security screenings - where is the standard?
 

OK, so Im the first to realize that Im not one of these consultants on airport security that get paid to speak about this, but Im just a traveller that has a (relatively) good memory and can notice what I feel is an apparent lack of standards in the levels of scrutiny for security screenings.

Here is my tale:

I did MEX-MIA-EZE on Thursday Nov. 1st. Upon arrival to MIA, I had to do the new thing with reclaiming bags and going through customs, and then exit the secure area to re-check my bag and go to the RCC. Needless to say, I had to go through the MIA security checkpoint (Xray and the now common hand-scanner routine) before being allowed to enter concourse F. Things were well organized, and you were required to remove laptops and place them in the X-ray machine separately, you had to remove all metal objects from your pockets, and then had to go through one or two metal detector arches (depending on whether the first went off or not), and then at the end you got a final screening from a security agent with a hand-held device. On this leg (outbound), the first metal detector went off, so I did the second, and then got the hand-held check. This hand-held scan was very meticulous, and they even screened my boots twice, then asked me to remove the boots to check my socks, and then had me xray the boots. Also, the xray machine check of my large carry-on backpack (containing 3 SLR camera bodies, multiple lenses, and a lead bag holding my unexposed 135mm film) caught the guards eye and they asked to hand check the lead bag. After a solid hand inspection, the bag was xrayed again and then I was cleared to proceed towards the gate area. All in all, the process was quick, efficient and thorough.

Alas, here's what happened on my return leg EZE-MIA-MEX on Monday, November 5th. This time, after arrival in MIA I went through the same checkpoint to the concourse F area. I had the same metal money clip in my pocket that fired off the first metal detector, the same boots I had on the outbound leg, and the same camera bag with all the gear and the lead bag. However, the result of the screening was a 'little different'. My money clip did not fire off the first metal detector, so I was spared the second detector. Then, the hand-held scanner routine was a joke, he only did me super fast in the
front, no turning around, no boot check, no nothing. My camera bag and, more importantly, my lead bag was ignored. The lead bag I carry is a large one, I can fit almost 20 rolls of 135mm film in those little plastic cylinders inside it, so it has the size for me to slip a medium sized semi-automatic pistol in it. Since its the strongest protecting lead bag you can buy (ie. its good for very fast film), the Xray machines cannot penetrate it. You cannot see what is inside. I just got my bag and proceeded to the gate. I was not again checked before I boarded the aircraft.

So... I understand that all these machines have sensitivity levels that you can adjust, and also that its very probable that even the most elaborate safety precautions involve sampling. But.. isnt the lead bag incident something to worry about? Also, how is it possible that the levels/standards for screening at MIA could vary so much in such a short period? (my trip to EZE was only 3 days).

Thoughts...?

------------------
Gaucho100K

[This message has been edited by Gaucho100K (edited 11-07-2001).]

Is there a standard? http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/wink.gif

Recently several people have gotten through with guns (multiple airports), stun guns, mace, knives. Most, if not all of those items should have been easily identified, and they were not. Your lead bag looked like a square probably, and since it wasn't a disposable razor, or nail clippers, they were not trained to care.

I do believe random checks are good, and I do believe the new standards are good, but as you clearly show, there isn't a standard. What is good today wasn't yesterday. There will never be a perfect answer, but there has to be consistancy.

I was at PHL last week and got the most complete security check yet- of any airport. X-ray machine, baggage search, wand scan and physical pat down. Everything except a cavity search. Was there again this week, with everything being the same except the garments in my bag, and got nothing but the walk thru xray. Absolutley no method to the madness!

The one good thing I can say about this is that it sounds like it kept you on your toes.

If you don't know what to expect, you don't know what to plan for. Keeping things consistent gives people an idea of what to expect and the potential to analyze a static situation for possible gaps or holes that could be exploited.

I, of course, am not going to credit these guys with being even remotely this clueful.
It is far more likely that they are too busy, not the same people as before, underpaid, underenthused or underbrained to be consistent.

A good general inspection, combined with random extra measures from time to time would be better than a one-size-fits-all screening
IMHO.

JD

[This message has been edited by Jet'Dillo (edited 11-08-2001).]

I have wondered the same thing myself. In the past month I've passed through HNL, PDX, SEA, BOI, SJC, DFW, HOU - some of them multiple times. No two 'security' checks were the same even in the same airport. Standards were very inconsistantly applied. For instance, in HNL, I pass through the metal detector without setting it off, but got patted down by a (female) security guard and wanded. My husband, who also didn't set off the detector was waved through. Sometimes our bag was searched, sometimes not. We have a lead film bag - which only about 50% of the time gets inspected. Sometimes laptops are taken out of bag to be x-rayed, sometimes not, etc. etc. My carry-on was searched, my purse was pulled out of the bag, and then my wallet taken out and the security person opened my wallet and looked into the bill compartment. I doubt that my cash appeared suspcious on the x-ray. And, if they are searching/x-raying wallets why aren't all wallets inspected. My husband walzed right through the metal detector with his wallet in his pocket and didn't even get a wanding.

My impression is that the security personnel are largely uninformed and have no real idea of what they are supposed to be looking for or what they are doing. Recent new stories of people getting on board with loaded gun, knives, mace, etc. I mean, if security fails to notice a loaded gun but is busy x-raying house keys (early post) something is really wrong. Its pretty disconcerting! And of course there is the recent post about the man asked to unzip his pants and pull them away from his body!

