[House Hearing, 117 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
TWENTY YEARS OF WORKFORCE CHALLENGES:
THE NEED FOR H.R. 903, THE RIGHTS FOR
THE TSA WORKFORCE ACT OF 2021
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON
TRANSPORTATION AND
MARITIME SECURITY
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
MAY 4, 2021
__________
Serial No. 117-11
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Homeland Security
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.govinfo.gov
__________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
44-825 PDF WASHINGTON : 2021
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY
Bennie G. Thompson, Mississippi, Chairman
Sheila Jackson Lee, Texas John Katko, New York
James R. Langevin, Rhode Island Michael T. McCaul, Texas
Donald M. Payne, Jr., New Jersey Clay Higgins, Louisiana
J. Luis Correa, California Michael Guest, Mississippi
Elissa Slotkin, Michigan Dan Bishop, North Carolina
Emanuel Cleaver, Missouri Jefferson Van Drew, New Jersey
Al Green, Texas Ralph Norman, South Carolina
Yvette D. Clarke, New York Mariannette Miller-Meeks, Iowa
Eric Swalwell, California Diana Harshbarger, Tennessee
Dina Titus, Nevada Andrew S. Clyde, Georgia
Bonnie Watson Coleman, New Jersey Carlos A. Gimenez, Florida
Kathleen M. Rice, New York Jake LaTurner, Kansas
Val Butler Demings, Florida Peter Meijer, Michigan
Nanette Diaz Barragan, California Kat Cammack, Florida
Josh Gottheimer, New Jersey August Pfluger, Texas
Elaine G. Luria, Virginia Andrew R. Garbarino, New York
Tom Malinowski, New Jersey
Ritchie Torres, New York
Hope Goins, Staff Director
Daniel Kroese, Minority Staff Director
Natalie Nixon, Clerk
------
SUBCOMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND MARITIME SECURITY
Bonnie Watson Coleman, New Jersey, Chairwoman
Donald M. Payne, Jr., New Jersey Carlos A. Gimenez, Florida,
Dina Titus, Nevada Ranking Member
Josh Gottheimer, New Jersey Jefferson Van Drew, New Jersey
Elaine G. Luria, Virginia Ralph Norman, South Carolina
Bennie G. Thompson, Mississippi (ex Mariannette Miller-Meeks, Iowa
officio) John Katko, New York (ex officio)
Alex Marston, Subcomittee Staff Director
Kathryn Maxwell, Minority Subcomittee Staff Director
Alice Hayes, Subcomittee Clerk
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Statements
The Honorable Bonnie Watson Coleman, a Representative in Congress
From the State of New Jersey, and Chairwoman, Subcommittee on
Transportation and Maritime Security:
Oral Statement................................................. 1
Prepared Statement............................................. 4
The Honorable Carlos A. Gimenez, a Representative in Congress
From the State of Florida, and Ranking Member, Subcommittee on
Transportation and Maritime Security:
Oral Statement................................................. 6
Prepared Statement............................................. 8
The Honorable Bennie G. Thompson, a Representative in Congress
From the State of Mississippi, and Chairman, Committee on
Homeland Security:
Prepared Statement............................................. 9
Witnesses
Dr. Everett B. Kelley, National President, American Federation of
Government Employees:
Oral Statement................................................. 11
Prepared Statement............................................. 12
Ms. Joi Chaney, Senior Vice President for Policy and Advocacy and
Executive Director, Washington Bureau, National Urban League:
Oral Statement................................................. 18
Prepared Statement............................................. 20
Mr. Thomas S. Warrick, Nonresident Senior Fellow and Director of
the Future of DHS Project, The Atlantic Council:
Oral Statement................................................. 22
Prepared Statement............................................. 23
Mr. Jeffrey Neal, Principal and Founder, Chief HRO, LLC:
Oral Statement................................................. 30
Prepared Statement............................................. 32
For the Record
The Honorable Bonnie Watson Coleman, a Representative in Congress
From the State of New Jersey, and Chairwoman, Subcommittee on
Transportation and Maritime Security:
Letter From The Association of Flight Attendants--CWA, AFL-CIO
(AFA)........................................................ 3
The Honorable Carlos A. Gimenez, a Representative in Congress
From the State of Florida, and Ranking Member, Subcommittee on
Transportation and Maritime Security:
Statement of Administration Policy............................. 6
TWENTY YEARS OF WORKFORCE CHALLENGES: THE NEED FOR H.R. 903, THE RIGHTS
FOR THE TSA WORKFORCE ACT OF 2021
----------
Tuesday, May 4, 2021
U.S. House of Representatives,
Committee on Homeland Security,
Subcommittee on Transportation
and Maritime Security,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:05 p.m., via
Webex, Hon. Bonnie Watson Coleman (Chairwoman of the
subcommittee) presiding.
Present: Representatives Watson Coleman, Payne, Titus,
Gottheimer, Luria, Gimenez, Van Drew, and Norman.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. The Subcommittee on Transportation and
Maritime Security will come to order. Without objection, the
Chair is authorized to declare the subcommittee in recess at
any point. Thank you to Ranking Member Gimenez and our panel of
witnesses for joining us.
Today marks the first hearing for our subcommittee this
Congress, and I am excited to be chairing the subcommittee
during this Congress, and I look forward to working with my
colleagues on both sides of the aisle to tackle the critical
security challenges that lay before us.
The challenge that we have gathered here to discuss today
is one many of us has grappled with for years. Since TSA's
establishment nearly 20 years ago, its work force has lacked
the workplace rights and protections afforded to other Federal
employees.
Despite the diversity and the dedication of the
transportation security officers, or the TSOs, they remain
among the lowest-paid workers in the entire Government. We
cannot wait any longer to correct this injustice, and I am
proud to be an original co-sponsor of Chairman Thompson's H.R.
903, the Rights for the TSA Workforce Act, a common-sense and
bipartisan solution to one of TSA's foundational flaws.
In 2001, after the deadly attacks of September 11, Congress
passed legislation to create TSA to protect the safety and
security of our Nation. However, by excluding the TSA work
force from Title 5, that statute has failed to protect the
front-line workers who uphold that mission.
H.R. 903 simply applies Title 5 to the TSA work force and
ensures TSA employees stand on equal footing to their peers
elsewhere in Government.
The contrast between the challenging nature of TSA's work
and the unfair treatment of its front-line work force is stark
as can be. Every day, TSOs screen millions of passengers and
pieces of luggage, securing the public from threats to aviation
security.
Behind the scenes, air marshals, TSA inspectors, and other
essential workers perform equally critical National security
tasks. In doing so, they must deal with unruly passengers, a
rapidly-evolving threat landscape, and, in some cases, even
gunmen who have specifically targeted TSA personnel.
Instead, basic full-time TSO salaries can start as low as
$29,000 per year, and even after years of dedicated service,
the opportunity for advancement can be far more limited than
for most Federal employees.
Now over the last year, TSOs have confronted new dangers.
Even when faced with the prospect of coming into contact with
thousands of traveling passengers each day amid a deadly
pandemic, TSOs showed up day after day at great risk to
themselves and their families.
To date, 16 TSA employees have tragically lost their lives
to COVID-19, and approximately 7,800 personnel have tested
positive. Yet unlike other Federal Government employees, TSA
employees lack the basic Civil Service protections.
Full collective bargaining rights? Not if you work at the
TSA. The ability to appeal disciplinary decisions to a neutral
third party? Not if you work at the TSA. Title 5 whistleblower
protections, the regularly-scheduled salary increases almost
all other Federal workers receive? Again, not at the TSA.
To add insult to injury, TSOs aren't even paid under the
Federal Government's normal wage scale, known as the GS scale.
As I stated before, basic full-time TSO salaries can start as
low as $29,000 a year, and even after years of dedicated
service, the opportunities for advancement can be more limited
than for most employees in Federal Government.
I think most Americans would be shocked to learn that the
workers charged with protecting the traveling public are living
paycheck to paycheck, struggling to pay the rent, sometimes
relying on food banks, and denied basic workplace protections.
These disparities come with consequences, and these
consequences impact TSA's ability to fulfill its Homeland
Security mission.
While their salaries are low, turnover and attrition rate
among front-line TSA employees are very high. Each time a TSO
quits because of inadequate pay and workplace rights, TSA needs
to spend more money recruiting and training a new officer.
According to the Department of Homeland Security, the
Office of the Inspector General, in specific, in 2017, TSA
spent $16 million on new hires who left within 6 months.
Wouldn't these resources be better spent ensuring that TSOs are
compensated and treated fairly in the first place, so they are
incentivized to stay and to grow their careers at TSA?
But rectifying these wrongs isn't just about improving
retention and morale at TSA. Fundamentally, it is also about
equity and fairness. The diversity of its work force is one of
TSA's greatest assets. Fifty-five percent of TSA employees come
from underrepresented racial and ethnic groups.
This means that when our law singles out TSA workers for
disparate treatment, denying them the compensation and the
protection that other Federal Government employees receive,
people of color bear the burden of that consequence.
When the 2019 Government shutdown occurred, and TSOs were
required to show up for work without receiving a paycheck, this
extraordinary burden was disproportionately placed on members
of marginalized communities.
So instead of maintaining a personnel system that treats
TSA workers as second class, we should be exploring ways to
help those workers enter the leadership pipeline and diversify
DHS as a whole.
Passing H.R. 903 will send a powerful message to the TSA
work force that they are anything but second class. They are
the front line of our Nation's transportation security. They
are essential workers, and their dedication will be rewarded
with respect and dignity.
Simply put, H.R. 903 is about workers' rights, civil
rights, and enhancing our Nation's security. It is supported by
Members of both parties, and its benefits will flow to
communities all across our Nation. The TS work force deserves
to be treated equally.
I am looking forward to hearing from our witnesses--thank
you for being here--who each will bring important and distinct
perspectives to this issue.
Finally, before I close, I ask for unanimous consent to
insert into the record a letter of support for H.R. 903 from
Sara Nelson, who is the international president of the
Association of Flight Attendants. Without objection.
[The information follows:]
Letter From The Association of Flight Attendants--CWA, AFL-CIO (AFA)
April 30, 2021.
The Honorable Bennie Thompson,
Chairman, House Homeland Security Committee, 310 Cannon House Office
Building, Washington, DC 20515.
Dear Chairman Thompson: The Association of Flight Attendants--CWA,
AFL-CIO (AFA) represents 50,000 flight attendants across the industry.
We offer our strong support for H.R. 903, the Rights for Transportation
Security Administration (TSA) Workforce Act of 2021.
Twenty years ago, when TSA was created, Congress wrongfully
excluded TSA agents from basic rights and protections afforded to most
Federal employees. The result has been a shameful separate and unequal
system of low pay and inadequate protections for this critical group of
public safety employees.
During the pandemic, 7,787 TSA employees have contracted COVID-19
and 16 have lost their lives to the virus.\1\ Under the previous
Administration, many TSA agents were forced daily into close proximity
with hundreds, even thousands, of maskless passengers. Ignoring the
advice and guidance of Federal health agencies and public health
leaders, TSA and the Administration permitted airports to set their own
rules for mask-wearing, denied their workers access to Personal
Protective Equipment (PPE), and never created a preventative testing
system. These constitute a profound and unacceptable failure to address
the vulnerabilities of this essential and frontline workforce. The
solution is clear. Congress must extend to TSA personnel the equal
protections and representation long-denied under Federal law.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ https://www.tsa.gov/coronavirus.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As aviation's first responders, Flight Attendants depend on the
professionalism and expertise of the TSA workforce every day. TSA
employees need and deserve a strong voice at work to help promote the
best conditions for security of air travel. H.R. 903 ensures full
collective bargaining rights for Transportation Security Officers
(TSOs) to negotiate for better working conditions, puts TSA officers on
the General Schedule pay scale, and provides officers with much needed
statutory worker protections against unfair labor practices.
Security is very personal for me. I remember airport security prior
to September 11, 2001. I remember the faces of the screeners who
allowed terrorists to enter Terminal C at Logan and to board Flight
175. I remember the screeners' faces because they were there all the
time, 7 days a week, all hours of the day. I remember the sound of
their voices, their tired smiles, and the long hours they worked for
the lowest bidding security company just so that they could provide for
their own families. I often wonder how those security agents have coped
with their part in failing to stop the most fatal attack on U.S. soil.
Do they understand they were set up to fail?
Twenty years ago, the decision to Federalize airport screening
improved aviation security immediately. When AFGE won the largest
organizing campaign in the public sector in over 70 years and gave
these workers a voice at the agency, our security improved again. My
colleagues and I depend on TSOs to keep us safe. We also depend on our
union. We know that our union has made flying safer for everyone
through constant vigilance, and by giving front-line workers--the
people who know the operation--a clear and strong voice in the
workplace. Safety and security doesn't just happen; it happens because
we demand it of ourselves, demand it of management, and demand it of
government.
The unjust decision to exclude TSA from the basic rights and
protections of Federal employees has produced a workforce that is among
the lowest paid and least secure. While TSA's diversity is a cause for
celebration--55 percent of the TSA workforce identifies as a racial or
ethnic minority \2\--this makes their exclusion even more problematic,
creating yet another disparate treatment, another barrier to
advancement for historically marginalized workers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ https://Federalnewsnetwork.com/workforce/2020/03/dhs-workforce-
is-more-diverse-than-most-but-struggles-to-prime-employees-for-
leadership-roles/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We finally note that the drive to win long-denied rights for TSOs
aligns with the goals of the newly formed White House Task Force on
Worker Organizing and Empowerment.\3\ The first goal of this landmark
Task Force is to ``lead by example by ensuring that the Federal
Government is a model employer with respect to encouraging worker
organizing and collective bargaining among its workforce (emphasis
added).''\4\ The moment for action has arrived.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/
2021/04/26/fact-sheet-executive-order-establishing-the-white-house-
task-force-on-worker-organizing-and-empowerment/.
\4\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
AFA applauds your leadership and support for the aviation workforce
and pledges to work alongside you and Members of this committee to
secure the basic worker rights and protections long denied to
Transportation Security Officers.
Respectfully,
Sara Nelson,
International President.
[The statement of Chairwoman Watson Coleman follows:]
Statement of Chairwoman Bonnie Watson Coleman
May 4, 2021
Thank you to Ranking Member Gimenez and our panel of witnesses for
joining us.
Today marks the first hearing for our subcommittee this Congress. I
am excited to be chairing the subcommittee, and I look forward to
working with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to tackle the
critical security challenges before us.
The challenge we have gathered to discuss today is one many of us
have grappled with for years.
Since TSA's establishment nearly 20 years ago, its work force has
lacked the workplace rights and protections afforded to other Federal
Government employees. Despite the dedication and diversity of
transportation security officers, or TSOs, they remain among the
lowest-paid workers in the entire Government.
