Analysis of Security of the Airport - Research Paper Example

Analysis of Security of the Airport Introduction Security of the airport is of paramount importance as it entails the security of the passengers, the aircrafts, the crew, the nation and a huge amount of individual, organizational and national property. Airports are easy targets by criminals because of the large number of people that pass through airports and because of the large number of people that can be found at one place at any point of time. Besides, the shocking images of the 7 July 2005 London bomb attack, the 11 March 2004 train attack in Madrid, and the 11 September 2001 attack on world trade centre in New York (Enoma & Allen, 2007) urge the airport authorities to ensure security of staff and passengers. Each country has its own agency or authority to protect its airports but by and large the world follows the policies and the regulations laid down by the United States. Research Topic Recently the number and types of crimes have increased which has aggravated the situation leading the airport authorities to introduce and impose new security measures. It is debatable whether the new security measures provide extra safety or they have added to the concerns of the passengers and the crew alike. Research Hypothesis The new security measures have only added to the woes and concerns of the air travelers and the airport employees. Data sources This paper will first cite some examples from newspapers and journals which convey the concerns of the passengers. To substantiate the secondary data, data from passengers have been collected through questionnaire. Some employees were informally spoken to, at the airport. Secondary search The number and type of security measures are causing unnecessary delays in passenger check-ins and flight departures. Security of freight is as important as security of passengers. Following the discovery of explosive devices from Yemen in air freight at East Midlands airport and Dubai, the passengers face new “ludicrous” security measures (Bentham 2010). The devices were found hidden in printer ink cartridges and hence difficult to detect. They contained the explosive PETN which could not be detected in initial tests and now the BAA authorities plan to introduce “package by package” screening, thereby further delaying the process. X-raying individual packages would hit the passengers as travel would be uncomfortable and the passengers would be subject to even more tedious ordeal. Each time some such incident occurs, further measures are introduced but they remain totally ineffective. The American driven security measures have been irritating the passengers for over a decade and would eventually have to be relaxed (The New Zealand Herald, 2010). Electronic self-check in would have to be introduced as the current system is time consuming which the passengers can ill-afford. Europe and the European air officials have started resisting the United States imposed useless and intrusive travel security measures, most of which they do not adhere to for their internal flights (Judd, 2010). Removing shoes and taking laptop out of bags are redundant measures and have done nothing to ensure security of the passengers or the crew. The demand is to have speedier security checks and not further delay the process. Even with all the security measures in place, suspicious packages were found on American-bound cargo aircraft at British airports (The Express, 2010). This implies that air freight consignments would also have to be screened, which would add to the security measures without bringing in any positive outcome. Passenger experience remains had despite the airports now bring virtual security companies as almost 41 percent of the airport staff are security related (Judd, 2010). Canada has introduced secret weapon- air sky marshals – who are rigorously trained to detect and eliminate every threat to passengers, flight crew and air craft (Gulli, Henheffer, Mendleson, & Macdonald, 2010). However, the role of the sky marshals would be needed only if other security measures at the airport fail or are missing. There already exists a multi-layered approach that includes traditional tools such as metal detectors and bomb sniffing dogs but these have not found to be the best way to fight terrorists. Canada has introduced new security measures such as 44 body scanners at a cost of $250,000 each but terrorists can safely pass through the scanners if they stuff explosives in their body cavities. These body scanners can pick up metal, plastic, rubber, wire, ceramic and liquids, even tucked inside pockets. However, this cutting-edge technology would not be able to catch these explosives, according to Canadian Air Transport Security Authority. This means the bombers can still get into the plane with explosives on them. The machines add more time in scanning the passenger even though gaps still remain, thereby rendering the system ineffective. This step takes place after the metal detector and x-ray scanner and takes one minute per passenger. This secondary step of body scanning is not only time consuming but useless as well. The body scanners put more focus on objects rather than people and their intentions. The new theory is that people’s intentions have to be ascertained because even if someone has the most lethal weapon he may not have the intention to use it. Thus, behavior screening is being introduced and the process