UK Borders - Shaming
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 137
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Capot wrote:
The places are awful, especially, but not only in BAA airports, which is not the fault of the UKBA. It is up to the airport to supply the place in which UKBA personnel work. It can supply a pleasant, cheerful, well-lit, spacious environment, capable of handling large variations in flow without seriously incoveniencing the airport's customers provided that UKBA does its job well and supplies sufficient staff when required.
UKBA does do it's job, it is legislatively bound to it's role and there's no getting out of it with all the oversight that it is applied from the Agency Inspector, the IPCC and prison inspectors amongst others. Where it does not do it's job, it is a matter of public record and that record is easily searchable by anyone who cares to look.
Here's one for you:
Heathrow Detention Facilities Criticised
Here's something else from an open source in direct response to a queuing criticism;
Manchester Airport aims to reduce passport queues
Such articles and reports are easily available, they show the oversight and response we are required to give and submit to. The example are endless.
What they do not cover is the lack of communication from the operator to the UKBA, new routes introduced with minimum notice, an ongoing lack of attention to the working environment that IO's work in and a general level of contempt towards the apparent inconvenience that the lawful execution of an essential national security strategy seems to cause to the commercial operation of the port.
There are things that should be self evident to some of the port management 'professionals' that purport to know what they are doing;
1) Nothing from international can land without a border control facility in place.
2) The law says you need to provide a space in which to do border control.
3) And this is separate to every other bit of your operation, your operation fails without this in place ergo you build your operation around it.
I've lost count of the number of times people have tried to re-enter immigration halls I've worked in to complain to us that baggage has yet to appear an hour after they've passed through. All your apparently 'overqualified' management course attendees have legged it. The contempt with which airports treat their 'customers' is obvious to us.
You keep mentioning better management and management courses, to what end though?
We know what we must do lawfully, we know how to do it, we are more than happy to work with you but you need to engage honestly and for the long term. You need to be mindful of our REQUIREMENTS.
This is an ongoing issue.
*The responses that purport to show a lack of tolerance with my position are becoming rather tiresome too, I have debated this in good faith and all I get is several people alluding to the fact that I must be stupid not to understand the points several people have made here. Let's be very clear here, I work in this field and all I've given is a subjective view. If you can't handle the opinion then don't bother to engage with me and crack on with your view, tolerance is a two way process and I'm still trying despite some of the nonsense being written here.
The places are awful, especially, but not only in BAA airports, which is not the fault of the UKBA. It is up to the airport to supply the place in which UKBA personnel work. It can supply a pleasant, cheerful, well-lit, spacious environment, capable of handling large variations in flow without seriously incoveniencing the airport's customers provided that UKBA does its job well and supplies sufficient staff when required.
UKBA does do it's job, it is legislatively bound to it's role and there's no getting out of it with all the oversight that it is applied from the Agency Inspector, the IPCC and prison inspectors amongst others. Where it does not do it's job, it is a matter of public record and that record is easily searchable by anyone who cares to look.
Here's one for you:
Heathrow Detention Facilities Criticised
Here's something else from an open source in direct response to a queuing criticism;
Manchester Airport aims to reduce passport queues
Such articles and reports are easily available, they show the oversight and response we are required to give and submit to. The example are endless.
What they do not cover is the lack of communication from the operator to the UKBA, new routes introduced with minimum notice, an ongoing lack of attention to the working environment that IO's work in and a general level of contempt towards the apparent inconvenience that the lawful execution of an essential national security strategy seems to cause to the commercial operation of the port.
There are things that should be self evident to some of the port management 'professionals' that purport to know what they are doing;
1) Nothing from international can land without a border control facility in place.
2) The law says you need to provide a space in which to do border control.
3) And this is separate to every other bit of your operation, your operation fails without this in place ergo you build your operation around it.
I've lost count of the number of times people have tried to re-enter immigration halls I've worked in to complain to us that baggage has yet to appear an hour after they've passed through. All your apparently 'overqualified' management course attendees have legged it. The contempt with which airports treat their 'customers' is obvious to us.
You keep mentioning better management and management courses, to what end though?
We know what we must do lawfully, we know how to do it, we are more than happy to work with you but you need to engage honestly and for the long term. You need to be mindful of our REQUIREMENTS.
This is an ongoing issue.
*The responses that purport to show a lack of tolerance with my position are becoming rather tiresome too, I have debated this in good faith and all I get is several people alluding to the fact that I must be stupid not to understand the points several people have made here. Let's be very clear here, I work in this field and all I've given is a subjective view. If you can't handle the opinion then don't bother to engage with me and crack on with your view, tolerance is a two way process and I'm still trying despite some of the nonsense being written here.
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Danger - Deep Excavation
Posts: 338
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
qwertyplop
Please Bookmark this thread.
When you've lived abroad for a few years, you might end up agreeing with capot and Final 3 Greens. I promise you!
IMO, it's wrong to accept and it's almost as bad to Excuse poor service such as that received by capot.
Please Bookmark this thread.
When you've lived abroad for a few years, you might end up agreeing with capot and Final 3 Greens. I promise you!
IMO, it's wrong to accept and it's almost as bad to Excuse poor service such as that received by capot.
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1,608
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
qwertyplop
You seem to fail to realise the distinction between managing individual cases, and the known customer flows through the airport.
Aside from the disgraceful appearance of the airport (having read your quite clear description of how the commercial operation fail to accomodate your operation), disgraceful patronising signage that assumes that passenger have no manners (or the that matter the fanciful notion that signage will change plebs into mannered people), the problem that is clearly paramount is that you don't have sufficient staff working on the desks.
You know approximately when planeloads of low-risk US flights arrive, and high-risk Colombian flights arrive. You don't know how many individuals will take up more time exactly, but on the law of averages, you will (if properly planning your manning) have a reasonably idea of what you will have to cover.
However, the evidence is to the contrary - little planning, and always over-extended at known peak hours.