We cannot wait any longer to correct this injustice.
I am proud to be an original cosponsor of Chairman Thompson's H.R.
903, the Rights for the TSA Workforce Act, a common-sense and
bipartisan solution to one of TSA's foundational flaws.
In 2001, after the attacks of September 11, Congress established
TSA to protect the safety and security of our Nation. However, by
excluding TSA's workforce from Title 5, the statute failed to protect
the front-line workers who uphold that mission.
H.R. 903 simply applies Title 5 to the TSA workforce and ensures
TSA employees stand on equal footing to their peers elsewhere in
Government.
The contrast between the challenging nature of TSA's work and the
unfair treatment of its front-line workforce is stark as can be.
Every day, TSOs screen millions of passengers and pieces of
luggage, securing the public from threats to aviation security.
Behind the scenes, air marshals, TSA inspectors, and other
essential workers perform equally critical National security tasks.
In doing so, they must deal with unruly passengers, a rapidly-
evolving threat landscape, and in some cases, even gunmen who have
specifically targeted TSA personnel.
Over the past year, TSOs have confronted new dangers. Even when
faced with the prospect of coming into contact with thousands of
passengers each day amid a deadly pandemic, TSOs showed up day after
day at great risk to themselves and their families.
To date, 16 TSA employees have tragically lost their lives to
COVID-19, and approximately 7,800 personnel have tested positive.
Yet unlike other Federal Government employees, TSA employees lack
basic civil service protections.
Full collective bargaining rights? Not if you work at TSA.
The ability to appeal disciplinary decisions to a neutral third
party? Not if you work at TSA.
Title 5 whistleblower protections? The regularly-scheduled salary
increases almost all other Federal workers receive? Again, not at TSA.
To add insult to injury, TSOs aren't even paid under the Federal
Government's normal wage scale--known as the GS scale.
Instead, basic full-time TSO salaries can start as low as $29,000
\1\ per year. Even after years of dedicated service, the opportunities
for advancement can be far more limited than for most Federal
employees.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ $28,688.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I think most Americans would be shocked to learn that the workers
charged with protecting the traveling public are living paycheck-to-
paycheck, struggling to pay the rent, sometimes relying on food banks,
and denied basic workplace protections.
These disparities come with consequences. And those consequences
impact TSA's ability to fulfill its homeland security mission.
While their salaries are low, turnover and attrition rates among
front-line TSA personnel are high.
Each time a TSO quits because of inadequate pay and workplace
rights, TSA then needs to spend money recruiting and training a new
officer.
According to the Department of Homeland Security Office of the
Inspector General, in 2017 TSA spent $16 million on new hires who left
within 6 months.
Wouldn't these resources be better spent ensuring TSOs are
compensated and treated fairly in the first place, so they are
incentivized to stay and grow their careers at TSA?
But rectifying these wrongs is not just about improving retention
and morale at TSA. Fundamentally, it is also about equity and fairness.
The diversity of its workforce is one of TSA's greatest assets: 55
percent of TSA employees come from underrepresented racial and ethnic
groups.
This means that when our laws single out TSA workers for disparate
treatment--denying them the compensation and protections other Federal
Government employees receive--people of color bear the brunt of the
consequences.
When the 2019 Government shutdown occurred and TSOs were required
to show up for work without receiving a paycheck, this extraordinary
burden was disproportionately placed on members of marginalized
communities.
So instead of maintaining a personnel system that treats TSA's
workers as ``second class,'' we should be exploring ways to help these
workers enter the leadership pipeline and diversify DHS as a whole.
Passing H.R. 903 will send a powerful message to the TSA workforce
that they are anything but ``second class.'' They are the front line of
our Nation's transportation security. They are essential workers. And
their dedication will be rewarded with respect and dignity.
Simply put, H.R. 903 is about workers' rights, civil rights, and
enhancing our Nation's security. It is supported by Members of both
parties and its benefits will flow to communities all across our
Nation. The TSA workforce deserves to be treated equally.
I am looking forward to hearing from our witnesses, who each bring
important and distinct perspectives to this issue. And with that, I
recognize Ranking Member Gimenez for his opening statement.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. The Chair now recognizes the Ranking
Member of the subcommittee, the gentleman from Florida, for any
opening statement.
Mr. Gimenez. Thank you, Chairwoman Watson Coleman. I am
pleased that the subcommittee is holding this hearing today on
the important challenges facing the TSA work force.
Transportation security officers serve on the front line
protecting the traveling public from the ever-present threats
to our aviation system. Over the past few years, TSOs have
dealt with a 35-day Government shutdown, significant volume
changes in passenger throughput at airport checkpoints, and the
global COVID-19 pandemic.
Over 7,000 TSOs have tested positive for COVID-19 since
March of last year, and tragically, we have lost 16 officers to
that virus. I thank the TSA work force for their immense
dedication to the American people and the traveling public.
I look forward to hearing from the witnesses today to
discuss solutions to meet the challenges of low screener
morale, recruitment and retention efforts, and pay and
promotion opportunities.
I thank Mr. Jeff Neal for his service as chief human
capital officer at DHS under the Obama-Biden administration,
and in his role of chief of the Blue Ribbon Panel that examined
TSA's human capital services delivery. I appreciate him joining
us today to discuss the implementation of the panel's
recommendations from 2019.
I do have concerns with H.R. 903, the Rights for TSA
Workforce Act of 2021. Madam Chairwoman, I ask unanimous
consent to enter into the record a Statement of Administration
Policy from the 116th Congress on H.R. 1140, the Rights for
Transportation Security Officers Act of 2020. Thank you.
[The information follows:]
Mr. Gimenez. H.R. 1140 is the precursor to the legislation
we are discussing today. The statement of administration policy
noted that TSA's current personnel system, authorized by the
Aviation and Transportation Security Act, ATSA, just months
after the September 11 attacks, provides the flexibility TSA
needs so that it can quickly and efficiently adjust its work
force management to respond to emergency threats or National
emergencies.
I share that viewpoint of the legislation we are discussing
today, H.R. 903. When Congress created TSA in November 2001,
its goal was to bring in the entrepreneurial spirit of the
private sector. Placing TSA into Title 5 would go against
Congress' intent and force employees into an antiquated 20th
Century system that really is not designed for the 21st Century
National security threats.
TSA has all the flexibility it needs for the work force
from ATSA. It just needs to use that flexibility. Administrator
Dave Pekoske has stated before Congress that TSA needs to
employ its ATSA authority to make TSA an employer of choice.
Our focus today should be to ensure that TSA harnesses the
creativity and flexibility that it already has within ATSA to
properly fund TSO salaries and create additional promotion and
career advancement opportunities.
As the 20th anniversary of the 9/11 terrorist attacks
approaches, I thank the men and women at TSA for their hard
work and determination over the last 2 decades. I look forward
to finding ways to continue to empower the TSA work force and
address current challenges within the ATSA framework that
Congress designed for TSA.
Thank you, Madam Chairwoman, and I yield the balance of my
time.
[The statement of Ranking Member Gimenez follows:]
Statement of Ranking Member Carlos Gimenez
May 4, 2021
Thank you, Chairwoman Watson Coleman. I am pleased the subcommittee
is holding this hearing today on the important challenges facing the
TSA workforce. Transportation Security Officers (TSOs) serve on the
front lines protecting the traveling public from the ever-present
threats to our aviation system.
Over the past few years, TSOs have dealt with a 35-day Government
shutdown, significant volume changes in passenger throughput at airport
checkpoints, and the global COVID-19 pandemic. Over 7,000 TSOs have
tested positive for COVID-19 since March of last year, and tragically,
we've lost 16 officers to the virus. I thank the TSA workforce for
their immense dedication to the American people and the traveling
public.
I look forward to hearing from the witnesses today to discuss
solutions to meet the challenges of low screener morale, recruitment
and retention efforts, and pay and promotion opportunities. I thank Mr.
Jeff Neal for his service as chief human capital officer at DHS under
the Obama/Biden administration and in his role of chief of the Blue-
Ribbon Panel that examined TSA's Human Capital Service Delivery. I
appreciate him joining us today to discuss the implementation of the
Panel's recommendations from 2019.
I do have concerns with H.R. 903, the Rights for the TSA Workforce
Act of 2021. Madame Chairwoman, I ask unanimous consent to enter into
the record a Statement of Administration Policy from the 116th Congress
on H.R. 1140, the Rights for Transportation Security Officers Act of
2020.
Thank you, Madame Chairwoman. H.R. 1140 is the precursor to the
legislation we are discussing today. The Statement of Administration
Policy noted that TSA's ``current personnel system authorized by the
Aviation and Transportation Security Act (ATSA) just months after the
September 11 attacks provides the flexibility TSA needs so that it can
quickly and efficiently adjust its workforce management to respond to
emerging threats or national emergencies''. I share that viewpoint of
the legislation we're discussing today, H.R. 903.
When Congress created TSA in November 2001, its goal was to bring
in the entrepreneurial spirit of the private sector. Placing TSA into
Title 5 would go against Congress' intent and force employees into an
antiquated 20th Century system that was not designed for 21st Century
National security threats. TSA has all the flexibility it needs for the
workforce from ATSA; it just needs to use that flexibility.
Administrator Dave Pekoske has stated before Congress that TSA needs to
``employ its ATSA authorities to make TSA an employer of choice.''\1\
Our focus today should be to ensure that TSA harnesses the creativity
and flexibility that it already has within ATSA to properly fund TSO
salaries and create additional promotion and career advancement
opportunities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ TSA Administrator David P. Pekoske testimony to House
Appropriations Homeland Security Subcommittee, March 3, 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As the 20th anniversary of the 9/11 terrorist attacks approaches, I
thank the men and women at TSA for their hard work and determination
over the last 2 decades. I look forward to finding ways to continue to
empower the TSA workforce and address current challenges within the
ATSA framework that Congress designed for TSA. Thank you, Madame
Chairwoman, and I yield back the balance of my time.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. Thank you very much, Mr. Ranking
Member. Members are also reminded that the committee will
operate according to the guidelines that are laid out by the
Chairman and Ranking Member in their February 3 colloquy
regarding remote procedures. Member statements may be submitted
for the record.
[The statement of Chairman Thompson follows:]
Statement of Chairman Bennie G. Thompson
May 4, 2021
Good afternoon. I would like to thank Chairwoman Watson Coleman and
Ranking Member Gimenez for holding today's hearing examining the state
of the TSA workforce.
I would also like to thank our witnesses for appearing today.
TSA is essential to the Nation's homeland security enterprise.
It could not do its critical work without its strongest asset: Its
workforce.
For nearly 2 decades, Transportation Security Officers, or TSOs,
have screened millions of passengers every day at airport checkpoints.
Unfortunately, after almost 20 years of promises by previous
administrations to improve TSA's personnel management system, the TSA
workforce still lacks the resources and support it needs to execute its
mission successfully.
Despite serving on the front lines of homeland security during the
COVID-19 pandemic, TSOs remain among the lowest-paid Federal workers,
and they do not receive regular salary raises afforded to most Federal
employees.
Under TSA's mismanaged personnel system, employees lack basic civil
service protections and benefits Congress codified for most Federal
workers many decades ago.
In recent years, TSOs have worked steadily through Government
shutdowns, staff shortages, increased passenger volumes and job
responsibilities, and now a pandemic--yet their pay has remained
stagnant.
According to employee surveys, TSA ranks dead last out of 415
Federal agency subcomponents on employee pay satisfaction.
TSA has used its administrative authority to limit the scope of
issues subject to collective bargaining, and TSOs lack the ability to
appeal adverse personnel actions to an objective third party like other
Federal workers.
As a result of these inequitable conditions, the TSA workforce has
extremely low morale and high attrition.
TSA spends millions annually to hire thousands of TSOs, only to
replace them with new TSOs soon after.
These issues not only cost taxpayers millions spent on constant
recruitment and training, but ultimately they undermine TSA's security
mission.
The Trump administration attempted to undermine the TSA workforce
through inadequate funding for the agency and threats to end collective
bargaining for the 45,000 front-line officers protecting our Nation's
transportation system.
I am pleased to see the Biden administration take encouraging steps
to address these concerns.
However, more needs to be done to provide full protections to these
front-line workers.
Over the last 15 years, with the support of the American Federation
of Government Employees and several colleagues, I have introduced and
supported numerous measures that would provide TSA employees with a
more equitable personnel management system.
With each Congress that passes, our legislative efforts garner
increasing support.
Last Congress, I introduced H.R. 1140, the Rights for
Transportation Security Officers Act of 2020. The House twice passed
the measure with 242 bipartisan cosponsors.
This Congress, several colleagues and I introduced H.R. 903, the
Rights for the TSA Workforce Act of 2021--and I am hopeful this will be
the Congress we get this effort across the finish line.
This bill would set a path for increased pay and benefits for TSOs,
providing access to the same basic personnel system used by most of the
Federal Government.
Addressing TSA's workforce challenges in a strategic manner will
not only improve front-line workforce morale, but also advance aviation
security in the face of evolving threats.
TSOs continue to serve on our front lines, protecting the traveling
public during the National pandemic.
To date, over 7,800 TSA employees have tested positive for COVID-19
and tragically at least 16 have died after contracting the virus.
It is high time we do right by them and provide them the same
rights afforded to most Federal workers under Title 5.
I strongly urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support
my bill, and I look forward to partnering with the Biden administration
to find ways to support the TSA workforce administratively while
Congress works toward a statutory solution.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. The Chair will now recognize our
witnesses. We would like to remind the witnesses that your full
statement will become a part of the record. I would ask you to
summarize your statement for 5 minutes.
Our first witness is Dr. Everett Kelley, who is the
national president of the American Federation of Government
Employees, the largest union representing Federal and D.C.
employees.
Mr. Kelley has, indeed, had a very prestigious career. He
has been a member of AFGE since 1981, serving in various roles,
including as national VP and president of Local 1845. He is a
veteran of the United States Army and worked at the Anniston
Army Depot, which he retired from after 30 years, and he also
served as a senior pastor of St. Mary Missionary Baptist Church
in Lincoln, Alabama, for 31\1/2\ years before retiring in
February 2019 and being appointed pastor emeritus.
Mr. Kelley, I think you have a new definition of
``retire.''
Second is Ms. Joi Olivia Chaney. She is the executive
director of the Washington bureau and senior vice president for
policy and advocacy at the National Urban League. Ms. Chaney is
a domestic legal policy expert, political strategist, and
former chief of staff to Senator Kirsten Gillibrand of New
York.
She has served as the director of Equal Pay Today, and as
senior policy counsel at Equal Rights Advocates. She held
senior roles in the Obama administration where she served as
chair of the United States Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission.
Mr. Tom Warrick is the director of the future of DHS
project and a nonresident senior fellow with the Scowcroft
Center for Strategy and Security and the Middle East Programs
Group at the Atlantic Council.
