Rules Will Allow Screeners to Remain in Jobs

After stoking high expectations that the federal takeover of airport security would lead to a new breed of airport security screener, one who was better educated and more qualified to assume a position of increased responsibility, the Department of Transportation has decided not to impose rules that would displace thousands of current screeners.

Most significantly, the department will not insist that screeners be high school graduates, a requirement that would have disqualified a quarter of the present work force of 28,000.

As recently as Dec. 20, the department said in a news release that "screeners must be U.S. citizens, have a high school diploma and pass a standardized examination."

But the Transportation Security Administration, the new agency created to supervise aviation security, announced a few days ago that it would allow a year of any similar work experience in lieu of a high school diploma.

The decision has dismayed advocates of tighter airport security, including groups representing flight attendants and business travelers, who had expressed hope that federalization would lead to an upgraded work force.

"We're dealing with very sophisticated and trained individuals who are trying to blow up our commercial aircraft," said James E. Hall, until recently the chairman of the National Transportation Safety Board. "These screeners are going to be an important line of defense, and it seems to me we should have higher educational standards for them. If all we're doing is recycling the existing screeners, why have we made this tremendous investment in creating a federal work force? It sends the wrong message."

Of particular concern to such critics is the agency's position that it hopes to retain many screeners who lack diplomas. Along with the decision to expedite the naturalization process for screeners who will lose their jobs if they do not become citizens, the relaxed education requirement suggests that the government hopes to minimize the turnover among the screeners when they become federal employees next November.

The guidelines published by the agency say that applicants for screening jobs must have a diploma or "one year of any type of work experience that demonstrates the applicant's ability to perform the work of the position." The agency has not said what kind of work experience would qualify, but a spokesman said it would apply to screeners who have been on the job for a year.

"The idea is to allow current screeners who would otherwise qualify but may not have high school diplomas to be eligible, so they do not get left behind," said Paul Takemoto, a spokesman for the security administration, which is part of the Department of Transportation. "Having a year of experience on the job is a valuable asset, and many of those people are perfectly qualified, even if they don't have a diploma."

But critics say the point of the new federal law was to upgrade the work force, not to retain the current workers, who have drawn fire in recent months for slipshod performance.

Kevin P. Mitchell, chairman of the Business Travel Coalition, which represents many large corporate buyers of travel services, said passengers have the right to expect a basic educational level from the screeners, given their importance in protecting aircraft from terrorists.

"This job is more than just looking at an X-ray screen — it's about looking at people and interpreting their answers to questions and making judgments," Mr. Mitchell said. "As much as anything here, we have to restore the confidence of the American people and the integrity of the aviation system, and I think most people would view the lack of a high school diploma with some alarm."

The Association of Flight Attendants, the largest flight attendants union, has also protested the lack of an education requirement, saying it fears the government will hire too many of the same screeners who allowed terrorists on the planes in the first place.

Security screeners now working for private companies are already required by the Federal Aviation Administration to speak, read and write English, and to demonstrate their ability to operate X-ray equipment and conduct physical searches of passengers. Transportation agency officials say the new law toughens the requirements with strong federal supervision of screeners, a criminal background check, and a passing grade on a new test that will measure aptitude, ability to deal with the public and English proficiency.

Those requirements will apply to all new screeners hired after February, when the security agency takes over responsibility for airport screening. Existing screeners may stay on the job, but by November 2002, they will have to reapply for their jobs and be hired by the federal government under the new requirements.

Transportation officials also said this month that they planned to work with the Immigration and Naturalization Service to find ways to expedite the citizenship process for screeners with good work records. They also plan to increase the pay of screeners, which until recently had been at minimum-wage levels, and to give a preference to hiring displaced aviation workers.

Advocates for the current screeners agreed with the agency's decision that experience, an aptitude test and a background check are more important than a high school diploma. Because of the high turnover in low-paying private screener jobs up to now, anyone who has remained in the job for a year has the kind of experience that the federal government will prize, they say.

"Anyone who can go through the training and pass the new tests is clearly qualified for the job, whatever their educational level," said Jono Schaffer, director of security organizing for the Service Employees International Union, which represents airport screeners in Los Angeles and San Francisco. "The only important requirement is whether they can perform the duties of the job."

In the new law, Congress gave the under secretary of transportation for security flexibility in interpreting the educational requirement. The law says that federal screeners must have a diploma "or experience that the under secretary has determined to be sufficient for individual to perform the duties of the position." Those were minimum requirements, however; the agency could have insisted on a diploma, but instead chose to accept a year of comparable work experience.

Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison, Republican of Texas and one of the principal authors of the new security law, said Congress decided it was too limiting to restrict screeners to being high school graduates.

