Summary
Secondary screening is a standard procedure at the airport through which the TSA gets information for background checks of travelers and crew members. However, there is a privacy concern for airlines that provide passenger identification data to the federal government (Price & Forrest, 2016). Sharing personal data between agencies and institutions is a violation when the individuals have not consented to such transfers. Another ethical concern is that personal documents are used to label people as terrorists, drug smugglers, or criminals even if they have not been proven guilty (The screening process). The other ethical issue is body-search, removing shoes and luggage from the bags. Such a security check is uncomfortable and may denote a lack of respect since searches are done in public (Price & Forrest, 2016). However, most airports now have advanced technologies, such as X-ray machines, which preserve the dignity of the passengers. In some cases, the screening procedure can be lengthy and time-consuming since there are at least three check-up points and people have to wait in line, which is time-consuming.
Ways TSA PreCheck Might Reduce the Risk Associated with Terrorism
The 9/11 terrorist attack made the customs and border agency (CBP) develop more sophisticated procedures in utilizing advanced passenger information, passenger name records (API/PNR), and other data to assess passengers’ risks. The report helps screen the people boarding the plane for their history in criminal activities and their reason for traveling (Lawson et al., 2020). If terrorist plans to travel, the TSA can deter them on time to protect others. Adopting a suitable model, such as allowing the customers to select where they will queue, screening passengers through millimeter-wave and luggage through the X-yay, is also necessary to enhance efficiency (Wang et al., 2019). In addition, all international visitors must have clearance from the electronic system for travel authorization which involves extensive background checks (Price & Forrest, 2016). Only the individuals classified as low risk can depart from the airport, which then ensures that the travelers are safe while on the air. Thus, TSA can reduce terrorist threats through thorough background checks of their passengers before the airplane takes off.
The implication of Covid Virus on Passenger Screening
The outbreak of the SAR-CoV2 increased security pressure for both the passengers and the TSA workers. In addition to the usual screening routine, they must monitor symptoms, perform nucleic acid or antigen amplification testing, and quarantine (Johansson et al., 2021). Covid made it necessary for the airports to strategize on how to mitigate the spread of the virus. Given that the process of getting Covid-19 clearance was lengthy, there was crowding and delays in the waiting areas leading to congestion. Yet, in the aviation industry, high-reliability organizations are those with efficient screening processes, error-free procedures, and low delay frequencies (Klenka, 2019). The challenge with coronavirus is even people working at the airport and doing the screening were exposed. Thus, Covid-19 created additional security concerns, increased delays, and exposed more people to the biological threat of becoming ill.
Adequacy of Training Provided to “Front-Line” TSA Screeners
Due to lack of professional training, human error can influence vulnerabilities that terrorists and criminals exploit for their selfish gain. Inadequate training may include gaps in supervision, poor maintenance of metal detectors, failure to recognize manufacturing defects, and unworkable schedules (McFarlane, 2020). Although the majority of the front-line TSA screeners have adequate training at the point of intake and recruitment, the world of technology is ever-changing. Moreover, according to Cheong et al. (2020), the TSA screeners must continually adapt to serving many passengers while maintaining high precision during clearance. Worse still, some travelers are new to using airplanes and may need help with biometric tests and guidance on where to pass through the metal detector doors (Price & Forrest, 2016). Thus, the training of people working for airport security is not enough as the number of people traveling is high, and new technologies are continually being developed.
References
Cheong, K., Kun, C. L., & Costello, F. J. (2020). The intention of passengers towards repeat use of biometric security for sustainable airport management. Sustainability, 12(11), 4528. Web.
Johansson, M. A., Wolford, H., Prabasaj, P., Diaz, P. S., Tai-Ho, C., Brown, C. M., Cetron, M. S., & Alvarado-Ramy, F. (2021). Reducing travel-related SARS-CoV-2 transmission with layered mitigation measures: Symptom monitoring, quarantine, and testing. BMC Medicine, 19, 1-13. Web.
Klenka, M. (2019). Major incidents that shaped aviation security. Journal of Transportation Security, 12(1-2), 39-56. Web.
Lawson, C., Bersin, A., & Kayyem, J. N. (2020). Beyond 9/11: Homeland Security for the twenty-first century. MIT Press.
McFarlane, P. (2020). Linking aviation security failures to human-mediated error. A review of the related literature with directions for policy and research. Journal of Transportation Security, 13(1-2), 33-51. Web.
Price, J., & Forrest, J. (2016). Practical aviation security: Predicting and preventing future threats. Butterworth-Heinemann.
Wang, Y., Zhang, J., Wang, G., Wang, Y., Yang, P., Huang, X., & Liu, Z. (2019). A network flow approach for optimizing the passenger throughput at an airport security checkpoint. IOP Conference Series.Materials Science and Engineering, 490(4), 1-12. Web.