Prior to joining the Atlantic Council from August 2008 to
June 2019, he was the deputy assistant secretary for
counterterrorism policy at the Department of Homeland Security,
and a career member of the Senior Executive Service. He was an
international lawyer in private practice for 17 years,
representing companies in connection with investment in the
Middle East and elsewhere.
Finally, Mr. Jeffrey Neal, he is the founder and principal
of Chief HRO, LLC. He was previously a senior vice president
for ICF. Prior to joining ICF, he worked for the Department of
Homeland Security as the chief human capital officer under the
Obama administration.
Mr. Neal serves as a fellow director and former board chair
for the National Academy of the Public Administration, and
serves as the strategic adviser to government executives for
the Partnership for Public Service.
So without objection, the witnesses' full statements will,
indeed, be inserted in the record. I am going to now ask each
of the witnesses to summarize his or her statement for 5
minutes, beginning with Dr. Kelley.
STATEMENT OF EVERETT B. KELLEY, NATIONAL PRESIDENT, AMERICAN
FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES
Mr. Kelley. Thank you, Chairwoman Watson Coleman, Ranking
Member Gimenez, Chairman Thompson, and Members of the
committee. On behalf of the more than 41,000 transportation
security officers that AFGE represent, I appreciate the
opportunity to offer testimony today. AFGE strongly support
H.R. 903, the Rights for the TSA Workforce Act, that extend
full Title 5 collective bargaining rights and fair pay for the
TSO work force.
For 19 years, TSOs have been subject to a separate but
unequal personnel system that sets them apart from other
Federal employees. They have fewer due process rights than even
their fellow TSA employees, let alone their fellow DHS
employees.
TSOs are denied the ability to appeal rights. The bosses at
TSA, however, have the same rights as other Federal employees.
They can do--they can, rather, and do, appeal adverse actions
not only to the MSPB, but also to the U.S. Court of Appeals.
Thus, no one can say that TSA cannot function if its employees
have full legal protection.
Justice demands that TSOs have the same protection as the
TSA employees who supervise them. TSA management has taken full
advantage of this separate system to foster a toxic work
environment. Fear and intimidation are the basis of everyday
management, and there is little the work force can do to hold
them accountable.
To this abuse work environment, the issue of low pay comes.
Even some who have opposed providing due process rights to TSOs
have acknowledged that their pay is far too low. An average
screener starts at about $35,000 per year, and since most live
in large metropolitan areas, it is not a living wage.
H.R. 903 will place the TSA work force on the GS pay scale,
the pay system that virtually everyone else at DHS and
throughout the Federal Government and work force have. Many
people try to delegitimize the GS locality system by calling it
antiquated or inflexible.
Some TSA managers have tried to turn TSOs against the GS
system. They falsely assert pay is better under the current TSO
system, and at the same time, GS pay costs too much. This is
contradictory. The truth is that it takes 18 years to advance
to the top step in the GS system. Meanwhile, it takes 30 years
to advance through a TSA pay band.
I had hoped to provide videos from TSOs sharing their
stories, but the toxic work environment that they endure posed
too much of a risk of retaliation, so I will do my best to
share their stories.
Worker M has worked as a TSO in Pennsylvania for 9 years.
She and her husband both work full-time. They can barely make
ends meet. She is first to volunteer for extra shifts, often
working 14 hours at a time, and giving up most of her days off.
Fair pay would mean more time with her small children.
Worker J works in the Washington area for 5 years, and now
fighting for, you know, back pay for reinstatement. He returned
from surgery that was not related to his vision, but was told
that he had to take a color vision test. His supervisor told
him he failed the test, but would not provide him the results.
He took a second test, and was told he didn't pass and would
not be fit for duty.
He went on to his own private optometrist, passed a color
vision test. He used the results to appeal his removal. The in-
house professional responsibility appeal board recommends
reinstatement and back pay, and still, yet, TSA says that he is
not fit for duty. If he could appeal to MSPB, this would not be
allowed.
Worker S works in New York for almost 2 years. She endured
terrible harassment from her supervisor and her manager. The
manager often made her uncomfortable, telling her to close his
door behind and making reference to the size of his anatomy.
The supervisor intimidated her with constant threats to write
her up, even declining to inform her of a new COVID-related
standard operating procedure, and instead telling others to
hang back and watch her do it wrong, just to make her the butt
of a joke. Now she is fighting to get her job back.
These are not isolated occurrences. They happen every
single day in hundreds of airports. TSA has allowed a
management culture of harassment, fear, and intimidation to run
rampant. There is no legal path to pursue, and reporting bad
managers end in isolation and retaliation.
My brothers and sisters at TSA work every day to protect
the flying public. We say the aviation security provided by the
screening work force is essential for Homeland Security, but
for too long, TSA has tried to do it on the cheap, if I may
say.
Members of this committee, this must end. I urge you to
advance H.R. 903 to the full House and support Homeland
Security in our skies the best way you can by voting for this
legislation. Thank you for your time. I appreciate the
opportunity to be here.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Kelley follows:]
Prepared Statement of Everett B. Kelley
May 4, 2021
Chairwoman Watson Coleman, Ranking Member Gimenez, Committee
Chairman Thompson, and Members of the Homeland Security Committee: My
name is Everett B. Kelley, and I am the national president of the
American Federation of Government Employees, AFL-CIO (AFGE). On behalf
of over 700,000 Federal workers represented by our union, including
over 41,000 transportation security officers (TSOs), I appreciate the
opportunity to offer testimony at today's hearing before the
Subcommittee on Transportation and Maritime Security of the Committee
on Homeland Security, ``Twenty Years of Workforce Challenges: The Need
for H.R. 903, the Rights for the TSA Workforce Act of 2021''. The title
of this hearing does not evoke nostalgia. Instead, please let it be a
sounding call to action because the TSOs we represent have experienced
continual mistreatment, fewer rights, and lower pay than their fellow
Federal employees as a result of the way the Transportation Security
Administration (TSA) was authorized. I am here today to reinforce this
message: Granting TSOs the same, full rights under title 5 of the U.S.
Code as other Federal employees would directly improve the ability of
TSA to provide the flying public the highest level of aviation
security.
I thank the many Members of Congress on both sides of the aisle who
stood with TSOs and voted for legislation in the 116th Congress to
ensure that TSOs have title 5 collective bargaining rights, full due
process rights, and fair pay. Unfortunately, the legislation was not
considered in the Senate last year and we thank Chairman Thompson for
reintroducing the bill in this Congress. AFGE fully supports H.R. 903,
the ``Rights for the TSA Workforce Act of 2021'' and is working toward
its enactment.
TSOs' lack of statutory rights is rooted in a combination of 2
things: First, a desire by the Government to provide aviation security
on the cheap; and second, a pernicious belief that worker rights are
somehow contrary to homeland security. TSA apparently bases its
personnel policies on both notions even though each is demonstrably
false, and each has made it more difficult for the agency to provide
security to the flying public. Above all else, TSA desperately clings
to its authority under 111(d) of the Aviation and Transportation
Security Act (ATSA) (Pub. L. 107-71).
The footnote reads as follows:
``Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Under Secretary of
Transportation for Security may employ, appoint, discipline, terminate,
and fix the compensation, terms, and conditions of employment of
Federal Service for such a number of individuals as the Under Secretary
determines to be necessary to carry out the screening functions of the
Under Secretary under Section 44901 of Title 49, United States Code,''
(49 U.S.C. 44935 Note).
The footnote has been interpreted by courts and administrative
proceedings as granting TSA almost unreviewable authority over TSO
employment rights. AFGE was the first union to file judicial challenges
to this interpretation beginning in 2003 and has continued to do so
ever since. Congress has never before or since granted any other agency
head this level of authority over a group of employees, and for good
reason.
In the past, AFGE submitted testimony to Congress describing TSA
working conditions as ``separate and unequal.'' TSA implemented 2
personnel systems: One created solely for TSOs and one for all other
TSA employees, managers included, based largely on the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) personnel system that applies most of Title 5 of
the U.S. Code.
Over 41,000 TSOs are denied the ability to appeal adverse personnel
decisions to an objective, outside body like the Merit Systems
Protection Board (MSPB) or through negotiated grievance procedures. In
contrast, like most Federal workers, TSA managers can appeal adverse
personnel decisions (including removals) not only to the MSPB but also
to the U.S. Court of Appeals. TSOs are subject to a cumulative
disciplinary system unlike the progressive disciplinary system applied
across other Federal agencies, including other Department of Homeland
Security (DHS) components. For too long, the TSO workforce has
performed their jobs effectively, efficiently, and with a professional
demeanor, all the while under duress largely at the hands of TSA
management and its inconsistent application of both discipline and
reward.
The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) reauthorization in the
115th Congress (H.R. 302) included Section 1907, Personnel Management
System Review directing: ``the Administrator shall convene a working
group consisting of representatives of the TSA and representatives of
the labor organization representing security screening personnel to
recommend reforms to the TSA's personnel management system, including
appeals to the Merit Systems Protection Board and grievance
procedures.'' TSA met the minimum requirements to meet but was
unwilling to conduct any meaningful discussion of a route to MSPB and
did not adopt meaningful changes to grievance or discipline procedures.
The events of the past 3 years put into clear focus the dire need
for legislation to protect TSOs' basic rights at work and even their
lives. Not only did TSOs work without pay throughout the 2018-2019
Government shutdown; a year later, as many were still struggling to get
back on their feet financially, they were hit swiftly and pervasively
by the COVID-19 pandemic.
covid-19 pandemic
Every action taken by TSA to protect the workforce during the
pandemic has been a hard-fought struggle between management and TSOs.
Early in the pandemic, supervisors pushed back when TSOs requested to
wear masks and face shields and were slow to develop safety protocols.
When masks and face shields were permitted, TSOs had to supply them
themselves. Later, TSA managers were quick to discipline TSOs who
didn't comply with those same personal protective equipment (PPE)
requirements. Leave policies were developed, but unevenly applied;
while TSOs in one airport may have been granted weather and safety
leave after close exposure to officers who developed COVID-19, TSOs in
another airport were disciplined, considered absent without leave for
taking leave under the same circumstances.
Make no mistake--the uncertain and unequal application of leave and
illness policies throughout the pandemic is only the most recent but
surely the most egregious evidence this agency must no longer
administer its own separate and unequal personnel management system.
To date, TSA has reported more than 7,700 cases of COVID among its
employees, almost entirely in the screening workforce, including 16
deaths. TSA could not have prevented all of the COVID-19 cases, but it
could have taken faster action to protect its workforce. For months,
TSA Administrator David Pekoske refused to require that passengers and
other members of the public wear masks to go through security
checkpoints.
To make matters harder on part-time TSOs, hours were cut to only 20
hours per week rather than 25-30 hours and until the Chairman of this
committee insisted, TSA had stopped providing new part-time employees
hired after October 2019 the full Government share of their health care
premium. The simple truth is rights at work are not a luxury or a
benefit, but absolutely essential when employers have the power to make
life and death decisions about workers' safety.
tsa personnel policies
TSA's application of its authority granted by the ATSA footnote has
created a personnel system that repeatedly leads to dismal workplace
satisfaction rankings. We know from the results of the most recent
``Best Places to Work in the Federal Government'' survey that TSA
employees failed to rank the agency above the lowest quartile (25
percent) in any category with the exception of training. In addition to
TSA coming in dead last on satisfaction with pay, TSA employees
provided remarkably low scores on the fairness of leadership, matching
employee skills to the mission, performance-based rewards and
advancement, and teamwork and innovation. The low marks of this survey
correlate with concerns AFGE has raised for the past 19 years.
Nineteen years of TSA running its own personnel management system
has devolved into a toxic work environment where supervisors and
managers foster a culture based on bullying, intimidation, and fear.
TSOs work under the constant threat of being written up, of being
disciplined unfairly and inconsistently, and never feeling respected.
TSOs who file complaints, formally or informally, are punished and
alienated. Their coworkers look the other way because they fear they
will be next. Under this culture, there is no path to report
harassment, mistreatment, or even unsafe working conditions. There is
no meaningful way to appeal the actions of managers.
pay
I began this testimony by noting that TSA cannot provide aviation
security on the cheap. Because TSA has abused its authority under the
ATSA footnote, and used it to shortchange its employees, the agency has
actually made it harder to recruit and retain the career, professional
workforce the public demanded following the terrible events of 9/11.
TSA administrators have continued to disappoint the TSO workforce by
failing to request additional funding from appropriators for a
meaningful pay increase for long-term TSOs. Federal Security Directors
(FSDs) have used public resources to communicate agency views intended
to turn the TSO workforce against the General Schedule (GS) locality
pay system and suggest pay is better under the current TSO-specific
system, yet they tell Congress they can't migrate to the GS locality
system because they don't have enough funding to do so. It cannot be
simultaneously too expensive to provide fair pay and disadvantageous
for the workers to provide fair pay. TSA management cannot have it both
ways.
The average starting salary for TSOs is about $35,000, just under
$17 an hour. A newly-hired TSO begins in the D pay band and is required
to complete a 2-year probationary period during which time they can be
disciplined or terminated for any reason without due process. At the
completion of probation, TSOs automatically receive the E pay band in
addition to any Employee Cost Index (ECI), an annually-recommended
Federal civilian employee pay increase. The majority of TSOs are then
stuck at the E pay band for their entire career. In the event a TSO can
secure a promotion to a Lead TSO, they go up a half step to an E2 and a
very few will advance to a one full level to the F pay-band. But the
outlook from there is grim. TSA eliminated the ability of bargaining
unit employees to be promoted to a G pay band position in 2017.
If TSOs score high enough on the Transportation Officer Pay System,
or TOPS evaluation, they may be eligible for a one-time bonus or a
slight increase in salary at the subjective discretion of their
manager. The TOPS ``payout''--a combination of a percentage pay raise
and bonus depending on evaluations and other factors--varies from year
to year subject to the administrator's instructions. Last year, the
TOPs award for the highest rating of 5--achieved excellence or 4--
exceeds expectations was a 1-percent pay increase. If you scored a 3--
achieved expectations, you received no pay increase. These inconsistent
and miniscule performance-based increases, particularly when they are
not combined with a time-in-grade increase, do very little to retain or
reward the front-line aviation security workforce that protects us
around the clock. TSA recently layered in a Model Officer Program that
recognizes only the top 5 percent of the entire screening workforce,
noting that any associated pay is subject to availability of funds. In
its guidelines it advises: ``Model Officer Recognition is granted at
management's discretion. Meeting the minimum criteria does not
guarantee or create an entitlement to a Model Officer Monetary/Non-
Monetary Award and/or a Model Officer Pay Increase.'' Under this
guidance, a TSO has no means of knowing whether meeting the
requirements will mean anything. So the question arises: What is the
point of this program?
