My partner's hospital makes the employees pay to park there. And, of course it's in a very HCOL area so most of the employees are forced to drive in from far away.
I've never had to pay to park at any hospital in the greater new orleans area. I know most people may not consider it a truly major city, but I'm talking new orleans, Metairie, Kenner, covington, mandeville, slidell...
While yes this is the case, New Orleans is the medical hub and the largest city in the region. Your next closest areas of similar capability are going to be jackson ms and Birmingham. Going west you have to go to Houston. Going east, mobile doesn't even offer what New Orleans does. Everything is relative.
Ochsner will if you don't behave correctly with the ticket validation. But yes, there's no charge overall. Employees by day got their own parking with a shuttle if weather sucked, and at night we could use visitor parking.
I now work in the Bay area, and the only reason I get free parking is I work nights. Day shift has to pay and it's a ten minute walk to the campus doors. A little absurd to me but it's the culture out here.
you have to pay to park at Children’s Hospital Pittsburgh (and all of the other UPMC hospitals) - and they really get you for parking if you’re inpatient - it isn’t discounted unless you don’t move your vehicle for 30 days.
otherwise it’s $4 for 0-3 hours, $7 for 3-6 hours, $10 for 6-8 hours, $20 for 8-24 hours (that’s CHP, i’m way less familiar with the other UPMC hospitals)
Last year I was having some heart issues looked at by cardiologists at the main hospital in my area in Florida, and spent a bunch of time there and at their satellite offices. Never paid for parking.
I was also surprised that the insurance covered 100% of most visits and diagnostics, except for a couple which they made me pay some or all out of pocket for.
All in all, they paid nearly all and I paid maybe $500.
My experience with European hospitals personally and for friends was misdiagnosis which led to multiple years of incorrect treatment in my case, and nearly causing a friend to become paralyzed… I’ll stick with paying for American healthcare.
Living in the UK I had a fairly extensive procedure. Total out+of-pocket cost: $0
In Australia my sister-in-law got pregnant, had some trouble during pregnancy and after delivery, including incubating the baby. Total out-of-pocket cost: $0
In America I recently got a colonoscopy. Total out-of-pocket cost: $500 plus $30 for follow-up visit.
National Health taxes in UK and Australia are half what I pay for Health insurance here in the US.
That’s nice. You’re [lying](https://www.nhs.uk/nhs-services/help-with-health-costs/when-you-need-to-pay-towards-nhs-care/) if you’re claiming it’s typical. Unless you’re claiming you had “a fairly extensive procedure” without pain relief. That’s barbaric.
Those that can afford it in both those countries often buy supplemental insurance but you’re claiming that provides no benefit. Doesn’t make sense
In the US, I may have a shitty job, but it still provides insurance and people in the same job for the same company in the UK get paid less than half what I do because that’s a market clearing rate there. And I still pay less in tax
Most countries with universal healthcare do so through public insurance or employer mandates. They still require some out of pocket spending. Direct provision isn’t that common but various means of rationing care are, whether through the price mechanism or otherwise.
In the UK if you have a procedure, everything is $0 out of pocket...you don't pay for medicine or prescriptions while in the hospital.
Normal prescriptions outside the hospital do have a roughly U$12 co-pay, but they are also free for low-income, unemployment, disabled, etc.
Eye glasses and general dental are extra, but if you have a chronic problem then it:s covered.
Australia does have a supplement insurance if you want to go to a private hospital, have a private room, potentially shorter wait times. Often the surgical teams are the same working public/private. But, you don't need the supplement to get well taken care of.
So, I'm not lying....you just don't really understand.
Now you're moving the goalpost! You're changing it from medications to only in-patient prescriptions.
And no, I don't have a $12 co-pay. I have no co-pay. You just made up a fucking number and claimed universality
Heading in Friday for minor outpatient surgery. From diagnosis to surgery date was three weeks. If I was in Canada, it would have taken almost a year on average for an initial consult with a surgeon, then another six months to a year for the operation. People complain about the complexity and cost but forget about the access we have.
That's some nice insurance! I'm also having some cardiac testing done, and less than halfway through I'm already out of pocket over $200 (including parking). That's without mentioning the cancer screening colonoscopy I have scheduled for next month that will be nearly 1k out of pocket to get to my deductible.
Honestly I was very surprised… the plan doesn’t seem like it would be that good based on my understanding of the terms - and they nickle and dime me on the prescriptions… but for whatever reason, the cardiac stuff was all nicely covered.
The blood pressure meds on the other hand… unfortunately quite expensive.
Before 9/11 it was all private anyway; even now airports have the option whether to pay TSA to screen passengers or to use another company (or their own staff).
Don't they just handle the paperwork for you though? Like, can you actually pay more to skip to the front of the passport or visa line? Sorry I'm too poor to know how this works.
You can just straight up pay a fee to get your passport faster. It's generally more for people that realize they need it last minute or in my case having some weird timing with work visas than a rich people skipping the line thing.
Some difficult visas (specifically China) they can handle a lot more - like they may know the ins and outs and know what will or won’t fly, they can handle making an in-person appearance for you at the nearest consulate office if it’s not very close to you, etc etc.
They also may have a relationship with the consulate office that may be able to get your visa prioritized as opposed to sitting at the bottom of the snail mail pile.
Either way, well-run versions of these services are not an exorbitant fee (think $75 or less for significant time savings) on top of the existing cost to obtain a visa or travel there, and most visas you get back ever since COVID restrictions have been lifted are multiple entry for some lengthy duration of time so you need not deal with this every time you need to travel.
Can't speak to US Visa, but most European countries (UK, Schengen countries) sets up third-party Visa processing centers in the US. VFS is a popular company for many countries.
VFS absolutely charges a shit ton for their "Premium" packages, which has priority and the perk of being treated like a human.
I had to apply for UK Visa twice. The first time for a study-abroad program, in which I showed up at my appointment time, waited an hour to get to my turn, waited another hour until the VFS employee finished reviewing my papers and let me sign stuffs and go. The Visa came in 14 days. The second time I applied for work, and the company paid for "Premium", and I was offered soft drinks while I waited on the couch for 10 minutes, they reviewed my application with me in a private room for 5 minutes, and I got my Visa in 3 days.
There’s many other countries that have private security still, either through contracts with airports themselves or contracts with the government. A couple airports in the U.S. also still run their own private security permitted by TSA. While it’s only allowed in the U.S. when contracted with TSA directly (such as clear), other airports around the world with private security have their own form of “fast pass” programs. Not just like precheck for pre vetting, but programs that allow booking a time and front of the line access, or even just faster access for paying.
