Screeners heave sigh of relief

SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, Calif. - After eight months of anxiety, the airport screeners can heave a sigh of relief, for the moment.
The planned lay-off which would have affected the non-citizen screeners is not going to happen.
Transportation Undersecretary John W. Magaw announced June 18 that five airports have been selected to participate in the Private Security Screening Pilot Program.
Under the program, screeners who are not yet citizens have been given two years to work on their citizenship papers.
Also, S.F. Supervisor Gerardo Sandoval told Philippine News, “The purpose of the pilot progam is to see if a private company can provide the same quality of security just as a public agency could,” . San Francisco International Airport topped the list chosen to join the program. The other airports are Kansas City International, Greater Rochester International in New York, Jackson Hole Airport in Wyoming, and Tupelo Airport in Mississippi.
Magaw said that developments at the five airports under the program will be key in determining how the administration moves forward in meeting provisions under the aviation bill.
His decision to select these facilities was based on a number of factors, including, “An airport’s willingness to participate, selecting a balance representation from across the United States, selecting areas with variable costs of living, the availability of existing screening company resources; and a mix of business, leisure and academic passengers.”
“I am so happy to hear that I am given two years more to work on my U. S. citizenship papers,” Jaime San Jose, who has been a checkpoint security supervisor for four years told Philippine News. “Sana tuloy-tuloy na, no more deadline, no more changes.”
Calling the citizenship policy for screeners “a transparently anti-immigrant policy, Laurel Carangelo of the Immigrant Airport Workers Solidarity Committee, said, “If (the policy) was really for security, then, when the Oklahoma federal building was bombed by a white U.S. citizen, then all the white U.S. citizens would have been fired.”
Jun, an active member of Filipinos for Affirmative Action who requested withheld his last name said, “If there was at least $354 billion dollars spent on aggressive military strategies, why can’t the American government protect its citizens from terrorism?”
“My screeners will continue to protest the American citizenship requirement,” said Marian Torquido, a duty manager in the international terminal when asked what could have they done if they were laid-off in November.
The administration’s next step will be to identify a qualified private screening company to participate in the pilot program. It will solicit, award, and administer all of the airports’ screening contracts to one of the three existing security companies at each of the pilot airports.
“The contract will be awarded to one company. I anticipate that the contract will be awarded through public biding,” Sandoval told PNews. “There are currently three companies namely: ITS, Argenbright and Globe.”
During this trial period, the Transportation Security Administration will keep a close eye on the contractors’ performance and will make termination decisions as the need arises.
The Aviation Bill, Section 108, requires the administration to establish the pilot program. It requires further that the private screening company be owned and controlled by a U.S. citizen.
It also sets forth the provision that the administration may terminate any contract entered into with a private screening company that has repeatedly failed to comply with any standard, regulation, directive, order, law, or contract applicable to hiring or training personnel or to the provision of screening at an airport.
Contractors are also required to meet or exceed employment standards, compensation and benefits rates, and performance requirements that apply to federal security screeners.
Under the aviation security law passed in November last year, airport security screeners who are not U.S. citizens would have lost their jobs by November this year.
“I am concerned that if all non-citizens are fired from their screener jobs at SFO, safety will be worse. This job cannot be learned in the wink of an eye,” said Vicente Crisologo who has been a screener for two years.
Boja and Crisologo were both plaintiffs in a lawsuit against Transportation Security Administration, which alleged that the citizenship requirement is a civil rights violation.
Meanwhile, House Democratic Whip Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) introduced an amendment approved by the House Appropriations Committee that would provide retraining and employment programs for dislocated screeners.
“I will keep pushing to roll back the citizenship requirement for screeners and to insist that the Immigration and Naturalization Service move more quickly to naturalize legal residents. But in the meantime, we must set programs in place to help workers find new jobs,” said Pelosi.
Funding for the displaced workers is available through the Workforce Investment Act, and Pelosi said the vote by the Appropriations Committee would send a strong message to Labor Secretary Elaine Chao to use her authority under the act to assist laid-off airport security workers.