Any bonuses a TSO may earn under TOPS are not included in TSO base
salaries and are not part of the calculation for their retirement under
Federal Employee Retirement System. TSOs' lack of opportunity for
salary increases today has long-term financial consequences--less
retirement income later in life. By contrast, most Federal workers have
been compensated under the GS locality pay system, which has been
reformed and updated many times since its inception in 1949. The GS
locality pay system includes step increases at various intervals to
employees with satisfactory performance. When there is not a pay
freeze, they also receive annual salary adjustments that include a
Nation-wide and locality component. These pay adjustments are based on
objective market data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and mirror
the size and direction of salaries in the private sector and State and
local government. The GS pay system is notable for the absence of pay
discrimination; people in the same job with the same level of
performance receive the same salaries regardless of race, gender, age
or other attributes unrelated to the job they do for the American
people.
Administrator Pekoske has advertised the Career Progression Program
as a career path for TSOs that will both improve retention as TSOs move
up the ladder and a means to improve pay. AFGE appreciates
Administrator Pekoske's intentions, but the Career Progression Program,
which TSA did not negotiate over with the Union, does not meet those
goals. The Career Progression Program only assists new-hires in
receiving pay increases to an E-band level more quickly than before but
does absolutely nothing for long-term employees.
When AFGE testified before this committee about the need for title
5 collective bargaining rights and the GS pay scale 2 years ago, it was
on the heels of the release of 2 reports: The March 29, 2019 DHS Office
of Inspector General Report (OIG), TSA Needs to Improve Efforts to
Hire, Retain, and Train Its Transportation Security Officers and a May
2019 Blue Ribbon Panel report TSA commissioned a private company to
conduct, ``Human Capital Service Delivery Evaluation.'' Both reports
acknowledged the high turnover and low pay TSOs face, noting that TSOs
are paid only a third of what Management, Administration, and
Professional (MAP) pay is at TSA. The Blue Ribbon panel wrongly
concluded that TSA should not utilize the GS pay system. It
acknowledged that under the GS system, it takes a full 18 years to
reach step 10 in a pay grade without recognizing that in TSA's pay band
system, it takes 30 years to reach the top of the pay band, essentially
the length of a full career.
The DHS OIG report recommended additional funding is needed to fill
program positions. TSA has also promoted a new On the Job Trainers
(OJTs) program as a way for officers to receive extra incentive pay but
these opportunities are very limited and do not change an officer's
salary. Federal Security Directors (FSDs) and other management
officials determine how many OJTs they need depending on operational
need and they decide who gets to be an OJT.
Many airports are located near major metropolitan areas with high
costs of living. Many TSOs cannot afford to rent a 2-bedroom apartment
or purchase a car on their salaries. At airports such as San Jose
International in Silicon Valley, TSA has offered TSOs recruitment and
retention bonuses to maintain its workforce. At the Seattle-Tacoma
International Airport, TSA was required to raise TSO pay in response to
the city's implementation of a minimum wage increase to $15 per hour,
or about $31,000 per year. TSA currently identifies 89 TSO essential
job functions in its current TSO medical guidelines and has established
rigorous standards for employment. TSOs often seek employment at other
Federal agencies. The advantages of seeking employment with another
Federal agency are substantial for a TSO: A likely significant pay
increase, clear and achievable career progressions, full civil service
rights under Title 5, and the ability to maintain their commitment to
public service. TSA is investing money to hire, train, and employ an
officer only to see them leave for higher-paying private employment or
go to another Federal agency covered by the GS pay system.
Finally, it is important to note that high-ranking TSA officials
are paid under the Title 5 guidelines for the Senior Executive Service
and the agency has sought special discretion to increase the pay of
upper management. The 100 highest-paid TSA employees all earn over
$175,000 annually. By pointing out the disparity in pay between TSOs
and the top brass at the agency we make no assumption that the
executive pay is unearned. AFGE does find it highly inappropriate that
the pay disparity between TSA management and TSOs is comparable to the
pay difference of Walmart store managers and salesclerks.
tso retention issues and staffing
The findings of the DHS OIG report 2 years ago confirmed AFGE's
warnings that TSA has become a revolving door for the TSO workforce at
many airports. The trend continues and it is even clearer that TSA's
personnel policies are directly linked to retention problems.
Throughout 2020 as the COVID-19 pandemic raged and travel declined
precipitously, TSA allowed the TSO workforce to drop from about 46,000
to fewer than 41,000 officers. With travel resuming, TSA is again
hiring. As a cautionary note during this time of hiring and training,
AFGE has observed that although TSOs at checkpoints are not OJTs, they
assist the many newly-hired TSOs as they learn their duties and have
noted that many appear ill-prepared.
TSO schedules at some airports are constantly manipulated to meet
airline arrivals and departures. As a result, TSOs have little
stability in their schedules. Women TSOs have even less flexibility
because they make up a smaller portion of the workforce but must be
available on every shift and every checkpoint for pat-downs. Because
there is little room in TSA's staffing decisions, at some airports
nursing mothers report managers expect them to express breast milk only
at specific designated times and are refused breaks as needed. Non-
private expressing areas are often too far away for the time allotted.
Other TSOs have reported denial of bathroom breaks resulting in
unnecessary and demeaning accidents.
many tsos perceive tsa to be a hostile work environment
The results of the DHS OIG report on TSA recruitment and retention
of its TSO workforce matched AFGE's Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)
data which revealed that over a 10-year period between 2008 and 2018,
TSA replaced its approximate 44,000 workforce. TSO duties are not easy.
The initial responsibility for the safety of the flying public is
assigned to TSOs screening passengers and baggage. Dealing with
passengers can be stressful and physically taxing, however, AFGE
represents thousands of Federal employees with stressful and taxing
positions. The difference is that Federal employees outside of TSA
represented by AFGE do not work under the smothering cloak of
unfairness described by their TSO brothers and sisters.
Under TSA's interpretation of ATSA, the agency makes and breaks the
rules of employment. As noted above, TSA reinvents pay standards
annually. Airport checkpoints are often the fiefdoms of TSA management,
reducing the likelihood of consistency between checkpoints or baggage
screening areas. All levels of TSA management exercise extensive
discretion in supervision and discipline of TSOs. Much of it is
subjective and has devolved into a culture of harassment and
intimidation that can only end with a permanent end to the separate and
unequal personnel management system.
Below are some of the situations described by TSOs in the daily
performance of their duties.
Male TSO, Washington State
J has been a TSO for over 5 years. When he returned from surgery
unrelated to vision last June he was told to take a color vision test.
He was told he failed the test, but not provided the results. He was
sent for a second test at a chain optometry store. He was told he
failed that too, but TSA refused to provide the results of either test.
He was stunned because in the past he had worked in color analysis for
a makeup company. He went to his own optometrist and to another
location of the chain optometry store. He passed both tests and took
them to his employer. He has taken multiple bag screening tests since
then and has passed with 90 percent but was still proposed for removal.
He appealed and to date, neither he nor the in-house Office of
Professional Responsibility Appeals Board has received the color vision
test results. He was told he would be reinstated but has again been
told he is not medically fit for duty. Under MSPB, his reinstatement
would not have been arbitrarily denied by the agency.
Female TSO, New York
S worked at TSA for almost 2 years. During that time, she endured
harassment from her manager--this included reference to anatomy size
and uncomfortable requests to close the door to his office. She was
also subjected to repeated intimidation by her supervisor. Rather than
providing instruction on a new COVID-related standard operating
procedure, the supervisor set her up so others could watch her fail and
made it a joke. When a passenger complained about communication with
her, the on-site supervisor asserted the situation did not happen, but
she still got written up by a supervisor who didn't see it. Her
supervisor engaged in a frequent barrage of threats to ``write her
up.'' When she turned to coworkers to corroborate what they witnessed
they said they wouldn't back her up because of fear for their own jobs.
There is no recourse, no accountability.
Female TSO, Pennsylvania
M has been a TSO for almost 9 years. She works full-time and as
does her husband, but they have 2 children under 6 in daycare, and she
still has $30,000 in student loans from college. She is the first to
volunteer to pick up every extra shift she can get, often working 7
o'clock AM to 9:30 PM or 11 o'clock AM to midnight and giving up most
of her days off. Because of the low pay, she has sacrificed work-life
balance and time with her family and says they barely make ends meet.
Female TSO, Maine
N received an ``employee of the month'' designation 10 months into
her first year of service. Her Mid-Year performance appraisal rated her
``Exceeded Expectations in all Competencies and Goals'' a few months
later. One week after that excellent appraisal, she informed TSA that
she was pregnant. Over the next several weeks, she experienced troubles
with her pregnancy and used accrued sick leave, receiving TSA
Management's approval of each and every one of her sick leave requests.
Three months later, she was fired and has a pending EEOC suit. This was
an excellent employee who loved her job.
Female TSO, Arizona
J, a TSO for 8 years, was summoned for a random breath blood
alcohol test. She had not been consuming alcohol and had no reason to
be concerned with the test. However, she had trouble with the equipment
and the ability to blow sufficient air into the machine. She was
terminated because it was determined she had no medical reason to
provide an insufficient sample. She was never given due process to
prove she has never reported for work impaired by alcohol and was not
impaired at the time of the random test. She appealed a denial of
unemployment benefit claims and won that appeal because the State found
that the employer did not meet the burden of proof that she was
disqualified for misconduct.
These and other responses from across the country were strikingly
similar in their details: Unfair treatment, no remedy when reported to
management, and almost certain retaliation.
Unwarranted disciplinary actions against TSOs present an
opportunity for badly-trained and poorly-managed supervisors to
victimize TSOs. In 2018, TSA modified their table of penalties for the
TSO workforce based on a fundamental misunderstanding of the concept of
progressive discipline. Progressive discipline provides increased
penalties for particular types of conduct. Under TSA's version of
progressive discipline, for example, a tardy will count as the first
offense, an unrelated uniform violation as a second offense that
includes a more severe disciplinary action which could lead to a
proposed removal even though a tardy and a uniform violation are
completely different forms of misconduct. There is little incentive to
the employee to improve behavior or misconduct.
Each disciplinary action remains in the TSO's personnel files for 2
years. The mandatory 2-year presence of a previous disciplinary action
in a personnel file negatively affects almost anything a TSO attempts
to do at the agency. TSOs with disciplinary actions in their personnel
files cannot transfer to another airport and face disqualification from
the Career Progression program. Any corrective action, discipline, or
sick leave restriction during the 12 months prior or during the OJT
assignment is a disqualification and eliminates a large score of
employees from receiving the highest TOPS rating.
The unrelentingly harsh disciplinary policies of TSA do not create
a work environment that fosters workforce performance growth and
improvement. A disciplinary action grinds a TSO's forward progress to a
halt for at least 2 years. It is difficult for TSOs to clear their
record without the right to appeal adverse personnel actions to the
MSPB or a negotiated grievance and arbitration process.
the future of u.s. aviation security
Nineteen years ago, TSOs organized the first AFGE TSA local
indicating a clear preference for union representation. They stood up
for the union without statutory protections of their right to organize.
AFGE is committed to the fight for full civil service rights and
protections for the TSO workforce. Low pay, stressful duties, and a
sense of unfairness create a trifecta for low morale and hopelessness
that impedes the ability of TSOs to boldly serve as the front line of
U.S. aviation security.
TSOs have stepped up and reported for duty through the lengthy
Government shutdown and the COVID-19 pandemic. Many have dedicated
themselves to this career protecting the traveling public and now they
are hoping their dedication will be met with respect, basic rights, and
fair pay.
We appreciate the continued advocacy of Chairman Thompson and
Chairwoman Watson Coleman in support of title 5 rights for the TSO
workforce. Their legislation, H.R. 903, the ``Rights for the TSA
Workforce Act of 2021,'' has well over 150 co-sponsors in the House.
When enacted into law this legislation will provide permanence and
predictability of the statutory rights and protections of title 5 of
the U.S. Code, the fairness of negotiated grievance and arbitration
provisions, and MSPB appeal rights lacking in the work lives of the TSO
workforce.
Thank you for holding this hearing and for the opportunity to speak
on behalf of the TSO workforce represented by AFGE. I am prepared to
answer any questions the subcommittee may have.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. Thank you, Mr. Kelley. Thank you for
your testimony.
I now recognize Ms. Chaney to summarize her statement for 5
minutes.
STATEMENT OF JOI CHANEY, SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT FOR POLICY AND
ADVOCACY AND EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, WASHINGTON BUREAU, NATIONAL
URBAN LEAGUE
Ms. Chaney. Thank you, Chairwoman Watson Coleman, Ranking
Member Gimenez, Committee Chairman Thompson, and Members of the
subcommittee. Thank you for the opportunity to testify today.
My name is Joi Chaney, and I serve as senior vice president
of policy and advocacy and executive director of the Washington
Bureau for the National Urban League. I bring you greetings on
behalf of Marc Morial, our president and CEO.
Before I continue, I must correct the record that I was not
chair of the EEOC. I worked for the chair of the EEOC, and I
loved every minute of it, as I do my current job.
The National Urban League is a historic civil rights
organization dedicated to providing economic empowerment,
educational opportunities, and the guarantee of civil rights
for the underserved in America.
Of the Nation's 10 busiest airports, the Urban League has
an affiliate in 9 and a presence in all 10 cities. I appreciate
the opportunity to share the Urban League's perspectives on the
need for the rights for the Transportation Security
Administration Workforce Act of 2021.
If this is signed into law, TSA jobs will have the
potential to offer pathways to stable employment with benefits,
and a pathway to the middle class in urban and rural
communities across this Nation. Thus, it is vital that TSA
workers are protected in the workplace and compensated fairly.
The TSA work force is diverse and reflects the communities
they serve. Nation-wide, 55 percent of the 60,000 workers at
the TSA are people of color. Black Americans make up about 11
percent of the overall population, but nearly triple that of
transportation screeners.
Latino and Asian Americans also make up a larger share of
the transportation security work force than their share of the
U.S. population. Within the Department of Homeland Security,
TSA workers of color have a higher concentration at TSA than
they do at DHS overall.
The TSA also employs a higher concentration of women
workers than DHS broadly. To put it plainly, the TSA is driving
the diversity and inclusion in our country's Homeland Security
work force, and, yet, transportation security workers are not
afforded the protections and the benefits of their counterparts
elsewhere in the Department of Homeland Security or the Federal
Government at large. It makes you wonder.
The hard-working officers of TSA screen more than 2 million
passengers each day at nearly 440 airports Nation-wide.
Transportation security officers, or TSOs, are front-line
workers who show up to keep our country safe through Government
shutdowns, when they are not being paid, and through the
pandemic, when their own health is at risk. Yet, they lack the
rights and protections afforded their peers in the Federal
Government under Title 5 of the U.S. Code.