starts as soon as the passenger enters the airport arena (Gulli et al). Trained officials try to detect danger in physical signs, vocal intonation and other clues. Travelers are assessed as they enter the terminal building and suspects are directed in a different direction. They test how people react before they get to the metal detector and this gives them indications of malicious intentions. However, here cultural and racial issues could hinder right detection and also create confusion. The gaps in security are not revealed unless someone walks through and hence all efforts towards securitization are rendered useless. Canada is trying to move away from airplane security to access control and surveillance outside of and throughout the airport. They have also introduced futuristic technologies such as “smart seat belts” that enables passengers to be locked down in their seats, and “brain fingerprinting” that senses travelers’ intentions but the benefits do not commensurate with the massive costs (Gulli et al). Any amount of in-flight and airport security measures have remained ineffective in stopping thugs from boarding the planes. In the aftermath at The Pearson International Airport, the security measures were such that left the passengers feel not only insecure but frustrated as well (Gulli et al). The security personnel ran their fingers through passengers’ hair, felt their whole body, lifted up the pant leg and let down the sock. They swabbed people and purses for gunpowder and even babies were woken up for inspection. All these caused nine hours delay leaving the passengers even more fearful. The multi-layered security includes the metal detectors and the baggage x-ray scanners but these are inefficient and the technology is outdated. One in three suitcases set off a false alarm and at times the scanners do not work properly either (Gulli et al). After the alarm the passenger’s name is announced over the public address system and then the baggage opened in his presence. All these create unwanted panic among the passengers. Bomb-sniffing dogs can be very expensive and the scope of their detection limited. Dogs cannot even sniff if someone has a box cutter in the pocket. Despite all these expensive security measures, neither the airport employees nor the passengers have any sense of security. The security measures should not be applied only at the point of departure and moreover the equipments need to be tested and set right at frequent intervals (Bentham 2010). Organizations or groups that have malicious intent do not decide on the crime after arriving at the airport. Intelligence capabilities have to be harnessed much in advance instead of subjecting the passengers to new ordeals after each new crime. The current security system has too many layers and it is an inconsistent security system (Judd, 2010). Primary data Attempts were made to interview passengers at the airports but the passengers are so hassled going through the multi-layered security process that they were just not keen on spending time talking about the process again. Hence, emails addresses of passengers from two airlines were collected. The airlines were assured that the email IDs would strictly be used only for the purpose of the survey and nothing beyond that. Moreover, the emails IDs of those passengers that had agreed to receiving offers and mails were only taken. The respondents were assured anonymity and informed consent was taken prior to sending them the survey questionnaire. More than 200 emails were sent out and the response received were 80 which translate into 40% response rate. This is considered good considering the passengers had no obligation to respond. Several pilots were sent out emails as well. Passenger concerns The most annoying new security measure is the pat-down process. Eight-five percent of the respondents found this to be intrusive because now the touch has changed from light groping to invasive. Moreover, this intrusive search still cannot locate weapons hidden in the body cavities so how do such measures serve any purpose. The passengers find it time consuming. Catching a flight entails keeping an extra hour in hand to go through the multi-layered process of security. They have expressed that it is a punishment to take a flight. If they had an alternative like short distance trains, they would have preferred than going through such security measures that do not leave them secure anyway. The full body scanner is another irritating security measure introduced by the Transport Security Administration (TSA). This intrudes into human privacy. The full body scanner sends naked images of the passenger to a TSA screener at some other location. Some respondents threatened to sue the airport authorities with robbing the passengers of their basic human right to privacy. They either have to undergo the full-body scanner or pat-downs. Passengers wonder which is worse – the scanner or the pat-downs. Another passenger’s woe was that new security measures are added every now and then which leaves the passengers taken aback each time they fly. Some fly just once a month or during vacations and they find it extremely harassing when they find between their last vacation and this, new measures have been added. Baggage checking is extremely tough and not well organized. While the passengers do agree that all these measures are being adopted for the security of passengers, the result does not ensure