"TSA Recommends Adding 48 Screeners at Providence, R.I. Airport"

Thursday, June 19, 2003

Security Agency Recommends Adding 48 Screeners at Providence, R.I. Airport
The Providence (RI) Journal


For the second time in less than two months, the Transportation Security
Administration has changed the number of passenger and baggage screeners it
will assign to New England airports. 

As part of the recalculation, T. F. Green Airport in Warwick gains 48
positions. Earlier, TSA said Green would lose 49 jobs. 

TSA is the federal agency created by Congress in response to perceived
lapses in airport security that led to the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorists
attacks. It oversees the screening force that scrutinizes all passengers,
plus checked and carry-on luggage at U.S. airports. 

Originally, the TSA set a hiring goal of 56,000 people. 

Then, on April 30, the TSA announced it was cutting 6,000 positions
nationwide. The first 3,000 jobs were eliminated by May 31, the second group
are to go by Sept. 30. 

The reduction is expected to save the agency about $320 million over the
next two years. 

Although the May deadline was met, scheduled reductions at several of New
England's airports were put on hold after airport operators appealed what
they considered too-severe cuts. They said that fewer screeners threatened
to cause long lines and delays for passengers, jeopardizing business. 

Manchester Airport in New Hampshire faced a 42-percent reduction in
screeners; Portland International Jetport in Maine, a 30-percent drop; T.F.
Green an 18-percent loss; and Logan International Airport in Boston, a
4.7-percent reduction. Hartford's Bradley International Airport in
Connecticut was to remain unchanged. 

Further review by the TSA has resulted in less drastic cuts at most of the
affected airports, and an increase in screeners at Green and a reduction at
Bradley. 

There are several reasons for the TSA turnaround. 

"This was a dynamic process and due to budget constraints we had to act
immediately," said Ann Davis, TSA's New England spokeswoman. After the cuts,
the TSA then refined the number of screeners at many of the airports that
had raised objections. 

The original data used by the TSA didn't include screening lanes added at
airports in recent months, said Davis. Nor was it based on the number of
originating passengers at each airport, "which is the best predictor of
passenger loads," she said. Once the new figures and updated information was
considered, it led to several changes. 

"We knew that we were probably overstaffed slightly, but we were astounded
by a 42-percent reduction, so obviously we are pleased by the actions taken
by the TSA," said Kevin Dillon, executive director of Manchester Airport,
which will now lose only 14 percent of its screeners. 

Here are the TSA's original maximum staffing levels and mandated changes,
along with current screener counts, as well as the new revisions: 

--T.F. Green: An original maximum of 274, reduced to 225, for a loss of 49.
Screeners currently stand at 238 and will rise to 286, a gain of 48
positions. 

--Manchester: An original maximum of 200, reduced to 116, for a loss of 84
screeners. Currently there are 199 screeners, whose numbers will be reduced
to 172, a loss of 27 positions. 

--Portland: An original maximum of 101, reduced to 71, for a loss of 30.
Screeners currently stand at 99 and will drop to 95, for a loss of 4. 

--Logan: An original maximum of 1,047, reduced to 997, for a loss of 50.
Currently there are 1,006 screeners, which will be reduced to 981, for a
loss of 25. 

--Bradley: An original maximum of 307 screeners, which stayed at 307.
Currently there are 344, which will be reduced to 302, for a lost of 42. 

Davis said she doesn't anticipate a need for hiring at Green for the
additional screeners because workers at overstaffed airports will have an
opportunity to transfer. Previously the TSA has said that with downsizing,
all screening lanes will be operating at peak times, but that travelers
should expect that at mid-day or other off-peak times, not all lanes will be
staffed.


 Do you have an opinion about this story?
Share it with other readers in our CAA Discussion Forums

http://www.californiaaviation.org/dc/dcboard.php

*****************************************