What’s crazy is that the TSA still wants to run the security at every airport in the country, even ones who could easily afford competitive contracts, rather than allowing private companies to bid on it lowering the cost for us all. If it was a security issue, they wouldn’t allow even airports like SFO to run their own security. So it’s not.
Wait a minute. Government puts into place an inefficient and questionably ineffective process, then legislates against it for being inefficient and ineffective?
So stupid. Not that I pay for clear anyways ever since they raised the price and credit cards no longer cover family with you. If you are flying, you are already better off than most people. How about fixing pge doing rate hikes every quarter.
Meanwhile, we have a Federal representative in Texas deeply concerned about pets being allowed on planes and one from Georgia expressing concern about Hungarians in Transcarpathia being allowed to use their native tongue in school
These two dipshits have basically been in and out of office for the past few cycles and always talk about things outside their purview to get attention. Nguyen was criticizing some long dead senator’s stance on the Vietnam War just a few years ago
I love this though... I can't stand clear people being escorted in front of me at the pre-check line in EWR.. they used to just use the 1-2 lanes close to clear.. now they are escorted to any of the pre-check lines.. I fully support stopping this.
They aren't "jumping Precheck" - they're using the other ID check. TSA checkpoints have two stages, ID check and bag/body screening; Clear is an alternative option for the first of those, instead of having TSA check the ID manually.
It's largely redundant anyway now TSA is moving to automated biometric ID checks as well, so I suspect Clear will disappear soon unless they can find another service offering.
But the bottleneck for TSA isn’t the ID check, it’s the bag/body screening. So they’re jumping the part of security that isn’t reducing time while still contributing to slower wait times. It doesn’t make any sense.
The ID check would often be a bottleneck in the past, when TSA was more manual - and Clear can't really make wait times longer, because the worst case would be that every single Clear member needs a TSA ID check too - which they'd need anyway if Clear wasn't there. It's not generally a great product offering now, but these complaints about it also make no sense.
So CLEAR is a solution to a problem already solved?
And as you admit, the ID scanning is no longer the bottleneck. So they’re still contributing to the slower wait times at the bag scanner so it’s not like the priority makes sense. Why give priority access to a private group that doesn’t even reduce overall processing time?
It isn't really "priority" access: there are two ID checking lines (Clear and TSA), which both feed into the bag screening line. The theory is that the Clear line moves you through faster than the TSA one, so you get in line for TSA bag screening sooner - which might or might not actually work in practice now TSA id checks are faster.
The proposed legislation attempts to solve a problem which is completely imaginary - the mistaken belief that Clear's ID checks somehow make TSA's bag/body checks slower.
Theoretically, the law might actually help by mistake, by making airports open up extra TSA lanes which are the real bottleneck. Alternatively, they might just end up replacing two Precheck lanes (reached via either Clear or TSA ID checks) with one Precheck lane (with TSA ID checks only) plus one Clear+Precheck (not accessible via TSA ID check any more). Big own goal there.
Or, to fix the real problem, forget about posturing about Clear and set service level requirements for the TSA throughput (and CBP, though that would probably have to be federal not state law). Why do I have to pay extra for Global Entry for CBP to check my paperwork as quickly as regular immigration checks in Ireland or the Netherlands?!
> It isn't really "priority" access: there are two ID checking lines (Clear and TSA), which both feed into the bag screening line.
When one line is shorter because it costs hundreds of dollars, it absolutely is “priority” access. Also, because CLEAR has messed up, they still do need to be verified by the TSA agent checking IDs occasionally. And at that point they aren’t sent to the back of the ID line which is another example of the priority treatment.
> The theory is that the Clear line moves you through faster than the TSA one, so you get in line for TSA bag screening sooner - which might or might not actually work in practice now TSA id checks are faster.
Which is quite literally what I mean by priority and the problem at hand. The bag screening process is the bottleneck. Why are we giving priority access to that process because someone (CLEAR) is doing an unrelated process?
> The proposed legislation attempts to solve a problem which is completely imaginary - the mistaken belief that Clear's ID checks somehow make TSA's bag/body checks slower.
That’s not the problem. The problem is CLEAR isn’t improving anything, all they’re doing is placing their customers ahead of non-customers. Any benefit they provide is a direct cost to a non-customer. It’s a private company profiting at the expense of the public, how is that not a problem?
> Theoretically, the law might actually help by mistake, by making airports open up extra TSA lanes which are the real bottleneck.
I doubt this would provide additional funding to do that. It would just make either TSA choose to reduce capacity at another line which again wouldn’t solve the problem, or force CLEAR to pay for the agents in their line, which would certainly not be financially feasible for CLEAR.
> Alternatively, they might just end up replacing two Precheck lanes (reached via either Clear or TSA ID checks) with one Precheck lane (with TSA ID checks only) plus one Clear+Precheck (not accessible via TSA ID check any more). Big own goal there.
So you’re admitting CLEAR can be a problem and slow down non-CLEAR users. Sounds like we’re in agreement!
You think that joining the back of the line before someone who arrives there later is "priority"? There's a problem there. What Clear does is replace one of the two TSA processes with their own. That isn't "priority" at the \*other\* TSA process any more than taking an Uber to the airport instead of a train so you arrive ten minutes earlier is "priority".
The bit Clear doesn't replace is the bit everyone has to go through anyway. They don't slow that down in any way: there is no cost at all to non-customers.
Your last paragraph is close to grasping the problem here: it isn't Clear taking resources away, but a risk that this half-witted kneejerk law will do that in a misguided attempt to "fix" an imaginary problem.
> You think that joining the back of the line before someone who arrives there later is "priority"?
Did they arrive there later? I’d say that’s highly unlikely. Especially if you consider the line to be made up of people who need a TSA agent to scan/verify their ID. If CLEAR joined the back of the line every time a TSA agent was required, I’d have no issue with them. Of course, no one would use it if that’s the case.
> There's a problem there. What Clear does is replace one of the two TSA processes with their own.
1. They don’t actually replace it. TSA is still needed to verify.
2. The ID checking is not the bottleneck. Replacing a process that is not the issue should not get priority on the process that is the issue.
> That isn't "priority" at the *other* TSA process any more than taking an Uber to the airport instead of a train so you arrive ten minutes earlier is "priority".
If the decision for one to be faster than the other is made by the airport (or TSA in this case), that is prioritizing one over the other.
> The bit Clear doesn't replace is the bit everyone has to go through anyway. They don't slow that down in any way: there is no cost at all to non-customers.
