Airport Security Fiasco?

[nunki]

caught in queue for security check

This is my first post whatsoever in this forum, and beeing a once-in-a-while-Pax, I don't have much experience. That's the reason why I will ask a question:
Happened to a Brazilian friend of mine, this morning at AMS. After check-in, he was caught in the queue for security check. He speaks some English, and when he became worried because time passed quickly with no visible advance in the queue, he asked someone of the ground staff if he could advance more quickly. The answer: You will have to wait till it's your turn, because everyone's in the same situation. And if he lost his plane? Don't worry, you will be put on another flight. The unlucky end: My friend lost his flight by three minutes, while his baggage was already under way on the plane bound to BCN. Asking the Transavia-Staff on the chreck-in, what to do? Well, buy another flight! This he did, but does really feel ripped of.
And he is not thick!
Just a little unexpirenced and maybe a litle too well educated, because when other people simply passed the waiting PAX, he stayed in line and waited till it was his turn...
Well, finally my question: Has anyone experienced a thing like that and has he/she tried to do something about it and did he/she succeed and if, what did he/she do?

[SXB]

It's mainly idiot pax who slow the process down - not the security personnel.

That simply isn't true. The reason the security process is so slow in UK airports is insufficient investment in both infrastructure and personnel. As far as European airports are concerned the problem is largely only in the UK. Massive airports like FRA operate a much more efficient security service. Why ? because the owners have invested sufficient resources to provide an adequate service.

As for some of the comments regarding the security staff all pax are paying customers and therefore have the right to critisize the standard of service they are receiving, some security staff, not all, simply do not get this concept. If I walk into my bank after, idiotically, losing my card I do not expect them to call me an idiot, even if I am. I expect to be dealt with efficiently and be on my way as soon as possible.

[Final 3 Greens]

Avman

If Final 3 Greens considers graphitestick arrogant, I would consider F3G a typical confrontational and just as arrogant type of pax.

Thanks for your feedback, which I choose to reject in this instance.

As an FQTV it is not in my interests to have confrontations with anyone in airports, as it makes my travelling even more tiresome.

I support all that SXB writes.

Furthermore, despite some of the less than intelligent actions of my customers, I am well aware that they pay my wages and am always prepared to be helpful and polite.

If I did not observe crass actions by UK airport security personnel on a regular basis (usually directed at people who are obviously not regular travellers), I would respect them more.

No doubt there are some good people I am unfairly tarring with a bad reputation, but the frequency of crass actions is high enough for me to take a dim view of the whole bunch - with sincere apologies to the good ones.

[Avman]

I believe that most of us have to deal with the odd idiot here and there. I also believe that most of us are paid sufficiently well enough to remain tolerant, patient and polite with those odd idiots. Security staff process thousands of customers per shift (far more than bank staff). That will equate to a significantly larger proportion of idiots. They are paid peanuts. If you have an issue with the number of available security channels, take that up with the airport authorities. It's certainly not the security personnel's fault if they're short-staffed. I would just love some of you guys to have a go at doing the job for a month and see just how long you could keep your cool.

[perkin]

As I've already partly mentioned, I travel frequently through the top 3 busiest airports in the UK and have never encountered the alleged unpleasant security staff. Sullen on occasions, yes, but never nasty, so I'm slightly puzzled about this debate. I've experienced worse problems with the security people at Schiphol and the passport checking people in the UK than any of the security bods in the UK airports.

I would also support the accusation that it is often stupid people who delay the queues by not doing as requested and separating liquids, removing outer coats, belts, removing laptops from bags etc before their turn. The number of times I've been held up by idiots carrying more than the 100ml and arguing the toss, or people fussing with a laptop defies belief However, it's the 'frequent fliers' with attitude I despise the most...I'm sure we've all come across them at one point or another!

[SXB]

Anyone who thinks that 'stupid people' or 'idiots' are responsible for the security delays at UK airports is not being realistic. Taking this view would indicate that the majority of people using UK airports are, indeed, idiots, since the UK is the only country in Europe which suffers from chronic security delays.

Avman

Security staff process thousands of customers per shift (far more than bank staff). That will equate to a significantly larger proportion of idiots. They are paid peanuts. If you have an issue with the number of available security channels, take that up with the airport authorities. It's certainly not the security personnel's fault if they're short-staffed. I would just love some of you guys to have a go at doing the job for a month and see just how long you could keep your cool

Regarding your comments about banking staff, maybe that is because their employers provide an adequate level of staffing and an infrastructure to match. Banking is a competative industry, unlike the running of the UK's major airports.

I have no wish to do a security job for a month, I'm sure most of them work extremely hard, just as everyone else does. But the fact of the matter is the security service being provided in UK airports is simply not good enough and offers poor value for money. As with many problems in the UK's major airports the blame lies with BAA's mismanagement.

