Does the Screening Process Need Fixing?
 

This Iain Murray commentary offers some interesting observations on the cost of screening and suggests some alternatives. Here is a sample:

Yes, it is from a well known conservative publication, but let's try to bypass any politics and discuss the ideas. Some may be good.

So, what do we think here?

TSA has been an abject failure from the beginning, and continues to waste money and provide no measurable improvement is aviation security. Given the weight of the numerous failures documented by GAO, you'd think that rational leadership in Congress would recognize that we need to completely revamp and overhaul our approach to security.

Wait a minute. What am I doing, expecting rational leadership from Congress.....

the TSA needs a total rebuild.

It's too late. Whatever would replace the TSA would end up being essentially the same; part of DHS, same management, same screening force (where else would they come from ?). OK, some new legislation with teeth for accountability and oversight would be a big improvement, but the Great Security Machine is too well established to be reeled in now.

Tinker a bit with the TSA perhaps, and turn the screening over to the private sector. No more 'federal agent' cr@p, no more bottomless money pit. Won't happen.

To answer the question from the columnist, look at it from these points:

In 2008, the TSA claimed they have 43,000 screeners. This year, it now claims to have 50,000 people working for them (credit: FTer Radiogirl).

In an age where technology is rapidly displacing people in the private sector, the TSA manages to bloat itself.


About technology. The TSA has been around for about eight and a half years. The TSA has yet to "deploy" (one of their favorite words) better x-ray machines. I'm not talking about better monitors, sun shades or floor mats, but actual, better x-ray machines.

The TSA is still using technology from the 1970s at the checkpoints. 2-D x-ray machines that the TSA even points out in their own SOP Manual that doesn't pick up all gauges of wires. It's no wonder they fail so many GAO tests.

To put this into perspective, here are some things the TSA has purchased before purchasing better x-ray machines:

• Uniform changes (three times)
• "Engage" classes
• 'Puffer' machines that were doomed from the start
• Lifetime achievement awards (in 2004, when the TSA has been around for TWO years)
• A gym ($350,000)
• Silk plants and artwork ($500,000)
• First-birthday party ($461,000)
  (source for the last three)
• Should I bring up the $200+ million in SPOT?

I'm sure there are more, but that should answer the question.


The next time the TSA beats its chest about finding John Q. Moron who taped a brick of coke to his back or Jane Q. Moron who brought a plastic bag full of ganja, think about how many times the TSA has said they have passed the GAO's testing. It's the same number as number of terrorists the SPOT program has snuffed out.

May I ask the same question I have asked for some time now? Why does the general public not appear to have an issue with TSA, and in fact many laud it for being 'better' than screening in other airports around the world?

I recently had a series of flights at various airports in the UK and western Europe after a relatively long spell of US domestic travel, and was again struck by the differences in approach (and frankly the peace, calm, logic, and civility was what stood out most)

I read so often online from the infrequent traveller how 'poor' non-US screening is, and how the screening is substandard to TSA. Yet it appears that they don't understand the facts, and only look to the outward top layer, and take shoes off and barking to mean 'better'. Why are more of them not questioning this?

This is how I view TSA:

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3098/...0c71e2a8f1.jpg

Can it be fixed and at what cost?

Probably because most people have never traveled outside the US, and many believe the propaganda TSA puts out. Most people fly a handful of times a year, at that much, so the show is for them. It LOOKS like they're doing something. And after all, if it's a hassle, security must be tight. And we haven't had any planes going down. It all makes sense right? :rolleyes:

And as many people don't fly very often, even if they don't like it, they don't make a big deal about it because they don't have to deal with it option. The ones who complain about the process are marginalized as "nuts", "natives", etc. So the net result is we get what we have now.

Despite the many public failures, TSA isn't going anywhere because Congress is afraid to take it out. If something happens, it will be there butt in the fire for reigning in TSA, and you KNOW TSA will be saying "Well, if you had let us do X, this wouldn't have happened." Until enough people complain to Congress to overcome that fear of not getting re-elected, nothing will change.

I think that the general public just doesn't understand what a mistake TSA is. Most kettles that I see might be flying for the first time, or only fly once or twice per year. However, for frequent travelers such as most FTers, we find it a big nuisance. We may deal with TSA two-six times per week, and possible more often!

