Why is security inconsistent at different airports?
 

Sorry if this was posted before ... search didn't show this topic.

So, why is security so inconsistent at each airport? It seems like every airport plays by different rules. And even when I fly thru the same airport at different times, the rules are different.

Some things I noticed:

BWI: September, my ID was checked once. It was only when I went thru security. United didn't check it, nor was it checked at the gate. Didn't feel less safe. Christmas Eve: same deal, but another check at the counter. No problems.

SFO: September. Some of the biggest PITA security I've seen. I flashed my ID 3 times before I even got to security. Removing shoes was mandatory. Checked again at the gate.

SLC: Various occasions. Some of the most anal I've ever seen. At times, I couldn't even carry my bags to the counter when I was next in line. Like I was going to put a bomb in there from the 5 feet from the head of the line to the counter. Had hands swabbed numerous occasions. Have to have take luggage to get screened after check in. Wife's purse emptied, repacked, then rescanned while we waited to see if anything else was in there. The only thing I could think of is who's to say that an unscrupulous agent couldn't put something in there while we waited? It didn't happen to us, but I felt bad that it could easily happen to somone of Indian or Middle Eastern descent. Too many other gaping holes I've seen inside the terminal that made me feel much less safe than what the terminal did.

ORD: My wife and I saw a 1 year old child being searched, but the mother wasn't.

Maybe I just haven't traveled enough to get why the rules vary so much at different airports. Especially in ones like SLC that most people could care less about now. I'm guessing that they have to do SOMETHING with all the equipment that was bought for the Olympics.

Security wasn't even this stupid when the Unabomber was a threat.

Bottom line is: I never know what to expect at each airport. I don't feel safer, I just feel hassled.

It's easier to get into the Pentagon than it is an airport anymore.

Super

Because fast food is consistent no matter where you go, but national security is far too important to standardize. So it is different in all 429 US airports.

If you're talking about inconsistent applications of the same SOP, you have a valid point. As a TSA screener, I am frustrated as well. It certainly makes life difficult for us as well as you. However, it seems that you're really talking about different situations which may be consistent applications of the SOP.

The airlines are responsible for checking your ID. The airline ticket agent may check your ID more as part of the payment procedure should you use a credit card to buy your ticket as opposed to a security measure. The individual who checks your boarding pass at the checkpoint entrance is not a TSA screener; that individual is a private contractor hired by the airlines whose responsibility it is to check ID and boarding passes of all persons entering the checkpoint. Airports vary as far as checking IDs at the gate is concerned. Some do and some don't. So far, all of this has to do with airline and airport policy not TSA policy.

There's nothing indicating that you were asked by TSA to show your ID. When you said before you got to security, I have to assume that you're talking about non-TSA personnel and are really talking about either airline representatives or their hired private contractors. Removing shoes should not be mandatory, and I covered that in another thread.

Sounds to me like you underwent selectee screening. Did your boarding pass have SSSS on it? If so, nothing inconsistent here; you simply underwent a more thorough security screening process which is what selectee screening is designed to do. By the way, I am not a big fan of selectee screening. I consider it a waste of time. However, the 9/11 Commission strongly endorsed it, so like it or not, it is here to stay. I don't like it.

I question what you perceive as screening. Sounds to me more like the child either alarmed at the WTMD or, more likely, was a selectee and the mother was not. This is one of the reasons why I think selectee screening is a wasted effort because of the lack of common sense when a young toddler pops up on the computer for this type of screening and the accompanying parent doesn't. However, both were screened when they came through the checkpoint because both could only enter through the WTMD (unless the mother was given a pat-down as an alternative screening method which may have been done out of your view).

Seeing as how the Pentagon IS a public building, yes, you can get inside but only up to a certain point. Of course, it's been several years since I've been inside the Pentagon, but I really can't see you waltzing into a SCIF without experiencing a very unpleasant physical encounter which would go beyond the politically-correct screening methods you experience at the airport. Could be wrong, but I doubt it.

Really? I thought that once an airport provided a selectee screening area for TSA at the main checkpoint, SSSS and "random" screening at the gate went away and airlines no longer had to check ID at the gate.

That's what a US Airways agent at LAX T1 once told me; according to her the gate ID check was a TSA policy. I don't know if her explanation was correct or not, but I haven't been to a single airport lately that checks ID at the boarding gates. LAX T1 was one of the few remaining places that performed SSSS (and checked ID) at the gate; it didn't receive a selectee area at the checkpoint until just a few months ago.

