Aviation Business Ethics Sept 11 Industry Implications

Aviation Business Ethics and Sept. 11 Industry Implications

On September 11, 2001, nineteen terrorists passed through several security checkpoints at three United States airports and proceeded to hijack four commercial jets. The horror began at 8:45 A.M. Two hours later, more than three thousand people were killed in New York City, rural Pennsylvania and Arlington, Virginia (Duffy, 2002).

shattered the nation's sense of safety and security and forever changed the way people travel through and across America. In response to the tragic event, there is an increased pressure on the aviation industry to develop and implement higher ethical standards.

Because millions of people fly daily and rely on airlines, s well as the Federal Aviation Administration's oversight of aviation procedures, the entire aviation industry must work together to keep their passengers safe and secure.

Research Objectives

This research paper aims to address the subject of business ethics in the field of aviation, as well as emphasize the effects of Sept. 11 on the aviation industry. Through discussing the responsibilities each part of the aviation industry has toward air travel, this paper will provide a clear analysis of why enhanced business ethics concerning safety and security are of utmost importance.

This paper will compare security features before Sept. 11 with security features after Sept. 11, in an effort to determine how they have improved and what they are still lacking. In addition, it will discuss the rights of aviation employees, shareholders and passengers to determine which security and business procedures are safe and which are invasive.

Methodology

Responsibilities of Aviation Industry in Aviation Safety and Security

The airlines have an ethical responsibility to provide the highest level of security to their passengers, who places their lives in the hands of the airlines (Sweet, 2002). Aviation security is primarily the responsibility of the aviation industry, which includes the major airlines, their security companies, the airports, and airline trade associations, which includes the American Transport Association.

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is responsible for assessing the level of threat to commercial aviation based on information received from intelligence sources. The FAA must subsequently establish procedures to address this level of threat and purports in an effort to enforce those procedures within the aviation industry.

The aviation industry is responsible for implementing the procedures (Wells, 2001). The airlines must purchase insurance for aviation disasters, recognizing the known risks, including hijacking and terrorism. The FAA, airports, and the aviation industry are provided with information from various intelligence and law enforcement agencies; and must develop contingency plans to address threat levels, including the use of sophisticated screening equipment.

Security Responsibilities of Aviation Staff

Aviation Managers are found in all airlines, as well as in transportation support fields and local, state, federal, and international regulatory agencies (Wells, 2001). It is the responsibility of aviation managers to study and analyze aviation, determining what can be done to make it safer, as well as to develop new products and techniques designed to increase aviation security.

Airlines have, since Sept. 11, expressed concern over the education and training of aviation pilots, and many are considering raising the requirements for these positions.

The FAA has, since Sept. 11, issued new guidelines for training flight crews in dealing with potential threats, especially hijackings (Sweet, 2002). The basic strategy for airlines has shifted from passive to active resistance by crewmembers.

Flight crew must now address additional security procedures concerning areas like food handling and maintenance, where direct access to the plane lacks security.

Airlines are now advising their crewmembers to treat any type of passenger disturbance as suspicious, act as a team in a threatening situation and land the airplane as soon as possible when faced with any threat.

Airlines are now enforcing stricter minimum requirements for their flight crew, including 50 hours of classroom training, 60 hours of on-the-job training, and an examination for screeners. All flight crewmembers must be U.S. citizens and have a high school education.

A pilot is more than just someone who climbs aboard an airplane and flies it. Pilots have a major responsibility towards their passengers, as they are considered the eyes, ears and brains of the aircraft. Pilots check weather conditions and plan a safe route (Wells, 2001).

The pilot must also completely check the aircraft to ensure that all systems are operating properly and that all control surfaces and electrical equipment are functioning correctly. During the flight, pilots must monitor their progress and maintain communications with air traffic control facilities on the ground (Morrison, 1986).

As a result of Sept. 11, pilots are faced with even more responsibility. Pilots are now being trained on how to open the new cockpit doors, and what to tolerate regarding a threat on the other side of the door (Sweet, 2002).

Pilots are encouraged to make every attempt to land the plane rather than attempt to control any situations in the plane. This is the job of air marshals, which will soon be a part of every flight. As a result of Sept. 11, air marshals will now be placed on an aircraft, inconspicuously, with ammunition and training in security services.

