Almost everyone can find something to complain about when traveling through airports. What happens when you realize the people who were supposed to protect you might have a vendetta against you because of they way you look or act? There is an issue of unfair treatment that needs to be called to attention because government security should make you feel protected, not discriminated against. By looking at the inadequate training, privacy issues, and racial discrimination of Transportation Security Administration, it becomes evident that the TSA is operating an organization with poor ethics.  This is a huge problem because the constitution says "all men were created equal" so what gives TSA the right to unfairly subjugate people to invasive searches and give power to unqualified citizens.

Like every job, training is essential to having effective employees, that inquire little to no issues. On a daily basis, the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) protects about 1.8 million passengers (Burns). Due to the unpredictable nature of the job, it is crucial that each employee be prepared to handle any situation. Sadly, the inadequate training puts the passengers and organization at risk. Many would expect government security personal to be some of the best and brightest, however, that is not the case, many of the employees are below average. To recognize this, we need to start at the hiring procedures. A majority of employees have minimal education because all that is required to become an agent, according to the Department of Homeland Security, is a high school diploma, no felonies on your record, and be of the age of 18 (tsa.gov). Of these qualifications, it seems that the background check seems to be overlooked. According to the Los Angles Time, when they searched the names of employees against the National Counterterrorism Center, 73 employees had previous terrorist links (Bennett). On top of that, background checks are done within thirty to sixty days of hiring, leaving to much time between for issues to arise (Stark and Hovell). Untrustworthy employees are equally a big risk because they have access places that could be very detrimental if a bomb was placed.  These issues only seem to get worse when we look at how the TSA officers are trained.

In order for the TSA to be effective, more intense training programs should be required because currently sufficient training isn't achieved currently. The TSA website says it takes about a week to do the initial classroom hours and 24 hours of on the job training (tsa.gov).  The Department of Homeland Security's Office of Inspector General released a report in October 2011 about the TSA's screening workforce training program saying that was not enough. The report found that the "TSA does not ensure that transportation security officers are provided the time they need to effectively complete training requirements," and that, "TSOs described rushing through course material without devoting the attention needed to retain the lessons" (CAIR).  This report came out five years ago saying that not enough training is done, it still isn't fixed. You would not want the doctors preforming surgery on you to rush through their lessons, so why is it okay for security officers to do so? It is an issue of national security and their lack of reform is unethical because they are putting our lives at risk. One-way reform is beginning to occur is through an amendment to the Aviation and Transportation Security Act (Public Law 107-71).  It is being asked that the number of hours for training, hands on work, they be aware of all policies and enforce civil rights.  This would be monitored by "annual proficiency reviews of security personnel a demonstration of the knowledge and skills necessary to perform screening in compliance with passenger civil rights" (CAIR.)  This would be very useful because they would be held accountable for their subpar employees.  The organization would face peer pressure from other countries as well as media.  These reports would help provide piece of mind to travelers and discourage racial discrimination. We should also look at examples from foreign governments to make sure our security is on equal levels.

No other airport in the world faces more threats than Tel Aviv's Ben Gurion airport in Israel (Wagner). They have responded by constantly implementing new security measures, making them a great role model to follow.  They prevent the issue of inadequate training by taking their security officers from their military, all have above average intelligence (Kleiner). They are then trained again in detection and interrogation skills which they use every day since every single passenger goes through an interview that happens before the ticket counter (Wagner).  It has proven to be true over the years, that humans give away distress signs that the officers pick up on which is why they only use basic medal detectors (Wagner). If the United States could duplicate a system that doesn't involve spending millions on machines, it would be better for our country because it would create jobs.  In order to do this, we need sharper agents working.  We should also restructure the security process to begin it when checking bags that would be beneficial.  

