TSA has now confirmed, on the record and nationally, what Against Giants reported from the field three weeks ago.
Chairs are being removed from Travel Document Checker podiums at airports across the country, and TSA has given its own reason for the policy, something it had not done publicly until this week.
What TSA Says, in Its Own Words
A TSA spokesperson told national outlets the change "reinforces both our security posture and our commitment to hospitality by having these officers on their feet and alert." The statement continues: "All officers must meet fitness for duty requirements to be capable of performing their vital national security function while simultaneously creating a welcoming and professional environment for travelers."
That is a different rationale than the one Against Giants reported earlier this month from an internal email, which described the change in customer-service terms, professionalism and engagement with passengers. The two are not contradictory. But the national statement adds something the earlier message did not: TSA itself is now naming fitness for duty as the agency's own reason for removing the chairs.
For the original report and the contract provisions that apply, see TSA Removes TDC Chairs Nationwide.
What That Connection Actually Means for Officers
Against Giants has previously laid out, in detail, what happens when an officer cannot sustain a standing requirement and requests a reasonable accommodation. That analysis was built entirely from TSA's own policy documents, including the accommodation handbook, the statutory carve-out for officers unable to meet the position's physical requirements, and the reassignment process under HCM 339-2. At the time, the question of why TSA removed the chairs was still open, and the fitness for duty consequences of that removal were a documented possibility, not something TSA had connected to its own reasoning.
That has changed. TSA has now said, in its own public statement, that this policy exists because officers must meet fitness for duty requirements. That does not mean TSA has said officers will be disqualified for standing limitations. It means the agency has, for the first time, tied the policy itself to the same standard that governs accommodation eligibility and medical determinations.
They are weighing a policy TSA has explicitly justified on fitness for duty grounds, against a documented process, already laid out by Against Giants, for what happens when an officer discloses that limitation.
For that process in full, including the four documented outcomes, see Chair Removal, Accommodation Requests, and Fitness for Duty.
The Union Says It Got No Notice, and That Claim Is No Longer Just the Union's Word
AFGE Council 100 said when the policy became public that it learned about it from members in the field, not from TSA, and called it a disregard for working conditions. National news coverage has since reported, independent of the union's own statement, that there was no formal notification to AFGE or any of its local chapters before the change began.
That strengthens the question Against Giants raised in its first report on this policy: whether TSA met its obligations under the collective bargaining agreement to notify the union before modifying a work area and before implementing a change affecting working conditions nationally. Independent confirmation that no formal notice occurred does not resolve that question on its own. It does mean the premise behind it, that the union was not told in advance, is now reported by more than one source.
The Timing Lines Up With TSA's Own Modernization Strategy
Three weeks before the chair policy became national news, TSA Administrator David Cummins announced the Horizon 25 Strategy, a set of initiatives tied to the agency's 25th anniversary. TSA's own materials describing that strategy name, among its checkpoint hardware priorities, "credential authentication terminals that read physical IDs directly rather than relying on officer judgment" and "facial comparison systems that automate the identity check at the podium."
In plain terms, TSA's own modernization plan names automating the exact function TDC officers perform, checking a traveler's identity at the podium, as a stated priority, announced in the same five-week period as the policy requiring those same officers to stand without a chair while performing that function manually.
Against Giants is not asserting that TSA removed the chairs because of this automation plan. TSA has given its own reason, and that reason is what is quoted above. What can be said directly is that TSA's own public materials place both initiatives under the same strategy, launched within weeks of each other, aimed at the same point in the screening process. Officers can draw their own conclusions about what that timing means for the TDC position over the longer term.
For the strategy itself, see Horizon 25.
What This Means for Officers Now
TSA's confirmation changes the posture of this issue. What began as a local observation, reported by officers and discussed in an internal email at one set of airports, is now a stated national policy, defended publicly by the agency, tied explicitly to fitness for duty language, and reported to have proceeded without formal notice to the union.
TSA's own rationale now intersects directly with the accommodation and fitness for duty process Against Giants has already documented in detail. Officers managing a condition that affects their ability to stand should understand that intersection is no longer theoretical.
Officers with questions about how this policy applies to their specific situation should contact Against Giants before taking the next step. againstgiantsllc.com/get-help.html or info@againstgiantsllc.com