Granted, you see the peaks and troughs, but that does not cover for the fact that every single time I arrive from various destinations without exception at Heathrow over the past 3 years, there has not once been sufficient staff on duty.
Recession aside, I can quantify a large number of US, Asian and non-EU European colleagues who actively avoid transiting through or entering the UK due to hassle factor (again, granted, BAA add to this as well).
Furthermore, I have had specific examples of inappropriate and condescending behaviour of UK immigration officials recounted to me by colleagues, who not only have appropriate visas and right to reside and work in the UK, but have lived in the UK for many years. This actually does hinder business and economic growth in the UK.
Customer service, common sense and politeness do not need to be compromised in the course of conducting a rigourous border check.
You seem to fail to realise the distinction between managing individual cases, and the known customer flows through the airport.
Aside from the disgraceful appearance of the airport (having read your quite clear description of how the commercial operation fail to accomodate your operation), disgraceful patronising signage that assumes that passenger have no manners (or the that matter the fanciful notion that signage will change plebs into mannered people), the problem that is clearly paramount is that you don't have sufficient staff working on the desks.
You know approximately when planeloads of low-risk US flights arrive, and high-risk Colombian flights arrive. You don't know how many individuals will take up more time exactly, but on the law of averages, you will (if properly planning your manning) have a reasonably idea of what you will have to cover.
However, the evidence is to the contrary - little planning, and always over-extended at known peak hours.
Granted, you see the peaks and troughs, but that does not cover for the fact that every single time I arrive from various destinations without exception at Heathrow over the past 3 years, there has not once been sufficient staff on duty.
Recession aside, I can quantify a large number of US, Asian and non-EU European colleagues who actively avoid transiting through or entering the UK due to hassle factor (again, granted, BAA add to this as well).
Furthermore, I have had specific examples of inappropriate and condescending behaviour of UK immigration officials recounted to me by colleagues, who not only have appropriate visas and right to reside and work in the UK, but have lived in the UK for many years. This actually does hinder business and economic growth in the UK.
Customer service, common sense and politeness do not need to be compromised in the course of conducting a rigourous border check.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 137
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re-Heat,
I agree on the signage, it is patronising and fails to deal with the fact that those it's aimed at don't give a toss one way or the other about anything approaching normal and reasonable behaviour. Totally agree, I well remember dealing with the consequences of airlines flogging booze to already out of control people that required action in our work area. Signage also tells you how to complain if you are not happy to something called the 'Customer Service Unit', it also tells you how to claim asylum amongst other things.
In answer to paragraph 3 - no it's impossible to say. (take it or leave it but it's true...). e-Borders will help in that respect. Immigration rules are subjective, no two flights are ever the same. It's the person in front of you that counts. Your idea of what constitutes risk is not what I constitute as risk based upon the information I access in relation to risk indicators.
Staffing is based, ultimately, on national priorities. There is a tasking and command process, and at this process, the boss's sit down and go through all the jobs that have to be done nationally in addition to the core tasks that don't go away. A simplistic explanation but this is then passed down to the same process on a local level. Resources are scarce and the overwhelming priority is the staffing of the immigration points. When I did such work,we almost always started the shift with a full compliment but things happened over a duty that knocked out the numbers, managers were very clear on the KPI's for queuing. See para 2 of this answer.
For every legitimate person you recount as having been troubled by an officer on-entry, I'll give you ten, that despite having a visa, lied about what they were doing to get it and only through robust questioning were we able to overturn the visa and remove. This is not a customer service environment - yes I will treat you with dignity and respect but I also have a duty to uphold the law. I've never met any of the people I have to deal with as they come through, so their backstory and credibility in recounting that story are the tools with which I start to form opinions in addition to comparing what they said today to what they told the visa officer a month ago, and I have to be mindful of language and cultural differences, all this takes time. It requires a degree of co-operation from the passenger and one get's better results, in a faster fashion, if the exchange is polite and to the point. Where it is not possible, more rigorous questioning may be required. I think you may be confused in thinking that this is a customer service environment, it is not. Straight to the point please and away, that is how it is.
The directness of the questions is what seems to get most peoples back up in my experience. I'd love to make you a cup of tea and sit down for a chat about why you've got $200,000 in cash in your bag and letters from your mates wishing you good luck in your new life when you just told me that you were coming to see a relative for 6 months but that won't happen will it?
This has been an interesting exchange, it's clear that there needs to be a bit more give and take on both sides, but it's clearer that law enforcement does not communicate what it does very well either so that you or your customers expectations can be met. I'll certainly give this some thought as it's worth considering. Like you, I agree that hassling 99% of the travelling public is probably pointless so doing it in such a way that makes the experience of having to go through a bit more painless is no bad thing.
Not sure what the answer is though because staffing really is not the problem on the basis that some locations might have a few empty desks but not the space behind the scenes to allow more staff to work. The problem may be housed in policy type questions and how do you get the port operator to make more space to work in.
Thanks.
I agree on the signage, it is patronising and fails to deal with the fact that those it's aimed at don't give a toss one way or the other about anything approaching normal and reasonable behaviour. Totally agree, I well remember dealing with the consequences of airlines flogging booze to already out of control people that required action in our work area. Signage also tells you how to complain if you are not happy to something called the 'Customer Service Unit', it also tells you how to claim asylum amongst other things.
In answer to paragraph 3 - no it's impossible to say. (take it or leave it but it's true...). e-Borders will help in that respect. Immigration rules are subjective, no two flights are ever the same. It's the person in front of you that counts. Your idea of what constitutes risk is not what I constitute as risk based upon the information I access in relation to risk indicators.
Staffing is based, ultimately, on national priorities. There is a tasking and command process, and at this process, the boss's sit down and go through all the jobs that have to be done nationally in addition to the core tasks that don't go away. A simplistic explanation but this is then passed down to the same process on a local level. Resources are scarce and the overwhelming priority is the staffing of the immigration points. When I did such work,we almost always started the shift with a full compliment but things happened over a duty that knocked out the numbers, managers were very clear on the KPI's for queuing. See para 2 of this answer.