TSA screeners do not have the same protections to
collectively bargain. Their pay scale lags behind that of other
agencies in the Government, and they are missing out on Family
and Medical Leave Act protections available elsewhere in the
Government.
Potential whistleblowers in the TSA are not protected.
Without access to an objective outside body like the Merit
Systems Protection Board, or a negotiated grievance procedure,
TSA officers are denied the ability to appeal adverse personnel
decisions in the same way as other Federal employees.
Unlike the progressive disciplinary system applied across
other Federal agencies, including other DHS security
components, TSOs are subject to a cumulative disciplinary
system.
In addition to these disparities in statutory protections,
the TSA ranked the lowest out of all Federal agencies in
employee satisfaction with pay. TSA employees scored their
employer poorly on the fairness of leadership, matching
employee skills to the mission, performance-based awards and
advancement, and teamwork and innovation.
This is no way to treat anyone, certainly not a work force
that reflects the diversity of this Nation, or one that places
itself at risk daily on our behalf.
As we know, people of color and women face unfair barriers
to pay equity and workplace protections. One cause of this
disparity is that people of color and women are often
overrepresented in lower-paying professions that yield fewer
benefits and fewer protections.
So, removing barriers to success and increasing protections
to match those of other Federal workers, including those in
management at TSA, is absolutely a matter of equity that is
overdue and should be addressed once and for all.
TSOs should have the same fair pay, union rights, and
treatment as other Federal workers. The Rights for the
Transportation Security Administration Workforce Act of 2021
would codify these rights, and give long overdue workplace
protections to TSO officers.
The Urban League supports this effort, and thanks you for
your focus on the issue, as well as TSA officials and workers.
Thank you and let me know if you have any questions.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Chaney follows:]
Prepared Statement of Joi Chaney
May 4, 2021
Chair Watson Coleman, Ranking Member Gimenez, Committee Chairman
Thompson, and Members of the Subcommittee on Transportation and
Maritime Security, thank you for the opportunity to testify today. My
name is Joi Chaney, and I serve as senior vice president of policy and
advocacy and executive director of the Washington bureau for the
National Urban League. I bring you greetings on behalf of Marc Morial,
our president and CEO, who could not be with us today but who supports
this testimony and applauds the committee in its work.
The National Urban League is an historic civil rights organization
dedicated to providing economic empowerment, educational opportunities
and the guarantee of civil rights for the underserved in America.
Founded in 1910 and headquartered in New York City, the National Urban
League has 90 affiliates serving 300 communities in 36 States and the
District of Columbia, providing direct services that impact and improve
the lives of more than 2 million people Nation-wide.
Of the Nation's 10 busiest airports, the Urban League has an
affiliate in 9 and a presence in all 10.\1\ One of those cities is
Orlando, FL, where I was born and raised. I also spent several years in
the Office of the Chair at the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission during the Obama administration and have dedicated much of
my career to promoting equity in employment for women and persons of
color.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ https://www.statista.com/statistics/185679/passengers-boarded-
at-the-leading-25-us-airports/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I appreciate the opportunity to share the Urban League's
perspective on the need for the Rights for the Transportation Security
Administration Workforce Act of 2021. Ensuring that transportation
security officers--whose service helps keep us safe and our economy
moving--receive the same rights and protections as other Federal
workers is important to the mission of the Urban League and my personal
mission. Transportation Security Administration (TSA) jobs have the
potential to offer pathways to stable employment with benefits and the
middle class in urban and rural communities across this Nation. Thus,
it is vital that TSA workers deserve to be protected in the workplace
and compensated fairly.
What Members of the subcommittee have likely noticed while flying
to and from your home districts, including this week, is that the TSA
workforce is diverse and reflects the communities they serve. For the
most part, these are not jobs that can be outsourced. They are your
constituents. Nation-wide, 55 percent of the 60,000 workers at the
Transportation Security Administration are people of color. Black
Americans make up about 11 percent of the overall population but nearly
triple that (32.7 percent) of transportation screeners.\2\ Latino and
Asian Americans also make up a larger share of the transportation
security workforce than their share of the U.S. population. Within the
Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the Transportation Security
Administration makes up a quarter of the workforce and workers of color
make up about 45 percent of all employees, so TSA's workers of color
have a higher concentration at TSA than they do at DHS overall.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ https://datausa.io/profile/soc/transportation-security-
screeners#-demographics.
\3\ https://www.fedscope.opm.gov/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Transportation Security Administration also employs a higher
concentration of women workers than DHS broadly.\4\ Across the
Department of Homeland Security, only 30 percent of employees are
women.\5\ At the Transportation Security Administration, women make up
over 41 percent of employees.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ https://www.tsa.gov/sites/default/files/resources/
tsaatglance_factsheet.pdf.
\5\ https://pages.fiscalnote.com/rs/109-ILL-989/images/CQ-Womens-
Representation.pdf?aliId-
=eyJpIjoiNU5NajVDK3I2T3d1NFZqKyIsInQiOiJTS1BQbGxqQloxaXprXC9NXC9UT-
jRzVEE9PSJ9.
\6\ https://datausa.io/profile/soc/transportation-security-
screeners#demographics.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To put it plainly, the Transportation Security Administration is
driving the diversity and inclusion of people of color and women in our
country's homeland security workforce. And yet, transportation security
workers are not afforded the protections and benefits of their
counterparts elsewhere in the Department of Homeland Security or the
Federal Government at large.
As President Biden noted in his Joint Address to Congress last
week, people of color and women face unfair barriers to pay equity and
workplace protections. Due to historic injustices such as slavery,
segregation, redlining, unequal access to Government programs, and on-
going institutionalized and systematic discrimination, Black men on
average make 87 cents on a White man's dollar. Black women face an even
larger pay gap on average, making only 63 cents for every dollar earned
by a White man. At the same time, 80 percent of Black mothers are the
sole, co-breadwinners or primary breadwinners for their households.\7\
These trends track for the Latino community as well. One cause of this
disparity is that people of color are often overrepresented in lower-
paying professions that yield fewer benefits and fewer protections. So,
removing barriers to success and increasing protections to match those
of other Federal workers in the Transportation Security Administration,
which employs a higher proportion of people of color and a higher
proportion of women than the Department of Homeland Security overall,
is absolutely a matter of equity that should be addressed urgently.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ https://www.aauw.org/resources/article/black-women-and-the-pay-
gap/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The hard-working officers of TSA screen more than 2 million
passengers each day at nearly 440 airports Nation-wide. Transportation
security officers (TSOs) are front-line workers who show up to keep our
country safe through Government shutdowns when they are not being paid
and during the COVID-19 pandemic when their own health is at risk.
Since the novel coronavirus hit our shores, over 7,810 TSA employees
have contracted the virus.\8\ At least 16 have died as a result. But
these dedicated Federal workers continue to clock in and perform their
duties in service to their country and communities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ https://www.tsa.gov/coronavirus.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Despite the importance of their role and the professionalism with
which they continue to bring to their work, transportation security
officers face inequities compared to other Federal employees. They lack
the rights and protections afforded to their peers in the Federal
Government under Title 5 of the U.S. Code. TSA screeners do not have
the same protections to collectively bargain. Their pay scale lags
behind that of other agencies in the Government and they are missing
out on the Family and Medical Leave Act protections available elsewhere
in the Government. Potential whistleblowers in the Transportation
Security Administration are not protected. Without access to an
objective outside body like the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB)
or negotiated grievance procedures, transportation security officers
are denied the ability to appeal adverse personnel decisions in the
same way as other Federal employees. And unlike the progressive
disciplinary system applied across other Federal agencies, including
other Department of Homeland Security components, transportation
security officers are subject to a cumulative disciplinary system.
In addition to these disparities in statutory protections, results
from the ``Best Places to Work in the Federal Government'' survey \9\
consistently show that TSA employees rank the Transportation Security
Administration in the lowest quartile (25 percent) in all categories
except training. In addition to the Transportation Security
Administration being ranked the lowest out of all Federal agencies in
employee satisfaction with pay, TSA employees scored their employer
poorly on the fairness of leadership, matching employee skills to the
mission, performance-based rewards and advancement, and teamwork and
innovation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ https://bestplacestowork.org/rankings/detail/HS10.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Our front-line workers in the Transportation Security
Administration, who are disproportionately people of color, are facing
added barriers to maintaining and excelling in their roles because the
Federal Government has not affirmed their workplace rights in the same
way as their peers working in other Government agencies.
It is past time this disparity is addressed. Transportation
security officers should have the same fair pay, union rights, and
treatment as other Federal workers. The Rights for the Transportation
Security Administration Workforce Act of 2021 would codify these
rights, and give long overdue workplace protections to TSA officers,
including: Family and Medical Leave Act protections; expanded
collective bargaining rights; the right to appeal adverse personnel
decisions before the Merit Systems Protection Board; whistleblower
rights; and better pay and benefits (including pay under the General
Services wage system). The Urban League supports this effort. Thank you
for your focus on this issue, I look forward to answering any questions
that Members of the subcommittee have.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. Thank you very much for your
testimony.
Dr. Kelley, excuse me for not giving you your due
recognition as both reverend and doctor, Mr. Kelley.
Mr. Kelley. It does not matter. OK? Thank you so much.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. Thank you. I will now recognize Mr.
Warrick to summarize your statement, sir, for 5 minutes.
STATEMENT OF THOMAS S. WARRICK, NONRESIDENT SENIOR FELLOW AND
DIRECTOR OF THE FUTURE OF DHS PROJECT, THE ATLANTIC COUNCIL
Mr. Warrick. Thank you very much, Chairwoman Watson
Coleman, Ranking Member Gimenez, and Members of the
subcommittee. Thank you for the opportunity to testify in
support of H.R. 903. I am the director of the Atlantic
Council's Future of DHS Project. I served at DHS from 2007 to
2009, the last 10\3/4\ years as a member of the Senior
Executive Service. I have served under Presidents of both
parties, and under 8 secretaries and acting secretaries of
Homeland Security.
I am proud to have served alongside the men and women of
TSA, who are some of the finest officers serving our Nation. We
need to honor TSA's service during the COVID-19 pandemic when
TSA officers have been on the front lines every day. They
deserve our recognition and respect for what they do.
Madam Chair, there is much about DHS that is good and
important, but DHS has some serious challenges that need to be
addressed. One of these is DHS's consistently low morale. This
diminishes the effectiveness of the work force, lowers employee
retention rates, increases costs to hire and train new people.
When DHS needs to replace experienced officers with new
people, this risks the security of the American public. Some of
us are old enough to remember that in the 1970's the U.S.
military had morale problems. Fixing this became a National
priority. Today, we need to treat morale at DHS with the same
sense of urgency.
If I could ask the clerk to put up on screen figure 1 for
my testimony. Let me talk about that briefly. This data comes
from the Office of Personnel Management's Federal Employee
Viewpoint Survey. Figure 1 shows overall morale in each Cabinet
department.
Other surveys shows that DHS employees are strongly
dedicated to the mission, but since 2010, DHS morale has been
consistently lower than any other large Cabinet department.
Success in turning DHS's morale around is not only
possible, it has happened many times at the component level.
If I could ask the clerk to show figure 5. My testimony
gives 3 success stories: The Office of Intelligence and
Analysis under Frank Taylor; the Secret Service under Director
Tex Alles; and what you see here--Immigration and Customs
Enforcement between 2015 and 2017, under Sarah Saldana when
morale went up by 20 points.
So let me now turn to TSA. TSA's morale overall is the
lowest of the large components of DHS. In 2019, out of 420 sub
agencies in the Federal Government, TSA ranked 398 out of 420.
If I can ask the clerk to show figure 6.
As this table shows, 30 percent of all DHS employees work
at TSA, more than any other part of DHS.
Madam Chair, we have done the math. If TSA's morale scores
increased by 20 points as they did at ICE under Sarah Saldana,
that alone would mathematically lift DHS out of last place.
That is how important morale is at TSA to improving morale at
DHS as a whole.
There are 3 categories where TSA stands out, and in a
negative way: Pay, promotions and career advancement, and
employee empowerment. H.R. 903 will help address all 3.
If I could ask the clerk to show figure 7. The most
striking problem at TSA is low pay. TSA is shown in the red
line. As someone once said, TSA right now is competing for
talent against Amazon fulfillment centers, and losing.
Let me ask the clerk to show figure 8. TSA also has
problems in how employee performance is evaluated, and how its
officers are promoted. H.R. 903 would force TSA to address
both,
Let me ask the clerk to show figure 9. There are 3
important questions TSA employees were asked, if we could look
at figure 9, please. Thank you. Our DHS employees were asked,
are promotions based on merit? Are steps taken to deal with
poor performers? Can you get a better job in your organization?
TSA, in each case shown in red, is the lowest, or among the
lowest, of all large DHS components.
We have to conclude from this, Madam Chair, TSA's current
pay and promotion system simply is not working, and H.R. 903
will be a forcing function to enable DHS and TSA to address
these problems.
There is only one improvement I can think of to mention
here. TSA does need to retain the ability to issue security
directives and emergency amendments without being subject to
delays. So, I would recommend a short, tightly-focused
additional provision so that nothing in the bill would delay
TSA from taking necessary or urgent actions for a short time to
protect the traveling public.
This should not be open-ended or indefinite. Eventually,
all things should be subject to negotiation under the
collective bargaining laws governing civil service.
I would refer you to my written testimony for some other
comments, and thank you very much for your attention, and I
will be happy to answer any questions. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Warrick follows:]
Prepared Statement of Thomas S. Warrick
May 4, 2021
Madame Chair, Ranking Member Gimenez, and Members of the
subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to testify in support of
H.R. 903, The Rights for the TSA Workforce Act of 2021. I am currently
the director of the Atlantic Council's Future of DHS Project, which has
been working since April 2020 to improve the Department of Homeland
Security (DHS). I served from August 2007 to June 2019 at DHS, the last
10\3/4\ years as a member of the Senior Executive Service at DHS
Headquarters, under both Democratic and Republican presidents and 8
Secretaries and Acting Secretaries of Homeland Security.
I'm proud to have served alongside the men and women of the
Transportation Security Administration, who are some of the finest
officers serving our Nation. They help secure our transportation
infrastructure--air travel, railroads, and pipelines that bind our
country together and keep it running. They deserve your support.
Along with the other women and men of DHS, TSA's people help keep
the United States secure from non-military threats, including
terrorism, COVID-19, hostile nation-states like Russia, China, and
Iran, and the long-term threat to lives and infrastructure from climate
change and extreme weather.
We particularly need to honor the service of the people of TSA
during the COVID-19 pandemic, when TSA officers have been on the front
lines every day. Some have lost their lives to COVID-19. The officers
of TSA deserve our deepest recognition and respect for all that they
have done.