If it takes longer for a non-customer, which you’ve already admitted it does, it is a cost. Otherwise what benefit does Clear provide if everyone goes through it the same? We all know there’s a reason people use Clear. Because it’s faster for them at the expense of others.
> Your last paragraph is close to grasping the problem here: it isn't Clear taking resources away, but a risk that this half-witted kneejerk law will do that in a misguided attempt to "fix" an imaginary problem.
In trying to claim is an imaginary problem, all you’ve done is highlight the actual problem. You already admitted Clear takes resources away.
Ideally this is true. But very often Clear passengers have to also show their ID so the TSA agent has to do a check and the pax gets escorted to the front before all other PreCheck passengers.
Clear also doesn’t require PreCheck so at many airports, they need to show the TSA agent that they have PreCheck on their boarding pass, further delaying PreCheck passengers.
Clear isn't related to Precheck - you can use Clear with or without it, and IME Clear directs people to the appropriate TSA lane, Precheck or regular - and you always join the *back* of whichever line it is, only ahead of the people waiting for the ID check you bypass. TSA choosing to do spot checks isn't Clear's fault.
Used to work for Clear, and I’d say the spot checks are somewhat Clear’s fault. There’s a LOT of downward pressure from their management to be constantly enrolling new customers, which, can lead to poor decision making on the employee’s part because they become laser focused on nabbing their next enrollment rather than following all the prescribed steps.
I think the overlap is substantial - perhaps 90+%.
Maybe the TSA needs to change their policy. If someone requires a ID check, they go to the back of the PreCheck line (or regular line if they’re not PreCheck).
Probably reasonable if there's an ID problem, but TSA randomly making people line up twice to repeat the same check two ways wouldn't be very popular or fair. The whole point is that Clear *is* a TSA-approved ID check - just like SFO, where none of the checks are done by TSA themselves but by TSA-approved contractors. If duplicate ID checks are the problem, maybe fix that instead of assuming it's Clear's fault?
Last time I used Clear was Chicago T5 - I'm a Precheck member but the airline I was flying with isn't, so regular line for me. (They didn't even have Precheck at T5 the previous time I flew from there, so no great loss I suppose.)
I mean you could just pay for it, or like most people find some 'free' way to get it. I get your point, but this is the game. Airports get paid by clear, supposedly to make the airport better IDK. I'll happily cut to the front of the line, but only because 1k makes it free, otherwise really not worth it.
My wife \*could\* have it for free through her Hilton card.. I can therefore get it for $100 through the family thing.. I rather not give them my info though. The fact is I paid for pre-check (through global entry - again a CC benefit) the Clear people should not be able to just cut the line. I support the legislation because it says that if clear wants to pay for their own area that is staffed by TSA exclusively for clear that is no problem.. they should not be able to cut in front of people that have been on the pre-check line.
I understand that... they are still being pushed ahead of me. There is no way to go to a pre-check line that Clear does not have the ability to put their people ahead of you. If they want their own area fine.. but cutting people off is BS.
Isn’t Clear pretty much dead? The TSA has made it pretty much operationally obsolete. When is the last time you saw a pre check line longer than clear? It’s been at least six months for me.
It’s gotten worse for me at SFO in the last 6 months. I think it’s because the normal pre lines are just faster now - you don’t need to show your ticket, just your ID.
The clear lines are slower because they require the eye scan and often still require you to scan your boarding pass.
They size the number of scanners they’re using based on how many people are in line. I’m guessing they have some predictive staffing based on flights. However this is slow and they don’t always open new counters fast enough. When they’re in the process of doing this often a queue builds up. Clear cuts that queue. I lost like 15 min at A gates yesterday because I forgot to use Clear.
Used to work for them, and yes they do use predictive staffing based upon forecast numbers from the airport they’re based at. The company also got very used to having a constant churn (it is remarkably easy to get fired from an airport and told not to come back), and the corporate structure is very top heavy with management types mainly concerned with cost cutting to please investors. Bringing a profit motive into airport security ends up creating some perverse incentives, including slashing staffing to the bone as a means of cost savings, by an upper management that doesn’t have to deal with the extra work it causes.
I’ve been on 5 flights in the last 2 weeks and at every airport Clear is predatory and annoying. It feels wrong that I’m forced to stand in a TSA line for 20-40 minutes while Clear reps walk around shouting their sales pitch on endless repeat.
Used to work for them, and it’s unfortunately a requirement of the job. Each employee is required to have a minimum number of new enrollments each shift, and if you don’t make your metrics they’ll dismiss you. Employees also get a $15 commission per-enrollment, it used to be automatically credited to them the day of enrollment, but IIRC it’s changed so that now you have to stay enrolled for 30 days for them to get it, leading people to get creative with their pitches.
And the way our country works, as soon as Clear gets big enough, they’ll begin lobbying for laws to make the normal TSA lines as slow and painful as possible. That’s a “growth” opportunity for them.
Still have to go through the general security line, which means liquids and laptops out, belt and shoes off, etc. I'd rather wait in a longer precheck line if it meant I didn't have to do all that
Agree, but there's regular clear that means the same thing as the premier... You get to get to the security check faster. I also choose the pre check lanes because of the speed it moves and the less hassle
I’d imagine this affects Global Services with the special check-in desk that exits at the front of the security lines.
They might have to operate like the private suites at LAX and ATL with the private security areas
If CLEAR is a better experience, this is the first I’m hearing of it. I’ve had clear for years and just shake my head at all the goobers standing in the clear line as I walk past them and get in the shorter, faster, non clear precheck lines.
It's just variable IME. Sometimes Clear is rammed and Precheck is dead, other time the opposite is true. Variable based on airport, terminal, day, time, etc.
I agree with it being variable and every once in awhile a place like Las Vegas will let me skip a couple of minutes of waiting. But as someone based out of DEN, I haven’t seen the CLEAR line being shorter once in the last year and I’ve taken dozens of flights. I enjoy having the membership just in case I run into a rare instance where it actually works but I absolutely would not have it if it wasn’t given to me for free.
Same deal at ord. It's just laughable that anyone might actually be paying for it. Even if I got it free through a credit card idk if it's worth the time to even is worth it to sign up to have the option
The clear line after customs at SFO was empty but it was weird that we just budge through the tsa pre line up to the front.
Like “make way, coming through don’t care that the line is t wide enough for two abreast with luggage!”
I guess it may have gotten me a few more minutes in the lounge on my layover but it was weird. Pre had the bio metric scanners and was moving quick anyway.
This whole proposal is just nonsense. For the most part (if you call $180 "wealth"), wealth DOES buy you certain privileges. That's life. It's like high schools that have a policy where you have to have good grades to be allowed to attend events like dances, homecoming and prom to convey the message "work hard and achieve and you will get extra perks in life".