For every legitimate person you recount as having been troubled by an officer on-entry, I'll give you ten, that despite having a visa, lied about what they were doing to get it and only through robust questioning were we able to overturn the visa and remove. This is not a customer service environment - yes I will treat you with dignity and respect but I also have a duty to uphold the law. I've never met any of the people I have to deal with as they come through, so their backstory and credibility in recounting that story are the tools with which I start to form opinions in addition to comparing what they said today to what they told the visa officer a month ago, and I have to be mindful of language and cultural differences, all this takes time. It requires a degree of co-operation from the passenger and one get's better results, in a faster fashion, if the exchange is polite and to the point. Where it is not possible, more rigorous questioning may be required. I think you may be confused in thinking that this is a customer service environment, it is not. Straight to the point please and away, that is how it is.
The directness of the questions is what seems to get most peoples back up in my experience. I'd love to make you a cup of tea and sit down for a chat about why you've got $200,000 in cash in your bag and letters from your mates wishing you good luck in your new life when you just told me that you were coming to see a relative for 6 months but that won't happen will it?
This has been an interesting exchange, it's clear that there needs to be a bit more give and take on both sides, but it's clearer that law enforcement does not communicate what it does very well either so that you or your customers expectations can be met. I'll certainly give this some thought as it's worth considering. Like you, I agree that hassling 99% of the travelling public is probably pointless so doing it in such a way that makes the experience of having to go through a bit more painless is no bad thing.
Not sure what the answer is though because staffing really is not the problem on the basis that some locations might have a few empty desks but not the space behind the scenes to allow more staff to work. The problem may be housed in policy type questions and how do you get the port operator to make more space to work in.
Thanks.
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: UK
Age: 64
Posts: 3,586
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A fascinating thread - the issues being argued out by people who are intelligent and informed.
There's a lot of info to summarize - let me know if you disagree, but I see this as being...
There's a lot of info to summarize - let me know if you disagree, but I see this as being...
- Airport Operators - Tend to treat UKBA in much the same way as they treat airlines i.e. as an adjunct to the Airport Retail business - a necessary evil to be tolerated but to be minimally resourced.
- UKBA Staff - Face a work environment that may lack space and facilities and a workload that is flexible and hard to predict. That said, there are areas in which the service could be improved.
- Airline Passengers - Must learn to accept that queues are inevitable for clearance, but also have a right to expect that every effort is made by Airport Operators and Authorities properly to resource and manage the process: There is some evidence that this is not happening.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Airline Passengers - Must learn to accept that queues are inevitable for clearance, but also have a right to expect that every effort is made by Airport Operators and Authorities properly to resource and manage the process: There is some evidence that this is not happening.
Frequent Transit Airline Passengers - Constantly seeking and using the routes that are most convenient, taking their ticket revenue, taxes, shopping and food outlet spend with them
UK Airports - known to be low convenience places to transit
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 137
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DCS99 wrote;
Please Bookmark this thread.
When you've lived abroad for a few years, you might end up agreeing with capot and Final 3 Greens. I promise you!
IMO, it's wrong to accept and it's almost as bad to Excuse poor service such as that received by capot.
There are elements of their pieces that I am in agreement with, I have stated this.
Equally, there is stuff in it that is just fiction frankly, and fiction because it is not a situation or circumstance that was not explainable by an understanding of the reality of the issue. Much of this lies with the port operator and their financial imperatives.
Customer service standards apply where you have customers, we do not have customers. In the same way the Police and HMRC at port don't have customers, in fact anyone suggesting that they did would be laughed out of the country in most cases.
In my line of work, it's down to a number of factors, most notably the fact that people object to being examined when they arrive in the UK in anything less than an expeditious fashion. You've paid for a service to get to you to your location and your expectation is that you paid your money therefore you can behave and do as you like. Ask cabin crew about this, it rings true I assure you. I was travelling last week and I watched a man verbally destroy and physically threaten a female member of staff for a well known train company, his words and actions implied I've paid my money so I can act how I like, he is not in the minority of people and how they seem to have been conditioned to behave in such circumstances. I see it regularly if I'm honest, it is a regular part of modern life in this country more and more. I've seen it in airports more than I'd care to repeat.
If you live here or not, and have a passport that says you are a Brit Cit or otherwise, should you be subject to controls on entry?
Yes or no?
1) What if you are wanted?
2) What if you are involved in criminal enterprises that may need reporting upon?
3) What if you trafficked people?
4) What if your passport is false?
I could get to about number 70 on this one issue alone, 'what if' and how do measure and determine 'what if'. The questions need asking and someone needs to ask them. Does the idea of paying money for a ticket get you away from such controls and questions? Not in my opinion or through any examination of the moral implications of the principles of natural justice applied lawfully by appropriately trained and warranted officers. It's a very different and separate part of the airport experience.
This is as far removed from the business of commerce, IMHO, as it is possible to get. Your expectations are skewed I'd argue. Yes, do complain if the seat pitch was not to your liking, yes do complain because your veggie meal has a bit of mince in it, yes do complain if the bloke next to you in business class was odious and thus ruined your Veuve Cliquot.
And importantly, do challenge things properly that you don't like about border controls but think about it before you do it and;
Bear in mind that there are things happening of which you have no knowledge.
Bear in mind that the chances were they started the day with a full compliment.
Bear in mid that they are no happier than you about the squalor you are passing through that they have to work in.
Bear in mind that you will be dealt with quickly and expeditiously if you warrant no further examination and don't confuse it with rudeness or indifference.
Bear in mind that it is they that often get it in the neck for the shortcomings of everything from baggage delays to shortcomings in the way the airline dealt with the Derby and Joan clubs annual trip to Malta.
Bear in mind that most representatives of the airlines tend to leg it landside as quick as they can possibly leg it.
Bear in mind they have no say over scheduling or how you are presented to them.