When I was in London, I flew out of LHR. What an easy screening process! All I had to do was take off my belt and I went right through the WTMD. It was a nice change from the normal TSA screening.

As an addendum to Superguy's response, I would add that many not only believe the propaganda the TSA puts out but also that they, personally, will be a victim of a terrorist attack. Therefore, the more they see the TSA doing, the safer they "feel."

Further, many people have fallen for the blue shirt/tin badge ploy and believe that TSA is LE. Therefore, anything the LE does can only make us safer.

Thank you for your responses.

I believe that it is virtually impossible to fix a problem if the problem is not even identified or acknowledged.

+100000

The other problem is that TSA thinks they are doing everything perfectly well. They cant see what a CF TSA has become.

From what I've seen at most checkpoints and outside TSA HQ, I don't think many TSA employees use the gym.

It's only for the deep thinkers at HQ.

Several points to answer this:

1. The TSA was built in a knee-jerk fashion in response to 9/11.

2. When the TSA was assembled, it was also during a time when airport security was the butt of a lot of jokes in America, primarily due to most of the screeners having a very loose command of the English language. The TSA's hiring standards brought on people who do speak English fluently, and it part of eye (or ear) candy for the general public.

3. Answering the question about the "around the world" thing. The TSA is admittedly between a rock and a hard place, for them no news is good news. However, they feel they need to justify their existence given they haven't caught any terrorists when their agency has the perception among some of needing to do just that.

That's a long way of coming to this point: The TSA does many things to bolster its PR image.

- They purchased new police-style uniforms, which they even admit was done to command respect from the traveling public.

- They have many signs in airports citing "testimonials" from its screeners, most invoking 9/11 somehow. 9/11 is rapidly becoming shamelessly used. Rudolph Giuliani used it as a platform to run for president, and the TSA uses it to boost its perceived value and image. And here in the States, it's an unwritten law that if you attach 9/11 to something, you're vilified if you go against it.

- The TSA doesn't cater to the frequent fliers. They focus in on Ma and Pa Kettle. You have heard of the 70/30 rule of flying (70% of the airlines' revenue is dependent on 30% of its passengers), right? That basically means that the TSA wants to cater to the 70% that are infrequent fliers, the ones that are in awe and easily impressed by things at the airport, including those police-imitation uniforms (again, purchased to command respect) worn by the TSA.

So, to summarize those points, it's all about the PR and its image for the TSA.


I largely do the travel you mention (though no UK), and I see the same thing at Western Europe airports as I do with U.S. airports.

I don't share the same point of view about civility. People yelling at me (and others) to take liquids out is not what I see (or hear) in Europe. "Male assist, no alarm" yelled out is not something I hear in Europe either.

The TSA would like to advertise professionalism, but actions speak a lot louder than words (even if you shout them).

The difference between U.S. and European screening is that the Europeans don't feel the need to justify their existence. Yes, some European lines can sometimes be a little (and I mean a little) slower, but I find them to be competent and professional.


Again, the warm and fuzzies about the PR the TSA puts out.

The Europeans just do their job, there's no "sizzle" or PR with what they do.

I should have said: "and employees I see outside the TSA HQ complex...." ;)

I actually have a friend like that. He was actually to the point of considering dividing his family up on two flights so his whole family didn't die in a plane crash or terrorist incident on the family vacation. :rolleyes: Got 3 (not 4 kids), so he'd take a kid or two with him and his wife would take the other(s). I thought he was absolutely nuts.

I brought out the usual arguments about more likely to die on the way to the airport, more likely to be struck by lightning, blah blah. He finally conceded that he could keep his family together but thought that TSA was absolutely doing a great job. Baby steps I guess.

Pretty much his fear came down to not being in control - that he was at someone else's mercy. When he's driving, he has control of the car and can dodge, etc. I pointed out that he has less control than he thinks - he can't control the other idiots around him and there's no guarantee that he'd have the room, skill, or even the chance to react. And I also asked him how he felt riding in car as a passenger then since he has no control. Same thing - just he's on the ground instead of in the air.

And yes, he's the once a year type flyer too.

We pretty much don't talk about this topic anymore.

^ :D

Fixing?

TSA should be wiped off the map and replaced with Argenbright.

While not advocating paranoia about air travel or absurd/extreme measures, I have always wondered about the validity of the stats that claim flying is so much safer than driving and the claims that drivers actually don't have much/enough control to make a difference.