I think general standards would be a good idea. E.g all items in x-rayed carry-on bags that are too dark to identify (e.g. lead bags) need hand inspection, all pocket stuff (wallets, etc.) gets x-rayed, wanding is done is a certain way, a consistent policy about shoes (do you xray them or not?), suspicious items on x-ray, who gets patted down and who doesn't, etc. I don't know what the standard should be, not being an expert on airport security, but it certainly seems like their is significant room for improvement. Additioanlly, the benefit of standards is that it can provide consistency in training the security personnel - it is more likely that they will do a competent job if they are given a detailed desription of what it is they are supposed to do.

I think Doc summed it up. There is no standard, and maybe the FAA should be busy working on one.

Security Screener Standards Fundamental to Air Safety

MEMPHIS, Tenn., Jan. 10 /PRNewswire/ -- The Department of Transportation (DOT) has announced a relaxation of a provision requiring high school diplomas for security personnel who screen passengers and luggage. The National Association of Security Companies (NASCO) is greatly concerned by this. ``We welcomed federal oversight of the passenger screening industry,'' said Rick Massimei, Chairman of NASCO, ``because it linked the related issues of higher pay and more stringent selection standards. This change makes us wonder what's next in the relaxation of standards.''

On December 31st, President Bush spoke in Crawford, Texas saying, ``Americans realize that we live in a new culture after 9/11 and we must remain vigilant.'' Relaxing personnel standards will not allow us to remain vigilant. Isaac Yeffet, former director of general security for Israel's El AL Airlines, currently a private security consultant in the U.S., also emphasized the need for high standards in a recent statement, saying, ``What we really need are people who understand how terrorists work, who can spot a false passport, (and) who can ask the right questions of the right people.''

The National Association of Security Companies (NASCO) is an industry trade association that was founded in 1972. It represents the interests of businesses engaged in providing professional security services to commercial, industrial and government organizations in the United States. Member companies actively promote high standards in the industry. NASCO members include:

http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/020110/dcth044_1.html

As mentioned above, not having a standard or routine is good. Not knowing what is going to happen, like the random searches makes it difficult for the bad guys.

You really do not want a complete standard for security reasons. But, the should have some standards to allow you to carry normal acceptable items and not worry that one day some goon is going to take it from you.

While we talk of "standards" what is really being noticed is individual performance. We are noticing how individuals do their assignments with differing diligence, skill, concern, competence, etc. The XRay observer is looking at the screen. (Sometimes paying attention, sometimes thinking of his date last night.) The Wander (new job title) is wanding. (Sometimes with concern and energy, sometimes with a pressure to process quickly, sometimes with a concern about his green card.)

If we were to compare all Burger King "counter specialists" we would find variations, even though they were all told to perform certain functions to a standard.

The security screening personnel have to be elevated in competence and respect and be exposed to more standardized training before we frequent travelers will see any common level of performance.

I was at PHX yesterday. As soon as I went through X-ray gate, the woman said to me "Random check." Well, my laptop just came out on the conveyor and just sitting there. There were so many other passengers around me - I wanted to pick it up before someone takes (by mistakes) or grabs and run away.

I said to the woman quietly - "OK, Give me 2 seconds - I would like to pick up my pc and put it aside, then I don't have to worry about losing it." She did not listen to me at all and started screaming at me - she might have not understood my explanation or was simply not smart enough?

It is a sad fact that some not-that-smart people are in charge of airport security. Terrorist people would be much smarter than them...

I managed to ask my colleague to pick up my PC - there were like 5+ other PCs just came out of the conveyor and 10+ passengers around.

Sigh...

Given the fact that the current companies don't mind hiring felons, it wouldn't surprise me one bit if she was holding you up so that one of her fellow thugs could steal your laptop. And that's why she started screaming, because you foiled her plan.

We definitely need some minimum standards. They should not back down at all about the requirements for a high school diploma or the equivalent and US citizenship.

sorry, but i'm going to continue to disagree about the citizenship standard.

what point does it make to require a screener to be a citizen? they have to have a green card, which means a background check. and a green card holder would be able to apply for and obtain a job with a cleaning company, caterer, or the airline itself. next time you are flying overseas, ask the foreign language speaker on board if he or she is a citizen? chances are good that they are simply a legal alien.

last i heard, you don't have to be a citizen to join our armed forces, just swear allegiance! does that make sense? at least make the standards equal.

In fact, I ignored the woman and picked up my PC and put it in my PC bag. Then her "colleague" showed up as she responded the woman's screaming and took my PC out the bag and placed it on the conveyor again. She threatened me by saying she would call a cop if I do not proceed to the search area immediately. I was fully searched, but my jacket, PC, suitcase, and PC bag were unsearched and left alone at the X-ray gate area. If my colleague was not there, I would not have known what could happen to my PC.

I am not sure about the citizenship status, but absolutely some minimum standards should be required. Terrorists are smart - how could these morons compete against terrorists?

Not to mention, they do not need to be that arrogant and nasty - sometimes they misunderstand as if they are given supreme power and authorities.

Travel and Air Industry Association (or something) have shown some TV campaign - we have brought you back safe sky, so travel more! - Every time I see these airport security people, I just feel the association needs to work with airport autorities to do major clean-up. Tightened security won't be brought by hiring a bunch of morons.

Another sigh...

[This message has been edited by FlyMan (edited 01-11-2002).]

Well, if you want to be a federal employee, you need to be a citizen. Therefore, since we are federalizing airport security, and they'll be getting paychecks from Uncle Sam, they need to comply with those regulations.