Bear in mind that they work for you and more often than not, in the best interests of the population around them.
QP
Please Bookmark this thread.
When you've lived abroad for a few years, you might end up agreeing with capot and Final 3 Greens. I promise you!
IMO, it's wrong to accept and it's almost as bad to Excuse poor service such as that received by capot.
There are elements of their pieces that I am in agreement with, I have stated this.
Equally, there is stuff in it that is just fiction frankly, and fiction because it is not a situation or circumstance that was not explainable by an understanding of the reality of the issue. Much of this lies with the port operator and their financial imperatives.Customer service standards apply where you have customers, we do not have customers. In the same way the Police and HMRC at port don't have customers, in fact anyone suggesting that they did would be laughed out of the country in most cases.
In my line of work, it's down to a number of factors, most notably the fact that people object to being examined when they arrive in the UK in anything less than an expeditious fashion. You've paid for a service to get to you to your location and your expectation is that you paid your money therefore you can behave and do as you like. Ask cabin crew about this, it rings true I assure you. I was travelling last week and I watched a man verbally destroy and physically threaten a female member of staff for a well known train company, his words and actions implied I've paid my money so I can act how I like, he is not in the minority of people and how they seem to have been conditioned to behave in such circumstances. I see it regularly if I'm honest, it is a regular part of modern life in this country more and more. I've seen it in airports more than I'd care to repeat.
If you live here or not, and have a passport that says you are a Brit Cit or otherwise, should you be subject to controls on entry?
Yes or no?
1) What if you are wanted?
2) What if you are involved in criminal enterprises that may need reporting upon?
3) What if you trafficked people?
4) What if your passport is false?
I could get to about number 70 on this one issue alone, 'what if' and how do measure and determine 'what if'. The questions need asking and someone needs to ask them. Does the idea of paying money for a ticket get you away from such controls and questions? Not in my opinion or through any examination of the moral implications of the principles of natural justice applied lawfully by appropriately trained and warranted officers. It's a very different and separate part of the airport experience.
This is as far removed from the business of commerce, IMHO, as it is possible to get. Your expectations are skewed I'd argue. Yes, do complain if the seat pitch was not to your liking, yes do complain because your veggie meal has a bit of mince in it, yes do complain if the bloke next to you in business class was odious and thus ruined your Veuve Cliquot.
And importantly, do challenge things properly that you don't like about border controls but think about it before you do it and;
Bear in mind that there are things happening of which you have no knowledge.
Bear in mind that the chances were they started the day with a full compliment.
Bear in mid that they are no happier than you about the squalor you are passing through that they have to work in.
Bear in mind that you will be dealt with quickly and expeditiously if you warrant no further examination and don't confuse it with rudeness or indifference.
Bear in mind that it is they that often get it in the neck for the shortcomings of everything from baggage delays to shortcomings in the way the airline dealt with the Derby and Joan clubs annual trip to Malta.
Bear in mind that most representatives of the airlines tend to leg it landside as quick as they can possibly leg it.
Bear in mind they have no say over scheduling or how you are presented to them.
Bear in mind that they work for you and more often than not, in the best interests of the population around them.
QP
Last edited by qwertyplop; 15th Mar 2009 at 12:29.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: N. Spain
Age: 79
Posts: 1,311
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
QP
Thank you for the clarification provided in your posts, especially the previous one. I found it very informative and I hope to have someone with an attitude similar to yourself on duty when I pass through border controls in the future. It does help to see the situation from the other side of the fence.
s37
Thank you for the clarification provided in your posts, especially the previous one. I found it very informative and I hope to have someone with an attitude similar to yourself on duty when I pass through border controls in the future. It does help to see the situation from the other side of the fence.
s37
Guest
Posts: n/a
Qwertyplpop - you do not get it - FQTV like me don't care about you internal constraints or problems, as the reality is that the equivalent authorities in other countries provide a far higher service level.
I do not know whether it is a function of poor facilities, poor education of staff, lack of motivation, sub standard management or what, but the only time I will use a UK airport is when I am being paid to deliver an assignment there.
Then I accept the experience as part of the cost of doing business, bill for the work and export the money.
If I have to transit, its a case of anywhere but the UK.
That is my reality, the difference is that people like me can be net contributors of a substantial income stream for the UK in taxes on airline tickets, security and airport charges and corporation tax on airlines, whereas employees of the system are net withdrawers.
Call it narrow minded thinking if you wish, but unless your system offers a better experience, your country does not deserve the income stream when you cannot provide an equivalent serivce to Zurich.
If you have the time, look at Michael Porter's 'Competitive Advantage of Nations.'
I do not know whether it is a function of poor facilities, poor education of staff, lack of motivation, sub standard management or what, but the only time I will use a UK airport is when I am being paid to deliver an assignment there.
Then I accept the experience as part of the cost of doing business, bill for the work and export the money.
If I have to transit, its a case of anywhere but the UK.
That is my reality, the difference is that people like me can be net contributors of a substantial income stream for the UK in taxes on airline tickets, security and airport charges and corporation tax on airlines, whereas employees of the system are net withdrawers.
Call it narrow minded thinking if you wish, but unless your system offers a better experience, your country does not deserve the income stream when you cannot provide an equivalent serivce to Zurich.
If you have the time, look at Michael Porter's 'Competitive Advantage of Nations.'
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 137
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FTG - I do get it, I agree with part of it but I don't agree with all of it. I do not defend the airports either, they are mostly poo-holes.
I think you make some good points and it's these I said earlier I will think about to tailor my own interactions with the public wherever necessary. Having travelled fairly extensively myself, I'm at a loss as to where the border control experience is any better than the UK but hey ho.
I will search out the 'Competitive Advantage of Nations.' You never know, perhaps I'll make it to the dizzy heights within my organisation and it will help form some of my thinking around the strategic and tactical problems faced by my service.
