but EVERYONE CAN IDENTIFY THE AIR MARSHALLS...why?
MORE STUPIDITY OF SUPERVISORS.....
you think THEY'D LEARN!!
Dress Code May Hinder Their Work, Air Marshals Say
July 17, 2004
By BRIAN WINGFIELD
WASHINGTON, July 16 - Beards are out. So are jeans and
athletic shoes. Suit coats are in, even on the steamiest
summer days.
That dress code, imposed by the Department of Homeland
Security, makes federal air marshals uneasy - and not just
because casual clothes are more comfortable in cramped
airline seats. The marshals fear that their appearance
makes it easier for terrorists to identify them, according
to a professional group representing more than 1,300 air
marshals.
"If a 12-year-old can pick them out, a trained terrorist
has no problem picking them out," said John D. Amat, a
spokesman for the group, the Federal Law Enforcement
Officers Association.
Documents and memorandums issued by the Department of
Homeland Security and field offices of the Federal Air
Marshal Service say air marshals must "present a
professional image" and "blend unnoticed into their
environment." Some air marshals have argued that the two
requirements are contradictory.
Federal air marshals must have neatly trimmed hair and men
must be clean-shaven, the documents say. Some of the
service's 21 field offices have mandated that male officers
wear suits, ties and dress shoes while on duty, even in
summer heat. Women are required to wear blouses and skirts
or dress slacks. Jeans, athletic shoes and noncollared
shirts are prohibited.
In April, the officers' group sent a letter to members of
Congress saying that the "military-style grooming standards
and a blanket 'sports coat' dress policy," along with
conspicuous boarding procedures, jeopardize the safety of
air marshals.
At least two airline industry unions, the Allied Pilots
Association and the Association of Flight Attendants, have
publicly backed the assertions of the officers' group.
A spokeswoman for Senator Herb Kohl, Democrat of Wisconsin,
said that he became aware of the issue when The Milwaukee
Journal Sentinel contacted his office after one of its
reporters spotted several air marshals in the Milwaukee
airport. The spokeswoman, Lynn Becker, said that the
senator was working with the director of the Federal Air
Marshal Service, Thomas D. Quinn, primarily to address the
boarding procedures, but that they were also discussing the
dress code issue.
Since May, the Air Marshal Service has changed the check-in
procedure for its air marshals, no longer requiring them to
sign a logbook when they board.
The Federal Air Marshal Service acknowledges that a dress
code for its marshals does exist, but it will not give many
specifics, saying that it is "security sensitive
information."
However, Dave Adams, a spokesman for the service, said,
"There is nothing in the policy that says we have to wear a
suit and tie" and "there is nothing in the policy that
places our federal air marshals at risk."
Mr. Adams said that the Federal Law Enforcement Officers
Association "is misrepresenting our dress code policy." Mr.
Adams said a dress code was put in place in April 2002
after the airline industry complained that air marshals'
attire was too casual. He said some marshals had worn
shorts, blue jeans, sandals and T-shirts while on duty.
"In order to gain respect in a situation, you must be
attired to gain respect," Mr. Adams said in an interview.
He said if air marshals were allowed to be too casual in
their dress, "they probably would not gain the respect of
passengers if a situation were to occur."
Andrea Houck, 52, who was traveling through New York's John
F. Kennedy International Airport this week, said that she
thought federal air marshals should be "totally
undercover."
"Look around you," Ms. Houck said as she pointed to other
passengers waiting in the food court. "Most people are
traveling in T-shirts, sweatshirts and khakis." She added:
"If I was a terrorist and I spotted someone dressed like an
air marshal in a suit, I wouldn't get on that flight. I
would get on another one."
Eddy Ramírez contributed reporting from New York for this
article.
nytimes.com |