For example, a large plurality of car-accident injuries and fatalities happen between 1 a.m. and 5 a.m. and/or involve alcohol/drug consumption on the part of the driver of that car (not the driver of the other car, which I cannot control). I can control both of those factors by avoiding the roads between 1 a.m. and 5 a.m. and not driving drunk or riding with a drunk driver. I wonder how much of the safety margin between flying and driving is eliminated by those simple choices. Add more margin by not driving sleepy, minimizing or avoiding cell phone use, etc.

In contrast, I have little to no control over the rested state or impaired state of commercial airline pilots, other than FAA regulations and the margin provided by requiring a copilot. I would not have driven a car under the conditions that the pilots of Continental/Colgan Air 3407 were operating, but it's unlikely any of the passengers knew how sleep-deprived and distracted their crew was.

DMV's are routinely mocked as striking epitomes of government inefficiency, and yet most people put up with them on a very infrequent basis to renew a license, get a permit for a teenager, etc. Everyone hates doing it, everyone acknowledges it sucks, but since the general public is only forced to patronize one every few years, it's easy to dismiss. It's easy to think "Oh, I was just here on a busy day/time, I'm sure the line isn't normally this long."

Of course, if you visited the DMV weekly for years at a time, it would be enough to make your blood boil. But if there is a drivertalk.com, I doubt the DMV would be subject to even one-tenth the vitriol that we direct towards the TSA because the vast majority of the public just doesn't interact with it enough.

One experience, no matter how egregiously terrible, is rarely enough to inspire any behavior change. Think of a restaurant or grocery store or pretty much any retail outlet where you had a negative experience. Short of being physically assualted or robbed, one long line or a lousy clerk is not likely to dissuade you from returning.

Those who fly frequently clearly have a valuable perspective and insight into truly how terrible the TSA, its procedures, management, and employees truly are. However, I'm not sure what, if anything, can be done to share this experience in a meaningful way that will produce any substantial result.

9/11 is like the corollary to Godwin's Law.

Mike

TSA* needs to be FIXED, as in "we're taking Fido to the vet to get FIXED." :D @:-)

*Before anyone complains about verbal attacks, I mean the organization as an entity, not the individual screeners. :rolleyes:

TSA could also be called CYA (cover your you know what) as I think that was the driving force for it's creation by the government. We are spending billions to screen 99.999 of those flying who have no intention on doing anything but flying from point to point. It needs a major overhaul.

I don't travel very often at all, but even on my few travels I have found the European security theater more respectful than the TSA. I might be lucky, but I have never had a TSO yell or be rude to me. The big difference to me personally is the way searches of my baggage is handled.

I carry a lot of camera equipment and my bags to get cluttered due to the need to fit a lot of stuff into my camera bag. So I know that I often get picked to have my bags searched at the checkpoint. This search is where I see the most difference between the US and Europe.

US: Watch as the TSO takes off with your bags as you try to put on your shoes. (I almost think that they make us take of our shoes so that we cannot catch them, I have also learned to put my most likely bag to trigger screening on the belt last). Watch as the TSO opens compartments (if you know where they went with your bag), digs through your bags, picks up expensive equipment and then almost drops it, banging equipment against each other, try to shove everything back into the bag while scratching and denting it, giving you "respect my authority" looks when you tell them "this bag and everything in it costs $5,000 so please be a little bit more careful with it".

Europe: When my bag triggers screening their security stands next to it and attempts to locate the owner. After they find me they ask me to carry it to the secondary screening table. They ask me to open the compartments. They ask me to remove equipment. They ask me to manipulate the equipment (please take the lens off the camera, please take the cap of this, please open this container). They ask me questions about some of my equipment (most often "Why is there a countdown timer attached to these metal pipes?"). They are very direct and straightforwards with their requests/commands, but I have never encoundered what I would consider rude. And I can also honestly say that I don't think I ever had a European lay a finger on any of my equipment.

That could be perceived as making the checkpoint experience as calmer and less distracting. :D The security eunuchs at the moat...:D

It's curious to me why infrequent travelers would have much of anything to say about screening in the U.S. given nil basis for comparison. I am wondering where one might find this outpouring of opinion?

I am disgusted that any thinking adult would consider this necessary. Those poor kids are going to grow up afraid of their own shadows.