Stick-on SSSS?
 

At SJC about 2 weeks ago, the security line ID checker had a sheet of clear adhesive labels with the letters "SSSS" printed on them and a red crayon, which were being liberally applied to, it appears, the BP of anyone presenting an ID other than a driver's license, of which there seemed to be a few in the line just in the time I observed. TSA would give the red carpet treatment (full sitting and standing wand, and bag search), then punch a hole in the BP – not that anyone seemed to be checking this when boarding.

Her uniform said "Globe Security Services"… I think? For a moment I thought this might be a WN thing, since they share the checkpoint, but the gate agents told me this is an AA contractor. (The line referee didn't seem to be letting anyone use the first class line, even without looking at their BP, so maybe there's a bit of the WN mentality? ;)) Aside from the general weirdness of one non-airline employee applying the SSSS based on a relatively arbitrary non-TSA criterion (one not even applied at other AA airports), isn't there an absence of concern with due process when a private party (the airline/a subcontractor thereof) decides who they don't like, then TSA proceeds to grill those folks extra?

What a crock! :mad: What if one decides to tender one's US Passport, or worse, maybe one is a foreign resident and uses a foreign passport, such as Japanese, given AA has SJC - NRT flights on daily?

Several airports use contract personnel still - I think SFO is one as well.

But clear sitckers SSSS? :cool: I want a packet! NOT!

I've seen the Global folks at SFO and OAK as well.

As for this "policy," it seems no less logical than the "you are not required to take off your shoes, but if you do not take off your shoes, you will be harraSSSed" policy.

The Security screeners are no longer under the jurisdiction of the airlines! Each airport has their own, which must be either TSA or a TSA contracted security firm.

If you are unhappy about the treatment that you received at the security checkpoint, be sure to write to Airport Security or TSA.

Can't find the link now, but I seem to recall a consensus in the past that the person who checks IDs in the security line is always an airline contractor, not a TSA employee nor contractor – because the need for the name on the ticket to match the traveler's name is more of a revenue protection measure than a security measure, and because this is often the person that enforces the first class/status distinctions, which are not under TSA's jurisdiction.

I do plan to write to AA, so we'll see if any useful information comes from the response.

Think about what you just said. Name on ID must match name on BP. So, inturn, it is a Security issue, not revenue issue.

Yes some airports do have priority lines, which those screeners (TSA or Contracted) have been informed what to look for on the tickets (FIRST, ExP, PLATINUM, ONEWORLD, SSSS, etc.)

I'm sorry, but name on ID vs name on BP is nothing BUT a revenue issue. The fact is quite simple: if someone is dangerous, a secured cockpit door is going to keep them from wreaking havoc. Said and done.

In the old days, when security went to the lowest bidder, when airlines shared a concourse, and thus the checkpoint, one airline was sort of the "point man" for the concourse. The "official" term was checkpoint custodian. All of the airlines were involved in decision making on who to contract with, how things were done, etc, etc, but the contract for security was usually let with just one airline, the custodian even though all the airlines payed.

Fast forward to now. While TSA, or in a select few places, the TSA selected contractor handles the checkpoint, responsibility for ID checks is almost always done by the airlines or a contractor to the airlines. And that contractor is pretty much handled the same way as the old security contractor was. One airline typically will be the custodian of the checkpoint and handle things with that contractor on behalf of all the airlines on the concourse. It's a neat and clean way to do things and also a convenient excuse for the airlines that aren't the "custodian" but most definitely play a role in selecting and keeping that contractor to take a "hands off" approach when things don't go correctly.

I've never seen the "SSSS" sticky approach applied before. Very interesting, and strange. A "government issued ID" is a government issued ID, and penalizing people for using a passport or whatever seems to be a bit of overkill.

In another note, matching ID to the name on the boarding pass is most definitely a revenue measure for airlines. But it's also a heck of a lot more. Your name does matter when it comes to a lot of security procedures. (Yes, I know we could debate their value for days)

That's my understanding as well.

BTW note that the OP said checking IDs is "more of a revenue protection measure than a security measure"--not that it was only a revenue protection measure.

So I now qualify for SSSSpecial Treatment based solely that I never show the TSA my State-Issued Drivers License, but rather my Federal-Issued U.S. Military Active Duty I.D. (it's the most convenient card in my wallet since I have to pull it out so much on a daily basis)?

Makes me glad i'm not going to SJC anytime soon...

OT and curious....please help me understand.

I'm curious how everyone seems to think that checking the ID (State, Government, or Passport) against the BP is 'more' of a revenue protection, not a security protection.

ID says John P. Public
BP says Sally Q. Private

So "Custodian Checkpoint" person allows this person to slip by because they weren't doing their job properly.

How is that a Revenue Issue?

Being from a military background and being in situations to where I had to check IDs to allow people into secure locations, if I allowed Mr. Public into an area with Mrs. Private's pass, that is a security breach.

Same thing at an airport. Allowing someone with a mismatched ID and BP is a Security issue, not Revenue Protection issue.

Someone drops their BP on the way to security. An airport visitor (dropping off someone or picking up someone) picks it up and goes to security. When there, they are asked for their ID, it is then up to that 'custodian checkpoint person' to verify that the name on the ID matches that of the BP.

I'm just curious how that is a type of revenue protection. That person can't get the BP persons money, or take the money away from the company? If that person tries to get any type of refund, they again will have to show an ID...whoa, it must be the same on the BP, or provide the same CC that it was purchased from...

please, not looking for an argument, just trying to understand.

back to the OP problem: I don't see how not having a Drivers license warrants an SSSS sticker. Like many people have said, there are too many Government issued IDs that are even better than Drivers license. Passport and/or Military ID. I don't see how SJC can keep that up. Probably was just a one time deal.

Because in the name of "security," name changes are not allowed. In truth, this is just another way for the airline to extort more money from the pax.

I can't tell you how many thjousands of dollars worth of tix my former company had to throw away because they had been purchased for employees who, for one reason or another, left the company before their scheduled travel dates. There was no way to transfer them to other employees who replaced them.

That's poor management. Why would a company purchase thousands of dollars that are most likely on restricted fares, and most likely can't be altered anyway. I use to work for a Newspaper Software Publishing company that had to purchase tickets through several airlines for many employee's who were on Elite status. Wasn't worth buying tickets in advance because of schedule cancelations, weather, or fare/travel restrictions. This was in the late-90s.

Name changes due to marriage is allowed. As long as you have your marriage certificate, it's allowed.

I still don't buy into the fact that it's a revenue strangle or airline extorting revenue.

It's plain and simple a Security Concern...unless someone can give me a better explanation, either here or PM (preferably) it's going to be a tough to pursuade me otherwise.

Thanks in advance!

Nice security... One question.. How difficult is it to change the name on a boarding pass to match an ID? It is very easy for the print at home ones.
How does this really prevent someone on the no fly list from flying? The id check is a visual one comparing two documents. The person doing this check isn't validating the boarding pass contains the name of the person that was actually booked on the flight, as they don't have access to the passenger list.

I believe that NK (Spirit) allows name changes for a $25 fee. Or at least, that used to be the case. Many European airlines allow this as well. QED :).