Sequester Security Nightmare?
Feb 27, 2013 | 5:59 am
#31
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: An NPR mind living in a Fox News world
Posts: 14,343
I posted this in the other thread, so I'll paraphrase:
1) Contractors will feel it first, depending on the contract. Not sure whether MCI and SFO are contracted with TSA or the airports - if with TSA, then hit first.... if with the airports, then likely no effect.
2) The administration controls the personnel (absent direct laws mandating specific staffing). They can (and will) staff in a way that increases delays materially to make the other party look bad. It will backfire if there is documented evidence that they are deliberately reducing staffing to increase delays to make other party look bad. If, on the other hand, make the case that this is just in-kind fallout from the sequestration, it will in fact make the other party look bad. There's a fine line, and make no mistake that they will make it just bad enough to make folks squeal but not so bad that they get blamed.
3) Expect it to hit pre-check first as the few folks that use that are considered "privileged" and are expected to wield the most influence on the hill. The lines are seen by the public as overstaffed relative to the numbers processed (that's the failing of the agency to approve enough folks, but that's also a different argument). The net effect will be to make the regular lines longer and delay folks.
4) From the Global Entry perspective, I'd still expect GE to function normally, though they may shut the expedited Customs function. Meaning you'll still save some time unless you get the X, but not as much as normal. I'd also expect longer Customs lines as I'd expect them to understaff the regular exits.
1) Contractors will feel it first, depending on the contract. Not sure whether MCI and SFO are contracted with TSA or the airports - if with TSA, then hit first.... if with the airports, then likely no effect.
2) The administration controls the personnel (absent direct laws mandating specific staffing). They can (and will) staff in a way that increases delays materially to make the other party look bad. It will backfire if there is documented evidence that they are deliberately reducing staffing to increase delays to make other party look bad. If, on the other hand, make the case that this is just in-kind fallout from the sequestration, it will in fact make the other party look bad. There's a fine line, and make no mistake that they will make it just bad enough to make folks squeal but not so bad that they get blamed.
3) Expect it to hit pre-check first as the few folks that use that are considered "privileged" and are expected to wield the most influence on the hill. The lines are seen by the public as overstaffed relative to the numbers processed (that's the failing of the agency to approve enough folks, but that's also a different argument). The net effect will be to make the regular lines longer and delay folks.
4) From the Global Entry perspective, I'd still expect GE to function normally, though they may shut the expedited Customs function. Meaning you'll still save some time unless you get the X, but not as much as normal. I'd also expect longer Customs lines as I'd expect them to understaff the regular exits.
As a guy who is in the national security/first response business, the timing of the sequestration was not lost on me. It's a quiet disaster period and is generally a time when federal agencies prepare for the coming year by cutting costs anyway. We're past hurricane season, we're about 6-8 weeks from the big tornado/thunderstorm season, and, snowstorms are mostly a state & local problem. The only things that could throw a monkey wrench into the political machine would be a major west coast earthquake or a west coast volcano that decides to blow its top. Both could happen in Alaska, but there aren't that many people up there to take care of.
Feb 27, 2013 | 6:00 am
#32
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 150
So 3/1/13 will be like any other day.... it'll be 3/8/13 or April when the staffing would be affected.
Feb 27, 2013 | 7:10 am
#33
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Nashville, TN
Programs: WN Nothing and spending the half million points from too many flights, Hilton Diamond
Posts: 8,043
We may be assuming they would follow procedure. All they have to do is not schedule enough people and when things back up scream "Sequester!"
Honesty and openness are not two of their redeeming qualities.
Honesty and openness are not two of their redeeming qualities.
Feb 27, 2013 | 7:32 am
#34
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Mountain Time Zone
Programs: AS Million Miler/Marriott Lifetime Titanium/ IGH Ambassador
Posts: 6,126
Feb 27, 2013 | 7:59 am
#35
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Nashville, TN
Programs: WN Nothing and spending the half million points from too many flights, Hilton Diamond
Posts: 8,043
Answer this question:
Is it within the administration's mode of operation to create havoc so they can blame it on the opposition?
If yes, then there will be problems. If no, they are blowing smoke.
If the sequester continues, I will be greatly surprised and pleased if the administration with the cooperation of the media do not maximize the perception of the problems just for political effects. It is what politicians of both parties usually do.
Is it within the administration's mode of operation to create havoc so they can blame it on the opposition?
If yes, then there will be problems. If no, they are blowing smoke.
If the sequester continues, I will be greatly surprised and pleased if the administration with the cooperation of the media do not maximize the perception of the problems just for political effects. It is what politicians of both parties usually do.