"We know there are people who have dropped out of high school who still have the basic intelligence to do that job," Ms. Hutchison said. "The military service doesn't require a high school diploma, and we think the Transportation Department is also capable of making judgment calls on a person's background. You don't want to judge someone in a cookie-cutter way if they have a good work record."

The private security industry, which lobbied hard against the new law, agrees with that assessment. Kenneth P. Quinn, counsel for an association of the private airline security companies who will turn over their responsibilities to the government next year, said the repetitive nature of the screening jobs is often not a good fit for people with higher educational backgrounds.

"There's no demonstrable nexus between advanced educational degrees of any kind and the ability to perform at a high level as a screener," Mr. Quinn said. "In fact, the opposite is often true."

But many security experts say the government should begin to have higher expectations of its screeners, giving them more responsibility than just robotically working the checkpoint machines.

"What we really need are people who understand how terrorists work, who can spot a false passport, who can ask the right questions of the right people," said Isaac Yeffet, former director of general security for El Al Airlines and now a private security consultant in Cliffside Park, N.J. "Every screener is holding on his shoulders a 747 full of passengers. It is impossible to imagine that they would have dropped out of high school."

We'll keep the same people and just pay them more. And make it impossible to fire the incompetant ones. And we'll hire based on gender and race rather than qualification. Yeah, that's the ticket to security.

Is anyone really surprised at this?

Up is down, down is up, and politics is politics.

Leni

Most significantly, the department will not insist that screeners be high school graduates, a requirement that would have disqualified a quarter of the present work force of 28,000.

For some reason, I feel less like flying now, than I did before.

Our founding fathers sought to prohibit "titles of nobility" with their lifelong perks and pensions. A federal government job is today's title of nobility - perpetual income and perks granted to the privileged (at the expense of the unprivileged), who cannot be fired like their counterparts in the private sector. This is a grievous evil.

""These screeners are going to be an important line of defense, and it seems to me we should have higher educational standards for them.""

But then the federal government couldn't get away with paying them $6.00 an hour! ..and to think they have the power to (on a whim) yank someone from the line and cause much grief and inconvenience for them. The lower educational standard also makes it easier for them to be programmed with whatever propoganda is needed for them to do their job. Remember, independent thinking is the enemy!

I am probably going to get major flames for this, but here it goes.

What is so great about a high school diploma these days? I would rather have someone who dropped out of high school who has worked for a reputable security company, rather than a brain full of mush recent high school grad.

No flames here, DANE! I have attended a couple of High School graduations here in Anchorage recently, and it is hard for me to see much difference between many of the graduates and the ones who dropped out. Of course there is a difference at the extremes (the graduate who goes on to a good college, vs the drop-out who sells drugs and steals cars), but for the kids in the middle of this distribution curve, the diploma is just a meaningless piece of paper. It has been devalued over and over since the Sixties, and is now practically worthless.

By the way, I don't see a High School diploma as essential for what is going to be a rather boring and meaningless job in the very lowest reaches of the Federal bureaucracy. I'll be happy if they just exclude illegal aliens, convicted felons, and the rest of the Democratic voter base!

applicants for screening jobs must have a diploma or "one year of any type of work experience that demonstrates the applicant's ability to perform the work of the position."

The ability to put your "X" on the signature line of any public employee's union card AND on the registration card for the DemocRAT party will suffice.

While I agree that a diploma from today's public school system is an extremely poor yardstick for competence, I would question the overall quality of a younger applicant who had not even had the wherewithall to achieve that simple goal. Actually, I would be more willing to cut some slack for an older worker without a diploma......it seems to me that folks had more valid reasons for dropping out of high school back in the olden days.

Btw, Ranger......did you know you posted that response twice? Smile.......

I've said it before but will say it again: common sense and logic have totally lost their place in the running of this country, and thousands or more of innocent Americans will be sacrificed on the altar of political correctness before all is said and done. The terrorists must sit back and laugh at us. With good reason.

To be sure I understand, this is something that Bush himself has the power to change since it's dealing primarily with the rules of an agency and not law. If so, what on EARTH is the man thinking?

Screw the screeners. We activated most of the military police in the Guard and Reserves. They are, therefore, "Federal" employees. Fire the incompetents and put the men (and women) in uniform behind the X-Ray screen and be done with it.

And if the Feds decide they want to keep the drop outs, give them conditional employement for one year after which they must have earned a G.E.D. or they will be released.

...on the registration card for the DemocRAT party will suffice.

President Bush, who is a Republican, I think, signed this bill. And his drones in the Department of Transportation chose to interpret it to require the minimum of the qualifications specified in the bill--i.e., no high school diploma.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.