"Airports may apply for private screeners by end of year"

Sunday, July 11, 2004

Airports may apply for private screeners by end of year
BY TAMARA LYTLE
The Orlando (FL) Sentinel


WASHINGTON -- Airports soon will be allowed to use private contractors
to check passengers and baggage for weapons and explosives - a move that
has opened a fault line in a nation where memories of the Sept. 11
attacks are still raw.

"We could be opening the door to more danger to the flying public," said
Peter Winch, national organizer for the American Federation of
Government Employees. "We don't want to see a crazy quilt of regimes in
different airports."

But supporters think Winch and others are exaggerating the impact of
switching from federal workers to private employees for airport-security
detail. Private screeners, they said, would be much better trained and
supervised than those before Sept. 11.

Some think a change might be an improvement.

"We've had two years and can see the Swiss-cheese holes in the system,"
said U.S. Rep. John Mica, R-Fla., chairman of the House Aviation
Subcommittee who has access to secret investigations of how many weapons
are missed by federal screeners. "The failure rate to detect weapons and
explosives is totally unacceptable, and it's not that much better than
before Sept. 11."

The nation's airport-security system went through a complete overhaul
after the terrorist attacks that killed nearly 3,000 people on Sept. 11,
2001. Security is no longer entrusted to those with poor training,
criminal records and miserable pay that led to high turnover and
inexperience.

After the attacks, Congress passed a bill assigning all airport
screening to federal employees as a way to ensure accountability. The
new team has grown to 45,000 workers.

At the time, lawmakers left open the option to return to at least some
private screeners.

Since then, Republicans who control Congress have been privately
appalled that they presided over one of the largest expansions of the
federal bureaucracy in history. At one point the number of screeners
grew to almost 56,000 - about twice what Congress had first envisioned -
before lawmakers mandated a cap of 45,000.

Lauren Stover, spokeswoman for the Transportation Security
Administration that oversees screening, said airport security is much
better these days. The new requirements, she said, have improved
security and will be applied to private contractors:

_Screeners receive 100 hours of training, compared with a cursory system
before Sept. 11. And they must go through background checks.

_Screeners are subjected to new secret tests to determine whether they
are catching weapons now. Government testers can program computers to
show hidden weapons on the video monitors as screeners go about their
regular work to see whether they find the threats.

_And the new federal screeners are better paid than their predecessors
to attract a better quality of worker.

"TSA screening is exponentially better than pre-9-11," Stover said. And
the stricter federal controls, she said, would remain in place even if
some airports opt for private screeners.

Each airport now has a TSA employee called a "federal security
director." That person would continue to oversee screening, even if a
private contractor were hiring the workers.

Federal rules - new since Sept. 11 - would apply to the pay and level of
training for each screener. Federal employees would secretly test the
private screeners, just as they do the current government workers. And
federal rules would govern security rules such as the types of items
that can be brought aboard a plane.

But as TSA begins laying out the rules for private screening, it's not
clear exactly how the agency would guarantee that the quality of the
screening by private firms would be equal to the current system. TSA
would pay private contractors from the money it would have spent on
federal screeners. But the contractors would have some control of
important issues such as work schedules and hiring.

Private contractors already are being tested at five handpicked
airports. Several studies have shown little difference between federal
screeners and the private contractors in San Francisco; Jackson Hole,
Wyo.; Kansas City, Mo; Rochester, N.Y.; and Tupelo, Miss. One study, for
instance, compared federal and private workers and found little
difference in cost, customer service or the ability to catch weapons.

That's not necessarily a compliment. Homeland Security Inspector General
Clark Kent Ervin said they performed "equally poorly" in undercover
tests.

Michael Boyd, a Colorado aviation-security consultant, said the TSA is a
bureaucratic failure.

"All we've done is created a very expensive bureaucracy to look for
pointy objects," he said. "TSA is the DMV from hell."

Boyd said TSA needs more professional managers who are held accountable
when mistakes happen. For instance, he said, no heads rolled last year
when a college student slipped box cutters and other banned items onto
six Southwest Airlines flights as his own test of security.

But Doug Wills, of the airline trade group Air Transport Association,
said screening is better and customer service has improved under TSA.
"They're getting there."

A recent poll by Zogby International showed passengers felt safer with
federal screeners. Winch said that perception is behind the revival of
the travel industry this summer.

Richard Atkinson III, director of Yeager Airport in Charleston, W.Va.,
recently testified before Congress that Sept. 11 showed the weakness of
having private contractors.

"The essential role of government is to ensure the safety and security
of the citizens, and I believe that airline-passenger screening is an
essential national defense action."

Mica and other Republicans in Congress, however, have more faith in the
private sector. He said other important security jobs, such as guarding
nuclear plants, are trusted to private companies and so should
screening. David Stempler, president of the Air Travelers Association,
which represents passengers, said the quality of screening is about six
times better than before Sept. 11 but still not great.

Some airports - and travelers - are annoyed with the TSA. Aside from the
quality issues raised in various reports such as Ervin's, TSA draws most
of its criticism for its inability to schedule enough staff at peak
times at some airports and for centralized and balky decision making.

David Plavin of Airports Council International said some airport
officials are "supremely frustrated" with TSA and want private
screeners. Others think the federal government ought to figure out how
to "do it right" themselves.

About 25 airports are on a list of those with problems caused by long
lines during peak travel periods.

Airports have until Nov. 19 to apply for the new program. Mica said he
expects many of the nation's 440 airports to ask for private screeners.
TSA said 40 to 100 airports have expressed some interest.

Rep. Peter DeFazio, D-Ore., said he doubts the math will add up for
airports. The private screeners must be paid comparably to federal
screeners under the new system. And the airports will get about the same
amount of money as is being spent on federal screeners, so they could
end up with fewer workers if they have to cover the profits of a private
contractor, DeFazio said.


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

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


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