Thanks,
QP
I think you make some good points and it's these I said earlier I will think about to tailor my own interactions with the public wherever necessary. Having travelled fairly extensively myself, I'm at a loss as to where the border control experience is any better than the UK but hey ho.
I will search out the 'Competitive Advantage of Nations.' You never know, perhaps I'll make it to the dizzy heights within my organisation and it will help form some of my thinking around the strategic and tactical problems faced by my service.
Thanks,
QP
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Danger - Deep Excavation
Posts: 338
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hello qwertyplop
I have no problem with Border Controls and my Passport being checked.
I do have a problem with poorly maintained airside infrastructure which creates a bad impression for visitors to the UK, and just a handful of staff on duty together a 30 minute wait to enter the UK with a British Passport whilst >50% of desks lie unmanned.
Meanwhile, back in Whitehall, I notice this bombshell is being prepared:
All travel plans to be tracked by Government - Telegraph
I have no problem with Border Controls and my Passport being checked.
I do have a problem with poorly maintained airside infrastructure which creates a bad impression for visitors to the UK, and just a handful of staff on duty together a 30 minute wait to enter the UK with a British Passport whilst >50% of desks lie unmanned.
Meanwhile, back in Whitehall, I notice this bombshell is being prepared:
All travel plans to be tracked by Government - Telegraph
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 137
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The infrastructure thing is spot on - the airport provide all that and are required to by law to all the control authorities. What can I say, you've clearly noticed the shabbiness too, the desks being unmanned though? All I can say is sorry for your experience in that part of the port. In mitigation, perhaps something else was in the offing and resources were diverted to cope. I can assure you it will not have been by design that you were forced to wait.
e-Borders.....
Hard to say where I sit on this one, I am not a proponent of such databases, especially given the governments IT record but there are a few plus's I guess in intelligence and intervention work upstream. The downside is the issue of 'mission creep' but I've not heard of anything to suggest it would be used for anything other than looking at border stuff and I would not unfairly characterise it's use without knowing for sure. It's been operating for a while now anyway in another form.
UK Border Agency | How we tested e-Borders
Saw the following elsewhere about e-Borders - makes really interesting reading.
A UK Border Agency spokesman defended the e-borders scheme. "It allows us to secure the UK's Borders by screening people as they travel in and out of the UK.
"The e-Borders scheme has already screened over 82m passengers travelling to Britain, leading to more than 2,900 arrests, for crimes including murder, drug dealing and sex offences. e-borders helps the police catch criminals who attempt to escape justice."
Here's the response I read:
OK so that means that 0.0035% of travelers get arrested for crimes committed.
That is 3.5/100000 travelers.
Taking a look at other stats it transpires that 1.5/100000 Brits are in jail, caught and convicted.
Let's be charitable and say that the current policing and judicial system has an efficiency of 20%; i.e. 1/5 crimes gets solved and someone caught, convicted and sent to prison. That means that potentially 7.5/100000 Brits have committed a prisonable offence.
If e-borders manages to identify 3.5/100000 only it means that it is slightly less effective than tossing a coin.
Hmm, maybe not the best way to spend a few billion.
Cheaper than buying a bank I suppose.
Great post though.
e-Borders.....
Hard to say where I sit on this one, I am not a proponent of such databases, especially given the governments IT record but there are a few plus's I guess in intelligence and intervention work upstream. The downside is the issue of 'mission creep' but I've not heard of anything to suggest it would be used for anything other than looking at border stuff and I would not unfairly characterise it's use without knowing for sure. It's been operating for a while now anyway in another form.
UK Border Agency | How we tested e-Borders
Saw the following elsewhere about e-Borders - makes really interesting reading.
A UK Border Agency spokesman defended the e-borders scheme. "It allows us to secure the UK's Borders by screening people as they travel in and out of the UK.
"The e-Borders scheme has already screened over 82m passengers travelling to Britain, leading to more than 2,900 arrests, for crimes including murder, drug dealing and sex offences. e-borders helps the police catch criminals who attempt to escape justice."
Here's the response I read:
OK so that means that 0.0035% of travelers get arrested for crimes committed.
That is 3.5/100000 travelers.
Taking a look at other stats it transpires that 1.5/100000 Brits are in jail, caught and convicted.
Let's be charitable and say that the current policing and judicial system has an efficiency of 20%; i.e. 1/5 crimes gets solved and someone caught, convicted and sent to prison. That means that potentially 7.5/100000 Brits have committed a prisonable offence.
If e-borders manages to identify 3.5/100000 only it means that it is slightly less effective than tossing a coin.
Hmm, maybe not the best way to spend a few billion.
Cheaper than buying a bank I suppose.
Great post though.
Last edited by qwertyplop; 15th Mar 2009 at 21:34.
Possible thread creep!
re the Daily Telegraph story. I'm currently sitting in the San Francisco Bay area. My sons know where I am and which hotel I'm in (we stayed here several times when they were younger). More of my friends and relations know I'm in San Francisco, but not where and others simply know I'm out the country. This is a vacation but it could be a business trip.
From the business angle there is a "Health and Safety" (supposedly) implication about your employer having a responsibility for you and I know for a fact that several (if not most) companies run systems to track the whereabouts of their employees. This is particularly relevant to some of the more violent parts of the world but it's also relevant to places like San Francisco which can be the site of natural disasters. If something happens "somewhere" and your employees are in that place the system may help in tracking them, at worst it provides information about where to look for them.
I also know that at least one attempt was made prior to e-Borders to build a system to track everyone who left the country. It wasn't about immigration but this Health and Safety angle.
Now, my own view is that if I do get caught up in something (like the revolution in La Paz Bolivia I once walked into) it's up to me to look after myself and advise my family etc. But an awful lot of travellers (dare I say it) aren't that resilient and their relatives even less so. Therefore, having a database of where people are (supposed to be) might help in times of emergency. It might also help if someone in the UK needs to contact someone who is overseas because of a problem in the UK (remember those messages that used to be broadcast on the BBC Long Wave?).
