Why wasn't I surprised to read this? Maybe because the events weren't new. In fact, security training programs in general have been run haphazardly for a long time. This has been the case for a number of reasons, as far as I can discern. A rush to fill positions. This kind of demand is probably the major underlining cause of poorly and/or negligently trained security personnel. This is a reaon in the baggage screener scenario, and has been true for many contract security requirements, where security training organizations have been subtley requested to "short-cut training" and get the applicants cerified so that work can proceed. It was not uncommon to find security training schools paid by government grants, such as the Pell program, having trainees doing all kinds of work other than receiveing training as security perosnnel, just to fill out the class time requirements. Security training schools have been known to accept deals wherein the received payment for cetrifying trainees without the trainees ever attending class. All this led to was fines, retraining of personnel by legitimate training schools, and criminal prosecution for those involved. Which all goes to the point that when it comes to training security personnel, two important facts have to be taken into consideration: Planning and scheduling must be done early enough so that there is no need to attempt to shortcut the program, and Training sessions have to be monitored by representatives of the client organization In addition, task knowledge checking must be done to ensure the continuing effective performance of security personnel, particluarly in positions of high sensitivity, such as baggage screeners.
It is also important to realize that a good, solid, knowlegeable training program produces securlty personnel who reflect that description, as well as security personnel who can and will take pride in what they are doing.