I was interviewed by CNN anchor Tony Harris earlier this week about the latest lapses in airport security-mainly the failure to catch the infamous underwear bomber before he attempted to bring down Northwest flight 25. But since the more recent debacle at Newark Airport was on our minds, we also talked about my stint as a screener at the TSA three years ago and whether I thought security had improved markedly since then. [See clip above for my answers]
From his questions-and what I’ve been hearing from readers and sources around the country, the screeners aren’t getting much more respect from the public than they did right after 9/11.
When I worked there I was struck by extent of the screener bashing in
the media and Congress-we were routinely depicted as rude, incompetent
or worse (indeed there were some who did live down to these unfortunate
stereotypes, such as the crime ring that stole valuables out of fliers’
bags.)
So the Newark incident-in which a young Chinese doctoral student at Rutgers snuck past a reportedly distracted screener and through the checkpoint’s exit lane to the secure side of the terminal-is bringing all those unfortunate stereotypes back in a big way. I’m not out to defend the screener, but already there are too many conflicting reports on what happened-someone I know who’s reviewed the airport videotape, says that it appears the guy wasn’t talking on a cell phone as originally reported, but, rather, was shown to have spoken to the student and told him to step back, but then turned to answer a question from another passenger, which gave the first one his chance-and he took it.
But why was he talking to passengers at all? One problem may be inherent in the setup of that checkpoint at Newark. Apparently people waiting to see off friends or family congregate near that exit lane. At the checkpoint where I worked, the officer manning that spot sat far back from the throng-making it easier to spot someone approaching. The only people who were legally allowed to enter that way were air marshals, pilots toting guns or the like.
But the main message is that screeners are really only as good as the tools and support they’re given. The number of screeners hasn’t changed in years-it’s around 45,000, including part-timers-and at many airports they’re stretched thin (and others, though, it’s more like the “thousands standing around” joke about what TSA stands for). And one of the biggest hazards of the screener job is the tedium. Searching for the tiny number of baddies among the millions of innocent fliers who transit airports is inefficient, expensive and ultimately, it won’t work.
Most of the screeners are good at their jobs-they’re not chatting on the phone or nodding off. We have to find a way to expedite screening for the vast majority who pose no threat (if they submit voluntarily to pre-screening) so we can focus on the few who do merit more scrutiny.
Related Story
Inside Job: My Life as an Airport Screener
So the Newark incident-in which a young Chinese doctoral student at Rutgers snuck past a reportedly distracted screener and through the checkpoint’s exit lane to the secure side of the terminal-is bringing all those unfortunate stereotypes back in a big way. I’m not out to defend the screener, but already there are too many conflicting reports on what happened-someone I know who’s reviewed the airport videotape, says that it appears the guy wasn’t talking on a cell phone as originally reported, but, rather, was shown to have spoken to the student and told him to step back, but then turned to answer a question from another passenger, which gave the first one his chance-and he took it.
But why was he talking to passengers at all? One problem may be inherent in the setup of that checkpoint at Newark. Apparently people waiting to see off friends or family congregate near that exit lane. At the checkpoint where I worked, the officer manning that spot sat far back from the throng-making it easier to spot someone approaching. The only people who were legally allowed to enter that way were air marshals, pilots toting guns or the like.
But the main message is that screeners are really only as good as the tools and support they’re given. The number of screeners hasn’t changed in years-it’s around 45,000, including part-timers-and at many airports they’re stretched thin (and others, though, it’s more like the “thousands standing around” joke about what TSA stands for). And one of the biggest hazards of the screener job is the tedium. Searching for the tiny number of baddies among the millions of innocent fliers who transit airports is inefficient, expensive and ultimately, it won’t work.
Most of the screeners are good at their jobs-they’re not chatting on the phone or nodding off. We have to find a way to expedite screening for the vast majority who pose no threat (if they submit voluntarily to pre-screening) so we can focus on the few who do merit more scrutiny.
Related Story
Inside Job: My Life as an Airport Screener
Leave a comment