Before Sept. 11

Sept. 11's terrorist attacks caused more than 3,000 deaths, billions of dollars in property damage and a decrease in the people's confidence regarding air travel (Duffy, 2002). Immediately, aviation security became of utmost importance to the U.S. government, the aviation industry and the public (Sweet, 2002).

Before Sept.11, three groups provided aviation security: airlines, airports and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) (Wells, 2001). Basically air carriers and airports provided most of aviation security, while the FAA regulated the industry.

Before Sept. 11, there were a variety of aviation-security problems involving aviation computer security; access to aircraft, airfields and other facilities; as well as the detection of dangerous objects.

One of the main events that changed aviation security after Sept. 11 was the increased role of the federal government in providing security.

One of the most important features of the airline industry is its transportation design. With its network structure, passengers from various airports gather in an airport, where they depart for their destinations (Coughlin, 2002).

This system leads to interdependencies that give rise to what economists call an externality, which exists whenever the consumption or production activity of one consumer or firm affects the well-being of other consumers or the production activities of other firms.

The events of Sept. 11 clearly showed that the lack of aviation security in one location affected the movement of passengers, airports and airlines throughout the system. The existence of an externality offers an economic reason for governmental involvement in aviation security.

Unregulated private markets are less likely to provide sufficient aviation security due to the fact that the security policies for one location may not account for the spillover benefits presented upon others throughout the network (Dufy, 2002). The role of government is to regulate private providers, subsidize private providers, and provide aviation security publicly.

As a result of the recent involvement of the federal government, there has been a substantial increase in resources for aviation security. The government is funding large increases in the use of labor resources (passenger and baggage screeners, law enforcement officers in airports and airplanes, and administrators) and capital resources (passenger and baggage screening machines, access-control systems and reinforced cockpit doors), taking a huge pressure off the airlines and airports (Coughlin, 2002).

Security Breaches Prior to Sept. 11

Although security guidelines prior to Sept. 11 required airport screeners to confiscate dangerous items, including box cutters, from passengers, the airlines, which were in charge of security at the time, terrorist managed to get several box cutters past airport checkpoints (Salant, 2002).

Prior to Sept. 11, the Air Transport Association, a representative for major airlines, and the Regional Airline Association, a trade group for smaller carriers, published the main security guide for airlines. This Checkpoint Operations Guide was designed to implement Federal Aviation Administration security regulations.

However, prohibiting box cutters on airplanes was an industry requirement, not a government one. The FAA actually allowed airline passengers to carry blades less than four inches long before Sept. 11.

However, airlines often did not invest the time or money before Sept. 11 to check passengers completely. In addition, according to Rep. John Mica, chairman of the House Transportation subcommittee on aviation, the FAA did have strict guidelines for screening standards in place (Salant). This combination was a recipe for disaster.

The whole security process was in disarray," said Mica, R-Fla. "When you don't have the personnel with any standards, and you don't have FAA adopting specific rules, you have no one to enforce it." (Salant)

After Sept. 11

Transportation Security Act (TSA)

Within months of Sept. 11, President Bush signed the Aviation and Transportation Security Act (TSA), which created the Transportation Security Administration. This year, Bush announced the TSA would fall under his proposed Department of Homeland Security. (White House, 2002)

For the first time, airport security will become a direct federal responsibility, overseen by a new under secretary of transportation for security," said Bush. Additional funds will be provided for federal air marshals. And a new team of federal security managers, supervisors, law enforcement officers and screeners will ensure all passengers and carry on bags are inspected thoroughly. And effectively."

This means that by mid-November 2002, more than 55,000 TSA screeners will be in place at 429 commercial airports in the U.S. Each TSA screener hired will be a meticulously trained U.S. citizen with a high school education and will speak fluent English. By January 1, 2003 all checked luggage will be screened by an Explosives Detection System machine.

The number one requirement of the TSA screeners will be to make sure that aviation security is enforced before passenger board planes.

