Re: Security checks for crews are getting to the riduculous!
As part of my degree I have been studying the security lessons learned from 9/11 and what changes could be made to prevent these occuring again. Alot of these security measures which have been introduced are not visible, for example federal marshalls aboard planes in the US and special branch screening of passenger manifests in the UK. Another change was the profiling of high priority individuals for screening. 9/11 was carried out by people in their middle ages, with qualifications and without a "background". This has posed problems for security as it considerably widens the possibilities for potential terrorists. I'm afraid if you think of yourselves (forget your occupation) you are all middle aged, with qualifications and obviously no "background". Therefore there is nothing to say if your not checked, that you may carry explosives or fire arms to give to someone else or to leave on the aircraft for someone on the return leg. Obviously some companies take this to the extreme removing nail files etc but thats life.
However, what has become evident are two main obvious questions which remain unanswered;
1) Why do airport owners (think about security alone here) encourage access to airport terminals and airports in general for the non-travelling public? Do these non-travellers really contribute significant revenue to the airports? In efforts to thwart attacks on airport customers it would be advantageous to exclude non-travelleing public from the airport. This helps to remove petty thiefs, potential terrorists and their intelligence gatherers. This creates a release of landside capacity allowing more businesses and more space for passengers. It is then possible to check people before they enter the airport and could then include all passengers and employees WITHOUT EXCEPTION.
2) The establishing of careers for frontline employees, means a lower turnover of staff and thus reduces the ease with which jobs can be obtained (i.e by news reporters). This means recruit people with academic qualifications, pay them a professional wage, value them as employees and provide career progression. This will improve staff moral and the quality of the job done. (Budget reform can easily allow this to happen) The expense of the higher wages is outweighed by the saving of re-training and re-hiring.