All of the above doesn't mean I'm in favour of such databases and systems. I believe they are to open to abuse and they also induce a dependency condition in the populace at large.
Coming back on thread I can understand your arguments QP and I would hate to have open borders. Yes, we need controls for all the reasons you have stated. That said (and accepting your right not to be harrased etc) as a passenger I feel I need to be looked after. Prior to a few years ago I felt quite happy about my entry to the UK when I returned home; despite the tatty facilities the process was quick. Now when I get home the whole process has become gummed up.
People complained about US immigration. They may not be perfect but they have tried to improve. The last two times I've entered the USA (Baltimore and San Francisco) the process has been quick and relatively painless. A couple of days ago it took no more than 20 minutes from aircraft door to landside.
I would like the BA to take a look at itself from the point of view of the passenger and ask itself "are we providing a good (not the best - just good) service?". If it's honest I believe it will answer "not always".
From the business angle there is a "Health and Safety" (supposedly) implication about your employer having a responsibility for you and I know for a fact that several (if not most) companies run systems to track the whereabouts of their employees. This is particularly relevant to some of the more violent parts of the world but it's also relevant to places like San Francisco which can be the site of natural disasters. If something happens "somewhere" and your employees are in that place the system may help in tracking them, at worst it provides information about where to look for them.
I also know that at least one attempt was made prior to e-Borders to build a system to track everyone who left the country. It wasn't about immigration but this Health and Safety angle.
Now, my own view is that if I do get caught up in something (like the revolution in La Paz Bolivia I once walked into) it's up to me to look after myself and advise my family etc. But an awful lot of travellers (dare I say it) aren't that resilient and their relatives even less so. Therefore, having a database of where people are (supposed to be) might help in times of emergency. It might also help if someone in the UK needs to contact someone who is overseas because of a problem in the UK (remember those messages that used to be broadcast on the BBC Long Wave?).
All of the above doesn't mean I'm in favour of such databases and systems. I believe they are to open to abuse and they also induce a dependency condition in the populace at large.
Coming back on thread I can understand your arguments QP and I would hate to have open borders. Yes, we need controls for all the reasons you have stated. That said (and accepting your right not to be harrased etc) as a passenger I feel I need to be looked after. Prior to a few years ago I felt quite happy about my entry to the UK when I returned home; despite the tatty facilities the process was quick. Now when I get home the whole process has become gummed up.
People complained about US immigration. They may not be perfect but they have tried to improve. The last two times I've entered the USA (Baltimore and San Francisco) the process has been quick and relatively painless. A couple of days ago it took no more than 20 minutes from aircraft door to landside.
I would like the BA to take a look at itself from the point of view of the passenger and ask itself "are we providing a good (not the best - just good) service?". If it's honest I believe it will answer "not always".
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Cairo
Posts: 57
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
First impressions count. Would you want a foreign friends first experience of Britain to be immigration at Heathrow? I would not.
Every time I travel through Heathrow it embarasses me. I have no excuses to offer my foreign friends when the topic comes up.
I am ashamed that as a nation we are prepared to tolerate Heathrow and Gatwick.
Every time I travel through Heathrow it embarasses me. I have no excuses to offer my foreign friends when the topic comes up.
I am ashamed that as a nation we are prepared to tolerate Heathrow and Gatwick.
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Midlands
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Treated like a criminal by UK border agency
Hi there I am new to this forum but need to really let off steam after my recent experience at Heathrow this week.
My son recently returned from a trip to LA visiting friends and whilst there met a young lady who was planning to come to UK for holiday. They actually developed a lovely relationship whilst in LA and he asked her to return with him so he could show her our so called wonderful country but to also take her over to Europe.
She booked her flight via the internet to coincide with his. She had her bank card, cash relevant to her stay and a return ticket.
All in order? You would think so yes!
Anyway the customs officer decided that as she hadn't printed off her return ticket (which by the way isn't always possible as you can only do this within a set period prior to flying online) he needed to re-check her passport. This proved her return flight and was in order. They then decided to take her to one side to go through all her cases and asked my son to wait in the arrivals hall and they would ring him. That was at 1.20 by 3pm we had heard nothing. This continued until 4.45 when my son was finally called to answer some questions which he did and the customs officer told him they matched everything his girlfriend had told them. OK you think??
By 6.40pm (and a short stay car park bill of £30.60 later) he was told that she had been denied a visa. The reason? They had not been in a stable relationship long enough for her to support herself in the UK???? She had a bank card with her with funds and several thousand dollars in cash???
Now thats set the scene - sorry if I am boring you but the worst is yet to come!
She had just done the longest trip of her life a 10 hour flight across the Atlantic. She then faced interviews for another 6 hours absolutely terrified by this time. She then got told that all the money she had saved and worked hard for to pay for the flight was about to be wasted because she was now going back. She was then put in a small room with about 11 others and was made to sit on a chair all night until her flight the next day at midday? No bed, no access to her cases, a pay phone which she had no UK money although my son was allowed to call her but worst of worst she was put in a metal truck that had a locked cage with the 11 other passengers closely packed together and transported to another part of the building where they were all tested for TB then put back into the locked cage and taken back to the very small room. She managed to make herself a bed up from a childs air cot but when she woke the next morning from a very depraved sleep she saw 5 new faces all staring down at her!!!
Can somebody explain what this young girls crime was that she should be treated like this??? I would understand if she was drug dealing or a terrorist but she was coming to the UK for a holiday for heavens sake?? Is this the face we want to show to visitors/tourists? These appaling conditions? What happened to the hands across the sea bit? Allies in war? Trust me I know exactly how intimidating US customs can be they are terrifying but I am talking about the degrading way in which she was treated. Its perfect for real criminals but what about people who got a piece of paperwork wrong? And where does the responsibility of the airlines who are encouraging us to book online lie in all of this?
