniority for shift work assignments and overtime, along with vacation approval. They can help when a manager or supervisor abuses their power, if you are a member, but not as powerful as a private sector union.
And just to let you know....... at a worksite, no one cares who is or is not a union member. It is simply a choice. Again, not like the private sector.
I hope this is helps those who may not be familiar with the difference between federal and private sector unions.
Thank you so much for this explanation!
“The DHS also argues that…nearly 200 TSA officers are paid by the government but work full-time on union matters.”
This is the Musk administration.
Why should anyone believe this statement?
All they do is lie.
Well, they seem to be in agreement there. 200 officers (DHS number) is just under 0.5% (union number) of the TSA workforce.
mmmm. because it's true???
and easily verified with just a smidgen of on line research?
I think that the administration is on drugs and has no idea what they are doing?
Saying that union membership is optional is distorting the reality - if you decline you are not just ostracized by fellow employees but discriminated against and harassed. TSA needs to come into the 21st century especially with it’s long outdated policy on carry-on liquids.
Totally incorrect. I’ve had multiple family members in government for 20 years who never joined the union and weren’t ostricized. You usually don’t even know who is in the union. Most member involved is wpp% passive.
I work in local govt. The unions publish who is not in the union. I disagree that their is not pressure applied.
I was a pre board screened in college. Work was cool most passengers are nice. Sadly we now spend a lot more money for the same crappy results. I would bet that unions of the same size have far fewer people working on union issues on the employers dime.
TSA stinks, but reactionary anti-labor methods threaten lives and livelihoods for all of us except the ultra-wealthy parasites who run this oligarchy. It’s important to stand against hilariously illegal and fascistic bullying like this.
'Optional' to join a union?!?! On paper it's 'optional', but as anyone in the actual real world knows, try asserting your right NOT to join and see what happens to you 'unofficially' by the union and its thuggish enforcers. Lets not talk about the standover tactics. The slashed tires. The 'friendly' uninvited visits at home. The trashed work lockers. Yeah, you guys have no clue what it's like for independent-minded workers who don't care to...
'Optional' to join a union?!?! On paper it's 'optional', but as anyone in the actual real world knows, try asserting your right NOT to join and see what happens to you 'unofficially' by the union and its thuggish enforcers. Lets not talk about the standover tactics. The slashed tires. The 'friendly' uninvited visits at home. The trashed work lockers. Yeah, you guys have no clue what it's like for independent-minded workers who don't care to throw in their lot with unions.
Fantasizing about others persecuting you can be a sign of serious trouble, man — own your masochism in a healthy way or maybe just see a professional, check out betterhelp perhaps,, peace and love
Of course we have a bunch of people that look the other way when abuses happen to their view point
I always opt out of the xray scanner. I have TSA precheck but I was unaware not all airlines participate so i found myself in the normal line. I opted out and they had me standing there waiting. I asked the nearest TSA officer when someone would arrive. He was extremely rude and said I could see them as well as he could; there was another nearby and how was i supposed to know if...
I always opt out of the xray scanner. I have TSA precheck but I was unaware not all airlines participate so i found myself in the normal line. I opted out and they had me standing there waiting. I asked the nearest TSA officer when someone would arrive. He was extremely rude and said I could see them as well as he could; there was another nearby and how was i supposed to know if he did the pat downs or not. Eventually a supervisor arrived and he did the pat down. He was very friendly and nice so I mentioned the rude officer. He commented that they receive regular complaints but they could not fire him. This is perfect example of why the union needs to be disbanded.
Yeah, let’s make big decisions based on an anecdotal evidence. Genius
I can think of 9 to 11 reasons why this plan could backfire.
TSA didn't exist on 9/11 and since then has had abysmal detection rates for firearms, the most pernicious and likely daily disruptor to the safety of a flight originating in the US.
I'm no fan of DOGE but it's a stretch to equate the end of the TSA's union with an increased risk of an aviation-related terrorist incident.
This is so very transparent on the part of the Trump administration. Federal employees have a right to unionize and joining is voluntary. It is a small protection and help for the worker and TSA is going to crush it.
Certain federal jobs that are vital to the safety and security of the nation (ie military) are unable to unionize. The TSA with its security function belongs in the same camp.
They have a legal labor contract. It's one thing not to renew (and go through the inevitable strike), but this is something else and will likely waste even more taxpayer money in court. Thanks for wasting my dollars, administration
Truly a case of, “The flogging will continue until morale improves.”
Simply as a matter of principle, any job that is for the government and where there is no alternative market for the sourcing of labor, should not be allowed to be unionized. And there should not even be a question about why they should be paid to do union-related activities on the customer's dime.
Hmmm.
Explain the “principle” more?
“No alternative market for the sourcing of labor”? That comment in particular makes no sense. It’s a free market, an open labor pool, so what are you talking about? Benefits such as union representation might attract recruits, which may now be lost as an incentive.
By the way, I’m very middle of the line regarding unions…labor relations falls into my area, from the company perspective….
