Asian cultures, maintaining harmony is seen as being of paramount importance and, when questioned by a person in uniform, who is perceived to have authority, there may be a tendency to agree, or answer ‘yes’, even when the answer should be ‘no’. So what are the pitfalls and how can we empower and train aviation security screeners with the information they need to do their job with maximum efficiency and minimum frustration? Generally there is, according to Chau,


In January 2010, on a flight to Kentucky, a Jewish teenager put on tefillin for prayer; the crew panicked and the aircraft diverted to Philadelphia.


uncertainty. Congestion can undermine the integrity of the screening process”4


in turn will create added pressure for the security personnel.


Passengers Aviation security personnel, particularly the screeners who conduct body checks, have a daunting mission. There are thousands of passengers, each with their own story, wanting to get on a flight to their destination. They are from literally all over the world and many do not even speak the language of the screeners. Many of them are anxious and worried about flying regardless of security; according to Prof. Robert Bor, of Dynamic Change


“…in many Asian cultures, maintaining harmony is seen as being of paramount importance…”


Consultants, “between 10 to 40 per cent of air travellers experience some kind of fear response to the air travel process.”5 Furthermore, since 9/11, any passenger who is not of European appearance that is singled out for further examination may feel the decision to be racially motivated.


Security Personnel


With the aviation security system being heavily reliant on “human perception, performance, decision making and judgment”4


, which


Their responsibility is to ensure that all security threats are identified and dealt with before the travellers pass airside and board a flight. Primarily this task is done with the use of sophisticated technology that is utilised to discover potentially dangerous goods and substances.


Each time a passenger approaches


security, the security personnel need to make a decision as to whether the passenger has a special screening requirement. They ask themselves the question, “Is there anything obvious about the person that might indicate the need for special screening?” It is important to note that we all stereotype to some extent. If one mentions certain nationalities or religions we automatically conjure up certain labels or images. What we do with this is what counts. As Philip Baum, Managing Director of Green Light Ltd. notes, “...a Nigerian man; Thai girl; Jewish man; Colombian man; Albanian man; Buddhist man; Japanese woman. Unless one has had exposure to these ethnic and religious groups one might be forgiven in thinking of (in order) a fraudster; a prostitute; or masseuse; a Rabbi or money-orientated individual; a drug dealer; a human trafficker; a monk; and, a geisha”.4 Once special attention has been called


, the screeners are an extremely important part of the equation. Note that these employees are earning low wages and are often from a multitude of nationalities themselves. Many are not highly educated.


14


for, we have the beginning of a deeper interaction with a traveller, one that often has an intercultural element. Now imagine that the traveller perceives the screener to be a racist, because he was selected and others were not, things can easily escalate into an incident. Often screeners lack the training to ask appropriate questions, and can ask closed questions generating a ‘yes’ or ‘no’ response, thereby depriving the screener of valuable information. In many


Download your FREE ASI "iPad/iPhone APP" NOW


However, this is not always the case. At SNP Security extensive work has been undertaken to create a culture that will allow its employees to actually feel that they are there “to protect the gateway to Australia”. The process and systems are indeed


expressing a view about the global aviation security industry and the challenge he has set out to overcome in Hong Kong, a “high turnover and wastage rate of security officers.” He continues, “aptitude tests to select those suited to the test are largely non-existent, training is barely sufficient and little is done to alleviate the monotony of the job.”4


impressive with the focus on providing “security with politeness”. Leadership and coaching programmes are in place and training has been very focused on the aforementioned issues to reduce turnover. The cultural training begins with self- awareness, focusing on


own backgrounds, education and likely prejudices before interacting with the public. This is to ensure that, in the words of Baum, “screeners are not making decisions due to having some self- serving bias, whereby they favour people of a similar background to themselves.”4 Graduation


ceremonies are held at the end of the training, allowing those SNP employees to share their achievement with close friends and


February 2012 Aviationsecurityinternational


their


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52