HR-862-119
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
Sponsored by Timothy Kennedy (D-NY)
What it does
This bill would require the TSA Administrator to submit a feasibility study to Congress within 270 days of enactment. The study would examine whether time TSA employees spend traveling between their duty stations and airport parking lots or transit stops should count as on-duty, paid work hours. The study must consider travel times across small, medium, and large hub airports; average commute times; potential costs including retirement credit implications; and the feasibility of using mobile phones or location data to track arrival and departure.
Who benefits
TSA transportation security officers and other TSA airport employees who currently travel unpaid between parking lots or transit stops and their duty stations — a workforce of approximately 60,000. Employees at large hub airports with longer internal transit distances would likely see the greatest potential benefit. Federal employee unions representing TSA workers would gain leverage in future compensation negotiations if the study supports the policy change. Indirectly, airport transit and shuttle operators could benefit if the study spurs investment in employee transit infrastructure.
Who is hurt
Federal taxpayers who would bear any increased labor costs if the study leads to a policy change counting transit time as paid hours. TSA as an agency could face budget pressure if on-duty hours increase without a corresponding appropriations increase. Congress and the Office of Personnel Management would face pressure to act on the study's findings. Airports and airlines are not directly affected, but could face indirect operational coordination costs if TSA staffing schedules shift.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that TSA employees — unlike most federal workers — report to duty stations inside secured airport perimeters that are often far from public transit stops and employee parking, meaning they bear a unique, uncompensated time burden not shared by other federal workers. They contend that this unpaid transit time effectively reduces TSA employees' real hourly compensation, contributing to recruitment and retention challenges in a workforce critical to national aviation security. A feasibility study is a low-cost, evidence-based first step before any spending commitment is made.
Opponents argue
Opponents argue that commuting time — including travel to and from a workplace's entry point — is a standard, uncompensated condition of employment for virtually all American workers, public and private, and that creating a federal carve-out for TSA employees sets a costly precedent. They contend that even a study signals congressional intent to expand paid hours, potentially adding tens of millions of dollars in annual labor costs at a time of fiscal pressure, and that existing TSA pay and benefits already account for the nature of airport work environments.
Constitutional context
No significant constitutional issues are raised by this bill. Congress has clear authority under Article I to direct the operations and study requirements of a federal executive agency. The bill does not delegate broad rulemaking authority to TSA, so the major questions doctrine (West Virginia v. EPA, 2022) and post-Chevron scrutiny (Loper Bright v. Raimondo, 2024) are not implicated.
Checks and balances
The executive branch (TSA Administrator) gains a study mandate but no new rulemaking authority; Congress retains full control over any subsequent policy or spending changes, as the study is advisory only.
Historical precedent
The Portal-to-Portal Act of 1947 established that employers generally are not required to compensate employees for ordinary commuting time, though it left open questions about travel within a worksite — the precise issue this study would examine for TSA employees.