A Personal View Expressed by Capt. Tom Walsh
t has been some time since I've been able to make some positive comments regarding the US Transportation Security Administration. While not defensible from a logical security point of view, it is perhaps forgivable that in its early years, the TSA's basic aviation security model treated everyone as being equally suspect, including the aircrews flying passengers and cargo throughout the system. But in the past few years there have been major shifts in the TSA's approach to security screening. They have accepted that not every person with access to the aircraft poses the same risk and there are a number of programmes underway that demonstrate the TSA’s shift from a one-size- fits-all approach to a risk-based approach. While they may be moving at full government speed, which is to say slowly, passengers and crews alike will benefit as these risk based programmes continue to develop.
I
One example of the TSA shift to a risk-based approach is in the screening of US aircrew. Crew screening is something that I experience routinely in many countries around the world. I've seen systems that are quite good…and one that is actually silly! In the US, our crews in uniform are not required to comply with the liquids restrictions or take their shoes off and we are generally expedited through security. Most countries, but not all, appreciate that the crews are not a threat and that their time and money would be better spent elsewhere. Screening still occurs, but it's normally fairly benign, quick and effective. A new programme, ‘Known Crewmember’, proposed by the Air Line Pilots Association and supported by Airlines for America (the former Air Transport Association) has been tested and approved by the TSA and is now making crew screening in the US even more efficient. At the time of writing, many major US airports have come online and many more are on the way. With the Known Crewmember programme, crews in uniform present their airline ID at a separate TSA checkpoint and their identity and employment status is quickly verified via a secure online database connected to the participating airlines. The process takes just seconds and the crewmember is then on their way to work. They can be subjected to random screening at any time. If the crewmember’s employment status changes, then the system is instantly updated in order to prevent his or her access. If they aren't in uniform, they go through traditional screening. The programme is simple and secure, and allows the TSA to use their resources more efficiently elsewhere. This programme acknowledges that
48 Download your FREE ASI "iPad/iPhone APP" NOW
…our crews in uniform are not required to comply with the liquids restrictions or take their shoes off…
working crewmembers have already been repeatedly vetted and aren't likely to pose a risk to their own aircraft. Unfortunately, the concept of risk based screening for
aircrew has so far completely eluded the UK, and when it comes to security, there is no airport more universally despised by aircrew than London Heathrow. Many international aircrew avoid flying there because of the security screening protocols in place which are actually more onerous for crews than for passengers. We are taken by bus to a separate staff screening location. We're then required to comply with the same restrictions as passengers, including liquids restrictions. Why? I don't know. I can think of no good reason unless the authorities and regulators believe that this type of screening is actually effective. It's not, and worse still, it's a waste of time and money. I've watched incredulously as two screeners, whilst multiple airline crews waited in line, thoroughly searched a flight attendant’s bag to locate an offending corkscrew; there are several larger models already onboard the aircraft! Silly. Cosmetics that exceed the passenger limits are seized. Why? They are allowed for crews in the rest of the world but are suddenly dangerous in the UK? Silly. A pilot with a small pair of scissors? Seized despite the fact that we have a crash axe on every flight deck. Silly. And besides, if a pilot meant to do harm with an aircraft, he or she needs absolutely nothing more than their knowledge and access to the aircraft. But not to worry, in London offending crewmembers are dutifully entered into a logbook! Let me be clear. My objections to the crew screening methods at Heathrow are professional not personal. The simple fact is that crews do not pose the same risks as unknown passengers and screening them as if they are a severe risk is wasteful and ineffective, and the worst kind of security theatre. That money and manpower could be better used elsewhere.
So Kudos to the TSA for moving in the right direction with
crew screening. And for the UK, there's a famous Monty Python comedy skit where in the middle of a particularly silly routine, an authority figure steps in and says "Stop it, this is silly!"
Capt. Tom Walsh is an active international airline pilot and aviation consultant based in the United States. He is currently assisting as an aviation and security subject matter expert for ongoing US government level transportation security risk assessments.
August 2012 Aviationsecurityinternational
THE FINAL WORD
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