"Terror In The Skies" ITV 4th June

[Flintstone]

Thought I'd get in first and say that the leaders for this programme look fun. 'Security' staff asleep on the job and others missing scans while reading the paper.

Wonder if it'll have legs or prove to be sensationalist pap?


*popcorn

[CVTDog]

I cant believe what I watching here - I KNOW its a "Tonight" programme and thrives on sensationalism but how in heavens name has it taken a "undercover" reporter to find out what management must have already known about !

A truly awful set of working practices - I trust that the company no longer runs the security business or employs these people (particularly the one who admitted he had some "coke" for breakfast) :eek:

[Half_Cuban]

Oh come on guys.
We all know that confiscating pilots toothpaste is the important thing here, it doesn't really matter what the passengers take through security does it !

[TimV]

It's not surprising really is it? No doubt these folk are poorly paid and probably work on a "it'll never happen to me" basis. How wrong they could be. I've often thought how erratic it seems at Heathrow that some folk have to have their shoes put through the machine and others not. At the end of the day it's all down to probability - which of course it shouldn't be.

[fmgc]

Taxied out past a Corsair 747 the other day at BHX that had the rossers crawling all over it with dogs etc.

Apparently somebody had broken into it and stolen all the duty free out of the bars!

[MarcJF]

We all know that security is not what it might be. Question is, what needs to be done to balance security v passenger "satisfaction"? It's only a matter of time before something happens in UK skies, what will we be saying with hindsight in a year or so?

[IcePack]

Now that program IMHO proves that when the crew have to que with the pax when staff gate is closed.(not allowed to que jump) The BHX security are just doing it to jerk the crews off. Not for REASONS OF SECURITY:mad:

[RoyHudd]

And just profile the individuals "working", bunch of unskilled semi-literate skivers. Not too many native English speakers either. BHX security stinks

[xyzzy]

If I had tickets for the CO flight out of BHX tomorrow I'd be making sure my hotel bookings were easy to cancel. Because either the US TSA will turn it back, or there'll be about a hundred security people strip-searching everyone going on board. It'll be interesting to hear what BHX do to gloss over it. The claim the dodgy lot are secondary is odd, because if so, why have it?

Yes, Tonight is sensationalist and selective. But I'd be interested to hear _any_ justification for what was shown, even if there's a thousand counterbalancing cases of good practice. At best it might be that the on-camera hoodlums are boastful braggarts, but falsification of document audit trail is surely actionable?

[Skypartners]

Tell you what guys - since the liquid bomb threat my staff have been humping cases of drinks through remotely located 'out of guage' x-ray machines' doubling and trebling the cost and effort involved in staying in business ariside at an airport. Needn't have bothered - should just switch to selling Class A instead of food 'n beverage and I could take it through central search!

I laugh every time someone at BHX has a pop at us at Coventry - describing themselves as a 'real' airport. Well, chaps, it will certainly feel very real there tomorrow morning, I suspect.

[RED WINGS]

quote "A truly awful set of working practices - I trust that the company no longer runs the security business or employs these people (particularly the one who admitted he had some "coke" for breakfast) "

After receiving this report the airport made large numbers of airport employed security employees redundant and gave ICTS the contract for the whole airport! I wonder how long they are going to keep it?

[bhx runway15]

Does it matter, lousy pay equals no commitment.

[Freeway]

This programme has revealed what we all thought about these awful private security companies.

They employ individuals with criminal records and from the fringes of society, who are dealing in and smuggling drugs, they employ wholly unqualified, unsuitable, non-motivated staff who are mostly of low intelligence and cannot even be trained to a proper standard!
These individuals are airside staff, FFS!! Just goes to show what a nonsense the Disclosure Scotland vetting is.:ugh:

There is no real management structure and as such a lack of authority, the management seem to be just as bad as the frontline staff and the persistant failure of audits without any resulting action by any authority is a dambing indication of the shambolic current state of aviation security in the UK.

The consequenses of the failings of these security firms is something that as professional pilots we are all too familiar with.
It is the lives of our passengers, fellow crew members and ultimately our own lives that these useless cretins couldn't give a to$$ about.

If I worked at BHX, mercifully I don't, then I would be having serious discussions with my airline and fellow staff about a vote of no confidence in the security at the airport and ultimately a boycott.
I certainly won't be carrying any rush bags for anyone that's for sure.

It's a disgrace guys, and its your lives and the lives of your families that are at risk here.

[davey147]

Its about time we followed the States on this.

We need a govenment security acency in place who pay well, it will never be right without it.

