When Steve Grammas, head of the Las Vegas police union, received a waiver from the National Football League earlier this month about security changes at Raiders football games, he assumed the tweaks would be minor. 

Then he dug into the 20-page document’s fine print and realized the NFL was ordering police officers to submit to biometric facial scans if they wanted to continue providing security at games. Additionally, he said, officers whose police departments agreed to the waiver would lose control of their biometric data once they signed.

The union leader dug in his heels, and with the support of the local sheriff told the NFL his officers would not submit to the scans — designed for credentialing those with access to secure areas — spurring a tense Friday Zoom meeting with the league’s head of security. 

The spreading rebellion by law enforcement to the NFL’s new league-wide policy requiring all stadium personnel, police and media to submit to biometric facial scans is creating a growing stir. Grammas and a union colleague have now heard from other alarmed police and union officials whose officers work security at NFL games in five states, he said. 

While Wicket, the tech company facilitating the scans, describes its technology as categorically opt-in only, the reality is that workers and members of the press who opt-out will likely be opting themselves out of a job.

Many NFL, Major League Baseball and professional tennis and golf associations already use Wicket technology to scan fans' faces to speed entry into stadiums and other sports venues. 

While the NFL’s league-wide deal with Wicket is limited to credentialing personnel and media, a handful of the league’s 32 teams already elect to use the face scans on fans.

At least one NFL franchise has even extended their use of the technology to concessions in a bid to reduce lines. 

Grammas is unmoved by the widespread adoption of the facial recognition technology, which Wicket’s website says enables “sensational event experiences for fans, guests, and employees with facial authentication touchpoints that delight users and strengthen security.”

“We are a hard no because our officers do not need to be treated like a popcorn vendor or a groupie fan that wants to meet Maxx Crosby [a star Raiders’ defensive end] on the football field,” Grammas said. “They're there to do a job. They’re professionals.”

The football league’s waiver for law enforcement includes terms stating that officers’ facial scans can be shared with third parties such as vendors, that teams retain rights to the data for three years and that the NFL is protected from liability in the event of data breaches, Grammas said.

A tool with many fans

Despite growing controversy among privacy advocates and some fans and workers who object to the scans, Wicket’s customer base is exploding. 

The company, founded in 2020, has nearly 60 clients, according to Wicket Chief Operating Officer Jeff Boehm.

Not all of them are willing to be publicly named, but Boehm said he could reveal that professional sports teams using what the company calls its “facial authentication platform” include the Los Angeles Rams, the Atlanta Falcons, the Tennessee Titans, the New York Mets and the Carolina Panthers. The National Collegiate Athletics Association’s Southeastern Conference is also a client, Boehm said. 

Most teams use the technology for fan-facing applications such as stadium entry ticket processing, he added.

“Credential holders simply take a selfie before they come, and then Wicket verifies their identity [with the scans] and checks their credentials with Accredit (a credentialing platform) as they walk through security checkpoints,” Boehm said in a late July LinkedIn post explaining the system.

Biometric data captured by Wicket typically belongs to sports teams and associations, as well as other clients like Salesforce, to share and sell indefinitely once the scans have been completed, according to Boehm. 

Cops fight back

So far, Grammas is winning his fight with the NFL. Las Vegas officers have not allowed the scans in the pre-season and continue to wear the wristbands they always have used to indicate they are allowed to enter sensitive areas. 

The NFL did not respond to multiple requests for comment, but issued a widely-reported statement saying that it recognizes the importance of its “public safety partners and appreciate their efforts to ensure a safe gameday environment.” 

The statement added that the league had “productive conversations” with Las Vegas union and police officials about what it described as its “modernized, secure credentialing system for all working staff.”

“The credentialing system will enhance security at our stadiums, and we look forward to working with all stakeholders to address any questions or concerns raised,” the statement said.

Boehm referred questions about law enforcement’s resistance to the technology to the NFL, but said “venues find [credentialing with facial scans] to be a much more secure and convenient way to ensure they have full accountability for who enters restricted areas, avoiding well-documented and publicized cases of individuals sharing, stealing, or forging credentials to gain unauthorized access.”

But concerns about the credentialing system are being raised outside of Las Vegas, too. Union officials in Massachusetts, New Jersey, Florida and Colorado who believe the police agencies whose officers they represent have already signed the NFL waiver are now trying to unwind the agreements and have called Grammas and a union colleague for advice, Grammas said. 

A police sergeant in Houston also called Grammas because he had been charged with investigating the waiver and reporting back to a department captain, Grammas added.

Ultimately, there’s no need to scan officers’ faces, Grammas said, pointing out that police officers already submit to substantial background checks and are managed at games by department supervisors who verify their identity at the outset. 

“We don't need to give up biometric data to protect the President of the United States when they come to our city, but you guys do [require it],” Grammas said he told NFL officials during the Friday meeting. 

He said when he asked for an explanation he received a response he found unsatisfying.

“All they could tell me was ‘we've been working on this for three and a half years, we believe it's best practice, and it brings us into a more current state of security for the facilities,’” he said.