I may be wrong on this, but I think all TSA airports no longer conduct selectee screening at the departure gates. Of course, if a selectee should pass through the checkpoint without specifically undergoing selectee screening, then it will done at the gate. Don't ask me to explain it; that's the rule; hence, my cynical view towards selectee screening.

Checking IDs is something completely different. Perhaps a better way of phrasing it would be that airlines are not obligated to check IDs at the gate as a matter of routine since TSA conducts selectee screening at the checkpoint. Of course, this depends upon airport configuration; some airports have checkpoints at the gates themselves as opposed to one centralized checkpoint that serves a concourse. If an airline is checking your ID at the gate, then it's for a different reason than TSA policy (for example, international flights that require passports).

It's not just about the screening. It's about the whole experience in general.

If something is SO important that it has to be done at one airport (ie SLC requiring I hand my bags to a TSA agent), why isn't it done at ALL airports.

One of my biggest cake walks thru security was at Dulles. Considering how many of our nation's leaders go thru that airport, you'd think it'd be among the tightest.

That's just such a waste. It just adds another layer of "security." If the job was done correctly (regardless of who's responsible), why does an ID need to be checked again if all you need to get to the checkpoint is a boarding pass?

So at the gate, the buck's passed on to the FAA. Again, if it's so critical, why isn't it done everywhere?

Bart, I work in federal government as well, often side by side with contractors. For all intents and purposes, they're employees. The only difference is what color the badge is and who signs the checks. And undoubtedly, the money comes from the same place mine does.

Couldn't tell you what was on the boarding pass. That was a few trips back.

I'm also not a big fan of the 9/11 commission either. The "commission" was an attempt by Congress and the Bush administration to look like they were doing something to protect us. As I'm affected by what the commission said, and following laws, they only broke borked systems even more.

If a pat down isn't screening, I don't know what is.

Just think of public perception of how assinine that looks to see a small child being patted down. While I'm sure that nothing inappropriate was done, I highly doubt that that screening as you call it was effective. Same thing seeing 90 year old grandmas in wheel chairs getting searched. Of course the wheelchair's going to set off the alarm. ;)

The bottom line is that when people see the TSA searching 90 year old grandmas in wheel chairs that can barely move and 1 year old kids being searched, it's not hard to see how people can think that Mohammed is slipping by.

You wouldn't even get past the fence into one of those installations.

However, considering what happened there, what goes on there, and how many people walk those halls on any given day, if they can assure people's safety without the hassle that is airport security, don't you think you're chasing ghosts at the airport?

Super

Not so sure what you're talking about, but I'm going to take a stab at it and guess you're talking about a bin loader. In other words, a screener whose function it is to accept your carry-on items and load it into the x-ray for you. How I wish we had the manning for that function! Screeners know how to properly load items into the x-ray to make it easier for the x-ray operator to interpret the images. Passengers usually cram items inside of bins, leave their laptops inside of cases or insert bags standing up rather than flat on the side. This results in unnecessary bag checks or re-running bags through the x-ray for a better angle. Seems to me that the airport you went through has enough screeners to afford a designated bin loader. We were forced to drop this position due to the drawdown a couple years ago.

You're not paying attention. Allow me to rephrase: as a minimum, you are required to show your ID and boarding pass to enter the checkpoint at the checkpoint entrance itself. No ID, no boarding pass (or airline gate pass), then you don't come in. It's that simple. (There are procedures for mitigating expired IDs or insufficient ID, but that's a different topic.) IF you are required to show your ID at the ticket counter, then it's for some other reason such as the common practices that come with making major purchases with a credit card.

Not passing the buck. Just explaining some fundamental differences.

Let me spell it out for you. They are not federal contractors. They are private contractors hired by the airlines. Not TSA, not the FAA, not DHS, not any other government agency. They are strictly airline contractors.

Well, on this we partially agree. The Commission did come up with some pretty good recommendations. However, I don't agree with its endorsement of selectee screening nor do I think having an intelligence guru overseeing particularly the Pentagon and its various defense intelligence components is a smart thing to do. However, the Commission was appointed by Congress, and Congress expresses the Will of the People, so there you have it.

You either missed my point or I misunderstood you. What makes you believe that the mother was not screened?

Again, what makes you think that certain people are not screened? X-ray examinations and passing through the WTMD are the primary screening methods. Pat-down (with the usual exceptions), hand-wanding, physical bag searches and explosives detection are secondary screening, or to put it in laymen's terms, follow-up screening to the primary screening methodology.

I'm not a law enforcement officer. I'm a security screener. I don't chase ghosts nor do I capture bad guys. The police do that. I simply screen people and property before they get on the plane.