Would you be comfortable with strangers seeing details of your naked body? Body scanners have been a privacy issue for years now because they create very graphic outlines that provide detailed images for agents to look at. In 2015, it was passed that full body scanners can be deemed mandatory for some passengers (Brownlee).  This cause many passengers to feel uncomfortable because these scanners send out electromagnetic radiation which creates detailed images of your body. Pickler argued that it is "virtual strip searches without probable cause," which goes against the fourth amendment which prohibits unreasonable searches without a probable cause (Cornell Law). For this reason, "Twenty-five civil liberties, human rights, and non-profit organizations, have joined TSA body scan fight instigator Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) in a coalition spearheaded by EPIC to defeat the TSA's new procedures" (Brownlee).  The groups are speaking up for everyone's rights because someone needs to bring this injustice to the publics attention. It is clearly a violation of human rights proving the TSA is participating in unethical practices.  This is important because not stopping this is putting our country more at risk to be scrutinized. 

In addition to the privacy issues, the ethics of the machines can be questioned when we look at the price of them.  The article "Price for TSA's Failed Body Scanners" found that the machine costs about $120 million for these body scanners (Scholtes).  The average price tag for one scanner is about $150,000, plus the software updates and maintenance these machines need. The high price could be justified by a high success rate, but there is no evidence that they are sucessful. A recent security audit found that TSA had failed to find fake explosives and weapons in 96 percent of covert tests (Scholtes). It seems unethical to waste that much money on ineffective equipment when they cannot detect materials like C4 which is used to make most explosives (Leef). It should be noted that Israel only uses medal detectors and has had never considered the scanners.  According to Julian, who is an Israeli security, full-body scanners are useless because he can "overcome them with enough explosives to bring down a Boeing 747."  This is why they should focus on other alternatives methods since body scanners are not effective and are not responsible financially responsible. The TSA's ethics can be questioned when they are spending millions of dollars on frivolous machines. An observation program partnered with the body scanners is just not effective.

The current observation program is SPOT (Screening Passengers by Observation Technique), which focuses on behavioral cues to alert officers of suspicious activity . Although it is based on other successful identification programs, SPOT has flaws due to employees discriminating because of alterative motives and lack of training causing the officers to not use the system effectively.  In order to become a SPOT officer, an individual has to go through an additional four days of behavioral classroom instruction and analysis, and 24 hours of on-the-job training (CAIR).  There are 644 Behavior detection Officers deployed in 42 airports (Love). It is important to remember that Israel's Observation officers are taken from the military which is months of profiling techniques then trained again on behavior recognition. The additional training the U.S. observation officers get is just not enough for it to be equivalent to the successful recognition programs or make a substantial difference in our safety.  Many officers are homogeneous, white males which is important to look at since their tolerance towards other races might not be as high since they probably have never been discriminated against before because of they way they look. The real difference this program makes is the increased potential circumstances for racism since it justifies searching someone just because they don't look like they fit in.  It seems very unethical for our country to be attempting this program without requiring immense training to prevent issues. 

The reason the Israel's detection program is successful is because they have interaction with the people before they jump to conclusions. Sadly, security officers for SPOT just take behavior clues to tell if something is suspicious then investigate.  It is a lot easier to attribute certain actions to termism if you are discriminating against someone already. According to CIAR, an American Islam Relational Group, the "TSA hired an individual who appeared Middle Eastern/South Asian in descent to test screeners at the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport by carrying a shaving kit made to look like a bomb" (CAIR). The drill ended up backfiring on them when inappropriate profiling was concluded due to the race of the man.  

Recent studys have shown that "Humans do barely better than 50% in trying to guess whether someone is being deceptive. There are no great variations in individuals' ability to detect deception (Stanely).  Most terrorists are put through internal training to not make distress signs visible.   It is bold for the TSA to feel that they can rely on these signs to make our nation safe.  The article "SPOT off" says "Supposed experts such as cops and customs agents are no better than anyone else. There are few if any reliable cues to deception.  People frequently misread signs of stress, nervousness, and discomfort as indicating lies" (Stanley).  This easily happens in airports since officers are not aware of previous travel history or anxiety disorders that could lead to excess nervousness. There is not a textbook policy that can be successful so the TSA when guessing who is a threat.  In America, you are innocent until proven guily, and should be treated that way unless they find something on you that poses a security threat.  The way they assume they can detect  danger is unrealistic and unethical.  