I am so angry and felt very responsible for this poor young girl who had been so excited talking to me on the phone just a few days earlier and who then faced another 10 hour flight back to LA on her own and was terrified of flying enough as it was! My son was not allowed to see her and for a grown lad of 23 was absolutely shattered by this experience and was beside himself in grief.
My two concerns are this. Why are our border agencies spending so much time on a young girl who had money and a return ticket when there are far more undesirables getting across our borders? Why was she treated so badly and on the same level as someone who had actually committed something much worse??
By the way Capot I agree with you as well. I travel a lot and in the main it is my passion but in recent years I actually find myself getting depressed worrying about going to the airport just to check in ~ it is my worst nightmare!! Again it is this "making you feel like a criminal" element. The officers who are really well trained in their jobs are the ones that are pleasant and have a sense of humour but can be firm and authoratative when it is necessary. The ones that are rude are the very unprofessional variety that have usually been under the thumb at home either by their spouses or parents and enjoy every minute of taking out their frustrations at work whilst in uniform!!!
Any response or similar experiences would be welcome. I feel the need to make a complaint about this. I don't think anyone knows what is happening to unsuspecting visitors who are denied entry. This must be against Human Rights surely?? Criminals actually do get treated better!!
Thanks for listening!
My son recently returned from a trip to LA visiting friends and whilst there met a young lady who was planning to come to UK for holiday. They actually developed a lovely relationship whilst in LA and he asked her to return with him so he could show her our so called wonderful country but to also take her over to Europe.
She booked her flight via the internet to coincide with his. She had her bank card, cash relevant to her stay and a return ticket.
All in order? You would think so yes!
Anyway the customs officer decided that as she hadn't printed off her return ticket (which by the way isn't always possible as you can only do this within a set period prior to flying online) he needed to re-check her passport. This proved her return flight and was in order. They then decided to take her to one side to go through all her cases and asked my son to wait in the arrivals hall and they would ring him. That was at 1.20 by 3pm we had heard nothing. This continued until 4.45 when my son was finally called to answer some questions which he did and the customs officer told him they matched everything his girlfriend had told them. OK you think??
By 6.40pm (and a short stay car park bill of £30.60 later) he was told that she had been denied a visa. The reason? They had not been in a stable relationship long enough for her to support herself in the UK???? She had a bank card with her with funds and several thousand dollars in cash???
Now thats set the scene - sorry if I am boring you but the worst is yet to come!
She had just done the longest trip of her life a 10 hour flight across the Atlantic. She then faced interviews for another 6 hours absolutely terrified by this time. She then got told that all the money she had saved and worked hard for to pay for the flight was about to be wasted because she was now going back. She was then put in a small room with about 11 others and was made to sit on a chair all night until her flight the next day at midday? No bed, no access to her cases, a pay phone which she had no UK money although my son was allowed to call her but worst of worst she was put in a metal truck that had a locked cage with the 11 other passengers closely packed together and transported to another part of the building where they were all tested for TB then put back into the locked cage and taken back to the very small room. She managed to make herself a bed up from a childs air cot but when she woke the next morning from a very depraved sleep she saw 5 new faces all staring down at her!!!
Can somebody explain what this young girls crime was that she should be treated like this??? I would understand if she was drug dealing or a terrorist but she was coming to the UK for a holiday for heavens sake?? Is this the face we want to show to visitors/tourists? These appaling conditions? What happened to the hands across the sea bit? Allies in war? Trust me I know exactly how intimidating US customs can be they are terrifying but I am talking about the degrading way in which she was treated. Its perfect for real criminals but what about people who got a piece of paperwork wrong? And where does the responsibility of the airlines who are encouraging us to book online lie in all of this?
I am so angry and felt very responsible for this poor young girl who had been so excited talking to me on the phone just a few days earlier and who then faced another 10 hour flight back to LA on her own and was terrified of flying enough as it was! My son was not allowed to see her and for a grown lad of 23 was absolutely shattered by this experience and was beside himself in grief.
My two concerns are this. Why are our border agencies spending so much time on a young girl who had money and a return ticket when there are far more undesirables getting across our borders? Why was she treated so badly and on the same level as someone who had actually committed something much worse??
By the way Capot I agree with you as well. I travel a lot and in the main it is my passion but in recent years I actually find myself getting depressed worrying about going to the airport just to check in ~ it is my worst nightmare!! Again it is this "making you feel like a criminal" element. The officers who are really well trained in their jobs are the ones that are pleasant and have a sense of humour but can be firm and authoratative when it is necessary. The ones that are rude are the very unprofessional variety that have usually been under the thumb at home either by their spouses or parents and enjoy every minute of taking out their frustrations at work whilst in uniform!!!
Any response or similar experiences would be welcome. I feel the need to make a complaint about this. I don't think anyone knows what is happening to unsuspecting visitors who are denied entry. This must be against Human Rights surely?? Criminals actually do get treated better!!
Thanks for listening!
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: East Midlands
Age: 84
Posts: 1,511
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FOXXY. I am apalled at the content of your post. We aren't even 3rd World in our ability to handle people with dignity and respect. It is not just Borders Agency; relatives of mine were recently taken into custody. A dawn raid by 12 police in 3 cars. House searched, they were taken away in a van with 2 cages in the back;
15 hours in custody without food. One with a heart problem needing medication with food was allowed neither. This was for an tax matter, not drug dealing or kiddy porn.
UK is becoming worse than China and the former Eastern Europe in its repression of its citizens and visitors.
15 hours in custody without food. One with a heart problem needing medication with food was allowed neither. This was for an tax matter, not drug dealing or kiddy porn.UK is becoming worse than China and the former Eastern Europe in its repression of its citizens and visitors.
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Midlands
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi there fellow East Midlander!!
I am still feeling sick to my stomach over what has happened. I really don't like transiting through the US but my son was made to feel so welcome over there. This is a nice girl from a good background and they haven't given any other reason for her to be sent back. The crazy thing is she was planning to come here anyway prior to meeting my son so I cannot understand their decision based on an unstable relationship??
