Originally Posted by
milleriom
I think that is far too complacent a view, SecondDog.
The fact is that you cannot simply point the finger of blame at ''a contractor not being able to staff adequately to meet the requirement''. This is a key aspect and responsibility matter of airport management and it is to them that pax should look in the event of any issues at all.
The fact that there is an outsourced contract for security - as is normal at airports - does do not let the airport off any hook whatsoever. There are contracts in force which will specify in minute detail the service standards required of the provider and the penalties for not meeting them. Such matters are called ''Service Level Agreements'' (''SLAs'').
Instead of defending or trying to excuse the Airport in regard to the indefensible (when it has quite rightly been called a shambles - and on a number of occasions too) the appropriate thing for you would be to accept that there is an important issue which requires to be addressed. I believe that the key thing would be to ask what the airport has done and is doing about enforcing the service level agreement standards with the contractor. Service Standards which must be at all times WHOLLY suitable and adequate.
To try and excuse the airport is ridiculous.
Your knowledge of what an SLA is puts things in a whole new light there..... thanks!
So, when I said the airport had planned what was needed and the contractor let them down (very much at the 11th hour btw) what part of the fact that such provision is covered by an SLA that will allow the airport to roast the contractor after the fact means that the blame falls on the airport at 0400 when a number of people have reported sick for provision that is put in place for 0430?
I don't know if any of you know anything about the marketplace for provision of security at an airport but it is not plentiful. Nor is it something that can be changed at the drop of a hat. So while you are correct, the airport will review the events of the day with the contractor (and I expect these talks to have been full and frank to say the least) there are limited short term options as to what can be done.
Sure, all you guys who think you know all about aviation think you could do better/know better. Well, I call claptrap. Airport mgmt is entirely blameless when they have given instruction and it hasn't been followed. I also feel sorry for the contractor btw (or at least the decent staff) who get dealt a ****ty hand at best and who actually pulled things around on Saturday morning in a way which I cannot be bothered explaining because you guys would still run them down.
There are lots of ****ty comments about the security in BFS and how 'it is the worst anywhere'. I would say that some of the knowledge behind some of those opinions is flimsy at best. Did you ever think that some of the other places you go to aren't doing it right? I am fully aware that there are issues to overcome but they do not amount to the carnage you guys have described.
This will be my last post on this topic as we seem to go round in circles but such is your right to rage and mine to rebuff. C'est la vie, et la vie est belle.