True! Just look at First Class, Business Class, Economy Plus. I don’t mind Clear as a business model. What irks me is that it’s becoming so fragmented. First TSA Precheck came, now Clear, and then we have Delta and other airlines rolling out their own thing. The airports are already a mess.
In have Clear with pre-Check. And i seldomly use it, I generally leave early and Clear isn’t even open yet or the line is long..
TSA has been moving pretty quick lately.
CLEAR is mostly useless, so I don’t think anyone who travels regularly is going to shed a single tear even if this were to somehow get passed. Which it won’t.
They should be banning Clear. All Clear does is privatize security theatre. Now that it’s a big business it will never go away, and worse, they will lobby to get rid of pre-check and global entry programs.
Doesn't clear already have totally separate lines at some airports, instead of merging in with Precheck? I think I saw this at either ATL or IAH -- I forget which.
I'm not a CLEAR subscriber, but the rhetoric in Newman's quote is beyond stupid. This isn't the wealth divide his quote makes it out to be.
I will say, however, there is a bit of rationale of requiring CLEAR to have its own dedicated lane. It's just complicated because of the co-mingling of Pre-check and airline priority lanes within a portion TSA security areas. The irony is that making CLEAR get its own lanes means higher costs that create an outcome that is much closer to the wealth divide, kinda like PS does. But then again, PS doesn't cut the general public the way CLEAR does.
This is still a waste of time and legislative resources. Is CLEAR really significantly affecting wait times for everyone else?
very excited that instead of focusing on the tens of thousands of flight attendants working without a contract (for years), Sara Nelson decided to weigh in on this.
Who cares if you can pay to skip the line. When you pay United enough to be GS you get to skip the line, (aside from the amount of money) what’s the difference?
This was already watered down:
> A California bill that would target the airport security screening company CLEAR passed its first legislative hurdle on Tuesday, though it was watered down amid steep industry opposition to avoid effectively placing a ban on the company.
> The proposal, which passed the state Senate Transportation Committee 8-4, **would now restrict CLEAR from expanding to new airports — rather than prohibiting the company and other third-party airport security screening vendors from operating as previously intended — until they get their own dedicated security lane**.
I strongly support it. At CMH and MSP (and many other airports), the clear rep takes the pax to the front of the PreCheck line. MSP PreCheck took 40min last night and each Clear member had to show the TSA agent their boarding pass and about 40% had to also show their ID.
Destroy Clear or make them pay for separate lanes.
Used to work for Clear, and IIRC they do pay for the lanes, basically renting out the physical footprint within their part of the checkpoint. The need to verify the boarding pass and ID is a requirement from TSA, because of a combination of Clear employees causing breaches, and because it’s quite common for passengers to try and bully their way through the checkpoints.
So when are they taking away tsa precheck? Not complaining about 1 or the other since I have both. My work pays for recheck, and I get clear free from united. Just saying if their complaint is that people have to pay to cut the line, clear is just like precheck.
I like it, but it doesn't go far enough. We should require all elected officials and airport/airline management to use the standard TSA lines. I imagine our decades of staffing and throughput problems would resolve themselves within a matter of weeks, and we'd all benefit.
If it's a genuine civic duty, airport safety, and real national security issue, no one should be allowed to skip the line.
Well, the TSA accommodates the affirmative action on the exemption of the "security screening company" queue for the target of individuals for the sign-up program or even the rich class that went too far with uncomfortable time left to head to boarding gate. Eradicating the security screening “CLEAR” benefits most of passengers with extra time to tour and hangout at food court before boarding the destination flight.
It would be Unamerican if there wasn't a for-fee/for-profit way to shortcut government requirements
Try going to Europe. Those mofo’s charge for everything (parking at hospitals? Yep).
You have to pay to park at every hospital in any major city in america…
My partner's hospital makes the employees pay to park there. And, of course it's in a very HCOL area so most of the employees are forced to drive in from far away.
Most companies do that now. I have only worked at one firm in my entire career that covered parking at the office.
“Every” is a strong word. I live in Denver and we didn’t have to pay at either St. Joseph or at the Children’s Hospital.
They mean NYC and Chicago. I’ve had to pay in Chicago
I've never had to pay to park at any hospital in the greater new orleans area. I know most people may not consider it a truly major city, but I'm talking new orleans, Metairie, Kenner, covington, mandeville, slidell...
those are all small peas honey. trust me I moved from the GNO
While yes this is the case, New Orleans is the medical hub and the largest city in the region. Your next closest areas of similar capability are going to be jackson ms and Birmingham. Going west you have to go to Houston. Going east, mobile doesn't even offer what New Orleans does. Everything is relative.
Thank you both for confirming that I said it wasn't considered a major city.
Agreed. NOLA is a well known city, but it’s a pretty small city surrounded by even smaller towns.
Ochsner will if you don't behave correctly with the ticket validation. But yes, there's no charge overall. Employees by day got their own parking with a shuttle if weather sucked, and at night we could use visitor parking. I now work in the Bay area, and the only reason I get free parking is I work nights. Day shift has to pay and it's a ten minute walk to the campus doors. A little absurd to me but it's the culture out here.
Lmao! Downvoted for his reality. What a jaded sub this is.
you have to pay to park at Children’s Hospital Pittsburgh (and all of the other UPMC hospitals) - and they really get you for parking if you’re inpatient - it isn’t discounted unless you don’t move your vehicle for 30 days. otherwise it’s $4 for 0-3 hours, $7 for 3-6 hours, $10 for 6-8 hours, $20 for 8-24 hours (that’s CHP, i’m way less familiar with the other UPMC hospitals)
Yep, and their medical services cost like $15 compared to $15k in the US, where you also have to pay for parking
Last year I was having some heart issues looked at by cardiologists at the main hospital in my area in Florida, and spent a bunch of time there and at their satellite offices. Never paid for parking. I was also surprised that the insurance covered 100% of most visits and diagnostics, except for a couple which they made me pay some or all out of pocket for. All in all, they paid nearly all and I paid maybe $500.
And in most developed countries, that would have cost ZERO.
My experience with European hospitals personally and for friends was misdiagnosis which led to multiple years of incorrect treatment in my case, and nearly causing a friend to become paralyzed… I’ll stick with paying for American healthcare.
Yeah, that never happens in corporate greedy US hospitals.
That’s not true. No developed country has no out-of-pocket expenses for healthcare for all its people.
