While commuting on an airline other than the one I work for, I had the chance to chat with a very seasoned traveler. He was flying on this airline by chance (not his normal carrier).

When our discussion turned to airline related development, he became animated and quite agitated.

“Today, people are just plain savages!” he exclaimed. “People just don’t know what they are doing anymore and they will step on anyone to get what they want and to hell with all the rest…”

I chuckled to myself because I knew exactly what he meant and how he felt. I truly empathize with the frequent business travelers out there who know how the system works and knows first-hand that most of us front line airline staff are truly powerless to get things to change…at least most of the time.  If I wasn’t an airline employee (but could have the knowledge that I have gained over the years as one) I would never choose a career where I had to fly most of the time, unless I was privy to a private jet.

What seemed to anger this man the most was a serious lack of manners that he perceived had infected the public at large. As the baby boomers age, and the X and Y generations move into young adulthood, many educators have noted a shift in moral standards and values; tied to an ever-increasing exposure to violence, raw language and less exposure to parental authority, this up-and-coming generation has shown a true lack of respect for authority, or for their fellow human beings.

These observations have not gone unnoticed among those of us in the service and hospitality industries. Much of what we witness is frustration over many things that are simply out of the control of the person trying to correct the issue(s) at hand.

It seems clear that the reputation that the airlines have isn’t going to vanish anytime soon.  Of the six major airlines in the USA today, three are still trying to sort things out from recent mergers.  U.S. Airways merged with America West Airlines more than six years ago and they still haven’t worked out all the kinks that are needed in finalizing such a large transaction.

In the interim, how the airline customer perceives the airline employee adds a lot of negativity that passengers have felt about airline travel altogether.   But the most plain of observations is how airline passengers treat each other that have seemingly degraded the quickest.  Tempers are high and an air of “I’m only looking out for myself” tends to win out over helping a complete stranger out when they appear helpless.

Many “important” businessmen and women struggle to be first on-board their flights, jockeying for position of luggage space; some wouldn’t hesitate to run over another just to be first or have the best advantage.  I have seen it happen with my own eyes more than a few times!  Sometimes it’s comical – it reminds me of a “Keystone Cops” episode!  And I have had to act as referee more than a few times when these people start arguing over bin space, or leg room or a seat duplication…it can get pretty involved at times, but it’s certainly not the end of the world either!

In the grand scheme of things, these airline mergers will eventually be ironed out, and employees will once again beam with pride to work for their respective carriers.  Airline travelers will always have high demands and high expectations.  It’s how we choose to treat one another that can make or break a trip altogether.

As an experiment, I recently traveled across country in “civilian” attire; the only people on the plane who knew I was an airline person were the crew.  I did not have my badge draped on my neck nor my “CREW” tags hanging from my luggage.  During the boarding process, I found myself helping other passengers get bags arranged in the overhead bins, said “please” and “thank you” out loud with a smile and generally helped get folks settled in.  I laughed when one elderly person suggested that I should go to work for the airlines, I was so nice.

In general, the experiment showed two things happened.  First, the general attitudes of the people around me tended to lighten.  Second, I noticed that others started getting into the act, helping their fellow passengers get settled, arrange luggage and answer questions.  Before you knew it, a completely full airplane was boarded, settled and for the most part happy to be underway.  The flight was pleasant and concluded without incident.

Now, I’m not suggesting that every single flight would go without a hitch, but the great variable “unknown” was in play here because I never notified anyone of what I was doing and this flight was as random as any flight I might work as a reserve flight attendant.  It could have been any flight to any destination, and I believe that I would have gotten a similar response.

As a professional, I truly believe that, as a society in general, we should all strive to return to the days when we were civil to one another.  Dust off our books of etiquette and treat others with respect, dignity and how we’d want others to treat us…you know, that “Golden Rule” thing.

I challenge you to try this yourself and see what happens.  You may be pleasantly surprised to the outcome, AND enjoy the process itself at the same time!

Image courtesy Broadway Video & NBC

In my personal opinion, Alec Baldwin is a narcissistic blow hard.

There…I said it! And I make no apologies about that opinion.

I have been a casual fan of Baldwin’s work for years. I have enjoyed some of the things he’s done; others, not so much. In the grand scheme of things, I (and I believe all of us) need to remember one important distinction: he’s an actor! He’s not a rocket scientist, nor an important political leader, nor a distinguished medical expert. In the grand scheme of things, he hasn’t done anything that I would consider to be of great value to the sustenance or betterment of the human race.

I am a flight attendant. I have no delusions of grandeur when it comes to my place in society, nor my importance to the public. I do know my place and I understand the responsibilities that my job requires of me. First and foremost, I am a safety professional on board an aircraft. My authority as such stands directly beneath the Captain’s authority aboard the aircraft I am flying on. Since the Captain cannot attend to the activities behind him and the cockpit door, the onus of keeping order and peace falls upon the shoulders of the flight attendants.

In this day and age, the public has become more and more callous towards the flight attendant profession. While the majority of our time is spent smiling, assisting and serving beverages and meals, in the public’s mind, flight attendants are nothing more than the stewardesses they see on the ABC series ‘Pan Am,’ or the ditzy bimbos portrayed in movies like “A View from the Top.” They understand less and less about our primary function – to protect the safety of the plane and the passengers aboard it. During emergencies, it is the flight attendants who coordinate, organize and take charge of evacuations, medical emergencies and other disruptions. Our job is to maintain order. Chaos on board a flight is unacceptable and rarely tolerated.

