Seminole
Member
Interesting story in the Washington Post about airports wanting to return to security checks run by private firms rather than the government. It shouldn't be surprising that the private sector can do it better and more efficiently than the government, but it IS surprising that the airports are admitting so soon (although privately at this point) that they want to return to private contract screeners.
Airports Favor Private-Sector Screeners
By Sara Kehaulani Goo
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, May 30, 2003; Page E01
Just months after the federal government took over screening at security checkpoints, airports across the country are starting to show interest in returning to an airport security system handled by the private sector.
With Memorial Day kicking off what the airline industry hopes will be a small but noticeable uptick in passenger travel, airports are worried that the Transportation Security Administration's planned workforce reduction this summer will result in long security lines. Adding to the concern over potentially slow checkpoints is that the agency recently told airports it could not meet its goal of getting passengers through security in 10 minutes.
Many airports would not say publicly that they want to switch to private contract screeners. But an official of the nation's largest group representing airport owners said several dozen airports, including major hubs, have expressed an interest.
"Our fear of federalization is what we call the INS and customs problem -- that we would have a shortage of qualified screeners, and this would lead to lines getting longer at airports," said Steve Van Beek, a senior vice president of Airports Council International-North America.
Van Beek said airports want more control over the staffing of security personnel, as airline service tends to change rapidly and a federal workforce does not have the reputation for doing so.
Meanwhile, private screening companies that used to staff security checkpoints before the terrorist attacks, and some companies that have little experience in screening, are preparing to enter the business.
"This is new for us," said Steve Raquel, marketing director at Covenant Aviation Security LLC, a small aviation services firm. "Our desire is that more airports will desire to make the switch. We're keeping tabs on it and how things are progressing."
Under a law passed by Congress after the terrorist attacks in 2001, airports may apply to the TSA to "opt out" of having federal screeners and instead allow the TSA to hire a private contractor by November 2004.
TSA spokesman Robert Johnson said that the agency is still working on details of the program, but that private screeners would adhere to hiring and training standards as strict as those for federal screeners.
Johnson also said he doubts that the lines at security checkpoints will be as long as the airports predict.
Aviation security experts said European airports with tight security prove that good security does not necessarily mean government security, as long as the government sets and adheres to strict standards. But they also said private firms face a large public relations hurdle in distancing themselves from the image of Argenbright Security Inc., a now-defunct company that became a symbol of low-paid workers whose high turnover and poor English-language skills contributed to airport security lapses.
"The reason it was so bad prior to the federal takeover is the law simply said airlines must provide passenger screening, and the Federal Aviation Administration was supposed to promulgate performance and training standards," said Robert W. Poole Jr., director of transportation studies at Reason Foundation, a nonprofit public policy organization. "There's a long history of the FAA failing to do that."
Peter Winch, national organizer for the American Federation of Government Employees, said privatizing airport security "sends the signal of retreat."
"It's the wrong message in the war on terror," said Winch, whose group is trying to organize TSA screeners. "For TSA, just supervising a bunch of contract operations would lead to different standards at different airports. It would get away from one national security system."
San Francisco International and Kansas City International were among five airports selected last fall to participate in a pilot program that allowed them to keep a private screening workforce. Officials at both airports said they are pleased with the companies' performance.
"The lines are moving quickly; the baggage screeners are helpful, friendly and professional," said Kandice Bender, deputy airport director at San Francisco.
Worldwide Security Associates Inc. -- a subsidiary of WSA Group Inc., which used to provide security screening before the terrorist attacks -- and Aviation Safeguards, a unit of Command Security Corp., are interested in providing services, according to a source familiar with their plans.
Other firms, such as Huntleigh USA and Wackenhut Corp., both subsidiaries of foreign companies, are barred by the aviation security law from doing screening at airport checkpoints.
"There are companies that have been examining closely their ownership structure in order to comply with the citizenship requirement for airport screening," said Ken Quinn, a lawyer at Pillsbury Winthrop in Washington, which represents aviation and security firms.