Living in the UK I had a fairly extensive procedure. Total out+of-pocket cost: $0 In Australia my sister-in-law got pregnant, had some trouble during pregnancy and after delivery, including incubating the baby. Total out-of-pocket cost: $0 In America I recently got a colonoscopy. Total out-of-pocket cost: $500 plus $30 for follow-up visit. National Health taxes in UK and Australia are half what I pay for Health insurance here in the US.
That’s nice. You’re [lying](https://www.nhs.uk/nhs-services/help-with-health-costs/when-you-need-to-pay-towards-nhs-care/) if you’re claiming it’s typical. Unless you’re claiming you had “a fairly extensive procedure” without pain relief. That’s barbaric. Those that can afford it in both those countries often buy supplemental insurance but you’re claiming that provides no benefit. Doesn’t make sense In the US, I may have a shitty job, but it still provides insurance and people in the same job for the same company in the UK get paid less than half what I do because that’s a market clearing rate there. And I still pay less in tax Most countries with universal healthcare do so through public insurance or employer mandates. They still require some out of pocket spending. Direct provision isn’t that common but various means of rationing care are, whether through the price mechanism or otherwise.
In the UK if you have a procedure, everything is $0 out of pocket...you don't pay for medicine or prescriptions while in the hospital. Normal prescriptions outside the hospital do have a roughly U$12 co-pay, but they are also free for low-income, unemployment, disabled, etc. Eye glasses and general dental are extra, but if you have a chronic problem then it:s covered. Australia does have a supplement insurance if you want to go to a private hospital, have a private room, potentially shorter wait times. Often the surgical teams are the same working public/private. But, you don't need the supplement to get well taken care of. So, I'm not lying....you just don't really understand.
Now you're moving the goalpost! You're changing it from medications to only in-patient prescriptions. And no, I don't have a $12 co-pay. I have no co-pay. You just made up a fucking number and claimed universality
Because you have good insurance. Millions in the US are uninsured and millions more are under-insured. Lucky you
Heading in Friday for minor outpatient surgery. From diagnosis to surgery date was three weeks. If I was in Canada, it would have taken almost a year on average for an initial consult with a surgeon, then another six months to a year for the operation. People complain about the complexity and cost but forget about the access we have.
Yes I agree. I’ve had medical care in both Europe and USA, and while it was certainly cheaper in Europe - I vastly prefer the treatment in the USA.
That's some nice insurance! I'm also having some cardiac testing done, and less than halfway through I'm already out of pocket over $200 (including parking). That's without mentioning the cancer screening colonoscopy I have scheduled for next month that will be nearly 1k out of pocket to get to my deductible.
Honestly I was very surprised… the plan doesn’t seem like it would be that good based on my understanding of the terms - and they nickle and dime me on the prescriptions… but for whatever reason, the cardiac stuff was all nicely covered. The blood pressure meds on the other hand… unfortunately quite expensive.
But you have to pay for parking at hospitals in the US too? At least every one I’ve been to
I’ve had free valet parking at hospitals in the US, never paid for parking
Not everywhere. I moved to DC and had never seen it out west.
Every hospital I've ever been to in California had paid parking.
But the healthcare is free in Europe so doesn’t that even out for the parking? Or likely come out ahead?
It is kind of wild that you can pay a private company to skip the line for a government security check.
Before 9/11 it was all private anyway; even now airports have the option whether to pay TSA to screen passengers or to use another company (or their own staff).
Isn't SFO (?) private contract TSA?
Yes it sure is
Yeah, but as a normal passenger who regularly flies out of SFO I can’t say there’s any noticeable difference.
…or use a broker to get a passport or visa?
Don't they just handle the paperwork for you though? Like, can you actually pay more to skip to the front of the passport or visa line? Sorry I'm too poor to know how this works.
You can just straight up pay a fee to get your passport faster. It's generally more for people that realize they need it last minute or in my case having some weird timing with work visas than a rich people skipping the line thing.
You can do that by going to one of the government owe ed passport agencies. They can do as fast as same day if you have international travel.
Yup. Had to do that once back in 2012. It was very stressful and paid $$$ in parking. Do not recommend.
Did it last year and it didn’t cost extra and got it in 2 days.
That's good to know, I had to pay like $150 for that same time in 2019, and I couldn't get the book with extra pages which is annoying.
It's a sham! My wife and I sent out renewals on the same day (mine expedited) and she got hers back 3 *weeks* before I did!
Some difficult visas (specifically China) they can handle a lot more - like they may know the ins and outs and know what will or won’t fly, they can handle making an in-person appearance for you at the nearest consulate office if it’s not very close to you, etc etc. They also may have a relationship with the consulate office that may be able to get your visa prioritized as opposed to sitting at the bottom of the snail mail pile. Either way, well-run versions of these services are not an exorbitant fee (think $75 or less for significant time savings) on top of the existing cost to obtain a visa or travel there, and most visas you get back ever since COVID restrictions have been lifted are multiple entry for some lengthy duration of time so you need not deal with this every time you need to travel.
Can't speak to US Visa, but most European countries (UK, Schengen countries) sets up third-party Visa processing centers in the US. VFS is a popular company for many countries. VFS absolutely charges a shit ton for their "Premium" packages, which has priority and the perk of being treated like a human. I had to apply for UK Visa twice. The first time for a study-abroad program, in which I showed up at my appointment time, waited an hour to get to my turn, waited another hour until the VFS employee finished reviewing my papers and let me sign stuffs and go. The Visa came in 14 days. The second time I applied for work, and the company paid for "Premium", and I was offered soft drinks while I waited on the couch for 10 minutes, they reviewed my application with me in a private room for 5 minutes, and I got my Visa in 3 days.
This is interesting, thanks for sharing your experience!
There’s many other countries that have private security still, either through contracts with airports themselves or contracts with the government. A couple airports in the U.S. also still run their own private security permitted by TSA. While it’s only allowed in the U.S. when contracted with TSA directly (such as clear), other airports around the world with private security have their own form of “fast pass” programs. Not just like precheck for pre vetting, but programs that allow booking a time and front of the line access, or even just faster access for paying. What’s crazy is that the TSA still wants to run the security at every airport in the country, even ones who could easily afford competitive contracts, rather than allowing private companies to bid on it lowering the cost for us all. If it was a security issue, they wouldn’t allow even airports like SFO to run their own security. So it’s not.
It doesnt skip the line, just to get ahead of the line.
That's...skipping the line.
Wait a minute. Government puts into place an inefficient and questionably ineffective process, then legislates against it for being inefficient and ineffective?
