[Archive Home][Date Prev][Date Next][Index]
"Airport Checkpoint Operators Pose Tough Job for Regulators"
Tuesday, September 18, 2001
Airport Checkpoint Operators Pose Tough Job for Regulators
By DAVID ARMSTRONG, JERRY GUIDERA and CHIP CUMMINS
THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
Despite a new emphasis on security at U.S. airports, don't expect the
low-paid, undertrained screeners at airport checkpoints to be replaced
anytime soon.
Considered one of the most critical lines of defense against terrorists,
the job of working checkpoints at the largest airports is done primarily
by 18,000 screeners who work for private companies hired by the
airlines. Concern about the quality of their work has long made many
travelers uneasy and prompted several critical reviews by government
investigators, who have concluded that the checkpoints are dangerously
porous.
In the wake of last week's terrorist strikes, many airports have
stationed uniformed police and other local law-enforcement officials at
checkpoints, but these officers are doing no actual screening and are
widely viewed as a temporary measure.
Several airports, aviation experts and U.S. senators have proposed that
the federal government take over the job of screening passengers and
baggage at airports. But replacing the private workers would be time
consuming and costly. Even if a plan to federalize checkpoint workers is
approved, it will be several months before enough workers could be hired
and trained to replace existing screeners, security experts say.
The companies that perform the task, about 70 firms that act as
contractors to the airlines, have about $1 billion a year in revenues.
It is likely that it would cost the government much more than that to
take over the task, because wages would have to rise to at least the
level of lower-echelon federal workers. Most private security workers
have limited benefits -- few have health insurance, for instance -- and
pay starts as low as $5.15 an hour. Screeners at Los Angeles
International Airport who earn $9.40 an hour are among the highest paid
in the country.
Three companies dominate the checkpoint-staffing business. Argenbright
Security Inc., a unit of Britain's Securicor PLC, has the leading
position with about $450 million in revenue last year. It provides
guards to many major airlines at 40 U.S. airports, including at Newark
International and Dulles International, where hijackers boarded two
planes last week. Argenbright said it plans to station managers at each
checkpoint and provide more training in the wake of the hijackings, but
declined to provide more specifics.
The two hijacked flights that crashed into and destroyed the World Trade
Center, American Airlines Flight 11 and United Airlines Flight 175,
departed from separate terminals at Boston's Logan International
Airport. The American security post was manned by about a half dozen
guards from Globe Aviation Services Corp., a unit of Sweden's Securitas
AB. Huntleigh USA Corp., a unit of ICTS International NV of the
Netherlands, provided security for United at Logan. Both firms said they
were also taking steps to provide more training.
Cathal Flynn, the former chief of civil aviation security for the FAA,
said turning the screening work over to the government would likely
reduce turnover and ensure uniform security standards. Mr. Flynn, who
now serves on the board of a private airport-security firm, said the pay
and benefits commanded by federal workers would drive the cost of
checkpoint security significantly higher. But he added that creating a
quasigovernment agency to oversee the awarding of contracts to private
companies, in addition to setting tougher standards, would greatly
improve the screening process. Several airport managers have voiced
frustration with the work of the private security firms and called for
existing law-enforcement agencies to take over that function if the
federal government can't. Some airport managers last week -- at Logan,
Oakland Airport and San Francisco International -- talked of replacing
private security workers, but backed off later in the week.
Any immediate change would have to made by the airlines, which are
charged by the FAA with screening passengers and baggage at checkpoints.
That leaves the airports with limited options, including the uniformed
police some have stationed at the checkpoints since air traffic resumed.
At America West Holdings Corp., in Tempe, Ariz., spokesman Jim Sabourin
says its airline doesn't have any immediate plans to alter its
agreements with its security contractors or change its operating
procedures with these companies significantly. Southwest Airlines,
Dallas, also doesn't have any plans to change its relationships with its
contractors at airports around the country, according to a spokesman. As
far as plans for federalization, Southwest won't weigh in yet: "There
are three to four thousand proposals out there" after last week's
hijackings, said spokesman Ed Stewart.
The Service Employees International Union, which represents some 2,000
of 18,000 airport security workers nationwide, issued its own
suggestions for improving the work of screeners, starting with an
increase in pay. Low wages force screeners to keep two or more jobs to
make ends meet, and it fosters a job turnover of as much as 400% at some
of the largest airports in the country. The SEIU added that airports,
rather than airlines, should be in charge of preboard screening and
argued that the federal government should provide training for
screeners.
Alba Rivera, a screener for a private company at Los Angeles
International Airport, said checkpoint workers there are poorly trained
and often work while fatigued because they have a second full-time job.
"It makes you worry," she said of the impact the working conditions have
on airport security.
Ms. Rivera, 50 years old, said she earns more than one dollar an hour
more from her second job as a cashier at an airport parking lot than in
her security position.
Do you have an opinion about this story?
Share it with other readers in our CAA Discussion Forums
http://www.californiaaviation.org/cgi-bin/dcforum/dcboard.cgi?conf=DCConfID8
*****************************************
Fair Use Notice
This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of political, human rights, economic, democracy and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.html. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
If you have any queries regarding this issue, please Email us at stepheni@cwnet.com