When things get out of hand at 35,000 feet, because the cockpit door must remain closed and secure in-flight, the highest level of authority (with direction from the Captain) comes from the flight attendants. So physical and verbal abuse is taken at face value and dealt with severely on the ground when the airplane arrives at the airport. Any passenger who cannot control their actions aboard a flight faces real, severe penalties in the form of charges of interfering with a flight crew or a flight attendant, as set forth in Title 49 of the United States Code: “The statute applies to any “individual on an aircraft in the special aircraft jurisdiction of the United States who, by assaulting or intimidating a flight crew member or flight attendant of the aircraft, interferes with the performance of the duties of the member or attendant or lessens the ability of the member or attendant to perform those duties.” The statute provides for up to 20 years imprisonment, and further provides for imprisonment for any term of years or life if a dangerous weapon is used. Interference with a flight crew member or attendant is a general intent crime, and does not require a specific intent either to intimidate the flight crew member or attendant or to interfere with the performance of his or her duties.” [1]

Although this incident with Baldwin took place while the aircraft was on the ground, at the gate, the statute still applies. In this case, it has been argued publically that the flight attendant overreacted and that the penalty was too severe for the “crime” Baldwin was accused of. I disagree.

Flight attendants, in general, have a gauge by which we determine a passenger’s level of cooperation. If, while at the gate or on the ground, a passenger is unwilling to comply with a request or direct order from a crew member there, chances are pretty strong that they’d be as unwilling to comply at 35,000 feet, when things are more critical, and access to assistance from law enforcement is minimal, at best.

The fact that Baldwin continues to belittle the flight attendant and minimize his infraction on Twitter and on Saturday Night Live, thus stirring up public resentment toward flight attendants in general is unconscionable. Baldwin is no expert authority on air safety rules and regulations.

So why does the public continue to entertain his tirade? Because in today’s world, we have elevated celebrities to a level that somehow equates to leaders or experts or gurus. We look up to them…people who should be respected, admired and their opinions should carry more weight than the average “Joe.” They have become the equivalent of royalty and we treat them as such. We give them a pass on most everything, from drug abuse and infidelity to even more insidious and serious crimes.

This issue is far from over. The more conditioned the public becomes in disrespecting the direction of flight attendants on board aircraft, the less able we flight attendants will be able to maintain order during flight.

I believe it is time for the FAA and the airlines in general, to step up and clarify to the public the necessity to heed the authority of flight crews while flying. I applaud American Airlines’ decision to publicy defend and uphold the crew members who were involved in this case, and to rebuke and reject Baldwin’s behavior. But most of the time, airline companies more often than not become apologetic and simply reward bad behavior by accomodating the offending party with another flight, upgrades or additional mileage in their accounts. I’ve seen it happen. Thus the public gets the notion that if they act up when they don’t get their way, their perception is that they will get rewarded. This sort of compensation for their lack of cooperation must end.

Until then, there will continue to be more and more public incidents of celebrities and non-celebrities alike being removed from flights for disruptive behavior and the media will continue to make a spectacle of it all. It’s not acceptable, and the public should be outraged at the actor, not the safety professional trying to do their job!

—————————————

[1] United States Attorney’s Manual, U.S. Code, Title 49, Section 9-63.110, http://1.usa.gov/sP1XMk, revised August 1999.

2011 has been a turbulent year in the airline industry, especially overseas.  Just in the past couple of months, Air France and Qantas have been hit by labor disruptions.  For the unprepared, this could spell disaster on top of disaster if you aren’t keenly aware of what your rights are when it comes to rebooking or getting reimbursed for your paid tickets.

Here are some helpful points to consider…

Every airline has what they call their “Contract of Carriage,” which is the basic contract that every passenger agrees to abide by when they purchase their ticket.  “What contract?” you may ask?  Well, believe it or not, just as with most anything these days, we are subject to the rules, regulations and restrictions that a business will abide by, should all hell break loose.  We usually don’t give it a second thought because most of us can’t be bothered with the details.  It’s like that long list of legalese that we skip through and click “Accept” automatically when you install a piece of software on your computer: you have the chance to read it, understand it and decide whether or not you are willing you “accept” the terms of the agreement or not.  Most of us (me included) never take the time to understand these contracts, and just impatiently tap the “Accept” button on the screen and move on with our lives.

It is the same when purchasing airline tickets.

Most airlines these days will consider a job action against the carrier as a Force Majeure event, thereby releasing themselves from any further responsibility to handle a customer’s need to rebook or be reimbursed for the loss of their ticket.  Having said that, as a high-profile consumer business, most carriers will try to work things out with you, try to get you rebooked, or refund the price of your ticket to you – but understand that they are under NO OBLIGATION to do so!  They will most likely do it in order to avoid any further “bad press” since they will likely lose future business for a time long after the strike is over.

During the strike, things will be quite dicey, to say the least.  Phone reservation agents and ticket counter customer service personnel will be stretched to beyond capacity, and no doubt hold times on the phone and extraordinarily long lines at the airport will be the norm.  Personally, as a high-mileage frequent flier, I would strongly urge people to reestablish a personal relationship with a trusted travel agent (yes they do still exist!) because they have connections that the average traveler simply doesn’t have and they are in the business of handling all sorts of issues, including getting you rebooked or restored financially if a strike were to occur.

For those who choose to do things for themselves, your options are somewhat limited.  It’s important to read all press releases that the air carrier publishes regarding the situation.  Get subscribed to their Twitter feeds, “Like” their Facebook pages, and if you are a frequent mileage member of the airlines, know the contact information (toll-free numbers, email addresses, etc.) to stay up-to-date about what to do when your travel plans are disrupted by the strike.

While the air carriers in the U.S. are now subject to the Passengers Bill of Rights Act, foreign carriers have no such restrictions and trying to be reimbursed or re-accommodated on one of these airlines can be very tricky.  Utilize the same tools as you would with a U.S. airline.  Plus, many foreign carriers have travel offices in the major U.S. cities so make sure not to forget this option.