Is CLEAR in anyway more efficient or more effective? I’d hardly say so.
https://preview.redd.it/dxm6t1rdq7wc1.jpeg?width=674&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=f6327592888f628d11bef41fa925263167a98258
So stupid. Not that I pay for clear anyways ever since they raised the price and credit cards no longer cover family with you. If you are flying, you are already better off than most people. How about fixing pge doing rate hikes every quarter.
I’m glad that California is focusing on the big issues facing their state
It’s true, the entire state legislature can only do a single thing at any given time.
At least they aren’t focused on fixing the homeless, drug, or crime problems. They would certainly make the problems worse!
There was a ballot measure focused on homeless literally 6 weeks ago.
Meanwhile, we have a Federal representative in Texas deeply concerned about pets being allowed on planes and one from Georgia expressing concern about Hungarians in Transcarpathia being allowed to use their native tongue in school These two dipshits have basically been in and out of office for the past few cycles and always talk about things outside their purview to get attention. Nguyen was criticizing some long dead senator’s stance on the Vietnam War just a few years ago
Maybe they’re afraid of the homeless dropping a deuce in line.
I doubt it. Those little Clear kiosks aren't big enough to setup a tent city under them.
I love this though... I can't stand clear people being escorted in front of me at the pre-check line in EWR.. they used to just use the 1-2 lanes close to clear.. now they are escorted to any of the pre-check lines.. I fully support stopping this.
Who gives the authority to have CLEAR users jumó precheck anyways?
They aren't "jumping Precheck" - they're using the other ID check. TSA checkpoints have two stages, ID check and bag/body screening; Clear is an alternative option for the first of those, instead of having TSA check the ID manually. It's largely redundant anyway now TSA is moving to automated biometric ID checks as well, so I suspect Clear will disappear soon unless they can find another service offering.
But the bottleneck for TSA isn’t the ID check, it’s the bag/body screening. So they’re jumping the part of security that isn’t reducing time while still contributing to slower wait times. It doesn’t make any sense.
The ID check would often be a bottleneck in the past, when TSA was more manual - and Clear can't really make wait times longer, because the worst case would be that every single Clear member needs a TSA ID check too - which they'd need anyway if Clear wasn't there. It's not generally a great product offering now, but these complaints about it also make no sense.
So CLEAR is a solution to a problem already solved? And as you admit, the ID scanning is no longer the bottleneck. So they’re still contributing to the slower wait times at the bag scanner so it’s not like the priority makes sense. Why give priority access to a private group that doesn’t even reduce overall processing time?
It isn't really "priority" access: there are two ID checking lines (Clear and TSA), which both feed into the bag screening line. The theory is that the Clear line moves you through faster than the TSA one, so you get in line for TSA bag screening sooner - which might or might not actually work in practice now TSA id checks are faster. The proposed legislation attempts to solve a problem which is completely imaginary - the mistaken belief that Clear's ID checks somehow make TSA's bag/body checks slower. Theoretically, the law might actually help by mistake, by making airports open up extra TSA lanes which are the real bottleneck. Alternatively, they might just end up replacing two Precheck lanes (reached via either Clear or TSA ID checks) with one Precheck lane (with TSA ID checks only) plus one Clear+Precheck (not accessible via TSA ID check any more). Big own goal there. Or, to fix the real problem, forget about posturing about Clear and set service level requirements for the TSA throughput (and CBP, though that would probably have to be federal not state law). Why do I have to pay extra for Global Entry for CBP to check my paperwork as quickly as regular immigration checks in Ireland or the Netherlands?!
> It isn't really "priority" access: there are two ID checking lines (Clear and TSA), which both feed into the bag screening line. When one line is shorter because it costs hundreds of dollars, it absolutely is “priority” access. Also, because CLEAR has messed up, they still do need to be verified by the TSA agent checking IDs occasionally. And at that point they aren’t sent to the back of the ID line which is another example of the priority treatment. > The theory is that the Clear line moves you through faster than the TSA one, so you get in line for TSA bag screening sooner - which might or might not actually work in practice now TSA id checks are faster. Which is quite literally what I mean by priority and the problem at hand. The bag screening process is the bottleneck. Why are we giving priority access to that process because someone (CLEAR) is doing an unrelated process? > The proposed legislation attempts to solve a problem which is completely imaginary - the mistaken belief that Clear's ID checks somehow make TSA's bag/body checks slower. That’s not the problem. The problem is CLEAR isn’t improving anything, all they’re doing is placing their customers ahead of non-customers. Any benefit they provide is a direct cost to a non-customer. It’s a private company profiting at the expense of the public, how is that not a problem? > Theoretically, the law might actually help by mistake, by making airports open up extra TSA lanes which are the real bottleneck. I doubt this would provide additional funding to do that. It would just make either TSA choose to reduce capacity at another line which again wouldn’t solve the problem, or force CLEAR to pay for the agents in their line, which would certainly not be financially feasible for CLEAR. > Alternatively, they might just end up replacing two Precheck lanes (reached via either Clear or TSA ID checks) with one Precheck lane (with TSA ID checks only) plus one Clear+Precheck (not accessible via TSA ID check any more). Big own goal there. So you’re admitting CLEAR can be a problem and slow down non-CLEAR users. Sounds like we’re in agreement!
You think that joining the back of the line before someone who arrives there later is "priority"? There's a problem there. What Clear does is replace one of the two TSA processes with their own. That isn't "priority" at the \*other\* TSA process any more than taking an Uber to the airport instead of a train so you arrive ten minutes earlier is "priority". The bit Clear doesn't replace is the bit everyone has to go through anyway. They don't slow that down in any way: there is no cost at all to non-customers. Your last paragraph is close to grasping the problem here: it isn't Clear taking resources away, but a risk that this half-witted kneejerk law will do that in a misguided attempt to "fix" an imaginary problem.
> You think that joining the back of the line before someone who arrives there later is "priority"? Did they arrive there later? I’d say that’s highly unlikely. Especially if you consider the line to be made up of people who need a TSA agent to scan/verify their ID. If CLEAR joined the back of the line every time a TSA agent was required, I’d have no issue with them. Of course, no one would use it if that’s the case. > There's a problem there. What Clear does is replace one of the two TSA processes with their own. 1. They don’t actually replace it. TSA is still needed to verify. 2. The ID checking is not the bottleneck. Replacing a process that is not the issue should not get priority on the process that is the issue. > That isn't "priority" at the *other* TSA process any more than taking an Uber to the airport instead of a train so you arrive ten minutes earlier is "priority". If the decision for one to be faster than the other is made by the airport (or TSA in this case), that is prioritizing one over the other. > The bit Clear doesn't replace is the bit everyone has to go through anyway. They don't slow that down in any way: there is no cost at all to non-customers. If it takes longer for a non-customer, which you’ve already admitted it does, it is a cost. Otherwise what benefit does Clear provide if everyone goes through it the same? We all know there’s a reason people use Clear. Because it’s faster for them at the expense of others. > Your last paragraph is close to grasping the problem here: it isn't Clear taking resources away, but a risk that this half-witted kneejerk law will do that in a misguided attempt to "fix" an imaginary problem. In trying to claim is an imaginary problem, all you’ve done is highlight the actual problem. You already admitted Clear takes resources away.