September 11 Security Fee

As a direct result of the terrorist attacks, the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) implemented a September 11 Security Fee, which applies to all airline tickets sold on or after February 1, 2002, and is $2.50 per flight boarded, with a $5 maximum for one-way travel and $10 for a round trip. (DOT)

The charges apply to domestic and overseas flights originating at U.S. airports. The fee is federally mandated and impacts all airfare.

This fee will help pay for the federal government's costs of providing aviation security services. The funds raised through this September 11 Security Fee will be used for new aviation security measures to help achieve aviation security.

According to the DOT budget office, about $900 million would be raised from this fee in the fiscal year 2002. The funds will go towards passenger and baggage screeners, security managers and law enforcement personnel at airports, as well as other aviation security efforts, such as the purchase of explosive detection systems.

According to the White House, the U.S. government has steadily increased the number of Federal Air Marshals since Sept. 11.

In addition, President Bush has established a federal grant fund to strengthen aircraft security, including a fund of $500 million will be established to finance aircraft modifications that delay or deny access to the cockpit (White House, 2001). Funding will be used for a number of projects, including developing and implementing devices that:

Restrict opening of the cockpit door during flight;

Fortify cockpit doors to deny access from the cabin to the pilots in the cockpit;

Alert the cockpit crew to activity in the cabin; and Ensure continuous operation of the aircraft transponder in the event the crew faces an emergency.

Current Security Flaws

While the federal government's Aviation Security and Transportation Security Act of 2001, includes many strong measures to boost the security of air travelers, including a requirement to screen all checked luggage, aviation studies reveal that at the beginning of 2002, still only 10% of luggage was actually required to be screened for explosives. In addition, the act does not call for airlines to match all checked bags to passengers on board domestic flights.

Therefore, the pressure is on airlines and airports to pick up some of the government's slack regarding aviation security. The airlines have expressed concerns over the cost of bag-matching and further screening, on the grounds that it would cause too many delays.

Jet Blue Takes Security Initiative

Still several airlines, including Jet Blue Airways and Alaska Airline, have already implemented additional security procedures, as a result of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks (Wald, Matthew, 2002). Jet Blue's security enhancements include a bag-matching policy and improved cockpit doors.

Jet Blue has also installed cameras in several of its planes and expects to install them on all planes by next year (Jet Blue). Two cameras are visible, one is outside the cockpit door and a third is at the rear galley. Two additional cameras are hidden.

Jet Blue spent more per door than any other commercial carrier, considerably more than the steel bars that many carriers went with, but Jet Blue's chief pilot says that their style door will stop anything, even a bullet.

Enhanced Security Policies

Prior to Sept. 11, cockpit doors consisted of a paper-thin barrier that was no more than a symbol of security (Sweet, 2002). However, since the terrorist attacks, the federal government has required a major change to keep terrorists away from the flight deck.

The FAA ordered a mandate to strengthen cockpit doors. As a result, all air carriers have installed new and improved cockpit doors.

Thousands of commercial airplanes have installed cockpit doors that feature a variety of designs, ranging from steel bars locked across a traditional door to a fully bulletproof design (Evans, 2002).

The FAA minimum requirement calls for all long-term solutions to be able to withstand a round of shots fired from an AK-47, as well as fragments from an exploding device such as a hand grenade.

In an ethical effort to improve aviation security, many airlines are exceeding FAA requirements to improve flight deck security and reassure travelers that flying is now one of the safest ways to travel.

While each airline is taking a different approach to the problem, most have installed cockpit doors that resemble door bars, and are designed to keep terrorists from entering the cockpit and possibly seizing control of the aircraft.

Ethical Business Standards

Airports must now encourage passengers to allow extra time when traveling, as heightened security measures have increased the time needed to properly screen travelers. Most airports are now recommending two hours prior to a domestic flight and three hours for international departures.

When checking in passengers and at the boarding gate, airlines must insist on seeing a government-issued ID. At the screening point, airport staff must ensure that only ticketed passengers can get past this area. In addition, carry-on luggage must be limited and monitored. All electronic items, including cell phones and laptop computers, must be monitored and screened, in addition to any metal items.