There may also be a small silver lining to an airline that has been through a labor dispute.  Immediately following the end of a strike, an airline may drastically reduce their airfares in order to get back the business they lost.  Chances are that you may find some stellar travel deals on a recently grounded carrier.  As always, use caution and stay informed regarding the airline’s financial stability.  Most foreign carriers receive some sort of governmental subsidy, especially if it’s the only airline representing that country.  National carriers are less likely to flounder than a “free enterprise” airline, so keep this in mind.

Lastly, understand that an airline that is experiencing a labor action against it has very few obligations to help you out while it tries to iron out its troubles with their unions.  Check with other airlines that may honor your paid ticket or give you credit for your ticket towards a ticket on their carrier.  Sometimes, airlines have back-room agreements with competitors to handle each other’s passengers in times of trouble, but these are rarely made public knowledge.  It never hurts to ask or try to rebook.  Give it a shot, if you find yourself in this sticky mess.

Above all, take a moment to read your airline’s “Contract of Carriage” carefully.  Many times, it will spell out what you can and cannot do or expect the airline to do for you in these situations.  The more knowledge that you arm yourself with, the more “mileage” you may get when the airline is floundering!

I was witness to an increasingly unfortunate situation as I commuted home the other day – one that hits closer to home than most people may realize.

As I waited in the gate area of my flight home, the gate agent made the announcement that boarding would begin shortly, as soon as the less able passengers who were ticketed on this flight were accommodated onboard and situated. On this particular flight, there were nine wheelchairs waiting for boarding, one that was an electric wheelchair, which clearly meant that a little more time would be necessary to board this individual using the airline’s aisle chair on the plane.

While waiting in the boarding area, and quietly listening in on various conversations going on around me, I overheard a couple near me vocally protesting the extra accommodation by the airline and they were clearly upset that the extra time needed would cause them to arrive late to catch a connecting flight down the line. As they continued, a few people within earshot chimed in as well, all offering their own opinions about how the disabled and physically challenged passengers should be handled, one even going so far as to suggest that they should be restricted to certain aircraft types or even find themselves another method of travel. I was silently shocked at this conversation and began to wonder if these people were just unsympathetic idiots, or if this opinion was beginning to find traction among airline passengers in general.

Clearly, most of us are tolerant of the special needs of those less fortunate in physical abilities – in virtually every aspect of our daily interactions. We gladly make way for them, and are glad to be of service when they ask. While there are some cultural anomalies in this world that look down upon the disabled and handicapped, in the United States we seem to have evolved far enough to warrant added patience and we find ourselves wanting to help those who require a bit more human touch than most. But as I observed here, there was definitely a different feeling brewing in this gate area.

In 1986, the United States Congress passed the “Air Carrier Access Act” which spelled out specific requirements the airlines must follow regarding the handling of disabled passengers, which in many ways mirrors the “Americans with Disabilities Act” to protect these passengers from blatant negligence or unintentional neglect from the airline carriers. Over the years, there have been many changes to this law, many of which went into effect in May 2009. You can find a complete list of these changes, along with the requirements for special accommodation by the airlines at the U.S. Department of Transportation’s “Civil Rights” page regarding passengers with disabilities.[1]

A recent survey by the Scope Foundation, a charity that supports disabled people and their families, revealed that over 47% of disabled people faced some sort of discrimination while traveling. Of that number, 15% claimed they faced “high-level” abuse.  And the Commission on Equality and Human Rights (CEHR), who later this fall, will be publishing a report on violence towards those with disabilities while traveling, says that travel is one of the “hot spots for violence and harassment targeted at disabled people.”[2]

The airlines have had their share of mishaps regarding physically and mentally challenged travelers, and have paid huge penalties for not being proactive enough.  In Feb. 2011, Delta Airlines was slapped with a $2 million fine by the DOT for violating 14CFR, especially after it had been investigated four years earlier for similar violations and no improvements had been determined.[3] The DOT also fined Atlantic Southeast Airlines $200,000 in June 2011 for similar violations.[4]

Thankfully, with the assistance of watchdog groups such as Scope and CEHR, airlines have been forced to devote some of their resources to make sure this sector of the public is not only seen, but also treated with respect and dignity when they travel.  As much as it excites me that progress has been made in this area, it’s frustrating to see the backlash (especially first hand) from the public at large when it comes to the handicapped.

With more people flying than ever before, and airlines facing huge push-back from travelers who feel they are being gouged with additional fees, but seemingly very little improvement in the airline travel experience, it’s not surprising that people in general have begun to transfer their frustrations on any small thing that causes them even a minute’s worth of delay. The problem seems to be growing, but is there a solution? Can we, as a society, condone a growing outrage towards those who have additional physical and mental challenges who need the additional time and resources of airline personnel to travel?

I said at the beginning of this topic that this hits close to home for me. My sister has been a paraplegic since she was three years old. Today, at 26, she is happily married with three children, and is quite able to get around (especially with three kids!). While she was growing up, she would crawl around on the floor using her arms to propel her from place to place. She may have been physically disabled, but she never quite seemed physically limited.

Hearing these people in the boarding area of my flight publicly voicing these kinds of ignorant remarks makes my blood boil, but traveling in an airline uniform limits my ability to speak my mind. Believe me; had I been an ordinary passenger in that boarding area, they would not have gotten off so easily!

Most customer service oriented positions, especially in the airline industry, require training in sensitivity and the proper protocol for dealing with passengers with disabilities.  While not perfect by any stretch of the imagination, it tends to improve the quality of service that the disabled need just to get from one place to another. Even if I weren’t in the position I hold, I would still never think to discriminate, especially against those less physically or mentally able than I.  I don’t park in handicapped spaces in parking lots, and I go out of my way to open doors, or assist when I see someone struggling, handicapped or not.

It’s pretty sad to think that the public in general is increasingly less tolerant and I hope that by shedding light on this subject, that trend may be reversed.

