Policy Response Memorandum
TO: Lorina Hooper
CC: David Hoffman
FROM: Tara Gitter, Amir Abbady, Jonathan Gibson, Anuradha Singh
RE: Reclassification of Transportation Security Officer Title
DATE: November 19, 2015
______
Amir - Although the presentation advocated to improve the human element of our national security system, we struggled to identify your policy recommendations as the solution to this problem. If the policy problem is underpaid under-qualified TSA agents, we do not see how increasing application requirements (like requesting applicants have college educations) and increasing advertising to veterans solve this problem? College education does not increase employee proficiency in this kind of work, and the statistic for veterans employment in this field are comparable higher than the private sector.
We do agree that increased application requirements are necessary to build the TSA workforce and recommend the establishment of a civil service exam to help benchmark applicants. We recommend these increased hiring standards go in partnership with a new public relations campaign to improve the image of the TSA in the eyes of prospective applicants. We also recommend a comprehensive independent assessment into the training processors for existing TSA officers, with the goal of improving the TSA training programs efficiency.
Lastly the TSA is one of the largest law enforcement agencies in the country, and another policy recommendation you presented included increasing the pay for the TSA. With Congress reducing federal spending across the board, and with no details on the cost and/or what a satisfactory salary increase would look like provided; we struggle to support a major salary increase at this time.
Anuradha - To address the issues of retention and motivation, perhaps, there should be an increased emphasis on employee growth. Compiling a list of skills that currents employees have and the ways that they can build on those skills and grow in the organization would improve motivation. By targeting employee’s skills, we should build on the training programs previously suggested, and create a one to three year plan that focuses on employees individually. These plans would suggest a path that current employees and new employees can take in order to grow in the organization. This encourage employees to be motivated because there would be a goal for them to reach.
This plays into the option of job analysis because we will be able to determine the skills necessary for the job and determine what each employee has. We will also be able to determine the skills that current employees are lacking and incorporate those skills into their trainings. In addition, since we have opted out of increasing the salaries (which would not guarantee employee satisfaction) we have created a new option that would generate more satisfaction. With this option, we are able to focus on the employees the organization currently has and direct resources to making them better, rather than depleting resources to find new employees with better qualifications altogether.
Jonathan Gibson - Overall I found the sentiment conveyed in the Brief to important. The issue at hand is, as I see it, about the difference between whether the TSA is “Security Theatre” or Security done poorly. I think that the former is more correct. I think an analysis of whether or not the Federal Government in fact wants strong homeland security is missing. Without knowing, or making a claim as to what the TSA and Homeland Security are meant to be we can not claim to make recommendations to fix it. For example, if the TSA is meant to be Security Theatre, then the system in place is likely quite fine for that. Why pour money into an apparatus that is just show. Now surely there are fixes if it is just a show. On the other side if TSA is supposed to be more than theatre, then there are surely very large deficits. Either way, there are deficits and improvements, this reader thinks that we need to know the end result of the TSA: Theatre or Security. Clarity on that assumption will better guide the recommendations. That said, I think that the options presented are good. Other than this issue I find that the recommendations are sound. Finally, I think that if the TSA is not supposed to be theatre salary increases, increases in education, as you say, will lead to a better TSA and a better experience for the end user.
Tara Gitter- The above question is important to consider when looking at how to improve the TSA. At present, the role of TSA officers is not always viewed as significant. Many of the problems that were addressed in the Policy Options Brief are related to low morale and a lack of satisfaction in one’s work. These instances are found to have high correlations to voluntary attrition rates. Increase application requirements, as mentioned above, would help to bolster the public’s view of a the jobs of TSA employees. The improved perception of the position would foster a sense of self-importance and a satisfaction in one’s work that is important to improving retention rates. Increased skill-building and in-house trainings are essential to advancing the proficiency of the TSA, ensuring that the staff’s best practices remain current, and that the increase in involvement at all levels increase a sense of inclusion in the organization. The proposed reclassification of the TSA officer, in addressing job description, qualifications, and increased trainings, should all contribute to a more effective and efficient TSA.