Feb 27, 2013 | 8:19 am
#36
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: DCA / WAS
Programs: DL 2+ million/PM, YX, Marriott Plt, *wood gold, HHonors, CO Plt, UA, AA EXP, WN, AGR
Posts: 9,386
As a guy who is in the national security/first response business, the timing of the sequestration was not lost on me. It's a quiet disaster period and is generally a time when federal agencies prepare for the coming year by cutting costs anyway. We're past hurricane season, we're about 6-8 weeks from the big tornado/thunderstorm season, and, snowstorms are mostly a state & local problem. The only things that could throw a monkey wrench into the political machine would be a major west coast earthquake or a west coast volcano that decides to blow its top. Both could happen in Alaska, but there aren't that many people up there to take care of.
If yes, then there will be problems. If no, they are blowing smoke.
If the sequester continues, I will be greatly surprised and pleased if the administration with the cooperation of the media do not maximize the perception of the problems just for political effects. It is what politicians of both parties usually do.
If the sequester continues, I will be greatly surprised and pleased if the administration with the cooperation of the media do not maximize the perception of the problems just for political effects. It is what politicians of both parties usually do.
Feb 27, 2013 | 8:50 am
#37
Suspended
Join Date: Dec 2012
Programs: A3, AA. Plasticy things! That give me, y'know, Stuff!
Posts: 6,293
Feb 27, 2013 | 10:49 am
#39
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 3,657
I'm not so certain ... given that (a) the original idea was that the sequester wouldn't happen at all, and (b) much of US government action appears to succeed on the basis of dumb luck, I'd be much more likely to believe that the timing of the sequester was accidental, rather than intentional ...
Feb 27, 2013 | 3:37 pm
#40
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Portland, OR
Programs: DL MM Gold
Posts: 1,687
Indeed. Whatever percentage of the screening operation that's covered by the fees should not be touched by the sequester. Unless the fees also drop in lockstep with the budget? Nah.
Feb 27, 2013 | 5:37 pm
#41
Moderator: Coupon Connection & S.P.A.M
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Louisville, KY
Programs: Destination Unknown, TSA Disparager Diamond (LTDD)
Posts: 58,132
Feb 28, 2013 | 7:54 am
#42
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: BOS and vicinity
Programs: Former UA 1P
Posts: 3,730
One federal (DoD type) contractor around here was claiming that he was unlikely to be impacted because the contract had already been paid for the year (presumably fiscal year), so there was no reason to quit working, take furloughs, etc. If the "cuts" last, there might be issues with future contracts, but he seemed to think the current one was pretty safe.
Feb 28, 2013 | 9:15 am
#43
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Nashville, TN
Programs: WN Nothing and spending the half million points from too many flights, Hilton Diamond
Posts: 8,043
Any idea what the durations of the screening contracts are?
One federal (DoD type) contractor around here was claiming that he was unlikely to be impacted because the contract had already been paid for the year (presumably fiscal year), so there was no reason to quit working, take furloughs, etc. If the "cuts" last, there might be issues with future contracts, but he seemed to think the current one was pretty safe.
One federal (DoD type) contractor around here was claiming that he was unlikely to be impacted because the contract had already been paid for the year (presumably fiscal year), so there was no reason to quit working, take furloughs, etc. If the "cuts" last, there might be issues with future contracts, but he seemed to think the current one was pretty safe.
Feb 28, 2013 | 3:27 pm
#44
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: DCA / WAS
Programs: DL 2+ million/PM, YX, Marriott Plt, *wood gold, HHonors, CO Plt, UA, AA EXP, WN, AGR
Posts: 9,386
Any idea what the durations of the screening contracts are?
One federal (DoD type) contractor around here was claiming that he was unlikely to be impacted because the contract had already been paid for the year (presumably fiscal year), so there was no reason to quit working, take furloughs, etc. If the "cuts" last, there might be issues with future contracts, but he seemed to think the current one was pretty safe.
One federal (DoD type) contractor around here was claiming that he was unlikely to be impacted because the contract had already been paid for the year (presumably fiscal year), so there was no reason to quit working, take furloughs, etc. If the "cuts" last, there might be issues with future contracts, but he seemed to think the current one was pretty safe.
Virtually ALL Federal contracts provide for cancellation at the "convenience of the Government". So, regardless of term, they can be canceled upon whatever notice is required in the contract clauses.
I should add that contract screeners that are contracted by the airport/local authorities (rather than by TSA) will not be affected by the sequestration unless the local government obtains the funding from the Feds.
Feb 28, 2013 | 3:40 pm
#45
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 145
It depends.
Virtually ALL Federal contracts provide for cancellation at the "convenience of the Government". So, regardless of term, they can be canceled upon whatever notice is required in the contract clauses.
I should add that contract screeners that are contracted by the airport/local authorities (rather than by TSA) will not be affected by the sequestration unless the local government obtains the funding from the Feds.
Virtually ALL Federal contracts provide for cancellation at the "convenience of the Government". So, regardless of term, they can be canceled upon whatever notice is required in the contract clauses.
I should add that contract screeners that are contracted by the airport/local authorities (rather than by TSA) will not be affected by the sequestration unless the local government obtains the funding from the Feds.
castro