No. In SLC, after you check in at the ticket counter and they tag your bags, YOU have to haul them (meaning your checked bags) to the TSA guys. What sucks about this is you're not just dealing with one airline's passengers, rather multiple.

Southwest has their own as they have a separte check in area.

Come on. The airline isn't going to care about who charged what to what credit card. For all they know, you paid cash previously for that ticket. It's always been part of the "security" screening they did. Check id, ask if you packed your bags, been in your control, etc.

I should have clarified on the ID issue. I mistated my position and that's my bad.

SFO, for example, shouldn't have to card me THREE times in the line between the ticket counter and the checkpoint.

When that one guy in another thread was talking about guys with a megaphone hollering orders in the lines at SFO, he was dead on.


Doesn't matter. You apparently don't get that people see them as you. Maybe this is yet another reason why people don't like the TSA?

I don't buy the will of the people thing much anymore. Maybe you have more faith in Congress than I do. I've written Senators and Reps from the various states I lived in and they're more interested in sucking the corporate tit than they are the will of the people.

The people are there just to re-elect them. After that, they're forgotten about and the people with the money make the rules.

The 9/11 Commission was there for Congress to cover its butt and to look like things were getting done. It was political expediency to make sure that they kept their seats in Congress. They were more concerned about getting a bill, ANY bill passed that looked like they acted on the commission's recommendations.

Based on what I've seen waiting in lines to board the planes. I've seen the same things there too on the "random" checks.

I think you're barking up the wrong tree when looking at toddlers and grandmas. Simple enough?

Yes. We miscommunicated. You're talking about something that is a matter of physical configurations for checked baggage screening pods which will vary at different airports. When Congress mandated that EDS machines be used to screen checked bags, it became a simple matter of physics, geometry and gravity. Many of the floors in airport public lobbies were not designed to withstand the additional weight of the heavy EDS machines. And many of the baggage handling areas located behind the ticket counter were designed for the expeditious loading and unloading of passenger bags but not necessarily to accomodate adding a TSA screening pod. So, yes, you're going to have different configurations based on the physical layouts of various airports. Ideally, they should all be the same; however, it's a matter of physical reconstruction. How much more money are you willing to pay to accomplish this? Are you willing to wait over a period of time before the construction money is available or are you demanding that this be done overnight just for the sake of uniformity? Should we spend the money on reconstructing baggage screening pods first? Or should we spend the money available on new technologies such as the walk-thru "puffer" machines at the checkpoints to minimize removing shoes and jackets? Not trying to be sarcastic here, just pointing out that there is a practical side to all of this that many people overlook...or ignore.

I think you're confused, so I'll break it down for you. I truly don't care why the airlines ask you to show your ID at the ticket counter. You expressed frustration and I was offering a possible explanation for you. The bottom line is simply this: you need to show your ID to the airline private contractor representative at the entrance to the security checkpoint. Doesn't matter how many times you've shown it before outside of the checkpoint. It only counts at the entry to the checkpoint for security purposes.

You mistake the private contractors for TSA. I was giving you the correct information. They are not TSA employees nor are they hired by TSA. Checking ID cards at security checkpoint entrances is an airline responsibility. If you want to continue with the perception that they are TSA employees or affiliated with TSA, then do so with the knowlege that you are deliberately ignoring the facts. I'm not trying to convince you. I'm only sharing my insights with you. You don't have to accept them. It doesn't change a thing about the fact that these are airline representatives paid to enforce the airlines' role in airport security.

And that makes for another interesting topic of debate. I wasn't justifying it. I was trying to explain the difference to you. Congress ordered a commission to investigate US counterterrorism policies and then decided to act on its recommendations. My point is that this was not some policy thought up by some bureaucrat hidden in the halls of TSA headquarters. This was a public discussion held by the people we elect to represent our interests in government. My point was that, like it or not, once the commission embraced selectee screening as a sound methodology, the political reality is that we're now stuck with it. As for whether or not Congress truly represents our interests or those of corporations or special interest groups, that's a topic suitable for discussion in the Omni Forum.

Well, if you bothered to really read my comment, I said that selectee screening is a waste of time. I also highlighted the selectee screening of toddlers as an example of why I think selectee screening is a waste of time. However, if you are suggesting that we should assume that toddlers and the elderly pose no security concerns at all, meaning that we should not screen them at all, then I'm afraid you're being very naive about security in general. I won't buy into your hyperbole and will simply end the discussion here. Without a common frame of reference for security, it is pointless to seek any sort of discussion.

I'll let you get the last word in if you wish. However, I will respectfully decline to respond. We've kicked the hell out of this horse. It's dead. Let's stop beating it. Fair enough?

Fine enough. I'll agree to disagree.