Madame Chair, there is much about DHS that is good and important,
but DHS has some serious challenges that must be addressed if DHS is to
succeed in its missions to protect the American people. One of these
challenges is DHS's consistently low morale. Low morale diminishes the
effectiveness of the workforce, lowers employee retention rates, and
increases costs to hire and train new people. By failing to keep good
people on the job, low morale at DHS risks the security of the American
people when good people leave to take other jobs elsewhere.
Some of us remember when the U.S. military had morale problems in
the 1970's. Congress, the Department of Defense, and the American
people treated this as a National priority. Today, we need to treat
morale at DHS with the same sense of urgency.
My testimony today is going to be a data-rich discussion, so I want
to tell you where most of my data come from. Every year, the Office of
Personnel Management fields the Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey
(FEVS). This is analyzed by independent experts such as the Partnership
for Public Service, which publishes their results as the Best Places to
Work in the Federal Government.
I should take a moment to note the Atlantic Council's policy of
intellectual independence. The Atlantic Council itself does not take
positions on legislation. Views expressed are those of individual
experts. I also want to credit the Atlantic Council's partners at
Accenture, whose expertise helped the Future of DHS Project understand
and analyze personnel data and management trends. Of course,
responsibility for the conclusions is mine, as the lead author and
director of the Future of DHS Project. Let me turn to the data.
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Figure 1 shows the overall morale score of DHS compared to other
large Cabinet departments. Since 2010, and despite improvements in some
years such as 2015-2017, DHS has consistently ranked lowest among large
Cabinet departments.
Data for 2020 are not out yet, but some departments have released
responses for 37 of 38 questions in the 2020 survey. When you calculate
the average score for each department on each question, and connect the
dots for DHS with a blue line, it looks like this:
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
So in 2020, on virtually every question, DHS is once again the
lowest, or among the lowest, of any Federal department or agency that
has released 2020 data. DHS is not without success stories, and you
should know that success in turning morale around in DHS is not only
possible, it has happened many times. Let me present 3 examples before
I turn to TSA.
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Figure 3 shows the different categories of data tracked by the
analysts at the Partnership for Public Service. As you can see, most of
the lines move up or down together, which suggests that employees have
an overall opinion whether their workplace is doing better or worse
than in previous years. Individual scores tend to matter less compared
to whether all the scores are moving up or down.
In Figure 3, we see what happened during Frank Taylor's years as
Under Secretary of Intelligence and Analysis (I&A). He initiated a
major reorganization in late 2014. As often happens in the private
sector, morale initially went down right after the reorganization. But
by the end of his tenure, the numbers show morale was higher in 2017
than when he started--proof that he was right that his reorganization
would raise morale in I&A.
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Figure 4 shows how morale in the U.S. Secret Service declined
starting in 2012 after a prostitution scandal in Cartagena, Colombia
and other episodes revealed problems in the Service. The decline was
halted during Secretary Jeh Johnson's tenure, then morale improved
considerably because of efforts by Secretary John Kelly, both as
Secretary and as Chief of Staff in the White House, and by the
directorship of Randolph ``Tex'' Alles.
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Finally, Figure 5 shows the dramatic improvement in morale at
Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) during the directorship of
Sarah Saldana. Morale improved by 20 points in the way the Best Places
to Work FEVS scores are calculated.
Now let me turn to the Transportation Security Administration.
TSA's morale overall is the lowest of the large components of DHS. In
2019, TSA ranked 398 out of 420 subagencies across the Government
analyzed by the Partnership for Public Service.
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
It is important to bear in mind that there are more employees at
TSA than any other component of DHS. More than 30 percent of all DHS
employees work at TSA.
One of the most important facts I would ask you to consider, Madame
Chair, is that if TSA's morale scores increased by 20 points--as they
did at ICE under Sarah Saldana from 2015 to 2017--that alone would be
sufficient to lift DHS out of last place in the Best Places to Work
rankings of large Cabinet departments. That's how important morale is
at TSA to improving morale at DHS as a whole.
In the Atlantic Council's report on the Future of DHS, we took a
close look at what factors drive morale at TSA. We had the benefit of
people who have led TSA, worked at TSA, worked with TSA, and advised
TSA. And we had access to detailed data on surveys of TSA employees.
The answer quite literally jumps off the page and shows why H.R. 903
can be a key to unlocking TSA's potential to lead a turnaround in
morale at DHS.
In almost every respect, TSA's morale scores are comparable to
other DHS components. There are 3 categories, though, where TSA stands
out in a negative way. Morale at TSA can be improved by addressing the
3 issues of pay, promotions and career advancement, and employee
empowerment. H.R. 903 will help address all 3.
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
As Figure 7 shows, the most striking problem at TSA is low pay.
This shows the level of employee satisfaction with pay. TSA, on this
and the charts following, is shown in red.
This disparity cries out for correction. As one of our study group
members who knew what he was talking about said, TSA is competing for
talent against Amazon fulfillment centers--and losing. TSA's current
pay and promotion system simply is not working.
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Second, as Figure 8 shows, TSA has problems in how performance is
evaluated and how its officers are promoted. This is something that
H.R. 903 would force TSA to address.
During the Future of DHS Project, we worked hard to develop a
deeper understanding of the promotion and evaluation problems at TSA.
Figure 9 shows the responses to 3 questions--Are promotions based on
merit? Are steps taken to deal with poor performers? Is there a
prospect of getting a better job in your organization?
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
In each case, TSA is the lowest or among the lowest large DHS
components. This points to the need for major reforms to how TSA
evaluates and promotes its people. It also highlights that Congress and
DHS need to find a way to give TSA employees a pathway to a career in
homeland security, even if they decide to leave TSA for careers at
places like CBP and ICE, in much the way that service in the military,
through the veterans' preference, can be a gateway to a long,
successful, and satisfying civil service career.
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Another historical problem area for TSA, and unfortunately other
parts of DHS, is poor employee empowerment. Figure 10 shows the extent
of this. Unfortunately, in recent years, other components of DHS have
fallen down to TSA's level, rather than TSA joining the ranks of
components like USCIS where employee empowerment, through May 2019, has
been high.
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Finally, Madame Chair, I want to dispel any doubt in the
subcommittee's minds that TSA just has low FEVS scores all around.
Apart from the issues of pay, evaluations, promotions, and empowerment,
TSA's scores are comparable to other DHS components. Figure 11 shows an
illustrative category, how employees rate their immediate supervisors.
What this study makes clear is that if the Congress agrees with the
idea that low morale at DHS makes it harder for DHS to do its missions,
then improving TSA pay, evaluations, and promotions is an absolutely
essential step that needs to be taken as soon as possible.
Let me offer 4 other specific comments about H.R. 903, and 2
suggestions for strengthening it.
First, I've studied the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) scorecard
on the version of H.R. 903 that was introduced in the 116th Congress.
CBO scored the bill as costing $1.77 billion over 5 years, most of
which would go for higher pay for TSA employees. According to the CBO,
employees classified at the GS-5 level would see their pay go up by
$900 a year, and employees classified at the GS-7 level would see their
pay go up by about $3,400 a year. This might not be enough to bring TSA
pay into line with what it will take to attract and retain a qualified
workforce. Deciding how to classify TSA officers needs to be done using
a complex set of criteria, but one of those criteria should be what
level of pay and responsibility will be required to develop a
professional screening workforce with retention rates comparable to
other Federal, State, and local security and law enforcement services.
The mission of securing America's transportation networks should be
able to attract and retain talented individuals who want to make their
careers in homeland security.
Second, I recognize that, theoretically, there are other ways to
increase TSA's pay and fix the problems with evaluations and
promotions. Congress could simply appropriate more money. Congress and
TSA could reform TSA's personnel practices. I have no doubt a better
personnel system could be devised than what TSA now has. But those
changes could have been made years ago. The fact that those changes
were not made shows how hard it is force change into the system. H.R.
903 has the virtue of being a forcing function. If passed and signed
into law, it will require everyone--Congress and the Executive--to
improve a personnel system that is not working for TSA and its
employees.
Third, I recognize that the Title 5 personnel rules and pay scales
are not without their flaws and risks. As someone who spent 22 years in
Federal service, most of that time in the civil service in 2 National
security Cabinet departments, there are certainly aspects of the
Federal civil service system that should be reformed and improved. But
it would be wrong to think that flaws in the civil service personnel
system are a reason not to apply it to TSA. Those reforms and
improvements should be made for the benefit of all civil service
employees, not just TSA.
Fourth, I know there are past and possibly current officials at TSA
who would worry that Congress' answer to a request by TSA to pay its
employees more would be to order that cuts be made elsewhere, or that
TSA would be told to ``make do'' with fewer officers. That risks a net
loss in security for the United States and is not going to help the
problem of employee morale at DHS or TSA.
Madame Chair, in closing, let me offer 2 suggestions for ways in
which H.R. 903 could be improved.
First, you may need to extend the 180-day time line to classify all
of TSA's positions. It's vitally important to get the classification of
TSA officers right if the Nation is to benefit from H.R. 903. I would
expect TSA would need to engage outside experts to advise in the
process. I would hope TSA would come forward to the subcommittee with a
carefully thought-out time table of how long it will take. I respect
the subcommittee's desire to hold TSA's feet to the fire by drafting
this bill with an ambitious time table. Only TSA can propose an
alternative. I hope that discussion occurs soon.
Second, and most importantly, it is vital that TSA retains the
ability to issue Security Directives and Emergency Amendments to
protect the traveling public, without being subject to delays or
negotiations, even with its own employees. My concern is that nothing
should limit TSA's ability to take urgent actions under its authority
to protect the traveling public and our transportation infrastructure.
I know from personal experience working counterterrorism issues at DHS
that there will be times when TSA needs to take urgent action--in
hours--to put in place rules and procedures to protect the safety of
the public and TSA's employees. Some of these might involve matters
that in a non-security setting would be entirely appropriate for
collective bargaining. I would recommend a short, tightly-focused
additional provision so that nothing in this bill would prevent the TSA
administrator from taking necessary, urgent actions to protect the
traveling public.
Thank you for your attention to the important issue of morale at
DHS and the Transportation Security Administration. I will be happy to
answer your questions.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. Thank you very much, Mr. Warrick.
Finally, Mr. Jeffrey Neal.
STATEMENT OF JEFFREY NEAL, PRINCIPAL AND FOUNDER, CHIEF HRO,
LLC
Mr. Neal. Good afternoon, Madam Chairwoman, Ranking Member
Gimenez, and distinguished Members of the subcommittee. My name
is Jeffrey Neal, and I am honored to appear before this
subcommittee to discuss the vital issues regarding the work
force of TSA.
I was appointed as chief human capital officer for DHS in
the early days of the Obama-Biden administration, and in 2019,
I chaired a Blue Ribbon Panel chartered by Administrator
Pekoske to provide a neutral third-party review of TSA's human
capital operations, examine how policy decisions have affected
the TSO work force, and make recommendations for improvement.
Thus far, TSA has taken action on implementation of 43 of
the 46 recommendations that we made, and completed action on 21
of those recommendations.
I share your respect for the TSA work force, particularly
the officers who protect the flying public. The Blue Ribbon
Panel's recommendation recognized the need to ensure they have
competitive pay and benefits, and effective means of moving up
in the organization, and recognition for performance that
exceeds expectations.
We recommended that TSA provide officers with a longevity
pay, improve use of locality pay, and that they hire an
experienced H.R. professional to lead the human capital
operation. They did those things, and Ms. Bradshaw has made
significant improvements in her role as head of H.R.
I understand the interest in reducing the sweeping
authority authorized by ATSA. However, repeal of the personnel
flexibilities provided by ATSA is a double-edged sword. The
panel actually considered that option, but we saw no evidence
that moving to the General Schedule would have the intended
result.
The General Schedule, regardless of what anyone might say
about it, was designed in 1949 for a work force of a million
clerks. Virtually, every good Government organization,
including the National Academy of Public Administration, in
partnership with public service, has recommended replacing it
with a modern pay system.
While the bill rightly provides that no employee shall
suffer a loss in pay, there is no guarantee that employees will
continue to receive pay increases and benefits that they might
otherwise have received, such as split-shift pay differentials
and expanded leave transfer options that aren't available under
Title 5.
There is also no guarantee that TSOs are going to be
classified at any particular grade level, nor is there any
guarantee of funding if the jobs happen to be upgraded.
Moving 50,000 employees to a different personnel system,
even one that exists in other agencies, is a highly complex
process that requires extensive planning. Most TSA employees,
TSA managers, and H.R. specialists are not experienced in the
General Schedule, and most other aspects of Title 5, nor are
the contractors who actually do most of TSA's operational H.R.
work.
Likewise, not all TSA IT systems are designed to
accommodate the General Schedule. The 6-month transition period
in the bill does not provide adequate time to conduct necessary
planning, system changes, and training.
My 33 years of Federal H.R. experience tell me that rushing
implementation of something so far-reaching almost certainly
ensures it will be done badly, putting TSA employees and the
TSA mission at risk.
I urge the subcommittee to actually take this opportunity
to consider moving beyond the General Schedule, set minimum pay
standards for TSOs that still provide flexibility to raise pay
when it is needed, codify a process that provides longevity pay
increases that allows high-performing employees to move up the
pay scale quickly.
Allow TSA, within prescribed guidelines, to develop a pay
system that fits the TSA work force, provides job security,
ensures employee appeal rights, pay stability and upward
mobility, and allows TSA to compete for the talent it needs,
and make all of those changes within a disciplined program
management approach that provides a clear understanding of the
necessary steps, costs, and risks, and the time it will take to
do it right.
Madam Chair, Ranking Member Gimenez, and Members of the
subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to testify before
you today, and I look forward to your questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Neal follows:]
Prepared Statement of Jeffrey Neal
May 4, 2021
Good morning Chairwoman Coleman, Ranking Member Gimenez, and
distinguished Members of the subcommittee. My name is Jeffrey Neal and
I am honored to appear before this subcommittee to discuss the vital
issues regarding the workforce of the Transportation Security
Administration.
I was appointed as chief human capital officer for DHS during the
Obama/Biden administration. In 2019, I chaired a Blue Ribbon Panel
chartered by TSA at the direction of Administrator David Pekoske to
provide a neutral third-party review of TSA's Human Capital Operations
and examine how human capital policy decisions have affected the
transportation security officer (TSO) workforce. During our initial
meeting with Administrator Pekoske, it was evident to the Panel that he
was seeking solutions to address human capital issues and,
specifically, to deal with concerns from transportation security
officers. In the time since our report, TSA has taken action to
implement 43 of 46 Panel recommendations in 2 major areas:
Support for the TSO Workforce, and
Human Capital Service Delivery.
I believe they have made good progress toward accomplishing the
recommended changes.