[1] U.S. Department of Transportation, Aviation Consumer Protection and Enforcement, Rules Guidance & Enforcement Orders, 14CFR Part 382 “Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Disability in Air Travel,” http://1.usa.gov/q5UwLf

[2] The Telegraph, UK News, “Disabled passengers face ‘rising level of abuse on public transport,’” Jun. 11, 2011, http://tgr.ph/r1r318

[3] ABCNews.com, Money, “DOT Fines Delta $2M for Disability Violations,” Associated Press, Feb. 17, 2011, http://abcn.ws/otQcdI

[4] U.S. Department of Transportation, Releases and Speeches, “Atlantic Southeast Airlines Fined for Violating Rules Protecting Air Travelers with Disabilities,” July 11, 2011, http://1.usa.gov/rk114G

Ok, what **IS** in the water these days!?  In the air?  In people’s daydreams?

A couple of weeks ago, I wrote about two high profile cases involving celebrities misbehaving on airplanes.  Now it seems that the general public is trying to get into the act…

This morning, it was reported that a passenger on a Delta Air Lines flight from SLC to LAS threatened to slit another passenger’s throat with a knife over an argument regarding the armrest.  When other passengers noticed that the culprit reached into his bag several times, and removed something as it was cupped in his hands, the flight attendants were notified and the SLC Police moved in, removed him from the flight, and after a search of the contents of his bag, discovered a 3 1/2 inch folding knife.  He then proceeded to threaten the FBI agent who had joined the investigation![1]

Last week, on a flight from Majorca to Newcastle, UK, a 26-year old passenger suddenly felt the urge to attempt at opening one of the emergency exits at 36,000 feet, causing the emergency lights to come on, flight attendants to begin shouting their emergency commands and creating a panic among the passengers aboard.  He had to be restrained with eight seat belt extensions before they diverted the flight to London’s Gatwick Airport.[2]

And, of course, there were several tense situations on September 11, 2011, with suspicious incidents being reported at several airports, including the removal of three passengers in handcuffs from a Frontier Airlines flight from San Diego to Detroit (a flight that was met by fighter jets and escorted until they landed safely) and the remaining 116 passengers being detained and questioned by the FBI.[3]

These are just the incidents that actually made the news.  I have heard from several colleagues that they were involved in other cases where passenger misbehavior or suspicious activity was reported, and authorities called to the airplane for further investigation.

As with my earlier entry about other crazy stunts being pulled on flights, it should come as no surprise that in-flight crews, pilots and customer service agents are still on “high-alert” as it were, from the recent 9/11 anniversary.  Still, whether or not that is relevant, the fact still remains that some people still don’t understand that a “higher standard” of behavior is still expected when traveling by air.  Most crews can discern between rudeness and suspicious, but for the most part, they cannot afford to take chances in allowing any incident to develop into something bigger or more serious, especially when hurling through the atmosphere at nearly the speed of sound.

At times, the general public forgets that dissatisfaction is better communicated through letters or phone calls to the airline, rather than escalating it in the air.  There are unintended consequences that might have to be faced should a tirade from a fed up traveler evolve into a higher level of emotion.  Believe me; it doesn’t take much to move from “frustrated” to “taking justice into one’s own hands.”

In a somewhat ‘tongue-in-cheek’ blog entry, world-renowned travel critic, Peter Greenberg conveyed five sure-fire ways to get kicked off a flight, including dropping ‘F-bombs’ towards your flight attendant, to trying to assault a Presidential candidate![4]  While some of it may seem humorous, this doesn’t even scratch the surface of other surefire methods of instant removal.

Several years ago, while working as a Purser from Los Angeles to New York City, I had the misfortune of dealing with a truly strange situation.

A female passenger approached me in the forward galley to inform me that a seemingly inebriated male passenger was making unwanted advances towards her.  While she conveyed the story to me, she was very quiet, barely whispering the details to me when she told me that when she finally told him to ‘get lost,’ her retorted by bragging to her that she needn’t worry since he had a ‘bomb’ in his bag!  Definite red flag!  For certain, a ‘yellow card’ penalty of the first degree!

We immediately contact airport security.  Our General Security Manager (GSM) arrived planeside and informed us that all passengers and their belongings, including all checked bags and cargo in the belly of the plane were going to be removed and rescreened.  Two FBI agents appeared at the airplane door, and we directed them to the culprit.

As he was being questioned by the agents onboard, while being handcuffed right there in front of the remaining passengers on board, he exclaimed that he had told the woman that he had a “BONG” in his bag.  The agents weren’t buying it.  He was escorted off, along with his traveling companion, who just happened to be his boss and the CEO of the company the suspect worked for.  I wonder if he was eligible for unemployment insurance under those circumstances???

The bottom-line is that there really IS an unwritten rule regarding behavior on board airplanes.  While the general quality of the public’s set of manners continues to deteriorate, at some point the limits have to be established.  Although Congress recently enacted the Airline Passengers’ Bill-of-Rights, that is certainly not a free pass for bad behavior on a plane.

It really boils down to patience, both from the passengers and the airline personnel that deals with the public.  But should you find yourself in a showdown on words and personalities with an airline employee, be very careful.  The majority of the time, you will end up with the ‘short straw’ in that contest, and the ramifications of removal from a flight may be too high a price for you to pay.

[1] KSL-TV News, KSL.com, Utah-Local News: “Airline passenger carried knife, threatened others, police say,” Dennis Romboy, September 21, 2011,  http://bit.ly/ohOOLY

[2] FoxNews.com, Europe-World: “Passenger Tries to Open Plane Door at 36,000 feet,” NewsCore, September 15, 2011, http://fxn.ws/ndy3fU

[3] The Detroit News, DetNews.com, Metro and State: “3 Passengers hauled off Frontier flight at Metro Airport,” Calvin Men & Mark Hicks, September 12, 2011, http://bit.ly/mRAXSz

[4] PeterGreenberg.com, “5 Ways To Get Kicked Off Flights,” June 17, 2011, http://bit.ly/njLe1o

A recent report about a passenger being removed from a flight and arrested for not turning off their cell phone[1] got me to thinking this week.  Often times, I get this question from passengers wanting to know the “WHY” about phone and electronic device usage restrictions during a flight.  I dare say that many flight attendants know the basic knowledge of why, but I’ll wager that a good majority have probably not investigated this regulation much past the reply “it’s Federal law.”  It seems to me that this subject is rather vaguely reported in the media and the details of the reasons behind the regulations are often misquoted or completely misunderstood.

