Originally Posted by
Skipness One Foxtrot
Wrong, wrong, wrong! MAN has an incredibly high secondary screening rate, partly poor technology, partly people leaving in liquids and mainly staff being terrified of the sack. It is a VERY particular airport that skews the numbers game enormously.
There are many and varied issues round liquids imho. Including the cosmetics industries - you would think they would by now be promoting the smaller aerosols , however the rule is pretty pathetic anyway indeed the 100mils is an arbitrary number not set by science , more rather risk assessors .
As for Manchester truth be known ; is it not the profile of tourists going to the beach and general levels of ignorance (Not in a disrespectful way) that delivers such high rate failures
The fact that there have never been an interception of a potential chemical bomb Anywhere suggests the genuine risk threat to be
Infinitesimally small.
Your comment on employment risk ( low pay contract even agency) is however somewhat valid