Id be happy paying more tax for it.

[Litebulbs]

A programme funded by the Neocons? We need more security! Biometric everything. Free Daily Mails. I will certainly not be flying out of BHX tomorrow, FACT!

[Wedge]

So with a quick glance at this at the Panorama thread in the Mil forum, would I be correct in thinking that the PPRuNe consensus is that those pesky journos have actually for once put together a couple of factually correct, non-hysterical and important documentaries that actually have some public interest value?

Well there's a first time for everything. :} Credit where it's due.

[Pontious]

Well what would an external, thorough and thoroughly professional aviation security inspection team (possibly Governmental i.e. TSA in the U.S.) make of the profiles of the ICTS's mob of bone idle, worthless, useless, criminal,pond life, smackheaded scum, passing as security officers. The phrase '...not fit to scrape dogs**t off the bottom of curly-toed slippers' comes to mind.

As for that w****r who said he hoped that mornings' CO flight would blow up in mid-air, I'd like to see him strung up from a lamp post on he Solihull Express way.

In addition to pax profiling how about a bit of employee profiling?

As for the 'ethnicity' pinless hand grenade, the evidence is there in glorious technicolour detail. There's no denying it.

P.S. JFK Int'l Term. B and MAN T3 security staff are friendly, courteous and very thorough without being intrusive. How Avsec should be in these trying times.:ok:

[T4 Risen]

I have not actually seen the programme in question but have to ask, is it just BHX that has a problem or are there many more airports with similar problems? i had the displeasure of working in airport security before i became a commercial pilot and know how frustraiting the job can be. Is BHX just a one off case or is there a bigger picture?
T4

[Beausoleil]

This traveller's response was to think that their can't actually be that much of a terrorist threat if they are willing to have a system that allows this sort of thing. Why should I be forced to carry an ID card, allow 90 day detention without trial, and so on for fear of terrorists if the obvious front line defence can be allowed to be this lax?

[dwshimoda]

Out of interest, do security staff need to go through security themselves before starting work? I was wondering how the chap managed to get all the hidden camera equipment through a metal detector, and presumably body search?

Whilst it always goes for sensational headlines, I think this porgramme might have really got something right, and hope this makes people start to listen / look at what is really going on.

DW

[GK430]

A very comprehensive report especially considering the constraints.
Some of it has been plain to see, even to the casual observer.
So what has the DfT been doing.............? Are they not there to uphold and enforce the regulations.

[rubik101]

See post #244 in the Crew Security thread for the DoT response.

[shaun ryder]

I was absoulutely appalled and I only caught the last 10 minutes of this programme. As what could only be described as 'spume', these people have no right to be working at an airport. They seemed more akin to an inner city street with their penchant for criminal activity and lack of duty. And as for anyone sticking up for these tedious people by implying its down to the lack of a decent wage. Well thats the biggest load of dross I have ever heard, these fools are at best, a bunch of semi skilled low IQ'd bad eggs who need nothing more than a P45 inserting in their behind. The people who recruit these muppets should also be having a word with themselves :mad:.

[wobble2plank]

I believe you are all being far to hard on thses valiant perveyours of the front line of aviation security. I have just read the back of my toothpaste tube (75ml) and let me tell you there are some damn dangerous chemicals in there! There are more long word on the back of that tiny (75ml in a clear plastic bag to prevent contamination) tube than in Stephen Frys' diary!

Imagine, if you can, the emotional stress of searching and then discovering a 125 ML BOTTLE OF ANTI AGING CREAM!!!! The shock and stress must be what has forced them to drink and drugs.

Instead of shunning our brave, selfless and valient heroes of the security check-in we should immediately set up a welfare system, leaflet campaign and after care councilling. Perhaps an experienced b*llsh*tter to cover the political spin side, Ruth Kelly should do nicely!

Bunch of to88ers, oh well back to the crew aisle for checkin, probably won't be posting for a while! :zzz:

W2P

[flyinthesky]

For anyone working at any UK airport, the similarities between BHX and anywhere else are all too evident. In this country, we pay more attention to the profit bottom line. Security should be provided by the government. It SHOULD NOT be a profit making enterprise. ICTS like any other of the myriad private enterprises will keep squeezing the operation to gain an extra penny. We use ICTS to provide extra security at MAN and its a similar tale. The airlines are as much to blame. They want the cheapest possible service.
Manchester Airport had its own security highlighted not so long since, again there is a budget involved.

