The Transportation Security Administration is launching two experiments designed to lean on private contractors for airport security after recent government shutdowns snarled lines across the country. One trial, TSA Gold+, would shift day-to-day security opera
For the first time in months. the uncertainty has a shape: TSA is testing ways to move parts of airport security off the government’s plate and onto private contractors. The pressure behind the plan is not abstract. Two recent government shutdowns left federal TSA officers working without pay. and the result was visible across terminals—thinner staffing. demoralized workers. and security lines that stretched for hours.
The Transportation Security Administration is now rethinking how day-to-day airport screening runs, and it has picked two different paths to get there.
One initiative, called TSA Gold+, is designed to shift day-to-day security operations to private contractors without increasing airport costs. The TSA wants this model to become a broader reality, not just a localized exception.
Another trial begins in June in Boston. giving some passengers the option to clear security roughly 25 miles away and then ride a bus to the airport for a fee. Massachusetts Port Authority data says checked bags would be stored underneath the bus while passengers keep carry-ons and personal items with them. The bus would be secured by the transport company Landline for the often over one-hour drive—long enough that timing could make or break a trip.
This isn’t a brand-new direction for the Trump Administration. Privatization of aviation systems has been a campaign promise, with President Donald Trump saying he believes fully privatizing them while maintaining government oversight would save money, improve efficiency, and enhance safety.
The United States has already experimented with privatization through the TSA’s Screening Partnership Program. Under that approach, contracted security officials screen passengers and baggage at 20 airports, including San Francisco and Kansas City, along with several smaller regional airports.
The shutdowns earlier that experience: in late 2025 and early 2026. thousands of federal TSA officers worked without pay during two government shutdowns after Congress failed to reach funding deals. Staffing thinned as demoralized workers called out or quit, stretching security lines for hours with little to no notice. San Francisco’s private security saw minimal disruptions.
That contrast is part of why officials see private contractors as a potential stabilizer when the federal system falters.
Still. opponents argue privatizing airport security could come with a cost that travelers won’t necessarily see until later—loss of thousands of TSA jobs. lower pay. weakened worker protections. increased turnover. and pressure on contractors to prioritize profits over safety. The TSA employs roughly 50,000 security officers who start at about $40,000 annually. Average pay ranges from $60,000 to $75,000, with higher-cost-of-living cities paying more. Experienced TSOs with years on the job and strong performance can advance into analytical and supervisory roles that make six figures.
The Boston bus plan takes the privatization idea further by outsourcing not the screening decision, but the journey itself.
For now, the experiment is limited to Delta and JetBlue passengers. It is available only for flights between 5:30 am and 4 pm. The bus costs $9 per adult, while children 17 and under are free. Depending on traffic, the ride can take 20 minutes to over an hour.
Even though TSA officers would still conduct screening, Landline would handle the trip to the airport. If the Gold+ approach succeeds as officials expect, it could open the door to more remote screening setups paired with private shuttle buses.
Sheldon Jacobson. a computer science professor at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign who helped regulators develop TSA PreCheck. said privatization can work “so long as the standards for [private] employees are well-defined and the training is rigorous.” He added that the model “all sounds good. with TSA setting the standards and airports implementing them. If the lessons learned are widely shared, there can be some benefits.”.
But Jacobson also raised a separate problem with the Boston pilot: it depends on security procedures happening outside the airport itself. on public roads that introduce variables TSA can’t fully control. A Landline spokesperson said the company “meets the high security standards set by TSA and DHS.” The TSA said there will be a “multi-layered screening of passengers.”.
For Jacobson, the concern isn’t theoretical. A bus accident or a sick passenger could compromise security and require a rescreening—meaning travelers might miss their flight. “I don’t see the motivation in terms of convenience; people still have to park at the remote terminal. clear TSA. and get on a bus. ” Jacobson said. “The question is, will this now be a weak spot?”.
Underneath all the engineering details is the same story line: after shutdowns repeatedly disrupted federal staffing, TSA is trying to prevent future chaos by changing who does what—contractors for day-to-day operations under Gold+, and contractors for the trip itself under the Boston test.
The stakes are immediate for travelers and long-term for the workforce. The shutdowns showed how quickly inconvenience can become severe when staffing collapses. Now TSA is betting that private involvement can keep security functioning smoothly—even if that means redefining the boundaries of what “security” looks like when it extends beyond the terminal gates.
Even the most structured plan still has to survive real-world timing, and critics say the Boston model puts pressure on just that—an outside-the-airport environment where TSA’s routines may not be able to fully hold.
TSA airport security privatization TSA Gold+ Screening Partnership Program government shutdowns Landline Boston airport pilot Delta JetBlue TSA PreCheck airline security contractors