Should Non-flyers have Access into Secure Airport Areas?
|Courtesy: On Call International Blog|
What do you think? Should non-flyers--restricted from access since 9/11 terrorist attacks--now be permitted access to secure concourses and concessions? If so, should these non-flyers have to pay a fee to be cleared through TSA Security?
Aunt Mildred would certainly be delighted to have several nephews and nieces there to meet her as she emerges from the jetway. Certainly, the concessionaires would be pleased to serve the nephews and nieces some food, or sell them apparel, books, souvenirs, etc. as they wait for their aunt's arrival. Airport parking lots would see increased revenue from their short-term parking as well. Creative airport concessionaire could offer to validate a non-flyers short term parking ticket, allowing an hour or two of complimentary parking--if the non-flyer purchases a certain dollar minimum.
Pittsburgh's airport is trying such a procedure. Pittsburgh Post Gazette-28 AUG 2017 Airmall Article
Pittsburgh's airport lost its hub status to Philadelphia when U.S. Air merged into American Airlines, just as Cincinnati's airport lost its to Detroit when Northwest merged into Delta. Both have become what is termed 'origin-destination' airports in airline parlance. No longer must they accommodate massive numbers of connection passengers, scurrying from one gate to another, during scheduled surge periods.
I personally think hub airports should forbid non-flyer access. It's just too darn crowded during the surge periods to have non-flyers slowing down connecting passengers. Not to mention if you think TSA lines are long now, just think how long they will be with non-flyers having to clear security.
As for the origin-destination airports, I think each airport should decide for themselves. Cultural aspects may come into play. For example, folks deplaning in Jackson, Mississippi may be more patient waiting for Aunt Mildred and her greeters to clear the gate area, than those, say, in White Plains New York.