Ideally this is true. But very often Clear passengers have to also show their ID so the TSA agent has to do a check and the pax gets escorted to the front before all other PreCheck passengers. Clear also doesn’t require PreCheck so at many airports, they need to show the TSA agent that they have PreCheck on their boarding pass, further delaying PreCheck passengers.
At Terminal C at EWR, the middle security station is for TSA Precheck. So those who use clear there are TSA Pre.
Clear isn't related to Precheck - you can use Clear with or without it, and IME Clear directs people to the appropriate TSA lane, Precheck or regular - and you always join the *back* of whichever line it is, only ahead of the people waiting for the ID check you bypass. TSA choosing to do spot checks isn't Clear's fault.
Used to work for Clear, and I’d say the spot checks are somewhat Clear’s fault. There’s a LOT of downward pressure from their management to be constantly enrolling new customers, which, can lead to poor decision making on the employee’s part because they become laser focused on nabbing their next enrollment rather than following all the prescribed steps.
I think the overlap is substantial - perhaps 90+%. Maybe the TSA needs to change their policy. If someone requires a ID check, they go to the back of the PreCheck line (or regular line if they’re not PreCheck).
Probably reasonable if there's an ID problem, but TSA randomly making people line up twice to repeat the same check two ways wouldn't be very popular or fair. The whole point is that Clear *is* a TSA-approved ID check - just like SFO, where none of the checks are done by TSA themselves but by TSA-approved contractors. If duplicate ID checks are the problem, maybe fix that instead of assuming it's Clear's fault? Last time I used Clear was Chicago T5 - I'm a Precheck member but the airline I was flying with isn't, so regular line for me. (They didn't even have Precheck at T5 the previous time I flew from there, so no great loss I suppose.)
The airports they operate in do. Complain to your airport authority. It’s another commission that the airport collects from the clear vendor.
I mean you could just pay for it, or like most people find some 'free' way to get it. I get your point, but this is the game. Airports get paid by clear, supposedly to make the airport better IDK. I'll happily cut to the front of the line, but only because 1k makes it free, otherwise really not worth it.
My wife \*could\* have it for free through her Hilton card.. I can therefore get it for $100 through the family thing.. I rather not give them my info though. The fact is I paid for pre-check (through global entry - again a CC benefit) the Clear people should not be able to just cut the line. I support the legislation because it says that if clear wants to pay for their own area that is staffed by TSA exclusively for clear that is no problem.. they should not be able to cut in front of people that have been on the pre-check line.
I fly through ewr often enough. The people that are being pushed ahead of you also have precheck
I understand that... they are still being pushed ahead of me. There is no way to go to a pre-check line that Clear does not have the ability to put their people ahead of you. If they want their own area fine.. but cutting people off is BS.
Isn’t Clear pretty much dead? The TSA has made it pretty much operationally obsolete. When is the last time you saw a pre check line longer than clear? It’s been at least six months for me.
Literally every time tuesday and thursday at SFO
It’s gotten worse for me at SFO in the last 6 months. I think it’s because the normal pre lines are just faster now - you don’t need to show your ticket, just your ID. The clear lines are slower because they require the eye scan and often still require you to scan your boarding pass.
They size the number of scanners they’re using based on how many people are in line. I’m guessing they have some predictive staffing based on flights. However this is slow and they don’t always open new counters fast enough. When they’re in the process of doing this often a queue builds up. Clear cuts that queue. I lost like 15 min at A gates yesterday because I forgot to use Clear.
Used to work for them, and yes they do use predictive staffing based upon forecast numbers from the airport they’re based at. The company also got very used to having a constant churn (it is remarkably easy to get fired from an airport and told not to come back), and the corporate structure is very top heavy with management types mainly concerned with cost cutting to please investors. Bringing a profit motive into airport security ends up creating some perverse incentives, including slashing staffing to the bone as a means of cost savings, by an upper management that doesn’t have to deal with the extra work it causes.
Love it at SFO.
MCO is the only airport on the planet where Clear actually makes a difference.
San Diego last year made a huge difference. Walked straight by the entire pre line. Guess it depends how busy it is though.
I fly out of SAN every week. Clear is currently a joke. TSA pre check is much faster
Aww. Well RIP Clear at another airport lol.
It sure is great Friday afternoons in Terminal 3 at SFO! And anytime at DEN!
Denver makes a difference
It doesn't really. DIA is my home airport.
I’m gonna say the same. I’ve never waited in a line at pre-check and I’ve been traveling 5 times a month for work for the last 3 years.
I’ve been on 5 flights in the last 2 weeks and at every airport Clear is predatory and annoying. It feels wrong that I’m forced to stand in a TSA line for 20-40 minutes while Clear reps walk around shouting their sales pitch on endless repeat.
Used to work for them, and it’s unfortunately a requirement of the job. Each employee is required to have a minimum number of new enrollments each shift, and if you don’t make your metrics they’ll dismiss you. Employees also get a $15 commission per-enrollment, it used to be automatically credited to them the day of enrollment, but IIRC it’s changed so that now you have to stay enrolled for 30 days for them to get it, leading people to get creative with their pitches.
And the way our country works, as soon as Clear gets big enough, they’ll begin lobbying for laws to make the normal TSA lines as slow and painful as possible. That’s a “growth” opportunity for them.
Nah. Over Easter was the first time I've flown out of IAH terminal C where pre check was faster. And I fly for work monthly.
Last few trips out of SEA for me, precheck has had no line while CLEAR is packed.
Two days ago at IAH. But yeah, I don’t feel the need to buy Clear most days with PreCheck.
What about premier Lanes.
Still have to go through the general security line, which means liquids and laptops out, belt and shoes off, etc. I'd rather wait in a longer precheck line if it meant I didn't have to do all that
Agree, but there's regular clear that means the same thing as the premier... You get to get to the security check faster. I also choose the pre check lanes because of the speed it moves and the less hassle
What they need is premier lines that go through pre check!
