GovernmentExecutive.com

JDJ-Another component I failed to mention in my earlier post was more often than not when candidates make application to other Govt agencies it is normally because the is in their career field of interest. I can speak for my previous agency-USDA FSA staff there share a common vision and common goals about America's ability to feed it's self, land conservation and farm land preservation. We were drawn to the position because of deeper values we shared and a dedication to public service.

Once in a while when I phone a applicant to discuss a TSO position with they share a story or reason why they want to be employed by the DHS and TSA. More often now days I'm hearing-...a Part Time job is beter than no job so I guess I'll come in for the interview.

I firmly believe the TSA locally lead hiring will begin to turn around attrition rates. I know at the nine locations I hire for this has proved to be correct. Several sites are at 0% attrition and other sites may be at 20%...when there are only 5 staff total at a site and 1 leaves that's 20% attrition.

Debi Stephens  | Tuesday, March 04, 2008 |  07:32 PM

---

While I understand Debbie Stephens comments in her posting, I have a hard time agreeing with them. I'm sure many people comment that they just want in the Federal door at TSA, and that the job is hard, but that is true at many Federal jobs. How is it that other agencies manage to keep a much higher percentage of their employees than TSA? Something else of note from the USA Today article, most screeners who quit TSA, also quit the Federal Government completely, while 2/3 of those the leave other agencies go to other Federal jobs. It seems that something is amiss at an agency that has the attrition rate that TSA has and the caliver attitude that their deputy director has over it all.

jdj  | Sunday, March 02, 2008 |  08:20 AM

---

There are a number of reasons TSA employees leave the organization. As Gale Rossides mentioned, a number of staff leave because the position is not the position they envisioned themselves in. Security Screening can be demanding and dirty work. Inspecting someone's suitcase can be any eye opening experience. And let's not forget to mention lifting the suitcases, golf bags, snowboard bags etc-these are heavy items.
Many applicants view the position as a stepping stone to other federal positions. As a TSA hiring Coordinator (with many years of previous Fed Exp) I wish I had a dollar for each of times I've had people tell me over the past 4 years they just want to get their foot in the Federal Door-I could retire!
And there are some staff members who do fail in the TSA testing component which is ongoing -however this number is small in comparison to the other reasons staff leave. I won't dispute there have been management issues at local airport levels which have not been consistant from airport to airport.
TSA has a number of visionary staff and there are some inovative ideas taking place each day at TSA.
We need to remember other business models and the age of the TSA organization when discussing TSA along with it's rapid organization and growth across our country in carrying out the daily national security mission TSA is charged with.
My final comment is:

Every job is not for every person.

Debi Stephens  | Friday, February 29, 2008 |  09:15 AM

---

Dan Ketter, here are a few stats about the Postal Service and why I hold it up as an example to TSA on how to run a government agency. For the third year in a row, Americans rated the Postal Service as the No. 1 agency they trust to protect their privacy, according to a national study by the Ponemon Institute. The Postal Service was one of the few federal agencies to increase its customer satisfaction and trust scores. In a separate Ponemon Institute survey, consumers ranked the Postal Service as the No. 1 company in the package and delivery category. In addition, Forbes.com ranked the Postal Service among the top 30 U.S. businesses.For the fourth straight year, the Postal Service was named one of the best places to work in information technology by Computerworld magazine. Our commitment to a diverse workforce was reflected in being named one of the best companies for Hispanics, an honor from Hispanic Business magazine. And the nation’s first and only career-guidance and recruitment magazine for people with disabilities, Careers & the disABLED, named the Postal Service a publicsector employer of the year. We’re committed to fostering a business culture that provides an inclusive work environment for all employees.
Here, from the news is stats about TSA - only the Federal Emergency Management Agency, still suffering from its mishandling of Hurricane Katrina, ranks below the Transportation Security Administration among the least-liked federal agencies, according to a new Associated Press-Ipsos poll.

jdj  | Thursday, February 28, 2008 |  12:08 PM

---

jdj, I've heard of the postal carriers, have you ever heard the term "going postal" ?? I think that's enough said and I would not hold them up as a standard..

dan ketter  | Wednesday, February 27, 2008 |  07:57 PM

---

GREG YOU ROCK BIG TIME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
we all agree with you 100%, I couldn't have said that any better.