We are one of the most highly taxed nations on earth but our government cannot afford to address serious issues such as security. It can of course give free handouts to just about any immigrant coming here. Priorities? It wouldn't know one if it smacked it in the face. Of course it does know about political correctness and wastage. All aviation security needs to be state run and properly funded. In that way we might start to focus less on flight deck toothpaste and more on proper risk.

The U.S has its own problems, but aviation security is not one of them. When I report for work there, I can at least bring toothpaste, I don't need to remove my shoes and generally the TSA are a much more polite and friendly lot than any of our own shower over here.

The answer to last nights programme goes much higher than just the company involved. It requires a complete shift in governmental policy and outlook. Indeed it throws the whole concept of our welfare state into question.

[wobble2plank]

It is exactly the way they behaved when they thought the public eye was not upon them. They are paid by the airlines and thereby through the ticket price the public to perform an important service which was clearly not being done and being acknowledged as such by their own staff. I would describe any creed, colour or race as such after such a pitiful performance. (called myself it after a particularly stressful sim cx :) )

Scottish disclosure and the employers of these people need a damn good kick up the backside for allowing some of these people to work in positions of trust in which they are obviously not suited. I was under the impression that that was why we had background security checks. Not to allow a self confessed drug dealer to preach security to our passengers.

[ABO944]

If you pay peanuts you get monkeys!

Say no more ... :eek:

[wobble2plank]

Love the squabbling,

Disclosure Scotland provides the majority of airports within the UK with the preliminary background security check required to apply for a job within the restricted area of an airfield.

Most, if not all personell, myself included, have to have this rudimentary background check complete prior to job interview.

If you wish to defend these muppets thats up to you but at least most of us who have to put our lives in the hands of these people can see them for the sham they are.

Please note that that applies ONLY to those who have indited themselves by there own action on the programme last night. Many I have worked with have been extremely good.

Wake up to see the cancer that needs to be cut out before it gives the whole security system a bad name.

[Maude Charlee]

Oh you lot are just soooo funny! :}

Journalists put out a story about airport security, and you lap up every last word of it as gospel truth.

Same journos put out a story about the Sacred Cow of Aviation from a flight deck perspective and it gets shot down in flames like you wouldn't believe.

Double standards? Surely not. :rolleyes:

And some people want to put the Government in charge. Great, yet another soaraway success like the Police, Health Service, Education, etc, etc.......:ugh:

[wobble2plank]

The flight crew/flight deck has already been through the mill. Dispatches ran a thing a few years ago highlighting some of the down route antics from an insiders point of view.

Working practices were toughened up and a few people lost their jobs.

No point denying it or bleating about it, it was right there on camera. The military had the same, anyone remember 'Brilliant'? The bizarre thing about that 'sensationalistic jorno' piece was that while the old fogeys hated it the RN recruitment went through the roof.

I firmly believe that a few rocks need to be turned in any job to dust in the corners and shake out a few home truths.
Alot of what was shown last night was indeed senationalism and to be honest I can laugh at a guy catching 40 winks and snoring, it does little harm. However, there was one point at which I feel just about everyone watching the program was astounded. That was the part where a security employee detailed how he managed to smuggle a half a kilo of a class A drug into our country! A country where our children get to grow up with the every present drug spectre on the streets. Never should a person like that, a self confessed user of class A drugs and a dealer in the same, be allowed to hold a position of responsibility within ANY organisation. Worse still, the fact that his manager knew of this act and failed to act is a sign of gross misconduct and extremely poor management.

They are the two who should get the boot, the others have already watched their own wake up call and are probably feeling pretty awake today!
:ok:

[ohitsmonday]

Must say I'm a little surprised at most of the comments here. ICTS provide secondary security functions at BHX, they are not the guys you generally deal with as crew or pax passing through central search.
Obviously much of what was seen and heard- staff not paying attention to baggage passed through 'reject' x-ray system and drink and drug 'findings' are not acceptable.
But, much of what ICTS do in the UK do is provide secondary security to airlines (and contracted by airlines) required by their state regulations. Typical functions , as seen in the programme are guarding aircraft and searching all who enter it. Generally these services are provided to American based airlines and have been for many years - IMHO these requirements have always been ridiculous and pointless. In all the years I worked on the ramp I never witnessed one of these guards finding any reason not to grant staff access to the a/c in question.
I also found the implication that private security firms were to blame for the 911 atrocities shocking - correct me if my memory has got the better of me but weren't all the items used during the hijackings allowed under international regulations at the time?

Don't get me wrong - several scumbags and bad/mal practices were exposed on the programme and I'm glad they were, but I don't think we're at as much risk as the programme makers would have us believe.

