Backlash against the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, including a revolt by two pilots unions, ensued this month after the Transportation Security Administration implemented more invasive pat-down procedures for travelers who refuse full-body scanners that emit a dose of radiation and generate images of the traveler's body. Although many in the corporate travel realm doubt such security measures will impact the frequency of travel, some are seeking duty-of-care policies to address travelers' concerns.
Heightened by the approaching chaotic holiday travel season, public outcry against TSA grew at epidemic pace after unions representing American Airlines and US Airways pilots directed its members to be patted down instead of using the backscatter and millimeter-wave advanced imaging technology scanners. TSA this year announced an aggressive rollout of two forms of the technology and said it since has installed 211 backscatter units in 38 airports and 174 millimeter-wave units in 30 airports.
"Airline pilots are trustworthy by definition of their employment and responsibilities. They are very heavily scrutinized and evaluated on a daily basis," according to a statement by the Air Line Pilots Association. "Screening airline pilots for the possession of threat objects does not enhance security because pilots have the safety of their passengers and aircraft in their hands on every flight."
The University of California requested TSA conduct an independent study into the potentially harmful effects of backscatter radiation emissions, but scientists from the U.S. Food & Drug Administration and TSA agreed the equipment "poses miniscule health risks to individuals," according to a press release.
"A 90-minute flight would be equivalent to 180 scans. The amount [of radiation] you get from eating half a banana is equivalent to one scan. It's exceedingly low power; we don't want to take a medical X-ray," said Peter Kant, executive vice president for Rapiscan, developer of the backscatter units. "The feelings about this risk are unfortunately misinformed."
The dosage may be "miniscule in terms of occasional travelers, but obviously road warriors would have a much higher exposure," argued a travel manager from a high-tech company. As a result, the company's travel department is "now liaising with our legal counsel on our approach, so at the moment we're just evaluating."
IJet Intelligent Risk Systems "looked into this for some clients," CEO Bruce McIndoe said, but determined "there was an insignificant elevation of risk" because "there is less exposure to ionizing radiation by the scanners than traveling in the airplane at 30,000 to 40,000 feet." Still, Association of Corporate Travel Executives executive director Ron DiLeo called incorporating such concerns under a duty-of-care umbrella "a good use of time and a great idea."
"There are two duty-of-care issues here: mental health and physical health," said Business Travel Coalition chairman Kevin Mitchell. "Science really hasn't been put forth in terms of the safety of this technology to any level that satisfies people who are concerned about the issue. The concern is acute for pregnant women or some with skin cancers. If you are a corporation with thousands of travelers, you have to be saying to yourself, 'What is going to happen here?' In looking at it from a duty-of-care issue, by January it is going to start to be discussed pretty widely."
Travelers unwilling to be scanned must be patted down by TSA officials in a method that was enhanced this month to include what The Washington Postcalled the "touching of breasts and genitals," but is said to fall short of a cavity search. A TSA spokesman did not provide details on the heightened search procedures, which were implemented after an attempted late-October terrorist attack in which bombs were transported on cargo planes.
"We pay [TSA] to do this to us, to make us walk through these machines that in the long term could cause privacy violations and health effects," said a representative from Fly With Dignity, a grass-roots organization against the TSA initiatives. "It's not only aggressive frisking, we are being treated like people who are under arrest or search warrant. We are treated as guilty, and their search is proving you innocent."
DHS Secretary Janet Napolitano in a statement indicated that the "best defense against such threats remains a risk-based, layered-security approach that utilizes a range of measures, both seen and unseen. The vast majority of travelers say they prefer [body scanners] to alternative screening measures."
"We need to have an effective pat-down coupled with the best technology to resolve anomalies discovered during the screening process, and we believe the AIT is the best technology today," TSA Administrator John Pistole told the Senate Commerce Committee on Nov. 17. "Few people in the overall scheme of things will receive those pat-downs. Am I going to change the policies? No, because I think from being informed by the latest intelligence, the latest efforts by terrorists who kill our people in the air, I am not going to change the policies."
DHS also prohibited toner and ink cartridges larger than 16 oz. from carry-on luggage on both domestic and international flights inbound to the United States.
Business Travel Resilient Despite Hassles
Given that air travel is "an exercise in patience," the U.S. Travel Association claims "air travelers were so frustrated in 2008 that 41 million of them canceled their trips, not rebooked them--costing the economy $26 billion."
"From a corporate travel perspective, what we have heard is those that travel most are those who are the most frustrated with the system," said USTA executive vice president Geoff Freeman. "We have heard travelers say that they are avoiding trips, and this isn't just due to the recent issues with the TSA; this is due to the hassle factor--the delays, the cancellations.
"There are economic consequences to that, not just to the travel industry but also to the companies," Freeman continued. "There is a return on investment of face-to-face interaction. If we are serious about turning this economy around and creating jobs, we have to be equally as serious as getting Americans out there on the road. Air travel is the gateway to commerce."
However, ACTE's DiLeo said TSA's actions would not "negatively affect the upward trend in travel. Business performance is what is going to rule the day as opposed to convenience. We are being inconvenienced by travel. It is a necessary part of the whole experience of traveling, and CEOs--whether they are public or private companies--are interested in driving shareholder value [and] improving their business. You have to go out and spend time with your clients and your customers. [Corporations] are going to have to find people who are willing to travel. If I know someone is going to be personally violated, I would be wrong as a leader of that company to make them still travel. I am going to have people who are going to focus on getting through it and who are not going to feel personally violated. TSA is going to do what TSA thinks they need to do, whether you agree with it or not."
According to the National Business Travel Association, "With proper strategic planning, TSA can ensure safety for travelers without implementing new security measures that impose additional and unnecessary burdens on the traveling public; in fact, many of these measures are already in place."
Citing Secure Flight and the Global Entry international registered traveler program, NBTA urged TSA "to build onto these current layers of protection by reinstating a domestic registered traveler program with a security component." NBTA added that it "supports airport security programs that balance the necessity of safety with privacy of the individual traveler."
Hogg Robinson Group is "working closely with clients to ensure corporate travelers continue business as usual," said commercial director Stewart Harvey, adding that the travel management company "welcomes new security procedures."
Harvey noted that "most travelers seem happy with the introduction of the new body scanners as long as they improve safety for all passengers. Our clients are just accepting that the scanners are a part of the journey now, and many see them as a natural progression in anti-terrorism technology. Passengers have been quietly getting on with their journeys, and if that means being body-scanned and waiting for a little longer, then so be it."