As a frequent traveler once tried to point out to me on this very issue, it is the Federal Communications Commission that dictates the ban of cellular device usage on-board an aircraft, not the FAA.  After referring the matter to my own airline, I was advised that the customer was right and to move on.  In my research, however, I discovered that this is only HALF TRUE!  I will address the FCC matter in a moment.

I suppose that the mystery of all of this is really centered around some of the broader language that is found in Title 14 of the Transportation Code of the United States, better known as the Federal Air Regulations or FARs.  I will try to sort these out for you in plain English here, however you can find the complete wording of all these FARs on the FAA’s website, http://www.faa.gov.

There are actually four separate FARs that address the issue of the use of “portable electronic devices” (PEDs) or “transmitting portable electronic devices” (T-PEDs): § 91.21 [Portable electronic devices], § 121.306 [Portable electronic devices], § 125.204 [Portable electronic devices], and § 135.144 [Portable electronic devices].  In all four cases, the language of these FARs is identical, with one exception in Part 91.  All four FARs state that “no person may operate or pilot in command (PIC) of an aircraft allow the operation of, any portable electronic device on any of the following U.S.-registered civil aircraft: (1) Aircraft operated by a holder of an air carrier operating certificate or an operating certificate; or (2) Any other aircraft while it it operated under IFR (Instrument Flight Rules).”

Since Part 91 concerns “General Operating and Flight Rules,” the exception mentioned earlier pertains to IFR operated flights; all the other Parts are specific to type or class of specific operations (i.e. Commercial Domestically Flagged aircraft, Regional Carriers or Aircraft rated at 20 or more passengers, but a maximum payload of 6,000 pounds).  Otherwise, the language is identical.

All four parts are also specific in its exceptions to this regulation.  There are FIVE exceptions to the prohibition of PEDs and T-PEDs, and quite frankly, this is where the broader language is located, thus making it a rule that is specific to the carriers themselves.  The first four exceptions in ALL Parts are (1) Portable voice recorders, (2) Hearing aids, (3) Heart pacemakers, and (4) Electric shavers (I personally found this exception somewhat humorous, since I have never actually witnessed a passenger using one on a flight!).

The fifth exception is what seems to cause the headaches.  It states, “Any other portable electronic device that the part 119 certificate holder has determined will not cause interference with the navigation or communication system of the aircraft on which it is to be used.“  Really?  And how does the average passenger determine this?

According to another FAA publication, known as Advisory Circular 91.21-1B[2], it is the responsibility of each individual air carrier to test their aircraft for interference using highly specialized instrumentation to determine which devices pose a safety threat to communications and navigation aboard each type of aircraft the carrier operates.  So the reality of it all is that, in order for each airline to allow or ban particular devices, they must have them tested to the aircraft configurations they operate.  And as is ALWAYS the case, the PIC has the final say on ANY device, if he/she determines that it is a safety hazard to the aircraft or the crew.  No exceptions there…

Where the confusion seems to lie with passengers (and it’s something few of us really think about) is that it is entirely possible that Airline “A” would allow the use of a particular device that Airline “B” will not.  This is tied directly to the testing that each individual airline is required to perform on their fleet.  Of course, this begs the question: “Well, if Airline “A” operates the Boeing 737-500 and they approve my Bluetooth device, why wouldn’t Airline “B” allow me to use it on their B-737-500′s.”  This boils down to logistics and consistency throughout a particular airline’s operation.

What AC 91.21-1B does state is that the individual carriers are responsible for educating its passengers on what devices may or may not be used at every stage of the flight (boarding, taxiing, at cruise, decent, etc.).  As far as I am aware, every airline has some sort of list they provide their passengers and this can usually be found on the Safety Information Card (most of the time these are vague, at best), the in-flight magazine (usually you can find the complete list of allowable devices here) or both.  And almost every airline I have flown on has this announcement in the safety briefing that flight attendants are required to perform at the beginning of every flight they work.

I also did some digging, and every major airline, along with most of the regionals and the low-cost carriers (LCCs) have a place on their corporate websites that spell these out for passengers (I will admit, however, that many of these policies online were not easily found and I had to call one airline to get “directions” to find that list.

The bottom-line on all of this is that the onus of determining what devices can be used on what planes rests with the carrier itself.  It would be safe to point out that as a passenger, if you have any reservations about whether or not it IS okay to use your device, the flight attendant is your best, fastest resource.  When in doubt: Ask!

So that’s the FAA’s reasoning for regulating PEDs and T-PEDs…so why is the FCC involved in this debate???  The answer was completely unknown to me until I researched this article, and the answer may astound you.

Turns out that most airlines quote the FCC Consumer Advisory “Using Wireless Devices on Airplanes”[3] which states, “Federal Communication Commission (FCC) rules prohibit the use of cellular phones using the 800 MHz frequency and other wireless devices on airborne aircraft.  This ban was put in place because of potential interference to wireless networks on the ground.”  Notice a subtle but important difference?

It turns out that although the FCC’s jurisdiction usually doesn’t include airline regulation, when it comes to communication on Terra Firma, the FCC is the ruler of the roost.  The FCC is the department of the US Goverment which oversees all things to do with electronic devices that transmit, receive or have the potential to interfere with communications within our boarders.  As such, you will note that on most every electronic device you own, you will usually find a seal of approval from the FCC somewhere on it, which tells anyone who wants to know that the device is safe to use and causes no threat to the communication system in the USA.

