It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Airport screeners to be cut?

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 30 2005 @ 10:09 AM
link   
Up to 6,000 airport screeners in the United States could be cut if Congress approves the action. That is 13% of the current 45,000 screeners out there right now. I think this is a horrible move. Not only does it cut jobs but it also could cause a problem in the security process. If you have less screeners there becomes more pressure on the remaining screeners to move the longer lines along faster. This could allow for some oversight of potential terrorists. Sure, they are also moving some employees around to airports that need them. But JFK would lose 162, and here in Portland, OR we would end up with LESS screeners than prior to September 11. Where is the logic in that?

More here.




posted on Jul, 30 2005 @ 10:56 AM
link   
Just another move by your government to protect the citizens of this nation against terror.


Poor Homeland Security Dept. can't very well ensure domestic security of the Congress won't fund it.

When I think of the money we're spending 'out there' and the 'benefits' we're getting for that money spent, and compare it to the sacrifices we're making here in the homeland, I weep...
It's all backwards.



posted on Jul, 30 2005 @ 07:31 PM
link   
And what a wonderful idea it was to devote billions of dollars to a war against a potential future threat (possibly, maybe) and completely neglect our borders and ports. I'm embarrassed for and by this Government. They are doing all they can do to do nothing for their own people.



posted on Jul, 30 2005 @ 08:17 PM
link   
it is all backwards. if their true intent was to keep us safe, they'd cover home base before going all gun-ho in other nations


cjf

posted on Jul, 30 2005 @ 08:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Just another move by your government to protect the citizens of this nation against terror.



Originally posted by CyberianHusky
And what a wonderful idea it was to devote billions of dollars to a war against a potential future threat (possibly, maybe) and completely neglect our borders and ports. I'm embarrassed for and by this Government. They are doing all they can do to do nothing for their own people.


I hear what you are saying ….but c’mon.

1) The number of US FAA continental certified commercial airline hubs and public use airports are approximately 450-500; this is not a big cut for the industry. I can not locate an exact number but it would be near and average of about 12-15 an airport, not even near significant, in March of 2003, the TSA was already looking to reduce the 56,000 screeners to 48,000 by October 2004

(based loosely on what I could quickly find, there are 542 FAA certified public use airports).
(link)

2) I do not know how much you fly inside, from or into the United States, but these ‘screeners’ are already pathetic. For every one screener doing their job, three are not paying attention to anyone but the other screeners.

It’s even worse flying out of the Southern United States Airports (if it could be). I fly mostly solo, usually only carry-on baggage and often with a return trip within a day to two days. 9/10 times I get the dreaded ‘security check’, understandable; but generally speaking these ‘screeners’ are poorly managed, lack any sense of urgency, have low organizational skills and often speak ‘out loud’ about being disgruntled. Cut the fat, sack 6000 and give raises to the good ones. Throwing non-efficient bodies at the job does nothing.



Rep. Harold Rogers, R-Ky., chairman of the homeland security panel, said the TSA had hired too many screeners. Now, he said, it needed to cut back to fulfill its overall goal of looking at all transportation security and not just for aviation. March 2003 Article Link


That makes sense....

.



new topics

top topics
 
0

log in

join