[lotman1000]

You should not believe all the information that was issued about what weapons were used in the 9/11 incidents. There was probably a certain amount of manipulation of the truth to cover the fact that US security was lax, prior to 9/11, on domestic flights as to both what could be carried on, and what could be placed on the aircraft for later use.

[cwatters]

It was clear from the program that the audit process (eg testing the security service provided to ensure compliance) wasn't working or if it was the results of the audit were being ignored. As I understand it the airlines pay for the security that featured in the program. I suspect this is at the root of the problem - Airlines don't want passengers inconvenienced and planes delayed by security searches so they have no real incentive to audit properly. They just care about what they are charged to supply the minimium legal standard. Sounds like someone else should be doing the auditing. Time for a regulator to step in if there isn't one already.

[SpannerInTheWerks]

Completely innocently I carried one of those plastic cigarette lighters filled with butane through security at Manchester, Barbados (twice), Kingston Jamaica, Montego Bay, back to Barbados and finally to Manchester and it was never spotted.

I don't smoke but my partner had put it in my hand luggage with the intention of using it landside then disposing of it. Completely forgot about it in a side compartment of the bag!!!

Now we had perfume confiscated in Barbados and Jamaica which we know was sold on the black market ('customs' officials seen dividing the spoils in the womens' toilets), our bags opened and possessions robbed in Barbados and Puerta Plata, but the one item which could have caused a nasty incident was never noticed.

I feel bad about admitting we took this lighter on board, but it serves to prove the point.

Incidentally, a few weeks ago one of those lighters started leaking butane in our lounge. It just brought home how dangerous they can be!

As someone mentioned earlier, in MAN the airport authority decided to reduce security costs by cutting the wages. There was a hue and cry at the time.

But I know it's easy to bring drugs etc into the country (not personally I hasten to add!!!). Lots of people do it every day and they're never detected. It's a sham.

I know of drug squad officers who smoke 'weed', so who cares anyway?!

C'est la vie!

SITW :)

[Bernoulli]

The finger must also be pointed at the head of 'security' at BHX. This person has failed spectacularly to perform in their duty. They have not properly excercised a system of quality control. Irrespective of which outsourced company is actually performing the task of security, it should be being done to the standards laid down locally by... the head of BHX 'security.'

[RED WINGS]

Firstly I think it is unfair to tar every ICTS employee with the same brush, I am sure there are still people who take pride in there work and had nothing to do with the featured cowboys.

Secondly ICTS do and have for at least a month provide front line security at BHX! Interestingly today were refusing to allow anyone to take digital cameras through staff gate!

[INNflight]

Travelled with a pocket knife (approx. 7cm blade I'd guess) in my photo backpack on seven flights in 2006, airports included LHR, ZRH, STN, FAO and CAG (Cagliari). Staff was always that focused on my lenses (I'm hiding explosives in them after all :E ), they never ought to check the pockets. Got it taken away by the officers at Cagliari on the 7th flight finally, was interesting ( and shocking !!! ) to see how often I was able to take it onboard. :yuk:

[Taildragger]

Freeway.....
I certainly won't be carrying any rush bags for anyone that's for sure.

You KNOW when you are carrying Rush Bags.?? How.??

[bruppy]

Red Wing's re Digital Camera's they have always refused to allow people to take these through unless you have a permit to do so, took mine through earlier, was asked to show pass & then let through . No Problems.

Interestingly saw 3 of the people who were shown on the prog last night, still at work. 1 of whom was filmed flat out, was on the Int Pier reading a paper (will they never learn!!). also heard that staff coming in on the bus seemed pleased that more did not come out about what go's on, the mind boggles???????????:hmm::hmm:

[Out Of Trim]

Freeway.....
I certainly won't be carrying any rush bags for anyone that's for sure.

You KNOW when you are carrying Rush Bags.?? How.??


I guess, when he has to sign the Rush Bag manifest that tells him what method was used to screen the bags, the number and rush tag numbers etc.

or what were you implying?

[Freeway]

Out of Trim, that is exactly what I was meaning.

[RED WINGS]

Bruppy... I have carried a camera to work for years and never had a problem. I do however know at BHX you are not allowed to use them airside unless you have written permission from the airport.

Maybe these ICTS employees were ultra vigilant that day compared to the thousands of times I have passed through staff gate with said camera, but if what you say is true how many mobile phones are there these days that dont have a camera on them???????????:ugh:

[PAXboy]

Airport security staff suspended
Sixteen security staff have been suspended from work at a UK airport after a television documentary revealed serious security lapses.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/west_midlands/6729013.stm

[Bokkenrijder]

When I read all this and after hearing stories from colleagues having to remove shoes and having packs of yogurt confiscated, I'm just sooooooo happy to be based outside the UK!