According to the FCC, there have been instances where trying to use a cell signal from the air has caused damage and service interruptions on the ground, and THAT is the main reason for its strict stance on the issue.  According to its own Advisory, “In March 2007, the FCC terminated a proceeding that it began in late 2004 to consider lifting this ban.  The FCC determined that the technical information provided by interested parties in response to the proposal was insufficient to determine whether in-flight use of wireless devices on aircraft could cause harmful interference to wireless networks on the ground.  Therefore, it decided at this time to make no changes in the rules prohibiting in-flight use of such devices.”

As flight attendants, it is our duty on every flight to inform and enforce the FARs as written in our Flight Attendant Operation Manual (FAOM).  Anything in that manual is considered by the FAA to be the rule of law when applied to the specific airline for which it was written.  Keep in mind that “sleep mode” or “airplane mode” on ANY device is not enough to satisfy the requirement to power the device off during taxi, take-off and landing.  And, as was the case of the passenger who refused to comply with those FARs, failure to do so in most cases is considered by most every airline as “interference of a flight crew” and that is punishable by arrest, fines and sometimes even jail time.  So please, just turn it off!

So there it is in black and white (with a few color photos intermingled) about the WHY regarding cellphone usage (and any other electronic device) during various stages of airline travel.  This information certainly won’t stop those on-board airplanes from ignoring the flight attendant briefing or the safety card or the in-flight magazine.  But there are indeed U.S. Federal laws and regulations from two separate agencies that are quite specific about it, and the reasons behind the rules.  I am also feign to point out that when the flight attendant requests that a device be turned off, this is not a power trip for us crew mates.  We are simply doing what we were hired to do…it’s not a difficult request, but it IS the law!

“Deltalina” photo courtesy of Delta Air Lines, Inc.

——————————————–
[1]The Hill: Transportation Blog,“Airline passenger arrested for not turning off cellphone in flight”, Keith Laing, September 6, 2011

[2]FAA.gov: Document Library: Advisory Circulars, “AC #91.21-1B”, Dated 08-25-2006.

[3]FCC.gov: Guides: FCC Consumer Facts, “Using Wireless Devices on Airplanes.”

It’s funny to me how we flight attendants are perceived…

On the one hand, there is this notion that the life of a flight attendant is glamorous, glitzy and adventurous…on the other, we are looked upon as nothing more than the wait staff in the air, slinging peanuts and soft drinks.  The difference between these two pictures is vast, but the reality is found somewhere in the middle.

When I first began my service as an in-flight safety professional, we were trained on graciousness, how to serve elegant meals to first-class, international passengers; we learned how to fold linens and dress food carts and use a spoon and fork to serve rolls and other food offerings.  We were told that our most frequent flyers, these valuable individuals, made up the lion’s share of the airlines’ business so we were to do everything within our power to see to their comfort and satisfaction.

Fast forward past the terror attacks of 9/11…our lives as human beings (not only just Americans) changed dramatically, especially regarding air travel.  Suddenly, the emphasis changed and what was once essential in the name of service and comfort, took a back seat to safety, security and strict adherence to both.  And the most interesting change through all of this was that these responsibilities all fell onto the collective shoulders of the flight attendant community.

No one asked us if we’d like to take on these added duties; to most, it seemed the most logical and the most inexpensive route to take.  And sadly, many of these hard-working, talented folks took cuts in salary and benefits, while exponentially increasing their responsibilities and their roles as safety professionals.

Don’t misunderstand: the Flight Attendants role has always been about safety first…it’s a requirement of our jobs and one that we take very seriously.  We spend months in initial training learning about safety equipment and how to use it; how to deal with airplane ditching and eminent crashes; how to open emergency exits and direct people off the planes during an emergency; how to utilize life rafts and homing beacons and survival gear…it all comes with the job.  But typically, these issues are rarely ever used and I am certain that many people would avoid getting on an airplane altogether if all they ever thought about was what would happen if an emergency did arise!  Thankfully, this kind of information is more important to know and not ever use, than to have a dire need for it and not know how to execute it.  That’s why the Flight Attendant is there in the first place…someone’s got to do it!

The issue that seems to come up more often than not is the public’s view that we are JUST flight attendants…which truly comes across as “You’re just a stupid bimbo, what to YOU know?” or “It’s a flight attendant job, not brain surgery,” or a myriad of other demeaning statements and attitudes.

The "Girls" of 'Pan Am' - photo courtesy of Sony Pictures Television and ABC, ©2011

Which takes me back to the perception of the traveling public.

Most Flight Attendants are very intelligent, creative and LOVE their jobs.  Unlike a nine-to-five, 40-hour a week office job, we are in a new place everyday.  We meet new people everyday (most whom we will never meet again) and we have the privilege of assisting those people getting to those new places everyday.  Some of those people are flying for the first time; others are seasoned professionals whose lives are spent in the metal tube along side of us — perhaps even more so than most of us, simply to earn a living.

We are exposed to every conceivable aspect of human behavior imaginable, and most of us take it in stride and let it roll off our backs.  We are also exposed to bacteria, viruses and a myriad of all sorts of contaminants, yet we stay focused on making sure everyone has a seat and stays compliant with safety regulations.  Are there snarky flight attendants?  Of course there are!  There are flight attendants who hate their jobs (hard to imagine, but it’s true…there ARE some) and there are some flight attendants who are there simply because they know nothing else and would have very limited options available to them if their profession was to suddenly be dissolved.

But most of us are happy doing what we do, and do it without the need for praise or adulation.  We go about our job helping people get from Point A to Point B and MOST of the time, without incident or difficulty.  We give our time and energy to our passengers because that is what we are paid to do, and because we choose to do it, in exchange for a warm smile, a satisfied customer and the ability to see the world, all balled up into one VERY unique career experience.

