Transportation Security Inspector - Surface

[MrMisterSU]

Just wondering if anyone could give me more information on the DHS/TSA position of Transportation Security Inspector - Surface? I can kind of get a jist of their duties on USAjobs, but not really ;). It states in the announcement that Inspectors are not covered by LE provisions, etc. but it does not say they are not technically law enforcement / investigative enforcement. Just wondering if anyone knows more about what these guys do. Seems like they are hiring a few of them - 'many positions'. As always, I appreciate the help!

[Motorolanut]

I worked for TSA for 4 years, PM me and I'll giva ya my 2 cents on the job...:p

[MrMisterSU]

consider yourself PMed !

[JRJAguar]

i Worked For Tsa For 4 Years, Pm Me And I'll Giva Ya My 2 Cents On The Job...:p

111

[Norm357]

Just wondering if anyone could give me more information on the DHS/TSA position of Transportation Security Inspector - Surface? I can kind of get a jist of their duties on USAjobs, but not really ;). It states in the announcement that Inspectors are not covered by LE provisions, etc. but it does not say they are not technically law enforcement / investigative enforcement. Just wondering if anyone knows more about what these guys do. Seems like they are hiring a few of them - 'many positions'. As always, I appreciate the help!

This is not a LE position. The Inspectors go around to cargo houses doing compliance checks, checking record keeping. I deal with them on a monthly basis. Our Inspector is a pretty good guy.

[ButterChunk]

The Surface inspectors deal with rail for the most part and at the present time, don't have any regulations to enforce. Last I checked, there was an NPRM out for comment regarding some security regs for them. I've worked the past few years as a cargo inspector and I have to say that it's one of the best jobs in TSA. You essentially follow an annual inspection plan particular to your AOA and the co-located entities. In my case, it included a large GA cargo facility along with a dozen carriers and indirect air carriers spread out over a pretty wide geographic area. The work is all compliance inspections with respect to security regulations -- 49 CFR 1500 series, though mostly 1540, 1542, 1544, 1546, 1548, and 1550 (google "e-cfr" and check them out if you're curious). In a nut shell, the inspection arm of TSA took over the security oversight of the airline and air freight industries that used to reside with FAA S/As. A lot of it is documentation review and interviewing, but there's plenty of covert testing and surveillance thrown in as well.

As is always the case, it depends somewhat on the office where you're assigned, but by and large, inspectors work with little supervision and have plenty of discretion when it comes to deciding how best to investigate and resolve violations (counseling, warning letters, civil penalty cases, etc). It's rare, but we do occasionally bump into some criminal violations which we, of course, turn over to the appropriate agency--though, in every case I'm aware of, the inspectors were kept in the loop as much as was appropriate.

So no, it's not an LE job, but it does give you some experience in presenting civil cases to TSA attorneys in a similar fashion as an LE job (gathering evidence, interviewing witnesses, providing analysis of the violation, etc, etc).

TSA's concept for the future is that while TSIs will retain their specialty area (aviation, aviation cargo, surface), they will have cross discipline duties as well. Just to re-iterate - the surface guys are currently doing a lot of outreach as they have no CFRs to enforce yet. And I'm told that they're not being met very warmly by the rail industry. The aviation industry has been regulated for a very long time so they are used to it and there's not much pushback. Hope that helps!

[Norm357]

I've worked the past few years as a cargo inspector and I have to say that it's one of the best jobs in TSA.

Not too long ago, I was sitting at Cont Cargo, waiting to recover some freight, when this guy just out of the blue opened the back doors to my van. It was a TSA cargo Inspector.

You guys need to be careful doing that stuff.

[ButterChunk]

You guys need to be careful doing that stuff.

Golly gee, Norm, I'll take that under advisement. Sorry if he made you wet your panties. :rolleyes:

[Norm357]

Golly gee, Norm, I'll take that under advisement. Sorry if he made you wet your panties. :rolleyes:

Don't be an ***, noob. :rolleyes:

[FoodStampz]

Golly gee, Norm, I'll take that under advisement. Sorry if he made you wet your panties. :rolleyes:

You don't have to be a butthole. Seriously, why would you start off by insulting norm? He was trying to be helpful and you decide it's a good idea to respond with something so childish.
Grow up or move on.

[ngcsubutterbar]

Golly gee, Norm, I'll take that under advisement. Sorry if he made you wet your panties. :rolleyes:

what he's talking about is getting two in your head there smart guy. same freaking reason you don't pet working K-9s without asking the handler first.

[Hockey9019]

Its called use common sense :rolleyes:

[Hockey9019]

what He's Talking About Is Getting Two In Your Head There Smart Guy. Same Freaking Reason You Don't Pet Working K-9s Without Asking The Handler First.

+1 ;)

[ButterChunk]

Hey listen, folks, it's not my intent to insult anyone, or call them names (oh wait, I didn't), but I'm also not willing to let someone to get overly dramatic about a non-event. This happens all day long and has never resulted in any of the 400-some cargo inspectors getting double-tapped. It will generally go like this:

boxhauler: Hey, who are you and what are you doing?

inspector: Sorry, didn't mean to startle you, I'm inspector so-and-so, do you mind if I ask you a few questions?

boxhauler: Sure! Just don't sneak up on me like that again!

inspector: Sorry! Actually, I didn't see you there until I opened the door.

Physical security is big in my world, we test it all the time, wherever the boxes can be found. This is to ensure that the airlines are doing the right thing and that the cargo laden plane you and your Mom are flying on doesn't fall from the sky. If the inspector opened the door, then Norm is employed somewhere in the box hauling business foodchain and should have been trained on his security responsibilities and the possibility of being inspected. Without having been there, I can say with some degree of certainty that the inspector was acting within his authority, within the scope of his duty and in the furtherance of agency objectives and the public interest. In my experience, the personal risks are minimal and easily controlled. I find it incredulous that anyone can suggest their first instinct is to "double-tap" someone under these circumstances.

All that being said, my only purpose here was to give the original poster some insight regarding the job. It is a good one. :cool: Apologies to all who were offended by the wetting your panties comment.

[Norm357]

Hey listen, folks, it's not my intent to insult anyone, or call them names (oh wait, I didn't), but I'm also not willing to let someone to get overly dramatic about a non-event.

Who started with the drama? All I did was relay a story.

Physical security is big in my world, we test it all the time, wherever the boxes can be found. This is to ensure that the airlines are doing the right thing and that the cargo laden plane you and your Mom are flying on doesn't fall from the sky. If the inspector opened the door, then Norm is employed somewhere in the box hauling business foodchain and should have been trained on his security responsibilities and the possibility of being inspected.

Security is big in my world too. I am the security coordinator for my companies Atlanta office.
I also live in the car jacking capitol of America. Going around opening up someones van is a stupid thing to do, regardless of your position. I have shared this view with our offices TSA Inspector and I am sharing it with you.

Without having been there, I can say with some degree of certainty that the inspector was acting within his authority, within the scope of his duty and in the furtherance of agency objectives and the public interest.

I never said, implied, or other wise said he was not acting within his authority. He still did a VERY STUPID THING.

All that being said, my only purpose here was to give the original poster some insight regarding the job. It is a good one.

I happen to agree with you.