gsoltso

Doesn't TSA create the regs on who, how, and what is screened? If TSA wanted to screen airport workers all need be done is write a new regulation.

Piggybacking may be illegal so I guess that should not be a concern as nothing illegal ever happens in airports.

If TSA's budget was only $8 million annually that would still be $8 million dollars to much.[/QUOTE]

Not necessarily. Some regulations are mandated by Congress, some are mandated by The White House, some are mandated by DHS, some are mandated by the FAA. TSA creates some of the regs, and enforces some of the regs, but there are other entities that also have regs we have to be aware of (at least at the policy/regulation making level). That was one of the biggest challenges with standing TSA up in the beginning, was segregating the process for enacting regulations from the FAA and inserting it into DHS/TSA. In the beginning there was terrible confusion on the part of all involved (especially the airlines and the screening workforce). Now, things have settled into a fairly well defined process, where the powers that be work out the way regulations are created and implemented before it is published - at least, that is how it reportedly works now (see the proposed change on knives as a prohibited item, for how the political angles and lobbying can completely derail common sense changes).

Funny, you actually implied that I was implying that there is nothing to be concerned about. I don't recall ever saying something of that nature. Let me be a bit clearer - Piggybacking may indeed be one of the ways these folks that do not have a badge get into their normal work space without the badge, but it is illegal and illegal is bad by definition.... nope, still about the same message, none of it indicating that we should not be concerned with piggybacking at high security doors.

We all have our opinions.

Section 107

Piggybacking may be illegal so I guess that should not be a concern as nothing illegal ever happens in airports.[/QUOTE]

Exactly! Which is the same reason no one ever gets shot with unauthorized guns in DC.

Yes, it happens, but the sanctions for piggybacking are severe for both the -backer and the -backee. In some cases, not just the employees but the companies they work for are dismissed from the airport (contracts cancelled or not renewed) because of badge violations.

At some airports, such as Dulles, many airport employees do have to be screened to get to the secure areas.

Again, see the earlier thread on this but 100% screening of employees accessing the SIDA will not happen at least at medium and large airports for at least three reasons: 1) it is impractical, 2. it is prohibitively expensive, and 3) it will result in a miniscule increase in aviation safety.

As detailed in the other thread, right now the costs for the traveling public to be screened are borne by the travelers with significant subsidizing by the general taxpayer. But the costs (not just for infrastructure to accommodate the screening but also for the vast amounts of time needed) to screen all employeeswould be borne mostly by travelers with much lower rate of subsidy from the general public for it to be even somewhat politically acceptable.

That means drastically increased ticket prices (security fees, facility charges, and enplanement fees) probably on the order of $100 and I suspect much more PLUS significantly higher costs of all items and services at airports because of all the extra time needed by those workers to go through screening.

Put it in a different perspective: this year there will 30,000 - 40,000 homicides of occupants of motor vehicles just in the United States. Across the planet there will be many times that number. Now, it is empirically proven that automobiles can be made in which the occupants will survive collisions at speeds well over 100mph with minimal injuries (see race cars). We could save 27,000 - 36,000 (90%) lives (and untold number of injuries) each year just in the US by requiring cars be built to do so. The savings in funeral expenses, medical expenses, property damage might offset a fair portion of the cost. But we don't do it because it is impractical and phenomenally expensive. As a society we have decided those lives just aren't worth the expense. Probably half of those could be saved just by requiring breathalyzer interlocks in all vehicles at a cost of less than $100 per vehicle but we wont even go to those lengths.

Over the last 10 years how many aviation deaths and injuries have occurred because 100% of airport employees were not screened? You don't even need all the fingers on one hand to count them all.

So how many thousands of millions of dollars more should we spend to screen all airport employees so you don't have to use any fingers on one hand to count the aviation deaths and injuries attributable to unscreened airport workers?

Why would a society that wont even spend $100 per vehicle to prevent at least 10,000 deaths a year spend magnitudes more than that to save a negligible* number of lives in aviation?

*negligible in terms of both actual and relative numbers and not terms of the actual persons.

Keep in mind that previously you stated that even $8 million dollars a year is too much of a budget for TSA. Now what do you say?

Also, keep in mind that screening of employees is pointless if all vehicles and material entering the secure and SIDA areas are not also thoroughly inspected. Yeah, that isn't going to happen either.

Boggie Dog

Each of your arguments can be applied to passenger screening.

How much of a gain in security was gained by rolling out expensive Whole Body Strip Search machines, or making passengers remove shoes, belts, and other garments? Or restricting liquids as is currently done even while a previous head of TSA said liquid restrictions should be lifted?

1.8 million passengers are screened daily and it would have little impact to screen airport workers in the exact same security lanes as passengers. The cost do not go up significantly nor does the need for increased manpower go up by any great margin.

Airport workers are not screened because that's how the airports, workers, and their unions want it. Security comes up second or third in that discussion.

Riddle me this, why are flight crews screened if all other airport workers are not? Yes I know it is to a lower standard than passengers.

If security is the real goal then not screening airport workers is a criminal oversight.

Section 107

You are preaching to the choir about the fallacies of the current security regime.

Its not a difficult riddle - the answer is based purely on experience: from where have all recent attacks on civilian aviation occurred (not counting Putin's downing of the Malaysian plane)? The plumbers, electricians, accountants, operations officers, baggage handlers, and administrative types? Yeah, no. They have all come from the passenger cabin or the flight deck itself. History shows we are much more at risk from fellow passengers and pilots than from airport workers.