security. When checked baggage passes through x-ray, the officials ask the passengers to open the baggage in case they suspect something amiss. Most often the passengers have found that it was not something that was a taboo. It is just that the banned items are grouped in such a way that the x-ray machine is unable to detect it properly. It then sets off alarm even for legitimate things which is annoying to the passenger because they have to open the baggage to prove themselves innocent. Moreover, the officials simply throw things around from the baggage and no help is offered to set it right again. One passenger found it very annoying when he landed at the airport to catch a flight and was informed that his name was under “no fly” list. At the time of making reservation the passengers have to give their full name, date of birth, address, and home telephone number. The government computers comb the database and if they assess any threat from the passenger, it is encrypted on the ticket. This can be very humiliating for any genuine passenger. Moreover, Scarborough (2005) contends that this too does not enhance security because the terrorists need only to take test runs to crack the code. Another passenger complained that he was arrested simply because he was closely watching some security staff. He was taken to be a terrorist but would a terrorist openly watch security staff? This innocent passenger was released after 12 hours of interrogation when the security agents were convinced of his innocence. The innocent passenger has now filed a suit claiming compensation for loss of business opportunity and the damages as he could not take the scheduled flight. The general impression that the passenger survey gave was that each passenger is considered to be a terrorist by the security officials. This sounded ridiculous to them and they feel that the entire exercise in providing security to them has not taken into account the public relations that need to be maintained. No information is available on arrival at the airport that one has to either undergo body scanner or the pat-downs. Many may not the difference and hence are unable to taken an informed decision. Pilots’ woes Just like the passengers, the pilots too find it abusive to be patted down each time they have to fly. They feel the pilots should be spared such ordeal and jointly they are trying so that they are exempted. The pilots should not be suspected because they are entrusted with the safety of the passengers. Hence, they should be granted the dignity and spared full body scan or pat-down. Employees’ concerns Some of the employees of the Transport Security Administration were informally spoken to. Their names and identities cannot be revealed. However, all of them expressed their own concerns. They are the targets of abuse and backlash from the angry passengers. The employees contend that they are merely implementing the policies formulated by the decision-makers but since the passengers find these officers on duty easy to attack, all their anger and frustration is released on these innocent officers. This has made the staff fearful and they feel insecure when new security measures are being added on a daily basis for the safety of passengers. Conclusion Following certain incidents the authorities in different nations have instituted their own security measures but by and large most follow what the US does. However, the new security measures that are meant for the safety of the passengers and the employees, only leaves them further unnerved. No amount of technology and x-ray machines so far has been found to be fool-proof. The terrorists have become smarter as they can carry explosives in their body cavities and this cannot be detected even by the full body scanner. The only technology that to some extent can be relied upon in the behavioral screening but this being time consuming, it is yet to be seen how successfully it can be implemented. All other security measures have only added to the woes of the passengers and the employees. The basic human respect is denied as every passenger is considered to be a terrorist and is robbed of the basic human rights to privacy. The pilots too have to undergo the pat-downs which they find it humiliating. The employees suffer insecurity while on duty, as the frustration of the passengers angered at the new security measure, is released on the employees who are merely executing their duty. Thus, the new security measures have only added to the woes and concerns of the air travelers and the airport employees. References Bentham, M November 1, 2010, 'RYANAIR BOSS: BRINGING IN MORE AIRPORT BOMB CHECKS IS POINTLESS', The Evening Standard (London) Enoma, A & Allen, S 2007, 'Developing key performance indicators for airport safety and security', Facilities, vol. 25, no. 7, pp. 296-315 Gulli, C Henheffer, T Mendleson, R & Macdonald, N 2010, 'THE SCARY TRUTH ABOUT AIRPORT SECURITY', 00249262, 1/25/2010, Vol. 123, Issue 2, pp. 16-21 Judd, T October 28, 2010, 'Government backs calls to review 'redundant' airport security checks', The Independent (London) Scarborough, M 2005, 'An examination of the growth of the Federal Police Agencies', Cato Institute, viewed 20 November 2010 http://www.cato.org/pubs/briefs/bp94.pdf The Express, October 30, 2010, 'Longer delays as security gets stepped up', The New Zealand Herald, October 30, 2010, 'Time consuming airport security checks can't last, says pilot', Read More