When looking at "The Influence of Race/Ethnicity on the Perceived Prevalence and Support for Racial Profiling at Airports" by Gabbidon, it is proven that race affects people's belief that airport security racially profiles and discriminates unfairly. Around sixty percent of the public thought that racially profiling was a common thing.  The study focuses on the different views of people from different economic statuses or races.  It found that Blacks were more likely to say racially profiling at airports was a prevalent issue.  Whites and Mexicans are tied on their beliefs regarding how common it was.  When asked if it was justified, white people and males were much more likely to say it is. This is important because a large amount of TSA workers are Caucasian, so it is likely employees are discriminating less against their own race.  Pre existing bias and high sense of job security promote the unethical behavior of SPOT officers when judging passengers. 

The Journal of Airport Management claims airports are "socially-based economic organizations" therefore, it will be impossible to stop all observation programs since relying on instinct is human nature (Kirschenbaum).  Instead, the TSA needs to work on education programs that will prevent racial discrimination. An example of their ignorance to other religions was shown through their behavior to a fellow employee. The TSA employee engaged in a lawsuit, partnered with the International Center for Advocates Against Discrimination, because he was prohibited from wearing a Kara, a religious bracelet to remind him of God.   They denied his situational request because they were not respectful of his religion.  The lawsuit found that telling him he could not wear the bracelet was discrimination. This is evidence of intolerance because he was a fellow employee, not a threat to our country.  The did not like he was wearing something they did not understand and got scared.  If everyone had taken a religious tolerance class, this would have been less likely to happen since everyone would have known what it was.   a sad reminder that they are not enforcing security, they are enforcing intolerance.  

There are twelve main world religions.  Generally, people without college degrees are more intolerant of other religions.  Likewise, forty-three percent of all people who make less than $30,000 a year are intolerant of other races (Winseman). TSA agents fall into both of those categories which is why their training is most important. If they are not taught religious tolerance, how should we expect them to do their job correctly and fairly. This makes the organization more susceptible to discriminating against others. Not being aware of all religious symbols is unacceptable for people dealing with international citizens.  We can see an example of religious discrimination "at Miami International Airport (MIA) Terminal D passenger checkpoint on April 8th, 2015. Transportation Security Officer (TSO) Celestin asked me to take my hat off. I said my hat is on for religious reasons. He then said: 'no it's not!'" (Civilrightsfederal) Most foreign airports have religious sanctuary rooms that are clearly advertised by signs and over loud speakers.  In the United States, an individual has to seek them out if he wishes to find one.  The TSA should make it mandatory for officers to monitor these rooms because they might learn respect for other religions. Hundreds of harmless people pass through them every day and act as a great example of how being different isn't dangerous.  

A case of racial discrimination happened to Malaika Singleton and Novella Coleman.  They complained that TSA agents singled them out because they wore their hair in locs (Starr). They claim the officer had no reason to be suspicious and they were singled out for having different hair . The article "Security Profiling of Airport Employees: Complying with the Rules" found in a survey that many employees will disobey protocol if they were having a suspicion about a security threat (Kirschenbaum). If we were to rely more on having a technology based system before allowing officers to make these assumptions, unethical behavior would drop drastically.  There needs to be a change in protocol to prevent people from getting doubted for not fitting into American society. 

In conclusion, the ethics behind the TSA are struggling because of lack of training which leads to discrimination religiously and racially.  The officers are not selected from the most qualified pools of people.  By increasing the quality of the officers, the organization would not have to worry about as much ignorance to religions and races. Training programs are something that needs to be fixed at a government level by hold the training officers to a higher standard and finding a way to strictly enforce it. Looking at other governments would help us improve our systems and make this a more ethical program.  

