It appears that misconduct among Transportation Security Administration airport screeners detailed in recent news reports is the exception rather than the rule, at least according to TSA itself. Travelers are giving TSA high marks both in areas of customer service and security effectiveness, according to a survey TSA released this month.
Looking at 30 airports evenly distributed across regions in the United States, TSA, with the help of consulting firm BearingPoint, surveyed 62,173 travelers between Sept. 29, 2004, and Jan. 24, 2005—91 percent of whom said that they were satisfied on the whole with experiences at passenger security checkpoints.
"The results virtually matched those of a comparable survey taken in the fall of 2003, despite higher passenger traffic levels and more stringent checkpoint security," TSA said in a statement.
The screening experience was most well received in Daytona Beach, where only 1 percent of respondents expressed dissatisfaction, and responses were worst in Los Angeles, where 16 percent shared a negative sentiment of the airport's screening procedures.
In the category of screener courtesy, it appears that Southern hospitality is alive and well at the security checkpoints in Daytona Beach, as 100 percent of the respondents at the airport said they were satisfied with the courtesy of screeners.
National Business Travel Association executive director Bill Connors said that while there continues to be concerns among travel industry professionals and business travelers over TSA security initiatives, particularly Secure Flight
(see story), the survey results show the positive side of traveler perception. "Hopefully that good news will continue," he said.
Kevin Mitchell, chairman of the Business Travel Coalition, said he was skeptical of the report. "BearingPoint is a supplier to TSA. So you have a double ring of conflict: a supplier of TSA and TSA grading itself," he said.
"I would probably think that of those surveyed, for a large portion that was the only trip they took in the past ten months," Mitchell added. "I would like to see the same exact questions asked of a couple thousand business travelers." TSA did not break out the percentage of business to leisure travelers represented in the survey.
Even as the government continues to move forward with its Registered Traveler program as a means to speed up security times for frequent travelers, it seems most travelers are content with the time it takes to get through security.
Although Chicago Midway and Los Angeles airports appear to give travelers the most headaches with wait times—with 17 percent expressing dissatisfaction for each airport—they are exceptions to the rule as 91 percent of all respondents said they were content with wait times and 95 percent said wait times met or undercut their expectations. Philadelphia had the worst performance in this regard: 25 percent of respondents said that wait times were longer than anticipated.
While travelers are giving TSA an A grade for performance in courtesy and customer service, the Transportation Security Administration is falling in the B range for effectiveness. Eighty-two percent of the survey respondents said they were confident in TSA's ability to keep air travel secure, leaving 18 percent who were less sanguine. Yet, 89 percent of travelers said that TSA checkpoint workers gave them an appropriately thorough screening; 4 percent said it was excessive, and 7 percent said that screening procedures were inadequate.
TSA also took a look at five airports where the administration two years ago enacted a pilot allowing private screening companies to work security checkpoints. Despite concerns of inconsistencies from the National Business Travel Association and some travel managers
(BTN, Nov. 8, 2004), the results from the survey show similar, if not better, levels of performance.
Airports in San Francisco, Kansas City, Mo., Rochester, N.Y., Jackson Hole, Wyo., and Tupelo, Miss., since Nov. 19, 2002, have been piloting security screening with four contractors—and it appears travelers can't tell the difference. Of the respondents, 93 percent expressed satisfaction with the airports, which is two percentage points higher than those at 25 other U.S. airports.
Following the two-year pilot ending in November, the Transportation Security Administration once again allowed airports to employ private screening companies—albeit under the tutelage of TSA.
"As of Nov. 19, airports can apply to TSA to opt out if they express interest in returning to private screeners," according to a Transportation Security Administration spokesperson. "They would need to apply to TSA to do so, because any private contractor would have to meet TSA standards and TSA would manage the contracts."
TSA said its goal is to provide a common screening experience regardless of airport or screening company. Yet, there remains some disconnect in traveler perception of such consistencies. Fifteen percent of all respondents said that the screening procedures at the airport in which they were surveyed were "very" or "fairly" different from those from at different airports.
The numbers were nearly identical for those airports in which private screening companies are employed, with 14 percent of respondents saying that screening procedures differed from other trips at other airports. Cincinnati and Los Angeles had the worst performance in this area: 21 percent of travelers at each airport said that screening procedures were different than those from previous trips at other airports. Yet, 85 percent of total respondents found consistent screening procedures across various airports.
"We are building a metrics-based organization that is focused on the bottom line of performance measurement," said Admiral David Stone, assistant secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, who heads TSA. "It's important to note that by whatever yardstick, air travelers are confident that TSA-trained screeners—federal or private—will keep them secure."