When screening passengers, airport security is required to confiscate the following items: knives; cutting and puncturing instruments; corkscrews; athletic equipment that could be used as a weapon; fireworks or explosives; flammable liquids or solids; matches or lighters; household cleaners; pressure containers; and all weapons and firearms.

All articles loaded on an aircraft, which includes passengers, baggage, catering, mail, and cargo, must be electronically screened. Airports should incorporate full body, highly sophisticated electronic scanning machines.

While not mandatory, airlines should incorporate a policy that requires bag match on all domestic flights, as well as international flights. A variety of critical unsecured situations currently exist in the aviation industry, including procedures regarding bags that are left on board for passengers who miss connecting flights or those do who not remain on their initial flight.

In addition, the Department of Transportation should loosen up tracking and reporting criteria for "on time performance" to make sure that the focus remains on security. As airlines compete to win back customers, security is taking a back seat to "on time" performance. If the DOT tracking of these performance measures is loosened, this will enhance security by enabling airlines to focus solely on security issues.

Immediately following Sept. 11, airlines required domestic crews to conduct security briefings prior to boarding passengers. However, airlines are again overriding this valuable layer of the security net to focus on "on-time" performance.

The TSA is currently only required to review its federal screener program once a year. The aviation industry should take the initiative to constantly review screeners themselves, to prevent screeners from being intimidated, bribed, or not performing well. In addition, increased use of the Federal Air Marshal program should be implemented.

As of now, there is no accurate verification of employment for airline staff. Counterfeit documents and badges are a threat to aviation security. Airlines should invest in a Smart Card system, which will enable them to better track their employees.

Additional ethical business standards for airlines include:

Installation of aircraft cabin video cameras to provide secure access to the cockpit, as hardened doors, without cabin camera surveillance, will only be marginally effective in today's threatened aircraft environment.

Installation of discrete flight attendant cabin to cockpit communication.

Self-defense training for all crewmembers.

Check lavatories, baggage compartments and all cavities for unauthorized people or objects prior to every departure

Make sure a flight crewmember is present at all times when the aircraft is being serviced at locations away from company aviation facility or at home

Use the aircraft's security system (locks and alarms) whenever it is unattended away.

The Next Step

Many airlines and airports have simply addressed the symptoms of security problems rather addressing than the underlying problems (Kidd, 2002). In order to develop and implement higher ethical standards as far as aviation security is concerned, the entire aviation industry must take security to the next level.

This means arming all security and flight personnel with information and deploy systems that identify, authenticate and assess passengers and employees, as well as screen and track bags, cargo and other assets (Dullum, 2002). These systems can be implemented and will compliment federal guidelines, as well as give greater visibility to security personnel. By implementing these business ethics, airlines will improve aviation for everyone involved.

Airlines seem to be concentrating on a variety of things in an effort to get passengers back on their aircraft (Kidd, 2002). However, it is imperative that they do not neglect security in their marketing efforts. Before travelers will return, they must feel that airline security will protect them and see flying as the best way to travel.

However, airlines fear that these enhanced security efforts may result in extended delays and uncertainties among passengers. They are aware that business passengers will not tolerate the loss of productivity and convenience. Instead of flying, they will seek other methods of travel. If the aviation industry allows this to happen, they are displaying unethical behavior towards their shareholders, who have a stake in the economic success of the business.

Therefore, the aviation industry has relied on minimal security enhancements so far, sticking to the minimum requirements mandated by the federal government, including baggage screening and matching and the use of dogs trained to detect contraband. This is effective in keeping illegal or threatening materials from getting onto aircraft.

While these measures are appropriate, they are insufficient (Dullum, 2002). A trained terrorist, who will go so far as to commit suicide, is inherently threatening, even if he does not have a weapon. Therefore, the biggest ethical concern for the aviation industry today should be detecting threatening people as well as threatening materials.

This means that airlines must especially focus on travelers' identification and authentication from check-in through boarding, with risk assessment starting at the point of reservation. These measures will be complimentary to the detection solutions already in place.

One solution has proven effective in accurately identifying passengers. Travelers register for the program either on the Web or at an airport by filling out a brief questionnaire, providing much of information that is typically required when he or she applies for a credit card. A background check is then conducted using commercial, travel and law enforcement data.