I can tell you personally, from being on the receiving end of Flight Attendant service that unless you have walked a million miles in their shoes (believe me, it doesn’t take too many years of service to achieve that milestone) you can’t possibly know what life as one is truly like.  So when I read in the news or see on television or the movies how we are portrayed, I can usually tell when a flight attendant has been consulted on the issues.  Sadly, it usually turns out that they haven’t been.

Some people see travel today like it was the wild, wild west…every man (or woman or child) for himself.  It’s no wonder, with all the changes in airline policy, increasing fees and regulations and, when added to the frustrations of air traffic control delays, unpredictable weather and inevitable mechanical failures, it’s easy to see why sometimes, we Flight Attendants wear the “White Hat” and other times we don the “Black Hat.”  It’s really all in the name of trying to keep the peace in an otherwise chaotic environment.

Well, no matter which hat we are wearing at the time…someone has to be the Sheriff!

CURRENT TRAVELS
[travelmap-map height=400]

2PFTDCAEFJQ6

It amazes me what people will say, especially when they don’t think anyone else is listening.

Today, there was a flight that diverted to Salt Lake City due to a bomb scare on the plane.  I have personally been in this very same situation, as a crew member.  Flight Attendants and Pilots are fully trained in how to handle these types of situations.  I’m not so sure that the public is aware of this fact, and I really do believe that the everyday traveler must think that we just ‘wing-it’ when it comes to in-flight emergencies of any kind.

The fact is that there is a very good reason that Flight Attendants call themselves “Safety Professionals” and believe me it has NOTHING to do with whether or not we know how to serve a soft drink or mix your favorite adult beverage.  Granted, that’s what the general public sees, day in and day out, and frankly, I don’t mind so much.  I am glad that our day-to-day flying isn’t filled with bomb threats, terrorists and medical in-flight emergencies.  But we have no room for pause in these areas — we must remain on our guard and we are constantly reminded about how important that is.

Without the fast response of the in-flight crew, Richard Reid might have succeeded in his attempt to down an American Airlines plane just after 9/11.  Without a vigilent and alert crew, the “Underwear Bomber” might have made all Americans’ Christmas holidays quite bleak indeed, had he been sucessful.  We may look sweet and innocent to you all, but believe me, we are watching you!  (LOL)

On today’s diverted flight, I was quite impressed with how the gate agents and the management staff in Salt lake City was handling the situation.  As they could, they were re-booking passengers who were trying to make other connections, and for those that remained, while inconvenienced, they seemed to be pretty happy with how they were being dealt with.

But being as diverse and varied as the general public is, there always seems to be one or two in the crowd who can’t breathe without spewing some sort of vile comment.  I don’t really know what compels some people to say things, other than the fact that they have the right to express it (within certain boundaries — remember the “fire in the theatre” issue and the like are NOT protected rights of speech in the USA).

While I was waiting to board this flight to continue on to San Francisco, I started hearing this one passenger speaking to his seatmate, blatently critisizing the airline and the staff for his inconvenience that day.  While the seat mate was verbally acknowledging this talk, it didn’t seem that he was adding to what was being said.  Still, this guy ranted and raved about how poorly the airline is run, how weakly the staff is trained, how disorganized everyone was, and how angry he was that his “auto-updated” flight information on his blackberry simply stated that the reason for the delay was an “aircraft equipment delay.”

I’m thinking to myself, “REALLY?  You want your auto-alert to tell you that your flight is delayed due to BOMB SCARE?  or TERRORIST ACTIVITY?”  I truly don’t understand people and their need to express themselves, either to make themselves look good (usually in their own mind) or criticize others for things that are completely outside of their control!  One guy in the row in front finally piped in and said, “Well, I can’t believe that they diverted us to Salt Lake City…it would have been smarter to just take us all the way to San Francisco!”  Really?  With the threat of an explosive device on the aircraft and you just want to take it to the end.

The guy next to him said, “Well, they really didn’t have a choice, they are following protocol and this is what is necessary.”  The response was classic: “Well, if the plane was going to blow up anyways, might as well have taken it to California instead of f—ing UTAH!”

When I was growing up, my father used to tell us of an old saying he learned from his grandfather, who raised him and his brother and sister in the absence of his mother, who died while he was really young, and his father, who had abandoned the three of them and never returned.  And as I sat there listening to this garbage, those words rang in my ears and I sat back and smiled.  It simply says:

It is better to keep one’s mouth shut and appear to be ignorant, than to open it and remove all doubt.

Thanks Great Grandpa Letwinker!

Ten “Best Picture” nominees…really?

AMPAS^© (The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences) has got to be confused, or else that new cannabis law in California is alive and well in Hollywood.

I am a huge movie fan. When I was a kid, I dreamt of being a big time film director and saw myself and my creativity as on par with the likes of Spielberg, Lucas, Kramer and Wilder. Alas, it never came to that, but nonetheless, I studied filmmaking enough to know what to look for in the creation of an “A-List” movie, with special emphasis on the screenplay itself (I’m a writer at heart…that should be a no brainer!).

Over the years, I have been at odds with AMPAS^© over past nominees and winners because of the incredibly transparent political message they were sending at the time. Most of the time, the Oscars^© are really just a popularity contest. I’m not really sure that the general public understands how these nominations and awards are handed out, but in a nutshell, there is an elaborate application process, followed by an onslaught of “political” ads urging the AMPAS^© voting body to select their movies, actors, directors and film crews for the awards (mostly seen in the trade publications, like Variety or the Hollywood Reporter, and such. There are screening parties and tons of money is spent by the various studios to sway the votes.

As the voting goes, each individual category (Actor/Actress, Screenplay, Direction, Editing, Special Effects, etc.) can only be voted on by members of the Academy who are registered as that type of member, i.e. Editors vote for Editors, Directors vote for Directors and so forth. The only category open to all members of AMPAS^© is the “Best Picture” category.

