Most travelers probably don’t think too much about the federal Transportation Security Administration (TSA) officers staffing their airport security checkpoint. So they may not know that at a small but notable number of U.S. airports, the person checking their bag or sending them through a scanner may work for a private company.
Earlier this year, the TSA appeared ready to expand that model significantly.
Its proposed TSA Gold+ program would have allowed private contractors to take on not only passenger and baggage screening but also a much larger role in providing, maintaining, and updating the technology used at checkpoints. Tampa International Airport (TPA), Charleston International Airport (CHS), and Des Moines International Airport (DSM) all agreed to explore the program.
Then, three months later, the agency pulled the plug. On August 24, TSA Administrator David Cummins announced that the agency would discontinue Gold+ and instead pursue an “evolved” version of its existing Screening Partnership Program that already places private screeners at 20 U.S. airports. The decision is part of the TSA’s larger Horizon 25 Strategy for the agency’s next 25 years of operations.
For travelers, very little changes immediately, as Gold+ had not yet gone live. But its short life offers a glimpse at a much larger debate underway within TSA about how to modernize airport security, make checkpoint operations more resilient during government shutdowns, and decide how much of that work should be handled by private companies.
What TSA’s Gold+ Program intended to achieve
Under TSA’s Screening Partnership Program, airports can apply to use privately employed screeners instead of federal TSA officers. Those workers still follow TSA procedures and operate under federal oversight, but their paychecks come from private contractors. Airports including San Francisco International Airport (SFO) and Kansas City International Airport (MCI) already work under this model.
Gold+ would have considerably increased private companies’ responsibility for the technology behind the checkpoint, including acquiring, operating, and maintaining screening equipment. That was part of the program’s appeal: Airport security technology can be expensive and slow to roll out through the federal procurement process; supporters of Gold+ argued that private companies could potentially move faster.
The case for expanding private screening gained new urgency after recent government shutdowns exposed another vulnerability in all-TSA staff. Federal TSA officers are considered essential employees and can be required to work even when their paychecks stop. At some airports, many federally employed TSA workers walked off the job during prolonged shutdowns, which led to staffing shortages and lengthy security waits. Private screeners continued to receive pay through their contractors and thus continued to show up for work, contributing to fewer backlogs at airports that don’t rely on federal TSA agents.
Gold+ was pitched, in part, as a way to address both problems: Accelerate technology upgrades and make checkpoint staffing less vulnerable to federal funding fights.
Why Gold+ was canceled
TSA has not said specifically why it abandoned Gold+. The program was still being scrutinized by airports and TSA employees when Cummins took over the agency in August. Tampa International Airport, one of the airports considering Gold+, said it needed to work through security, workforce, technology, financial, and legal issues before deciding whether to participate—and ultimately decided not to proceed.
Gold+ also faced resistance from TSA employees and the unions that represent them. The American Federation of Government Employees, which represents tens of thousands of TSA officers, opposed the program and sued the agency in August, seeking records about how Gold+ had been conceived, developed, and implemented.
Meanwhile, Airlines for America, which represents the major U.S. carriers, opposed a separate White House proposal to require some smaller airports to use private screeners, arguing that airports should be able to decide whether privatization makes sense for their operations.
What happens now
What TSA has not yet explained is what an “evolved” Screening Partnership Program will look like—particularly whether contractors could take on some of the Gold+ program’s technology responsibilities and how, if at all, the existing SPP model would change.
Those questions come at a significant moment for the agency. TSA was created in November 2001 after the September 11 terrorist attacks, and one of its defining early moves was bringing airport screening (which had largely relied on private contractors) under federal control.
Nearly 25 years later, the government is again reconsidering where to draw that line.
That doesn’t mean returning to the pre-9/11 system: TSA still sets security standards and oversees screening even at airports using private contractors. However, the brief rise and quick demise of Gold+ suggests that the structure of airport security is not set in stone.
For travelers, little changes at the checkpoint for now. Gold+ is gone, but the debate over who staffs, equips, and operates those checkpoints is not.