Having lived and worked in both countries I can honestly say that Brits are more German than the Germans when it comes to blindly following stupid orders.

Signs ("watch your step") and stupid rules (no 'liquid bombs' larger than 100ml) everywhere in an effort to cover up the total lack of intelligence, common sense and flexibility.

What has happened to the British spirit of sailing the seas and exploring the world? :(

[ThreadBaron]

We are not allowed to carry enough water to make tea!!!!!:} So we stay at home.:ok:

[Rockhound]

WRT Lotman's post (#34), surely the matter of what "weapons" the 9/11 hijackers brought on board is a red herring. The hijackers were successful not because they wielded boxcutters or whatever but because they employed a tactic that was totally unprecedented, namely personally taking over the flight controls. I believe the crews of the two aircraft that hit the World Trade Center offered little or no resistance in the belief that, as in the majority of previous hijackings, the situation would be resolved on the ground. How could they have imagined the hijackers were suicidal fanatics? No doubt it was a different story on the other two flights but there the crews had some forewarning.
Rockhound

[PaperTiger]

I believe the crews of the two aircraft that hit the World Trade Center offered little or no resistance in the belief that, as in the majority of previous hijackings, the situation would be resolved on the ground. How could they have imagined the hijackers were suicidal fanatics? No doubt it was a different story on the other two.IIRC, none of the flight crews were even aware they were being hijacked. They were attacked in their seats without warning; except for UA93 who had received a SELCAL but not yet acted upon it.

[Wolfman857]

I have worked in security for a southern international airport (and my partner still does) and what we saw on that programme shook us both. Please do not consider that all security staff are noxious weeds :mad: and like to play the mini hitlers that some posting believe. We are both (like our colleagues) concientious about our roles. The restraints we have are usually imposed on us by higher up the food chain. Most (by no means all) will try to act impartially for ALL people going through security. I am gratefull that the level of competency here outshines all that I saw on TV and I feel that anyone travelling through will be as sure as they could be that all is done to prevent any acts of terror. :ok:

[Rockhound]

Paper Tiger,
Sorry, the acronym IIRC is one I don't know. But are you sure of your facts? I am open to correction but as far as I am aware, no one knows what exactly was the course of events on the two flights that hit the WTC.
Rockhound

[PaperTiger]

Sorry, the acronym IIRC is one I don't know. But are you sure of your facts? I am open to correction but as far as I am aware, no one knows what exactly was the course of events on the two flights that hit the WTC.IIRC = If I Recall/Remember Correctly.

Meaning I didn't check the facts, but I think that's what happened. The 9/11 report (http://www.gpoaccess.gov/911/index.html) should have the details, but there was communication between some of the cabin crew and Ops. from both flights. I think (again) they said the pilots had been killed first.

[Skidkid]

Statement from Birmingham International Airport:


"The Airport wishes to reassure passengers that its operations remain safe and secure and compliant with UK Government security requirements.

All passengers passing through Birmingham Airport are firstly screened by the Airport’s own security processes and these were not criticised by the programme.

ICTS are a third party contractor to a limited number of airlines. On receipt of information 17 days ago, an immediate investigation was launched by the Airport Company with all parties concerned. The behaviour of the ICTS staff featured on the programme is not acceptable and will not be tolerated at Birmingham Airport. Those ICTS staff involved have been suspended.

The Airport’s priority has always been the safety and security of its passengers and airline customers and it is confident that the actions already taken will assure passenger safety and security."

[World of Tweed]

Its a shame that the statement doesn't say that they are so vigilant Airport Security will stop at nothing to prevent crew getting to the aircraft!

Twice this week I've been held at the securty screening area having to wait for an "Escort" because I'm a Manchester ID holder and going through on my own without a crew. A rule I've never had imposed at any other UK airport. Point in case operating thought LPL yesterday - no issues.

I don't know why BHX are such T@?:sers when it comes to almost everything! Their security has always been overbearing and inconsistent even before the latest "Liquid" threat.

[MancRed]

Visited BHX a while back a nice ICTS chap at security issued me a peper visitors pass with my name on after checking my MAN airport id pass I wasn't searched and then walked straight onto the ramp(I was escorted by current BHX pass holder)
At the time I thought to myself what a joke...as it turns out some of them are a joke...:=