[perkin]

SXB - I was actually referring to the idiots I frequently encounter at AMS (last time I looked it wasnt in the UK ) who almost without fail do not prepare themselves for the security checks even when politely asked to do so well in advance by a member of the security personnel in both English and Dutch. They DO cause un-necessary delays to an otherwise smooth passage through security and it frustrates the hell out of me as they often appear to be business travellers who really should have the brains to know better!

A point I touched on earlier is that the primary issue in UK airports is the arrangement of the checkpoints. To reduce congestion, the authorities should consider switching to a system such as that at AMS whereby the vast majority of passengers pass through security immediately before they board at the gate. This way, the thousands are reduced to an assortment of more easily manageable tens and hundreds, allowing smaller queues and (apparently, at least) much reduced waiting times as it forces sufficient numbers of staff to be on duty to allow prompt boarding. But as I said before, this is likely to result in valuable retail space being given over to additional space in gate areas...will this ever happen? I doubt it very much...

[Final 3 Greens]

Perkin

A central security system works very well at FRA.
The difference is that there is sufficient infrastructure and an appropriate staffing level to meet the requirements of the German authorities.

Avman

I am surprised that you are apparently acting as an apologist for the problem part of the security community.

Some people on this thread, many on others and a load of people in the media are reporting avoidable and unnecessary problems.

To consider any paying customer as a potential idiot seems to me to some up the situation; Shop assistants face the same challenges everyday and their employment would be terminated fairly swiftly if they behaved in the same way that some of the security staff behave.

Let me give you some personal examples to support my assertion

February this year, travelling on an F ticket from LGW. The airline provides a chauffeur service to get me to the airport without hassle. On arrival I encounter huge queues to enter the central search area, so I ask the first line of security if the fast track is open. He takes great pleasure (big smile) in replying that "we don't have enough staff to man it today, you will just have to take your turn with the others." It takes about 45 mins to get through - travelling F does not make you a better person than someone on easyJet, but it generally buys you a better level of service - not at LGW apparently.

July this year, T4, in the queue for 'Fast Track' security (only one of 2 lines open on Friday peak), which is taking ages. I am near the front of the queue and a lady arrives with 2 small kids to ask if she can go straight through, as she has waited so long she is in danger of missing her flight. Security woman replies that she should have allowed enough time. Lady replies that she was there over 2 hours before, but check in queues were horrendous and now security too. Security woman says she cannot intervene as it 'is up to the other pax.' I immediately let lady and kids in front of me and security woman glowers at me, then makes a comment to a colleague that 'there is always a soft touch who lets these people have their way.' Shop assistants do not abuse their customers, why should security personnel?

LGW again, earlier this year. As I enter the lanes leading to the central security area, a yellow jacketed youth stops me and objects to me carrying a laptop as well as a laptop case, saying I am exceeding the carry on limit. I point out the sign ahead asking people to remove laptops for screening. He then (apparently seriously) tells me to replace the laptop until I have walked about 10 more yards. To give a little context, I have managed to find a time at LGW (3pm, Weds) when there are very few people using the airport and am the only person entering security at the time.... so he wants me to stop, replace laptop, walk for 3 seconds and then take out laptop again? I regarded this behaviour as verging on the abusive and reported the incident to BAA, who said the (temp agency) person was interpreting the rules wrongly and apologised. However, it still happened and reading other posts I'm not the only one to experience it.

Manchester recently. An old couple are berated for not taking off their coats. These people are clearly not the sharpest knives in the drawer, as my old GP used to say about senility 'its God's way of protecting them from being aware of whats shortly going to happen.' Is it acceptable to treat old people in this way? If it happened in a nursing home, would it be okay?

Stansted (a couple of years ago, but have to include this one as its a belter.) I am traveling business class, but the airline has run out of Fastrack stickers. So the check in agent writes her name on boarding pass (which clearly says C) and underneath 'Fast Track.'

Security woman refuses to let me into Fast Track, saying 'for all I know you wrote that on yourself.' When I point out that the boarding pass says 'C', she says 'no sticker, no Fastrack, its the airline's fault.' As queues are very long, I go back to check in desk. Agent is amazed, so calls duty manager of airline, who escorts me back, as they still have not stickers. Then the mother of all rows breaks out between security and airline duty managers about whose fault it is. I am standing there speechless, just wishing to go through.

So Avman, whilst I understand your point of view and am not questioning your personal experiences, there are enough people saying, on here and in other places, that there is a problem for there unquestionably to be a problem.

Considering that the passenger pays for the security provision, the minimum s/he should get is an efficient and polite experience.

[daedalus]

And to put the lid on all this....