But you just don’t make sense.
Yes it is a sheer waste of public money
At the most one can be released to union work to act chairman and another to work as general secretary of the union at headquarters location
No regional office office bearer
All administrative staff salary and other
Union related expenses are to be borne
By union including stationery furniture etc management can provide rent free
Accommodation for the union
...
Yes it is a sheer waste of public money
At the most one can be released to union work to act chairman and another to work as general secretary of the union at headquarters location
No regional office office bearer
All administrative staff salary and other
Union related expenses are to be borne
By union including stationery furniture etc management can provide rent free
Accommodation for the union
An extension of the toll free no is to be
Provided to union office for all official and emergency matters only
Huh?
As coherent as our great leader…great job.
Why have the TSA at all, we're the strongest in the world, and the right American men should be permitted to carry on flights, that way, we'll be safer from external threats from bad countries like Canada, Europeans and especially the ungrateful Ukrainians.
It’s very unusual for a union to be optional, so I’d be curious to know exactly what benefits the union affords those who join. 200 TSA employees working full-time union business to represent (some portion) of 47,000 employees does seem like an unusually high number. AFA-CWA has about 50,000 members so I wonder how that compares across airlines.
For so many of you who seem to be ignorant, I will take this opportunity to educate you on a few facts concerning unions. If it wasn't for unions we:
Would not have two days off
Would not have sick pay
Would not have paid vacation
Would not have maternity leave
Just to name a few benefits that unions have fought for and we now take for granted.
@Justin, I am not ignorant of unions or their history in any way - I was a proud and involved union shop worker for the first 15 years of my railroad career and have gone on to manage union employees. I am intimately familiar with the details of the various CBAs that covered my employees. That said, the railroads (at least the 5 I have worked for) are closed shops - you can’t pick and...
@Justin, I am not ignorant of unions or their history in any way - I was a proud and involved union shop worker for the first 15 years of my railroad career and have gone on to manage union employees. I am intimately familiar with the details of the various CBAs that covered my employees. That said, the railroads (at least the 5 I have worked for) are closed shops - you can’t pick and choose what union you are in or whether you want to join. It’s a condition of employment.
My question is what benefits this particular union affords the TSA workers since it is optional. Since they are all federal employees it seems unlikely there is a pay differential, so; what are those that choose to join the union getting for it? Obviously there are benefits or no one would join. I’ve never worked somewhere union membership is optional so that is the basis of my curiosity.
Of course this is a reference to Europe since the USA is the only country in the developed world with no sick pay, no maternity leave, 2 weeks holiday and no redundancy legislation. They have appalling work conditions and believe unions and universal healthcare are a communist plot . Their government sums up the stereotypical boorish, badly dressed ones we don’t want here.
I believe all federal unions are optional. Also, the post doesn't really explain in detail, but Gary Leff explained that some federal agencies unions are not allowed or can be not allowed at the discretion of the agency. The TSA wasn't allowed to have a union during the Bush Administration.
Like to see the TSA go the way of meals in coach on domestic flights.
And replaced with?
Metal detection at the gate like pre-9/11.
Think that will catch explosives?
SFO, MCI, and 20 other US airports do not have TSA. They have privatized screening. All airports should have privatized screening. The TSA should be limited to oversight.
Thank god more waste is being cut out.
I'm not even a republican, but, I love that things are being made more efficient.
Federal Employee Unions are the death of government.
IF it's true that the DHS pays 200 TSA employees full time who are not working on safety matters but only do union liaison tasks, then this has to be stopped immediately. It's insane to consider this reasonable. Let the union employ and pay for these individuals. Government employees shouldn't be represented by any union, they are being looked after handsomely with proper pay and benefits, with some of the highest job security protections in the country.
"highest job security protections in the country." Where have you been the last month or so?
In the real world, an employer would start the actions required to terminate underperforming employees. In the Trump / Musk world, they throw a bomb into the workforce and then try to sort out what remains.
Why have a plan when you can charge in like a bull at a gate and wreck everything? That's the strategy that makes the smooth-brained mouth-breathers think you're "draining the swamp!", when really all you're doing is fomenting chaos and confusion.
That is a foolish statement. They have offered $25k buyouts and have terminated probationary employees who have not yet earned job protections.
Yet another court case that will be paid for by taxpayers.
Thanks, President Musk.
I prefer to use “Napolelon” these days.
It's only a matter of time before Trump gives him the flick. The Orange God King has a pathological compulsion to be the centre of attention, and if Musk is getting to much of what Trump believes is rightly his, there will be consequences. Never underestimate the fury of a vulnerable narcissist who thinks their supply is threatened.
I can very much see a scenario where they don’t have great health insurance and it’s taking someone 7 months to get scheduled for surgery…but maybe Musk already has all their health records too
It's a pregnancy
Exactly.
Apparently only males were involved in preparing this idiotic "justification".
Came here to say this. I have had several employees request leave several months in advance. It's always pregnancy.
And responsible employers like that much notice. It makes planning much easier.