I share the respect that Members of this subcommittee and Chairman
Thompson have for the TSA workforce. These men and women are the front-
line officers who protect the flying public. The Blue Ribbon Panel
recognized the need to ensure that they have competitive pay and
benefits, an effective means of moving up in the organization, and
recognition for performance that exceeds expectations.
We recommended that TSA provide these officers with longevity pay,
similar to that provided to General Schedule employees. TSA implemented
that recommendation. We recommended improved use of locality pay. TSA
has implemented locality pay at 74 airports, using flexibility provided
under the Aviation and Transportation Security Act (ATSA). We also
recommended that TSA hire an experienced H.R. professional to lead its
Human Capital operation. They did so, and Ms. Bradshaw has made
significant improvements.
I understand the interest in reducing the sweeping authorities
authorized by ATSA. However, repeal of the personnel flexibilities
provided by ATSA is double-edged sword. It will provide Merit System
Protection Board appeal rights--a move I believe is in the best
interests of TSA and its workforce. It will offer a degree of job
security, a move that also has merit. But it will place employees under
the General Schedule pay system--a move that I believe may have many
unintended consequences.
The Blue Ribbon Panel considered suggestions that TSA transition to
the General Schedule to solve pay and hiring problems. We believed
there was no evidence that such a change would have the intended
results. Agencies that use the General Schedule complain about its
inflexibility and lack of labor market sensitivity. It still takes 18
years to get to Step 10. General Schedule job classification is
governed by classification standards that often take OPM years to
develop and are infrequently updated. It makes many pay policies
dependent on action by the Office of Personnel Management, which does
not always agree and is sometimes slow to respond to agency requests.
The General Schedule was an effective pay system when it was
designed in 1949. Much has changed since then. Virtually every good
Government organization, including the National Academy of Public
Administration and the Partnership for Public Service, has recommended
replacing the General Schedule with a pay system that is appropriate
for today's workforce and labor market. While the proposed Act rightly
provides that no employee shall suffer a loss in pay, there is no
guarantee that employees will continue to receive pay increases and
benefits they might otherwise have received, such as split shift pay
differentials and expanded leave transfer options. There is no
guarantee that TSOs will be classified at any particular grade level.
It is entirely possible that TSOs will be classified at a GS grade that
provides for a lower pay range than is currently available to them. It
is also possible that they will be classified at a grade level that
requires far more funding than TSA currently has.
Moving 50,000 employees to a different personnel system is a highly
complex undertaking that requires extensive planning and a clear
picture of the consequences of the change. It requires employee,
supervisor, and H.R. training, so all stakeholders understand how to
operate under the new rules. Most TSA employees, managers and H.R.
specialists are not experienced in the General Schedule. Such a change
also requires that the H.R. information technology is adapted to the
new processes. The requirement to move to Title V rules, yet retain
some pay and benefits under ATSA means that the HR information
technology systems will need modifications. The 6-month transition
period in the proposed Act does not provide adequate time to conduct
the necessary planning, system changes, and training, and my 33 years
of experience in Federal human capital management convince me that
rushing to implement something so far-reaching almost certainly ensures
it will be done badly. Botching a transition such as this will put the
TSA employees and the agency mission at risk.
Rather than moving the TSA workforce to a pay system that was
designed when propeller-driven aircraft were the state-of-the-art in
air travel, I urge the subcommittee to consider moving beyond the
General Schedule. Consider the recommendations of good Government
organizations and the GAO. Set minimum pay standards for TSOs that
still provide flexibility to raise pay where needed. Codify a process
that combines longevity pay increases, but allows high-performing
employees to move up more quickly. Allow TSA, within a set of
prescribed guidelines and following recommendations from GAO, NAPA, or
other unbiased groups, to develop a pay system that fits the TSA
workforce, provides job security, ensures employee rights, pay
stability and upward mobility, and allows TSA to compete for talent it
needs. And make all of these changes with a program management approach
that provides a clear understanding of the costs, risks, and time it
will take to do it right. Making these officers GS-5s or GS-7s is not
likely to do that.
The proposed Act provides an opportunity to rethink a 72-year-old
pay system and provide employees with a modern, flexible, and
competitive pay system that retains merit as the foundation of the
civil service and makes the United States Government a model employer.
The potential benefits of that are tremendous.
Madam Chairwoman, Ranking Member Gimenez, and Members of the
subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to testify before you
today. I look forward to your questions.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. Thank you very much for your
testimony, and thank you to each of the witnesses for their
testimony.
Mr. Warrick, I just wanted to piggyback on something that
you mentioned--I think it was you--with regard to being able to
make security decisions in a quick and efficient manner. That
discussion is taking place in terms of language that may need
to be updated in 903 that will not interfere with the ability
to make those decisions.
So, thank you for raising it. I knew that I had seen
something to that effect, and so I am glad to report that we
actually do listen.
So, I would like to remind the subcommittee that we will
each have 5 minutes to question the panel, and I will now
recognize myself for questioning.
One of this committee's priorities is to obviously improve
morale at DHS, and as we know, DHS employees do consistently
rank themselves among the least satisfied Federal workers, as
Mr. Warrick has pointed out.
But as Mr. Warrick's testimony laid out, the Department is
not a monolith, and morale varies widely among different
components.
Mr. Warrick, this is for you. Last year, you authored a
report on the future of DHS and said, and I quote, ``turning
around DHS's morale problem starts with the 2 components that
drive the Department's lowest scores, TSA and CBP.''
You also wrote that by offering better pay, by giving TSA
employees the prospect for a meaningful career, and by
empowering TSA's employees, TSA can help lead and turn around
DHS's morale. Would you please expand on how TSA serves as the
tip of that sphere for a turnaround for the whole Department?
Mr. Warrick. I would be happy to do that, Chairwoman. TSA
is the largest component of DHS, and its problems are, for all
of the difficulty that H.R. 903 might give, TSA's problems are
almost the easiest to solve.
H.R. 903 is one of the most constructive forcing functions
to come out of the Congress in years in this area. I am fully
aware of the fact that you could simply raise TSA salaries by
$400 million through the appropriations process, but let's be
realistic. These problems, as your witnesses have told you,
have been known for some time, and yet this problem has not
been fixed.
One of the reasons that I welcome H.R. 903 is that it is a
forcing function. It will compel changes that will address
these problems. So, that is one reason I hope that it moves
forward very speedily and in a bipartisan way through the
Congress, because this really would show the employees of TSA,
and all of DHS, the commitment of both the Legislative and the
Executive branch to addressing DHS's morale problems.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. Thank you.
Mr. Warrick. These really do translate into security.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. Thank you, Mr. Warrick.
Dr. Kelley, from the perspective of AFGE's membership,
would you please describe sort-of quickly how the passage of
the Rights for the TSA Workforce Act would improve morale?
Mr. Kelley. Oh, yes. I have to think about how to unmute
myself. But we truly believe that it would improve morale,
because it enhances the ability to do away with discriminatory
practices, especially when it comes to women and people of
color. OK? It automatically improve morale.
Unlike, you know, Brother Neal's testimony, we believe
that, you know, the system has been tried and proven. It has
been substantially modified over the years to make it better.
So we just think that it would improve morale all around, you
know, from AFGE's perspective.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. Thank you very much.
With a little bit more than a minute, I would like to
direct a question to you, Ms. Chaney. During the hearing, you
mentioned that 55 percent of the TSA personnel are people of
color, making it one of the most diverse components in DHS,
probably the most----
Ms. Chaney. Yes.
Mrs. Watson Coleman [continuing]. Diverse component. In
your testimony, you explain how passing the Rights for TSA
Workforce Act is absolutely a matter of equity, and I couldn't
agree more.
What message does it send that one of the Government's most
diverse workplaces also happens to be among its lowest-paid?
Ms. Chaney. Well, I think it sends a message that we don't
care about this work force, that they are not respected, that
they are not valued, that their sacrifices are not valued. I
know that is not what we mean, because when we go through the
airport, I have seen Members of Congress do it, we say, thank
you for your service.
But the way that we thank people here, and in particular,
in America, is that we pay them properly. We give them fair
benefits. The Federal Government is a great place to work, but
if you don't have the benefits of the Federal Government, it is
not a great place to work. It is a cruel joke. So we want to
restore their rights.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. Tagging on to that for just 30
seconds, what does that say about the issues of equal
protection? Does it not point to unequal protection?
Ms. Chaney. I think that, you know, that is a legal
question. I think there are some arguments there. I am sure the
union is making that point.
What I think it says is that we have to make the workers at
TSA whole. We have to make sure that they are treated the same
as we expect all other Federal employees, as we expect all of
us to be treated. That is what it says to me, and that is about
the spirit of equal protection under the law.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. Thank you. Thank you very much.
So, I am going to recognize the other Members who have
questions that they may wish to ask, and in accordance with the
guidelines laid out by the Chairman and Ranking Member, in the
February 3 colloquy, I am going to recognize Members in order
of seniority, alternating between Majority and Minority
Members. But I am first going to recognize my esteemed Ranking
Member, Mr. Gimenez.
Mr. Gimenez. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman, I really
appreciate that.
Mr. Neal, do you think that the No. 1 issue concerning the
morale for TSO workers is actually pay, that they feel that
they are underpaid?
Mr. Neal. I don't. I think actually, probably the No. 1
issue is quality of leadership in the airports.
Mr. Gimenez. The quality of leadership in the airports,
what do you mean by that?
Mr. Neal. Quality of supervisors. When we look at employee
survey data at TSA, what we found is there were some airports
where the work force had good things to say about TSA and about
the work, and there were airports where people who were doing
the same work and incredibly unhappy.
Obviously, pay is a factor in that, but the quality of the
supervisors is a bigger factor. The fact that you have some
airports where the employees actually say good things about the
agency, says that a big chunk of it is the quality of those
leaders.
That was one of the recommendations we made, was to improve
the quality of supervisors in the airports.
Mr. Gimenez. Well, I guess that complies with my theory
that 95 percent of the problems are management in nature. Is
that correct?
Mr. Neal. I would say that is true. Usually when you find
problems in a workplace, look to management first.
Mr. Gimenez. Would moving the TSOs into Title 5, would that
solve the issue of management?
Mr. Neal. No, sir, it wouldn't.
Mr. Gimenez. All right. So management is actually something
that the administration can deal with by choosing the right
managers, by having the right policies in place, and does ATSA
give the administration the flexibility to put those procedures
in place?
Mr. Neal. It actually gives them more flexibility than
Title 5 would give them to deal with that kind of issue.
Mr. Gimenez. So, if we wanted to really take care of the
issue at TSA and other agencies, we would direct the
administration to put the proper procedures in place, the
flexibility that they have under ATSA.
I also believe, wholeheartedly, I think they are underpaid,
and we, as Congress, should be appropriating more money for TSO
workers so that we can bump them up in pay and bring them up to
the level that most Federal employees, you know, are getting.
Because I do think that that is part of the problem, but I also
think that 95 percent of the problem is management.
Mr. Neal. I would agree with that. I do think that the pay
issues are very significant issues, and those need to be dealt
with.
Part of the problem about putting them under the General
Schedule, though, is there is no agreement on what grade level
they would be. Some of TSA's classifiers said they would be GS-
5s. Some of them told us they would be GS-7s or maybe GS-8s.
So nobody knows right now exactly what grade level these
folks would be, and this bill could result in them getting
large bumps in pay, or it could result in them being put in
dead-end jobs where there is not more than a GS-5 or a GS-6 or
7.
Mr. Gimenez. Right.
Mr. Warrick, to you. Do you think that just simply by
moving the entire work force to Title 5 is going to solve the
problem of morale at TSA?
Mr. Warrick. If the clerk is able to put up figure 11 from
my slide set, I would like to show you something. Basically, it
is certainly true that the Title 5 approach has its flaws, but
the solution is to fix the flaws in Title 5, not to say that
TSA employees should somehow be denied the benefits of Title 5
simply because it has flaws.
Mr. Gimenez. Sir, I really don't have that much time, so I
really can't, you know, look at your slides. So I have some
other questions that I have.
Isn't it true, though, that, say, in TSA right now, if you
are a part-time employee, you can actually get full-time health
benefits, but if you slide over to Title 5, the Title 5
schedule, that if that happened, that part-time employees of
TSA would not be able to get full-time health benefits?
Mr. Warrick. Dr. Kelley can describe in detail that that
depends on the number of hours somebody works, and that a
supervisor, by playing games with the hours, can deny people
benefits. That doesn't strike me as a fair policy.
Mr. Gimenez. No, but I am saying under Title 5, that would
be true. But right now, under TSA, part-time workers can get
full-time benefits, right?
Mr. Warrick. It depends on how many hours they work and
other factors.
Mr. Gimenez. OK. Well, thank you. It looks like my time is
about to expire, so I yield back the balance of my time. Thank
you, Madam Chair.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. Thank you, Ranking Member.
I now recognize Representative Payne for 5 minutes.
Mr. Payne. Thank you, Madam Chair. I apologize. I am in
transit, so please bear with me. Let me just say to you, Madam
Chair, thank you for this timely hearing. Since your arrival in
Congress, you have been consistent on this issue around
justification, and a good working environment for these great,
great public employees and servants. So I just want to commend
you for that.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. Thank you, kind sir.
Mr. Payne. Ms. Chaney, I greatly appreciate the perspective
that you provided here today. Clearly, TSA is a very diverse
agency, and I am sorry I--when things go wrong, they all go
wrong, but, you know--however, diversity doesn't always
correlate with equity. Would you please explain the difference
between diversity and equity, and how providing TSA work force
full collective bargaining rights would create a more equitable
agency?
Ms. Chaney. Absolutely. Thank you, Congressman, for the
question. I mean, just look at the agency as it currently is.
It is diverse, and yet, it is not equitable. Whenever you find
a situation where, you know, things look diverse on their face,
and yet, it looks like people are getting equal treatment, and
yet, in reality, if all of the people working at TSA, if they
are predominantly people of color, yet they are not being
treated the same as other people in the Federal work force,
including other people at DHS, that is not equitable.
So, we have to go and fix that in order to have equity at
TSA, and equity for, really as I said in my testimony, the work
force that is driving diversity and inclusion at the Department
of Homeland Security. So it is absolutely important that we
address this.
Mr. Payne. Thank you. With respect to, you know, we have
seen how the pandemic has disproportionately impacted
marginalized groups around the country in a tragic way.
Considering these impacts and that the majority of TSA's work
force is made up of racial and ethnic minorities, would you
conclude that they are also experiencing many of the same
challenges?
Ms. Chaney. Absolutely. What we know is that they are more
than likely experiencing a greater number of COVID-related
deaths and illness in their families, greater number of
economic trouble.
We already know from some of the testimony before that
during the pandemic, many of them were living paycheck to
paycheck, were struggling. We know that the same thing that is
happening to them is happening to people of color elsewhere.
