Sec. 2. Findings; sense of Congress
669 words·~3 min read·
/bill/114/s/3525/is/section-2A research copy — for the controlling text, always check the official state or federal source. Not legal advice.
Congress finds the following: On September 11, 2001, 19 terrorists, who underwent airport security screening prior to boarding domestic flights, were able to commandeer 4 airplanes and use those airplanes to perpetrate the most deadly terrorist attack ever to be executed on United States soil. In the aftermath of those attacks, Congress passed the Aviation and Transportation Security Act ( Public Law 107–71 ), which was signed into law by President George W. Bush on November 19, 2001— to enhance the level of security screening throughout our aviation system; and to transfer responsibility for such screening from the private sector to the newly established Transportation Security Administration (referred to in this section as TSA ).
By establishing TSA, Congress and the American public recognized that the highest level of screener performance was directly linked to employment and training standards, pay and benefits, and the creation of an experienced, committed screening workforce. Section 111(d) of the Aviation and Transportation Security Act ( 49 U.S.C. 44935 note) authorizes the Under Secretary of Transportation for Security to 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 .
The functions of the TSA were transferred to the Department of Homeland Security by section 403 of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 ( 6 U.S.C. 203 ). TSA has interpreted the authorization set forth in paragraph
(4)as applying to the majority of the Transportation Security Officer workforce performing screening functions, while all other Transportation Security Administration employees, including managers, are subject to title 5, United States Code, as incorporated in title 49 of such Code. In November 2006, the International Labor Organization ruled that the Bush Administration violated international labor law when it prohibited Transportation Security Officers from engaging in collective bargaining. After the Federal Labor Relations Board approved a petition for the election of an exclusive representative, on February 4, 2011, TSA Administrator John Pistole issued a binding determination stating that it is critical that every TSA employee feels that he or she has a voice and feels safe raising issues and concerns of all kinds. This is important not just for morale; engagement of every employee is critically important for security. . This determination was superseded by a second determination issued on December 29, 2014, which changed the previous guideline for collective bargaining and resulting in limitations in the subjects that can be bargained, issues in dispute that may be raised to an independent, third-party neutral decisionmaker (such as an arbitrator or the Merit Systems Protection Board), and barriers to union representation of the Transportation Security Officer workforce. The 2011 and 2014 determinations both cited TSA’s authority under section 111(d) of the Aviation and Transportation Security Act ( 49 U.S.C. 44935 note) to create a personnel system that denies the Transportation Security Officer workforce the rights under title 5, United States Code, that are provided to most other Federal workers, including— the right to appeal adverse personnel decisions to the Merit Systems Protection Board; fair pay under the General Services wage system, 2011; fair pay and raises under the General Services wage system, including overtime guidelines, access to earned leave; the application of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 ( 29 U.S.C. 201 et seq. ); fair performance appraisals under chapter 73 of title 5, United States Code; and direct protections against employment discrimination set forth in title 7, United States Code. It is the sense of Congress that— the personnel system utilized by the Transportation Security Administration pursuant to section 111(d) of the Aviation and Transportation Security Act ( 49 U.S.C. 44935 note) provides insufficient workplace protections for the Transportation Security Officer workforce, who are the frontline personnel who secure our Nation’s aviation system; and such personnel should be entitled to the protections under title 5, United States Code.
Connectionstraces to 3
Traces to 3 documents
1 reference not yet in our index
- Pub. L. 107-71
Citation graph
cites case law
Cites 4Cited by 0 across 0 sources