Her return ticket was for 8 weeks. Australians are really good at accepting their kids go off "travelling" for at least a year, so are the Americans! Why was she under suspicion for wanting to be here for 8 weeks?? My son was going to take her off to Europe, he wanted to show her London such a wonderful dream for a 20 year old girl. I would understand if something bad had come up on her passport but that wasn't what was on the written document handed to her as reason for non-entry. We feel they suspected that she'd come here to work. I've watched lots of border control programmes on tv. Yes that's understandable when someone comes without funds but she had funds. She had a return ticket.
How sad is this? I sat and tracked her flight back to LA last night because I felt so responsible for her and it made me feel better knowing she had arrived home safe. I have yet to meet her but she has made my son very happy in a short space of time and as a mum I know this lady is very special to him and he is heartbroken. Nothing he could do or say to the immigration officer changed anything. Even though the answers they gave when questioned seperately matched up the officer told him that it was up to a (faceless) chief to make the final decision. I say faceless because by all rights this person doesn't get to meet the passenger in question. Doesn't get to talk to them just makes a decision based on the written word and the initial reason for stopping them which was that she wasn't carrying the return portion of the e-ticket which as I have already said airlines don't always offer until so many days or hours before the return journey!!
Aaaaagh! I feel so frustrated with everything about this dam country right now. Proud Brit? No way! Third world - you've got it!
I am still feeling sick to my stomach over what has happened. I really don't like transiting through the US but my son was made to feel so welcome over there. This is a nice girl from a good background and they haven't given any other reason for her to be sent back. The crazy thing is she was planning to come here anyway prior to meeting my son so I cannot understand their decision based on an unstable relationship??
Her return ticket was for 8 weeks. Australians are really good at accepting their kids go off "travelling" for at least a year, so are the Americans! Why was she under suspicion for wanting to be here for 8 weeks?? My son was going to take her off to Europe, he wanted to show her London such a wonderful dream for a 20 year old girl. I would understand if something bad had come up on her passport but that wasn't what was on the written document handed to her as reason for non-entry. We feel they suspected that she'd come here to work. I've watched lots of border control programmes on tv. Yes that's understandable when someone comes without funds but she had funds. She had a return ticket.
How sad is this? I sat and tracked her flight back to LA last night because I felt so responsible for her and it made me feel better knowing she had arrived home safe. I have yet to meet her but she has made my son very happy in a short space of time and as a mum I know this lady is very special to him and he is heartbroken. Nothing he could do or say to the immigration officer changed anything. Even though the answers they gave when questioned seperately matched up the officer told him that it was up to a (faceless) chief to make the final decision. I say faceless because by all rights this person doesn't get to meet the passenger in question. Doesn't get to talk to them just makes a decision based on the written word and the initial reason for stopping them which was that she wasn't carrying the return portion of the e-ticket which as I have already said airlines don't always offer until so many days or hours before the return journey!!
Aaaaagh! I feel so frustrated with everything about this dam country right now. Proud Brit? No way! Third world - you've got it!
That's terrible, & here's a similar story from today's Independent newspaper letters section:
Letters: British embassy in Moscow - Letters, Opinion - The Independent
"My daughter, a British citizen and an Oxford University graduate, is currently teaching English in St Petersburg. She decided to invite her partner, Mr Alexei Sibikin, a Russian citizen, for a week's trip to the UK to show him the places where she grew up.
Mr Sibikin duly applied for a tourist visa to the UK. As requested, he provided his fingerprints, proof of his employment, payslips, my passport, my personal payslips from Glasgow University (is it not a breach of data protection that the UK visa authorities demand this?) and my invitation, where I expressly stated that I would fully finance the week's trip.
The application was turned down, allegedly because the Russian applicant "had not proven that he can finance the journey". The justification was a blatant lie, considering that I offered to pay for everything. Subsequently, I spent almost a day trying to phone the UK embassy in Moscow. It was a nightmarish experience. No one will give you a name. No one will put you through to a higher authority. The telephone exchange puts you through to extensions which ring out without anyone answering them. There are long minutes of meaningless pre-recorded messages. People who wish to enquire about the fate of their application are expected to phone a premium line which costs 70 roubles (£1.50) per minute. The first several minutes or so are taken up with pre-recorded gobbledygook.
You may conclude that no one in the UK is interested in how arrogantly and inefficiently the British diplomatic service behaves to non-British citizens."
Tim.
Letters: British embassy in Moscow - Letters, Opinion - The Independent
"My daughter, a British citizen and an Oxford University graduate, is currently teaching English in St Petersburg. She decided to invite her partner, Mr Alexei Sibikin, a Russian citizen, for a week's trip to the UK to show him the places where she grew up.
Mr Sibikin duly applied for a tourist visa to the UK. As requested, he provided his fingerprints, proof of his employment, payslips, my passport, my personal payslips from Glasgow University (is it not a breach of data protection that the UK visa authorities demand this?) and my invitation, where I expressly stated that I would fully finance the week's trip.
The application was turned down, allegedly because the Russian applicant "had not proven that he can finance the journey". The justification was a blatant lie, considering that I offered to pay for everything. Subsequently, I spent almost a day trying to phone the UK embassy in Moscow. It was a nightmarish experience. No one will give you a name. No one will put you through to a higher authority. The telephone exchange puts you through to extensions which ring out without anyone answering them. There are long minutes of meaningless pre-recorded messages. People who wish to enquire about the fate of their application are expected to phone a premium line which costs 70 roubles (£1.50) per minute. The first several minutes or so are taken up with pre-recorded gobbledygook.
You may conclude that no one in the UK is interested in how arrogantly and inefficiently the British diplomatic service behaves to non-British citizens."
Tim.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Cairo
Posts: 57
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The experience you describe is neither unique nor new, though it is shameful. A friend had a very similar experience at Heathrow many years ago, though in the end they let her in. The best part was WE had to sign a form saying that she had not been maltreated in any way BEFORE we were allowed to speak to her or they would release her.