Should Airports Move To 100% Employee Screening?

As the furor continues to simmer over the security breaches by airline employees at Orlando International Airport, and Congress scurries to draft legislation to close a perceived hole, the big question is -- should airports be required to screen 100% of their employees?  And the second question is if yes, who will pay for it?

The March 29 issue of Aviation Daily includes my story (subscribers only) on this very question.  Rep. Nita Lowey (D-N.Y.) has already introduced HR 1413, which would create a pilot program to test 100% employee screening at five airports, at least two of which would have to be large hub airports.  In a press release about the bill, Lowey noted that in 2001, Congress included a provision requiring the Transportation Security Agency (TSA) to provide full employee screening under the Aviation and Transportation Security Act.  More than five years later, TSA has failed to implement this basic policy or even set a deadline for doing so, she noted.

"It’s unfathomable that more than five years after September 11^th, a measure as fundamental and simple as this one still has not been implemented,” said Lowey, who serves on the House Committee on Homeland Security.  “Meticulously screening passengers but giving workers open access is like installing an expensive home security system but leaving your back door wide open.”

Apparently, the Puerto Rican Police Department has been complaining for years about the flow of weapons from Orlando and other Floridan cities, according to a March 18 article in the Orlando Sentinel.  And Police Superintendent Pedro Toledo blamed lax airline policies for the problem. 

A peek at the Delta Air Lines Web site finds that it accepts ammunition that is boxed, weighs less than 11 pounds and is packed in checked luggage only.  And firearms are accepted only if they are unloaded, declared to the agent at check-in, and packed in a suitable container in checked luggage only.  And other airlines have similar policies.

A letter to the editor in the March 19 edition of the Orlando Sentinel says that hitting the pocketbooks of airport and government decisionmakers who allow security breaches could be an effective way to stop security breaches.  Writer Dennis Dowling recommends fining key executives and offer bonuses to security personnel when breaches are discovered.

So what should airports do to stop security breaches among airport employees?  Is the TSA's random screening program implemented a year ago enough?  And if you think there should be 100% screening, who should pay for it? Airports?  The federal government? Airlines?  Or a mix of all three?   Tell us what you think!

Comments

[credit card processing]

I believe so. It's for their own security.