The public can be forgiven for being extremely sceptical about the seriousness with which the UK authorities take security. What is happening at airports is ridiculous given the following true scenario:
Fast ferry Boulogne-Dover (50kts, one hour B to D).
Arrive Boulogne 8th August. Car with 4 pax and much luggage. Passports checked by UK lady at Boulogne. NO CHECK ON CAR OR CONTENTS (never has been, not even random - I've used this ferry many times).
Arrive Dover, drive straight off onto road system and M20. I could easily have filled the car with explosives and driven it straight into central London.
Coming back to France, each car checked at Dover, driver and pax asked to exit, luggage looked at,asked whether luggage packed onself and if carrying anything for anyone else.
Asked security chappie why there was a thorough check at Dover for exiting traffic, but none at Boulogne for traffic entering the UK.
"Ah yes sir, I know it may seem strange. Perhaps they'll get around to it in a year or two" replies security man.
When I get home, I look up the MI5 website and ring their public telephone number for security matters. Speak to MI5 agent!
as I tell him what is written above his incredulity mounts and he thanks me and says that steps will be taken.
I wonder if they have been? Anyone else been on this route more recently?
How can Joe Public take the UK government seriously when great gaping holes like this exist?
Why are 100 deaths in an aircraft worse than 100 deaths in a train, a tube or a London street?
On the one hand we have pilgrims to Lourdes being deprived of holy water because there's more than 100 mls of it or it's in the wrong shaped container,
On the other hand, fill a van with fertiliser and fuses and drive slap bang into central London, park in Whitehall or outside a very busy underground station and BANG!

[perkin]

F3G, interesting that central security manages to work at FRA. My overall impression is that a plane load at a time seems more manageable than a central check. It would be interesting to know the comparitive costs of central security vs checks at the gate, in terms of personnel/equipment requirements and queueing times.

Personally, I like the checks at the gate - another advantage of this is you distribute people throughout the entire airport complex and do no have a large 'target' close to the entrances of the buildings...However, gate checks do somewhat limit taking a bottle of water etc on board with you. Swings and roundabouts I suspect, but I do agree there is precious little investment or full utilisation of existing equipment in the UK.

MAN T1 has added an extra 3 or 4 lanes to the security and it has made a significant difference, last time I was there (27th Aug) all the lanes were operational and I passed through security in about 10 mins. They do seem to be doing things a little better at MAN than at the BAA airports...

[Avman]

F3G

Tad busy so a quick response. I was really only defending security personnel only where they are confronted with occurences such as the Brandy bottle example. I can sympathise with their frustrations. At the same time I fully sympathise with your frustrations especially your LGW occurences. I fly roughly 60 to 70 sectors per year. I'm lucky in that I do not have to use LGW nor LHR, both which seem to encounter a great deal of criticism. Based in Dutch Limburg, my usual departure airports are CGN, DUS, BRU and occasionally MST. The security process at all these airports is generally efficient. The only UK airport I use regularly is BHX which, again, hasn't caused me any frustrations (yet). Bottom line is YES there can be some real brainless security personnel, but equally there are quite a number of brainless pax who just seem incapable of following simple well advertised instructions.

I will continue to avoid LGW like the plague.

[SXB]

Perkin - I'm not convinced about gate security. VIE operates a mixture of gate and central security, dependent on which terminal you're in. Gate security there works well on the smaller aircraft but when it's a large one it's a very long queue, epsecially as they often combine the security check with a passport control check. Often the central check at VIE is quicker. The one big advantage of gate security is you can elect just to sit in the coffee bar opposite and wait until the queue subsides, as it will once the majority of pax have passed through. Obviously you can't do that with the central security.

Interestingly, that particular airport, VIE, introduced gate security in that terminal because the previous central security area was inadequate and there wasn't the scope to increase it's size without encroaching on the retail units.

One other disadvantage of gate security in a large airport is that it's sigificantly more expensive than central. Though at VIE they decided those extra costs would be less than the loss of income from retail units.

[tall and tasty]

On two separate business trips both intra EU the volume of pax waiting to go through security was increadiable. Alot of the airlines at our local Airfield now do include in any of your ticket details an item suggesting that you do not take any liquids or keep everything to size 50mls to save time. I went through on a night stop with everything I needed in my handbag including toothbrush paste, etc and then bought other items airside which was suggested by our hotac department.

But it is the travellers who do not travel often which is where the tour operators can help with as much information on line when pax do a booking and in the packs sent out to the paxs instructing them to follow the guide lines to make their travel less plesant.

But families do suffer with small children in these lines and that is where maybe the airport authorities need to re address the who issues.

TnT

[pacer142]

AMS has gate security, so the bags are largely past passport control but NOT past security. If you passed through two lots of security, you went in the wrong way.