But the difference is, they work for the Federal
Government, and, so, we expect that they would have greater
benefits. I am sure when they came to work there, they expected
to have greater benefits. So it must be a cruel joke to be
representing the United States of America, and being on the
front lines and not being paid like it. We have got to fix it.
Mr. Payne. Well, thank you.
Madam Chair, I have introduced legislation, the Hazardous
Duty Pay for Front-line Federal Workers that would ensure that
TSA workers and other servants, who have continued to put their
lives at risk during this pandemic, are properly recognized for
the danger that they have put themselves in as they continue to
keep the traveling public safe. I invite all my colleagues to
join me as a cosponsor of this bill. With that, I yield back.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. Thank you, Mr. Payne.
The Chairman now recognizes Representative Ralph Norman for
5 minutes.
Mr. Norman. Thank you, Chairman, and thank each one of the
participants today.
Mr. Neal, on your testimony, what was the Congress' intent
when it established the TSA after 9/11 in terms of its
personnel system?
Mr. Neal. It was intended to be a very flexible system that
could be adapted as the situation changed within the TSA
mission.
Mr. Norman. So what is so--I guess, what is so important
for TSA to have a personnel system that is not like the, I
guess, the antiquated Title 5 systems?
Mr. Neal. The problem with Title 5 isn't the bulk of Title
5. It is the General Schedule pay system part of it, and that
is the system is inflexible. It doesn't provide the ability for
people to move up quickly; it doesn't provide the ability to
adapt the pay to the labor market. So--and it was designed when
literally more than half of the Federal employees were GS-5 and
below, clerks.
So it was a system designed for a work force full of clerks
which we don't have now. It is very inflexible when it comes to
assigning grade levels at jobs. Right now, it is possible that
if TSOs were put under Title 5, that these officers could come
out as GS-5s or 6s, which is the equivalent of a clerk or a
secretary.
So there is nothing in the bill that would guarantee a
reasonable grade level for the employees. Right now, the
classification would be akin to something like a security guard
classification standard that OPM has written, and those jobs
tend to be just 5s and 6s. So there is no guarantee this will
actually help pay for TSOs.
Mr. Norman. OK. You know, we have heard about low morale.
What test was used to gauge the morale? Was it an internal
questionnaire that went to an outside source, or what was used?
Mr. Neal. They generally are using the Government-wide
Federal Viewpoint Survey. That goes out to every Federal
employee every year, and it is accurate that TSA's morale
numbers, based on Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey, are quite
low.
It is also accurate that CBP, Customs and Border
Protection's morale figures, are quite low, and they pay their
employees GS-12 pay. So, they are much higher graded, much
higher paid than the TSOs are likely to be, and, yet, they
still have significant morale issues that haven't been dealt
with by the pay that they have gotten.
Mr. Norman. Does the test results point to management,
individual management, at each of the airports that you
mentioned?
Mr. Neal. It does tend to show that there are problems with
quality of leadership. A significant number of the questions
relate to issues that are entirely under the control of
managers, and those, they don't score well at all.
Mr. Norman. So that is really the administration's--if it
really wants to get to the root of the problem and correct it,
it is up to the administration to issue guidelines addressing
the problems that the morale report shows. Would that make
sense?
Mr. Neal. I would say that the current and the previous 3
administrations should have been doing more to deal with
supervisory issues.
Mr. Norman. And put guidelines in place?
Mr. Neal. Yes, sir.
Mr. Norman. OK.
Mr. Warrick, you state that H.R. 903 can solve the issues
of the low morale with the TSA, but TSA could fix--can it not
fix its own hiring, retention, and pay issues under the ATSA?
Mr. Warrick. It certainly would be possible to be able to
do that. However, the fact that it hasn't been done for so many
years would lead you to believe that that is just not a
workable solution. I think if you appropriated a lot more
money, or if you graded the work done at a level to generate
enough retention in the TSA work force, you could solve this
problem through several ways. But of all the methods available,
H.R. 903 is the best one on the horizon right now.
Mr. Norman. Would you agree that if the morale studies show
that the managers bear a lot of responsibility, should that not
be top priority?
Mr. Warrick. Actually, if you look at figure 11 in my
written testimony, TSA ranks its supervisors--the employees
rank their supervisors about on a par with other DHS
supervisors. So, I don't think the supervisors are the same
level of problem that pay, promotions, and empowerment are.
I certainly would hold supervisors to a high standard, and
there are improvements that definitely should be made in that
area. That is absolutely true.
Mr. Norman. OK. Back to you, Mr. Neal, the Blue Ribbon
Panel report shows that approximately it took 270 days to hire
a TSA screener. Why so long?
Mrs. Watson Coleman. The gentleman's time is up, but you
can answer the question quickly.
Mr. Neal. It is primarily the security clearance process.
It is a complicated and lengthy process, and that causes it to
be drug out for a long time.
Mr. Norman. Thank you.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. Thank you very much.
I now recognize Representative Dina Titus.
Ms. Titus. Thank you very much, Madam Chairman, and thank
you for your indulgence of letting me come back on. I was right
in the middle of another question.
I would like to ask Dr. Kelley if he would talk some more
about the impact of unions. Las Vegas is a strong union town.
We know when unions can negotiate for their workers, they are
able to come to a more equitable situation. Unions help people
get in the middle class and stay in the middle class. Here is
TSA with the inability to unionize like other Government
agencies are able to do.
Would you just address some of the problems that you see
that have occurred because of that lack of a presence at the
table to talk about working conditions, talk about COVID, talk
about equitable salary, being safe, being fair, Dr. Kelley?
Mr. Kelley. There are great advantages in being a part of
the union. Now, I have to say that, you know, all of TSA is not
absent a union, because the very supervisors that rate and rank
these employees, the TSOs, are already unionized. OK. They
understand the urgency. They understand the importance. At the
same time, these employees that are TSOs don't have that same
flexibility.
Now, when it comes to unions' ability to negotiate, right,
I think it makes for a good playing field to have those kind of
collaborations between the management team and the work force,
right? It gives the manager an opportunity to hear from the
work force to make a determination as to, you know, at least
give management an opportunity to hear the work force, you
know, and what they value more than anything.
When it came to the COVID, we all know that we had over, as
of yesterday, 7,800 TSOs that was affected by the COVID. We had
about 16 that died from COVID. Can we replace that? No. Had we
had a union presence that was really talking about, you know,
how we can make a safer workplace, how we can prevent deaths
and illnesses, you know, it was right there and it was open,
clear, and honest debate, I don't think we would have seen that
many deaths. I don't think we would have seen that many being
contracted with the virus.
So it has such benefit. You talking about morale, right? We
can't say that the GS system is a perfect system. I don't think
anyone that offers testimony today would say that; but the
people do trust it, OK? TSOs trust the system. They want the
system. They asked for the system. Pay is their No. 1 issue. I
am listening to them every single day, and so many of them
barely make ends meet because of that.
Now, again, the GS system is not perfect, but it is
certainly better than these inflexible opportunities that are
being presented, you know. The employees are asking for the GS
system. If you want morale, you know, to be beefed up, you
know, they are saying give us better pay, so that we can
provide, you know, stability in our homes, and in our
communities, and those types of things.
So I hope I answered your question.
Ms. Titus. You did. You absolutely did, Dr. Kelley.
That also leads to my next question to Mr. Neal and his
Blue Ribbon Panel. I am just curious as to why there was no
labor representative from TSA sitting on that panel to help
come up with the recommendations for redoing the personnel
system?
Mrs. Watson Coleman. You are muted, Mr. Neal. You have to
unmute.
Mr. Neal. Sorry. Sorry about that.
We were asked to put together a list of people from outside
the Government who were senior people who would understand the
issues at TSA, and there was no request to include a union
member in the panel, so we did not.
Ms. Titus. So you were asked and there was no request. Who
asked you to do that then, suggested not to include labor?
Mr. Neal. It was a contract, and so there was a
solicitation that said here is what we want to have in a panel,
the type of people. They didn't exclude folks who were union
officials. They didn't include them. We had a small panel, so--
--
Ms. Titus. Would it have been an overall better assessment,
if you had some union people at the table, since this is a
personnel system that is going to be affecting their daily
lives, and they could have had very valuable input to the
panel?
Mr. Neal. I think they would have told us a lot of what we
heard from the employees, which was, they didn't like their pay
system. They didn't like how they were treated by supervisors.
The employees were--one of the great things about TSA's work
force is they are vocal, and they are not the least bit bashful
about telling you about what they think and what they want
don't like. They were very clear about what they didn't like,
and our report highlighted that, and highlighted some of the
things that the agency needed to do to address those issues.
Ms. Titus. Well, thank you.
Madam Chairwoman, I would yield back. But I just think it
is almost ridiculous to have a Blue Ribbon Panel to look at the
personnel system when you don't have any representation from
labor when the lack of the labor union to represent your
interests is one of the biggest problems.
Thank you. I yield back.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. Thank you, Representative Titus.
A couple of things I heard that I would just like to speak
to very, very quickly.
No. 1 is that conceptually, it might have been a great idea
for TSA to have the kind of flexibility that we felt we needed
at that time, a very heightened time of concern, unprecedented
assault upon us, et cetera. So the flexibility has existed to
make life better, and fairer, and more predictable, but it
hasn't happened. Every administration that came about since
that legislation was enacted, there is responsibility for that.
The one thing Title V does is ensures predictability and
treatment equal to what other Federal employees get. There is a
provision, because I know my Ranking Member, the Ranking
Member, was very concerned about pay grade and pay level. But I
want you to know that there is a protection in the bill that
ensures that no employee would be paid less under Title V. So,
this may not be a perfect--but I think that that these
employees are crying and screaming and yelling and hollering
and stomping for equality and predictability, and the
opportunity to see where their careers could possibly lead
them.
I now would like to recognize--thank you Congresswoman, for
your patience, here--Congresswoman Elaine Luria.
Mrs. Luria. Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you for
holding this hearing today to talk about TSA as they are, you
know, passing the 20-year milestone.
I visited with TSA representatives here at our local
airport, at Norfolk International Airport, as they worked
through the Government shutdown when I first came into office
and as they, you know, endured a year of difficult working
conditions through the pandemic. One thing I have heard every
time that I visited with them is that they are very interested
in transitioning to be under Title V.
I will note that our TSA work force at the Norfolk
International Airport has really maintained safety of
passengers. They have apprehended 6 firearms this year alone in
carry-on luggage through our airport, even with the reduced
passenger volume. So they really are removing something that is
potentially a threat to passengers in the air.
One of the things that has been argued by people who are
detractors from switching to being under Title V say that TSA
was provided unique authorities to give it the ability to issue
security directives and emergency amendments to protect the
traveling public without being subjected to delays or
negotiations, even with its own employees.
Dr. Kelley, could you speak to that? Are those valid
concerns? How could they be mitigated if employees were placed
under Title V?
Mr. Kelley. You mean as far as TSA being able to take an
action in a timely manner?
Mrs. Luria. Yes. You know, would it change anything about
how they could react in a timely manner? You know, like the
Chairwoman said, some of the things were put in place in the
very early days of the Department of Homeland Security, post-9/
11, establishing TSA because it was thought there needed to be
some rapid flexibility. But would any of that go away under
Title V, or would they still be able to serve in the same way?
Mr. Kelley. OK. Thank you, Congresswoman Luria, for that
question, because there is a misrepresentation of that. It does
not go away. TSA still has the flexibility to act in a timely
manner to address any issue that it needs to address, you know.
While I have just a moment, can I just say this? That, you
know, the bill, as it relates to pay, you know, can specify,
right, the classification of the job, and that is the thing
that we also need to understand, you know. So I just wanted to
add that while I had an opportunity, if that is OK.
Mrs. Luria. Well, no. Thank you, Dr. Kelley.
You know, thinking about this, there is other entities
within DHS, CBP, for example, that has a security mission that
operates under Title V. Would you agree that, similarly, you
know, if CBP can operate under that, that it would show that
there is really no reason that TSA couldn't operate as well
under that system?
Mr. Kelley. I totally agree with you on that. That has been
tried and proven, once again. You know, over and over, we see
that TSA can operate effectively and efficiently under Title V
because, you know, so many other entities have already proven
that it can occur.
Mrs. Luria. Great.
Dr. Kelley, one last question because, you know, I am just
trying to dispel some of the things that, you know, maybe
critics of this legislation have put forward. But, you know,
some people might argue that under current law, you know, TSA
can exercise a one-step removal for serious offenses. But would
switching to Title V change anything about being able to hold
employees accountable, you know, if there was some sort of
egregious or misconduct action?
Mr. Kelley. Again, Title V does not eliminate TSA's ability
to act in a timely manner for even up to removal on egregious
actions, you know, and Title V does not eliminate that. Matter
of fact, it might enhance that in many ways.
Mrs. Luria. Well, thank you.
You know, I just wanted to bring up some of these points
because, you know, in talking about this, these are some of the
arguments that people have made against this, and I strongly
support this legislation. I co-sponsored it last Congress and
look forward to having an opportunity to move it forward this
Congress, and just wanted to make sure we could dispel kind-of
any of those myths about what a shift to this Title V system
for TSA employees would entail.
So, thank you again for testifying today, and to all of our
witnesses for being here.
I yield back.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. Thank you, Congresswoman.
I think that we all recognize that this is a very important
piece of legislation. It is still in the process. If, as a
result of our holding these various hearings, things come up
that we recognize would improve, protect, or solidify, we ought
to be willing to listen to those things and to incorporate
those considerations as we move forward.
We have no more Members who have questions. So if there is
no desire to enter a second round of questioning?
Alrighty then.
I want to thank the witnesses. You all have been very, very
helpful. I appreciate your commitment to the work that you do
and the perspective that you shared with us today. The Members
of the subcommittee may have additional questions for you, and
we would ask that you would respond expeditiously in writing to
those questions.
So without--excuse me. I am having a technical----
I have one more thing to say regarding 903. I think that,
by and large, there is bipartisan support for what we are
intending to accomplish on behalf of these front-line employees
who really had it on the line during the pandemic and had it on
the line after January 6 and got it on the line right now. They
are confronted with all kinds of possible dangerous situations;
but they show up, and their purpose is to keep us safe, and
they keep us moving and they keep us safe.
So, I am going to ask that my Republican counterparts on
this subcommittee consider signing on to the legislation. You
want to help us make it better, you know, please offer your
advice. But we agree that these employees are entitled to
greater protections, greater dignity and respect for the work
that they do.
As I said, some other Members of the subcommittee might
have questions for the witnesses, and they will probably send
them to you, and we ask that you would respond expeditiously in
writing to us.
Now, without objection, the committee record will remain
open for the 10 days.
Hearing no more business, God bless you. Thank you for
being with us today and sharing your information.
The committee is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 3:18 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]
[all]