Private Contractor versus Government-Operated System on Aviation Security
Travis Park
Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University
ASCI 202: Intro to Aeronautical science

I. Summary:
Throughout the 1960s, 70s, and 80s, the government developed its security system by introducing inspection devices, canine teams, and etc. However, on September 11, 2001, the most terrible tragedy has changed the United States. It was the most shocking moment in the history, and it changed the whole security system in aviation industry. The Aviation and Transportation Security Act of 2011 (ATSA) was passed, and the federal government created Transportation Security Administration (TSA) and gave direct responsibility of aviation and airport security to TSA. Although the government has done its best for aviation security, the government-owned system has its pros and cons. This research paper would discuss the pros and cons of security system between private contractor and government-owned system. II. Problem:
The United States called for more effective security system on the aviation industry, which ensures the safety and protect the country. However, the government agencies do not always succeed its efficiency and created many loss compare to private sector. The ATSA required TSA to run a two-year long pilot program, culminating the Screening Partnership Program (SPP), which allowed airports have private contractors for its security personnel and maintain issue that operate under the TSA requirements. However, there has been arguments whether the government should keep the government-operated system or allow the privately owned and operated, contracted airport security system or not, for the San Francisco Airport (SFO), for example, participated in the SPP and left very successful effectiveness in maintaining airport security compare to the airports solely staffed with TSA agents. III. Significance of the Problem
According to “www.tsa.gov”, the TSA spent 7.39 billion dollars just in 2014. The government is spending tremendous amount of money its security and has been looking for a better way to ensure the security of aviation industry. However, the TSA and the government are not recognizing how effective on safety and efficient and money-saving program the SPP was to improve the airport security. IV. Development of Alternative Action
The government can keep the privately contracted airport security system. The contractors can implement their own made additional safety features on the top of the minimum required safety policies, TSA made, and can have more flexibility of hourly wage, employee benefits, the risk management techniques, and destroy the wall of bureaucracy. According to Steve Amitay, Esq. Executive Director and General Counsel of National Association of Security Companies (NASCO), he states that “Even paying the same (equivalent) wages, private companies can beat the total cost of screening relative to TSA’s actual costs, and of course, relative to total federal costs. There are many reasons for this greater cost-efficiency.” The cons of privatizing can cause the disruption in the airport security industry because it has been government-owned system, and there can be disagreements in the new government policies in future. However, these issues can be resolved as time goes by. V. Recommendation
Having SPP program contractors at all airports while abiding the TSA guideline, regulation, and oversight can save a lot of money and increase the efficiency of airport security system. Although there would be discrepancies in the policies in the beginning, there is no perfectly satisfying change to everybody and the discrepancies issue can be resolved as time goes by. Eventually, privatizing the security system can improve the whole aviation security industry.

Reference :
FY 2014 Budget-in-Brief. (n.d.). Retrieved June 28, 2015, from http://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/MGMT/FY 2014 BIB - FINAL -508 Formatted (4).pdf
Screening Partnership Program. (n.d.). Retrieved June 28, 2015, from http://www.tsa.gov/stakeholders/screening-partnership-program
Amitay, S. (2014, July 29). Examining TSA’s Management of the Screening Partnership Program. House Homeland Security Subcommittee on Transportation Security, 8-8.