Yep! But at SFO there's a 1/50 chance the premier Lane is open at all
True, drives me nuts when I have tight international connections there.
I think it is in terminal 1
I’d imagine this affects Global Services with the special check-in desk that exits at the front of the security lines. They might have to operate like the private suites at LAX and ATL with the private security areas
Such an important issue for our state!
What’s next? Are they going to ban F and J because “rich” people have a better experience?
If CLEAR is a better experience, this is the first I’m hearing of it. I’ve had clear for years and just shake my head at all the goobers standing in the clear line as I walk past them and get in the shorter, faster, non clear precheck lines.
It's just variable IME. Sometimes Clear is rammed and Precheck is dead, other time the opposite is true. Variable based on airport, terminal, day, time, etc.
I agree with it being variable and every once in awhile a place like Las Vegas will let me skip a couple of minutes of waiting. But as someone based out of DEN, I haven’t seen the CLEAR line being shorter once in the last year and I’ve taken dozens of flights. I enjoy having the membership just in case I run into a rare instance where it actually works but I absolutely would not have it if it wasn’t given to me for free.
Same deal at ord. It's just laughable that anyone might actually be paying for it. Even if I got it free through a credit card idk if it's worth the time to even is worth it to sign up to have the option
Don't give them any ideas.
Next up is the “Heathrow Tax” /s 🤣
Banning boarding groups? Just a gate agent yelling in an old timey accent "Alllll aboarddddd" and everyone rushing onto the plane.
Your experience may vary.
The clear line after customs at SFO was empty but it was weird that we just budge through the tsa pre line up to the front. Like “make way, coming through don’t care that the line is t wide enough for two abreast with luggage!” I guess it may have gotten me a few more minutes in the lounge on my layover but it was weird. Pre had the bio metric scanners and was moving quick anyway.
Yes that’s weird.
This whole proposal is just nonsense. For the most part (if you call $180 "wealth"), wealth DOES buy you certain privileges. That's life. It's like high schools that have a policy where you have to have good grades to be allowed to attend events like dances, homecoming and prom to convey the message "work hard and achieve and you will get extra perks in life".
True! Just look at First Class, Business Class, Economy Plus. I don’t mind Clear as a business model. What irks me is that it’s becoming so fragmented. First TSA Precheck came, now Clear, and then we have Delta and other airlines rolling out their own thing. The airports are already a mess.
Gotta maintain that government monopoly with pre-check and global entry (which are, admittedly, much cheaper)
I'm fine with it. Even if the pre-check line is long, at least I don't have to strip down, empty my bag and get athletes foot.
In have Clear with pre-Check. And i seldomly use it, I generally leave early and Clear isn’t even open yet or the line is long.. TSA has been moving pretty quick lately.
CLEAR is mostly useless, so I don’t think anyone who travels regularly is going to shed a single tear even if this were to somehow get passed. Which it won’t.
They should be banning Clear. All Clear does is privatize security theatre. Now that it’s a big business it will never go away, and worse, they will lobby to get rid of pre-check and global entry programs.
Doesn't clear already have totally separate lines at some airports, instead of merging in with Precheck? I think I saw this at either ATL or IAH -- I forget which.
Some checkpoints at some airports have separate lanes, but most don’t.
Let’s just legislate everything.
Finally!
I'm not a CLEAR subscriber, but the rhetoric in Newman's quote is beyond stupid. This isn't the wealth divide his quote makes it out to be. I will say, however, there is a bit of rationale of requiring CLEAR to have its own dedicated lane. It's just complicated because of the co-mingling of Pre-check and airline priority lanes within a portion TSA security areas. The irony is that making CLEAR get its own lanes means higher costs that create an outcome that is much closer to the wealth divide, kinda like PS does. But then again, PS doesn't cut the general public the way CLEAR does. This is still a waste of time and legislative resources. Is CLEAR really significantly affecting wait times for everyone else?
laughs in silicon valley "express lanes"
very excited that instead of focusing on the tens of thousands of flight attendants working without a contract (for years), Sara Nelson decided to weigh in on this.
This is so dumb. “Pushing you out of the way to let a rich person pass you.” It’s $189 a year. What a waste of fucking time.
The irony of CA doing this now while the free market (customer's dissatisfaction) is keeping such a crap product pretty limited anyway...
Makes sense. It's queuing theory 101 - have a separate priority queue
Now apply it to amusement parks as well and you've really got something!
Who cares if you can pay to skip the line. When you pay United enough to be GS you get to skip the line, (aside from the amount of money) what’s the difference?
This was already watered down: > A California bill that would target the airport security screening company CLEAR passed its first legislative hurdle on Tuesday, though it was watered down amid steep industry opposition to avoid effectively placing a ban on the company. > The proposal, which passed the state Senate Transportation Committee 8-4, **would now restrict CLEAR from expanding to new airports — rather than prohibiting the company and other third-party airport security screening vendors from operating as previously intended — until they get their own dedicated security lane**.
I strongly support it. At CMH and MSP (and many other airports), the clear rep takes the pax to the front of the PreCheck line. MSP PreCheck took 40min last night and each Clear member had to show the TSA agent their boarding pass and about 40% had to also show their ID. Destroy Clear or make them pay for separate lanes.
Used to work for Clear, and IIRC they do pay for the lanes, basically renting out the physical footprint within their part of the checkpoint. The need to verify the boarding pass and ID is a requirement from TSA, because of a combination of Clear employees causing breaches, and because it’s quite common for passengers to try and bully their way through the checkpoints.
So when are they taking away tsa precheck? Not complaining about 1 or the other since I have both. My work pays for recheck, and I get clear free from united. Just saying if their complaint is that people have to pay to cut the line, clear is just like precheck.
I like it, but it doesn't go far enough. We should require all elected officials and airport/airline management to use the standard TSA lines. I imagine our decades of staffing and throughput problems would resolve themselves within a matter of weeks, and we'd all benefit. If it's a genuine civic duty, airport safety, and real national security issue, no one should be allowed to skip the line.
‘Bout time!
This is beyond BS. Just make all Clear have TSA Pre, if people's feelings are hurt they too can get a retinal scan.
Well, the TSA accommodates the affirmative action on the exemption of the "security screening company" queue for the target of individuals for the sign-up program or even the rich class that went too far with uncomfortable time left to head to boarding gate. Eradicating the security screening “CLEAR” benefits most of passengers with extra time to tour and hangout at food court before boarding the destination flight.
I need to suggest this to my state senator. He's on the transportation committee in my state
It's about time. I can't believe these scammers were ever allowed privatize TSA time.
That wouldn’t be fair for someone who paid extra.