Security Swap

Airports across the country could begin using private passenger and baggage screeners later this year for the first time since the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.

On Nov. 19, the Transportation Security Administration began accepting applications from airports that want to replace federal screeners with private workers managed either by the airports or by private security companies. The first airports allowed to opt out will be announced in February, says Tom Blank, TSA's associate administrator. The agency's Web site says transitions to private screeners would occur later in 2005.

If many airports choose to opt out, the return to private screening could significantly affect TSA's workforce of 45,000 federal screeners and alter the agency's composition. Applications are accepted on a rolling basis, and there is no cutoff date by which airports must apply. As of early December, only one had submitted an application to opt out: Elko Regional Airport in Nevada.

Blank says TSA is confident that private screeners can offer the same level of security, cost and customer service as federal screeners. TSA says airport screening has improved greatly since the 9/11 attacks, but covert tests and investigations have revealed deficiencies. The Homeland Security Department's inspector general issued a report in September 2004 saying that federal screening improvements were needed in training, equipment and technology, policy and procedures, and management and supervision.

Nevertheless, advocates of federal screening are trying to convince airport operators to stick with the federal program. "We need federal screeners doing this important job. It's great for public confidence, and we ultimately believe it provides better security," says Peter Winch, national organizer for the American Federation of Government Employees. AFGE advocates on behalf of federal screeners, even though they don't have collective bargaining rights.

TSA officials insist that security will not be jeopardized by replacing federal screeners with those from the private sector. The agency plans to conduct aggressive oversight to ensure that private screening companies meet or exceed federal security and workforce standards, including comparable pay and benefits for workers.

Winch worries that TSA's difficult position of managing a workforce of federal screeners while juggling multiple private contracts might cause confusion in screening operations or compromise security. When Congress federalized screening immediately after 9/11, five airports were allowed to continue using private screeners as part of a pilot program. Another September 2004 IG report found that TSA had not developed or implemented adequate performance standards or criteria to monitor, measure and evaluate the pilot program.

TSA notes that the IG audit was completed in November 2003 and does not take into account subsequent management improvements.

Airport officials, however, want to know how private screening would help them meet demands at their facilities, especially when it comes to adjusting staffing levels. TSA's future could be significantly altered if hundreds of airports choose to use private screeners, says Stephen Van Beek, senior vice president for policy and development at Airports Council International-North America. Under that scenario, TSA would no longer directly manage a large workforce of screeners. It is not clear what role, budget and staffing levels the agency would have.

Airports even can apply to hire some private screeners while keeping some federal screeners. Blank acknowledges that that would be an awkward scenario, but says TSA is up to the task of managing unique situations at different airports. The only area in which TSA will not compromise, he says, is security.