The TSA Is Quietly Planning to Privatize Airport Security
The union representing 47,000 TSA officers just sued the agency — not over wages or working conditions, but because TSA won't tell them what it's planning to do with their jobs.
The American Federation of Government Employees filed the lawsuit August 5 in Washington DC federal court, alleging TSA has been secretly developing a program called Gold+ that would hand airport security screening over to private contractors — and did so without telling workers, Congress, airport authorities, or the traveling public.
"TSA has been keeping everyone in the dark about its privatization plans," said AFGE National President Everett Kelley.
The union says it found out about Gold+ by accident. When it filed a Freedom of Information Act request in May seeking details, TSA missed its legal deadline to respond, indicated it would charge a $25 processing fee, and kept moving forward with the program anyway. The lawsuit is asking a court to force the release of those records.
What Gold+ Actually Is
Gold+ is TSA's description of the "next evolution" of its existing Screening Partnership Program — a program that already allows about 20 airports to use private contractors for security screening instead of federal officers. Under Gold+, private companies would handle not just the workforce but also the machines and technology used to scan passengers and baggage at checkpoints.
The federal government has made close to $13 billion available for the program. Tech giants and defense contractors are already circling — Palantir, Amazon Web Services, and Leidos were among the companies that attended a TSA industry event in May. The agency expects to begin awarding contracts in the fourth quarter of fiscal 2026.
Three airports have already signed up: Charleston International in South Carolina, Tampa International in Florida, and Des Moines International in Iowa. Tampa announced to its TSA workers on July 20 that their jobs would be privatized. Contractors are expected to be selected by September and screening fully privatized by next May.
Workers at Des Moines found out the same day — July 20 — that their employment situation was changing. The union found out around the same time, through unofficial channels.
The Bigger Plan Behind It
Gold+ is just part of a broader push. The Trump administration has also proposed dramatically expanding the existing Screening Partnership Program — currently at 20 airports — to cover all small and non-hub airports, which would push the number to roughly 220. The proposed fiscal year 2027 budget would also cut 8,400 TSA officer positions and replace only about half of them with contracted workers.
That math means fewer federal workers protecting airports — and private companies filling the gap with workers who generally earn lower wages, have fewer protections, and operate under different accountability structures than federal employees.
"I don't think it's any sort of surprise that a union and AFGE would be concerned about the privatization of federal jobs," said AFGE General Counsel Rushab Sanghvi. "We think it's wrong."
TSA, for its part, describes Gold+ as a program that "encourages private investment, accelerates technological innovation, and enhances the passenger experience while maintaining the highest levels of security." The agency pointed to the 75-day government shutdown earlier this year — during which 61,000 TSA officers worked without pay and lines at airports stretched for hours — as evidence that the current model leaves security vulnerable to federal budget politics.
Does Private Screening Actually Work?
It already exists — and the record is mixed enough that reasonable people disagree about it.
San Francisco International Airport has used private screening contractors since TSA was created after 9/11, making it the longest-running example in the country. Studies comparing SFO's private screeners to TSA at comparable airports have found similar performance on standard security metrics. Proponents argue private contractors can be more flexible, invest faster in new technology, and aren't subject to federal hiring freezes.
Critics point out that private screeners earn less, turn over faster, and that lower wage workers in high-stress security roles create consistency problems. They also argue that accountability is clearer with a federal agency than with a patchwork of contractors operating under different contracts at different airports.
The union's core argument is that none of this was supposed to happen in secret — and whatever you think of privatization, the workers whose jobs are on the line and the public whose safety depends on airport screening deserve to know what's being planned before contracts get signed.
The lawsuit is asking the court to make TSA show its work. Awards are expected before the end of the year.
Curious for more stories that keep you informed and entertained? From the latest headlines to everyday insights, YourLifeBuzz has more to explore. Dive into what’s next.