Restaurant refuses to serve TSA agents

Discussion in 'General Discussion | Travel' started by Bluto, Feb 23, 2011.  |  Print Topic

  1. Bluto
    Original Member

    Bluto Silver Member

    Messages:
    187
    Likes Received:
    242
    Status Points:
    360
    This article is from yesterday so I apologize if it has been posted elsewhere already. Apparently a restaurant near SEA has refused to serve TSA "until TSA agents start treating us with the respect and dignity that we deserve." The article says that police have actually helped escort TSA out of the restaurant.

    Do you support the restaurant or do you think TSA agents are being unfairly punished?
     
    kaka likes this.
  2. Bob Smolinsky
    Original Member

    Bob Smolinsky Gold Member

    Messages:
    3,346
    Likes Received:
    14,569
    Status Points:
    10,575
    That's just sad....
     
    vbroucek likes this.
  3. AmericanGirl
    Original Member

    AmericanGirl Silver Member

    Messages:
    860
    Likes Received:
    1,862
    Status Points:
    910
    While it's obvious I am not a TSA fan, I do think it is wrong to refuse service. The real blame lies with DHS, lack of training, lack of continuity, lack of everything.
     
  4. PTravel
    Original Member

    PTravel Silver Member

    Messages:
    269
    Likes Received:
    831
    Status Points:
    650
    I support the restaurant owner. TSA is an abomination. It would be bad enough if all it did was provide the illusion of security. It is, however, steadily whittling away at rights protected by the Fourth Amendment, and I see it as a significant danger. If someone, like this restaurant owner, wants to protest TSA's actions, it his right, under the First Amendment, to do so. Most TSOs are not abusive, rude, petty martinets. Many, however, are, and I am privy to at least one horror story resulting in an arrest and subsequent acquittal, now the subject of civil litigation, that was caused by obnoxious, rude and overbearing SEA TSOs. If I find myself in SEA, I'll make a point of seeking out this restaurant, patronizing it, and telling the owner that I support his actions.
     
    kaka and bluesky like this.
  5. taiwaned
    Original Member

    taiwaned Silver Member

    Messages:
    730
    Likes Received:
    1,678
    Status Points:
    995
    Restaurants have the right to refuse service. The "no shirt, no shoes, no TSA, no service" just happens to be their business service standard. Nothing wrong with that.
     
    kaka and bluesky like this.
  6. TrueBlueFlyer
    Original Member

    TrueBlueFlyer Silver Member

    Messages:
    493
    Likes Received:
    435
    Status Points:
    550
    Isn't it discrimination?
     
    vbroucek likes this.
  7. PTravel
    Original Member

    PTravel Silver Member

    Messages:
    269
    Likes Received:
    831
    Status Points:
    650
    Sure, but discrimination per se is not illegal. Discrimination based on membership in a protected class is illegal. "Works for TSA" is not a protected class.
     
    kaka and bluesky like this.
  8. intueri
    Original Member

    intueri Silver Member

    Messages:
    50
    Likes Received:
    69
    Status Points:
    200
    Well, until someone makes the legal argument that they really are smurfs...
     
  9. tuapekastar
    Original Member

    tuapekastar Silver Member

    Messages:
    36
    Likes Received:
    53
    Status Points:
    180
    A particularly silly move by the restaurant owner, cutting off his nose to spite his face. Within his rights? Probably. Decent and civil behaviour? Definitely not.

    I do not encounter the TSA often at all (in fact my contact with them has been limited to a number of flights last year), and I had no issues with their behaviour at all. But even if their behaviour had have been dreadful, still no excuse for the restaurateur's attitude.

    The people who work for the Department of Homeland Security (or whatever it is called - and I'm assuming the TSA does work for them) should not have to wear this sort of petty behaviour by the restaurateur. They are just employees like most of us, going about their job. I've no doubt there are @rseholes who work for the TSA, as there are for most organisations, but do not tar them all with the same brush.
     
    legalalien and jswong like this.
  10. bluesky
    Original Member

    bluesky Gold Member

    Messages:
    2,482
    Likes Received:
    10,214
    Status Points:
    10,495
    Is there any protected class that employment by the TSA might conceivably fall into? Is there an imaginative argument to be made?
     
  11. CubsGirl
    Original Member

    CubsGirl Silver Member

    Messages:
    44
    Likes Received:
    50
    Status Points:
    240
    I like Seatle more and more all the time!
     
    kaka likes this.
  12. CubsGirl
    Original Member

    CubsGirl Silver Member

    Messages:
    44
    Likes Received:
    50
    Status Points:
    240
    Protected classes are fairly limited: race, national origin, gender, age over 40, disability status, etc.--with some local variations for sexual orientation and other statuses. All the early discussions of classifications were based on classifications described as "immutable characteristics", though that's often the battleground.

    Employment by a disliked entity doesn't really fall into any of those categories, though one could make the argument that the very choice to work for a particular entity is evidence of diminished mental capacity. . .
     
    bluesky and kaka like this.
  13. Fredd
    Original Member

    Fredd Gold Member

    Messages:
    1,167
    Likes Received:
    3,181
    Status Points:
    1,970
  14. Bob Smolinsky
    Original Member

    Bob Smolinsky Gold Member

    Messages:
    3,346
    Likes Received:
    14,569
    Status Points:
    10,575
    I'm a protected class? cool.
     
    bluesky likes this.
  15. PTravel
    Original Member

    PTravel Silver Member

    Messages:
    269
    Likes Received:
    831
    Status Points:
    650
    One clarification: Age over 40 is a protected class only within the context of employment.
     
    bluesky likes this.
  16. Fredd
    Original Member

    Fredd Gold Member

    Messages:
    1,167
    Likes Received:
    3,181
    Status Points:
    1,970
    Interesting for not-gainfully-employed geezers like me. Given the authenticity challenge I linked to above, in this instance it may be a moo point, as the cow lawyers say. [​IMG]
     
    bluesky likes this.
  17. legalalien
    Original Member

    legalalien Gold Member

    Messages:
    4,536
    Likes Received:
    9,301
    Status Points:
    7,770
    It seems more people than just TSA don't believe it exists.

    As much as I dislike TSA policies, I can't agree with the restaurant owner if one exists. I think it is wrong to refuse service to TSOs, however legal it may be. As others have mentioned, most of them aren't rude or perverts who enjoy running their hands up and down your whatever, but just happened to have a job that requires them to enforce unpopular rules.

    I suppose a restaurant owner who refused service to high-level DHS execs/policy makers would have been far more commendable.
     
    bluesky likes this.
  18. IMGone
    Original Member

    IMGone Silver Member

    Messages:
    560
    Likes Received:
    327
    Status Points:
    575
    Anyone else surprised that Chris Elliott (blogger) gave out the contact information to other news media without permission, and then printed the out of office email response along with what may or may not be the person's name also without permission. Forgetting if the emailer is real or not, that is just so unprofessional, IMO.
     
    bluesky likes this.

Share This Page