STSO  | Wednesday, February 27, 2008 |  05:10 PM

---

Gale Rossides is just trying to hide her poor management skills by saying that maybe the rediculious attrition rate is due to the hard work involved at TSA. Has Gale Rossides ever heard about Postal Carriers who work much harder and have about a tenth of the turnover of TSA? Also, the post office has the highest rating of any government agency. Maybe TSA should adopt the employment policies, and management, of the Postal Service.

JdJ  | Wednesday, February 27, 2008 |  01:00 PM

---

As a taxpayer I'm appalled at Gale Rossides comments regarding the acceptability of 20% turnover. The cost of that turnover is NOT acceptable to taxpayers. Definitely time for TSA management to suffer a dose of reality and be subjected to the same scrutiny as the rank and file screeners. It's obvious that TSA management has way too cavalier an attitude toward the taxpayers' dollars.

a taxpayer  | Wednesday, February 27, 2008 |  12:04 PM

---

Not too concerned about a 20% attrition rate, you must be kidding me! Lets hope that the coming democratic administration gets rid of TSA's management and replaces them with one that cares about the taxpayers, flying public, and the lower level TSA employees!

DW  | Wednesday, February 27, 2008 |  07:36 AM

---

TSA is a sinking ship, senior management know this. WHY?

Well, most of senior management are double dippers and make sure they get the 20 to 60 thousand dollars in bonuses every year.

They do not care about the success of the future of the agency.

Double Dippers have NO VESTED INTEREST in the agency. They are there to groom new supervision and leave. Not take over and start a dynasty.

Do not get me wrong, Double Dippers are an important part of our workforce; because we do not have people to fill positions in times of need. Thank You, for those sacrifices.

JAJ  | Tuesday, February 26, 2008 |  07:32 PM

---

The fact that Gale Rossides doesn't seem too concerned about a 20% attrition rate, with all the associated administrative costs, training costs and and loss of experience says volumes about mismanagement at TSA!

Sean  | Tuesday, February 26, 2008 |  02:44 PM

---

As usual these folks view the job as typical fed job, come and go as you please lots of breaks and complaining every minute your actually work. Luckly TSA statred with a clean sheet of paper and expect these folks to mirror the private sector. I'm sooooo sad

dan ketter  | Tuesday, February 26, 2008 |  02:27 PM

---

This story shows the absolute disregard for the taxpayers money when the head of TSA claims that a 20% attrition rate is within the expected range. What is TSA management doing to make so many employees want to leave a Federal job? It's only spin to compare a federal job to the civilian transportation industry where most are minimum wage, entry level jobs, without benefits. Sounds like TSA's management should be the ones replaced.

George  | Tuesday, February 26, 2008 |  01:26 PM

---

As a Supervisor at TSA for over five years, and a 20+ year Federal Employee, I can tell you some reasons for the high turnover. Horrible management decisions, poor working conditions, a broken promotion process, low pay, no holding senior management accountable for their decisions, most I go on? TSA puts the uniformed workforce through 10 tests annually, any of which if you fail twice, you get fired for. Who would continue to keep chancing their odds if they had a choice to go somewhere else? It's funny how only the uniformed employees, or more appropriately, the ones that senior management doesn't care about, are the only ones tested. At average training costs of at least $15,000 and a 20% attrition rate, who is at fault, and who suffers? I consider it a slap in the face that Gale Rossides comments that the attrition rates are manageable. From what I can tell all the senior management at TSA should suffer the same fate as many screeners have who failed a test twice!!!

Greg  | Tuesday, February 26, 2008 |  11:32 AM

---