Holding up examples of previous bad decisions does not justify making more bad decisions.

I must apologize - I keep saying "refer to the earlier thread" and the link I gave was not to the thread I meant. This http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/pract...nscreened.html is the thread I meant where we have had exactly the same conversation and I explain how/why costs for travelers absolutely must go up.

Many airport workers do use the same screening lines as pax; others use dedicated employee screening areas. Except for the added time to go through those lines I agree, there is not much impact. But to screen all employees will absolutely have enormous impact and will require very significant amounts of additional manpower.

A modest example: the jetbridge malfunctions and passengers cannot exit a plane on a normal very hot IAH day. As pax start fuming what can the pilot say but, "Operations informs me the electricians have been called and are currently in the security screening lines waiting for their turn to pass through the nude-o-scope. To speed things up they have already taken off their tool belts and boots, put their degreaser and WD-40 in plastic baggies and their toolboxes are ready to pass through X-ray. Hopefully it won't be long as there are only 23 kettles and 4 families with young children ahead of them."

Half hour later pilot says, "Well, folks, I have an update - the electricians are finally here with their tools that were allowed through the checkpoint. They tell me they have identified the problem, have radioed the warehouse and are waiting on the part to arrive to fix it."

15 minutes later the pilot says, "Folks, I know everyone is eager to get off the plane." [as an aside he says to the copilot: 'so glad they hardened these cockpit doors,' forgetting he still has an open mic] "I have another update. Operations informs me the warehouse has located the part and its on its way. The warehouse is only 5 miles away on the other side of the airport so it shouldn't be long before the parts guy gets to the security screening location."

10 minutes later the pilot says, "Good news folks, the part parts guy is at TSA screening. Unfortunately, he doesn't have Pre-check. Fortunately, there are not many people ahead of him and the line is moving pretty well. Shouldn't be too much longer."

30 minutes later the pilot says, "Ah, um, another update folks. The parts guy was delayed at the screening checkpoint because some guy with a yellow luggage tag that said "FT" on his carryon started a discussion with a low level TSA employee about what right did they have to subject his family jewels to unnecessary microwaves and how come they STILL don't know that Washington DC is actually a recognized jurisdiction and his drivers license IS a legitimate ID (even though he doesn't really need an ID by TSAs own rules). But, he finally made it through the checkpoint with the part. However, the electricians just noticed that the TSA prohibited the tool needed to install the part from passing through the checkpoint because it was too long, pointy, and shiny. Or metallic - they are not sure why it wasn't allowed through. So they are trying to figure out what to do. In any event, the electrician thinks some TSA agent's boyfriend is gonna get a really nice Snap-on screwdriver set for their 6-month anniversary. I will give you another update as soon as I have more information."

15 minutes later pilot says, "Good news folks! Operations has figured out a solution. So, um, what they are going to do is move us from this gate to another gate where they assure me the jetbridge is working. Please release the flight attendants from the restrooms, take your seats and keep your seatbelts fastened until the doors are opened. Shouldn't be long now. Flight attendants, please arm the doors and crosscheck. If you can."

15 minutes later the pilot says, "Thanks for your patience folks. Unfortunately, none of the gates we are contracted to use are available. So, um, they are going to park us on a hardstand and we will exit this 747 using Airstairs. Buses will take you to the terminal.

[as an aside he says to the copilot: 'No way I am opening this door until the FAM says they are all gone,' forgetting he still has an open mic]
-------

Admittedly, some writer's embellishment was employed in the above - pilots never give that much information about what is happening or why - except when you are sleeping on a redeye to let you know you passing over a wave in ocean or the Grand Canyon.

Boggie Dog

Airport employee screening would certainly take some adjustments in routine and procedures but I don't see it as big a deal as some are making it out to be.

For those who say "I Can't" you rarely do.

gsoltso

Most likely the lack of seeing it as "big a deal as some are making it out to be" stems from not working at a larger airport (or even a smaller one like mine). The access systems are myriad, and while they are controlled by either access pads (bio and or coded), or personnel - they are not even remotely centralized. Here we have access points all around the airfield, depending upon the company and what they do for said company. At LAX or LGA or ATL, the same situation is even more large scale. Centralizing would be a huge undertaking.

chollie

I'm sure that a few short years ago, people would have said that the nonsense we undergo at the checkpoints would be unworkable, too.

"Search EVERY pax? Including putting our hands on their privates and inside their clothes? That's never going to work! People will be standing in lines for hours!"

Heaven forbid, but if there ever is an actual terrorist episode involving unscreened employees, I think a whole lot of people are suddenly going to be finding ways to make the 'impossible' happen.

Boggie Dog

Some years ago I had a security credential that gave me access to DFW's ramps, aircraft, and hanger/shop areas. I did not need an escort but times have changed since then. Even then a person had to have proper credentials to gain access.

Today airport employee screening isn't being done but not because its to hard or to time consuming but because TSA just doesn't want to.

I agree that many procedures and processes would require changing but the changes could be done if the will was there.

Not making employee screening a priority tells me that TSA is really not interested in real security.

Should something happen and it is determined that an insider had a hand in the event I hope to god that TSA's decision makers are held both legally and personally responsible for the dereliction to their duties.

chollie

Nah, they'll just hire 500 additional over-paid BDOs to stand around and play with their cellphones behind the scenes.