In case you missed the announcement, here are the “Best Picture” nominees for 2010:

• Avatar
  
• The Blind Side
  
• District 9
  
• An Education
  
• The Hurt Locker
  
• Inglourious Basterds
  
• Precious: Based on the novel “Push” by Sapphire
  
• A Serious Man
  
• Up
  
• Up in the Air
  

So, here’s my gripe: Has ANYONE ever heard of “An Education,” “The Hurt Locker,” or “A Serious Man”??? If you DID see “District 9″ (I did), what on earth makes this movie on par with other true greats, such as “Braveheart,” “Slumdog Millionaire,” “Gladiator,” “American Beauty,” and “A Beautiful Mind” (for those of the more recent decade) or such classic winners as “The Last Emperor,” “Rain Man,” “Amadeus,” and “Gandhi!” Really? This is the best of the best???

So let me offer up the movies that I think are better qualified on this LONG list of nominees:

• “Star Trek” (2009): Ok look, AMPAS^© rarely nominates science fiction or fantasy, and it’s even more rare that one wins. “Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King” (2003) is the ONLY Fantasy/Science Fiction winner of the “Best Picture” Oscar^© in the 82 year history of the award. “Star Trek” (2009) was well acted, well directed, and the script well-executed. If you are going to compare the two, putting this film up against “District 9″ is definately NO CONTEST!  The USS Enterprise WINS hands down!

• “Julie & Julia” (2009): Ok, Ok! So Meryl Streep is in (yet) another great movie, and yeah, she is nominated. But think about this. “Julie & Julia” was truly compelling when you stop to think that it’s based on two SEPARATE true stories, intelligently interwoven into a delightful and watchable film; “Up in the Air” (although loosely based on a true story) isn’t all that interesting and Clooney is…well, Clooney (same acting style as all three Oceans movies!)  If I had to choose between Streep and George Clooney as to who is the better actor, I don’t know any serious movie lover who would really have a plausible argument that Clooney could out-shine her! Clooney: eye-candy, maybe, but really convincing actor? Hardly…

• “Public Enemies” (2009): Wow! How did this film get overlooked? Johnny Depp, Christian Bale, Michael Mann’s direction? The script was incredible, the photography was amazing and the film kept you on the edge of your seat for the entire 140 minutes. That this film was snubbed is simply criminal!

• “The Soloist” (2009): Oscar^© loves human interest stories, especially those based on true events, and with the powerhouse duo of Robert Downey, Jr. and Jamie Foxx, this film should have been a shoe-in. It’s no wonder that the heavy-hitting films are best released in late December…AMPAS^© has a short memory than I do!

• “Coraline” (2009): Ok, maybe I’m grasping at straws here because this film IS nominated for Best Animated Feature Film this year. And I will admit that I REALLY liked “Up,” Disney^©/Pixar^©‘s latest offering. But I think what I am griping about here is that Disney^©/Pixar^© no longer has the corner on the market for animation-based films, so why shouldn’t THIS picture be considered for the BEST picture of 2009? “Coraline” (2009) just proves to me that there is REAL talent existing outside the borders of the Magic Kingdom!

• “The International” (2009): The best suspense-thriller action flick that no one saw! Cast was amazing, camera work was unique and compelling and the direction was definitely worth a nod from the Academy.  What a shame!
  

NBC Nightly News reported today that AMPAS^© listed ten nominees in order to quell criticism from the public who have felt in the past that better films were overlooked for odd, obscure pictures. While that may be true, who cares!? The public doesn’t vote!

Sadly, I am not a member of the Academy, so my opinion is simply that. And that’s the way it is every year too, and will be ’til the day I’m six feet under. But if they were asking me, here are the nominees:

• “Avatar”, Dir. James Cameron
  
• “Inglourious Basterds”, Dir. Quentin Tarantino
  
• “Julie & Julia”, Dir. Nora Ephron
  
• “Public Enemies”, Dir. Michael Mann
  
• “Star Trek”, Dir. J.J. Abrams
  

And the Oscar^© goes to…

A few years ago, I was given a pair of those amazing Bose Quiet Comfort 2 noise-reduction headphones for my birthday. They were one of the best presents I had ever been given and I got an amazing amount of use out of them.

Bose Quiet Comfort 2 Noise Reduction Headphones

After owning them for about 18 months, I fell victim to someone’s sticky fingers and I found myself actually sick to my stomach that such a great gift was gone in an instant. I was determined to replace that wonderful piece of equipment as soon as was possible.

About the time I was ready to make the purchase, I read a review of a new product that was comparable to those wonderful Bose headphones that I had lost. These new headphones, the Auvana X-Fi, were produced by Creative Labs, a company whose products I had come to trust and rely on for over 10 years, as they are the producer of the extremely popular “Sound Blaster” series of audio components for computers. They’ve always been a reliable and well made product.

Creative Labs Aurvana X-Fi Noise Reduction Headphones

Read More…

Is there anyone else out there that has a gripe about this?

At Christmas, we purchased a Blu-Ray player. I suspect that we aren’t the only ones to do this and while still relatively new, there is enough content out there to justify having one (although I will admit that the discs are still too pricy – thank goodness for Netflix!).

So I decide to rent one of my more recent favorite movies, the remake of “Casino Royale” starring Daniel Craig as James Bond. I’m excited because, unlike a lot of movies that are being released in the BD format, this was filmed with high-definition cameras, making it a true high definition picture on the smaller screens that can handle 1080p resolutions.

The problem that I seem to run into has been an age-old one since commercial VHS tapes were introduced to the consumer: the movie studios insist on placing trailers for either upcoming new films or soon-to-be disc releases. Disney, in the past, was particularly guilty of this practice with their tapes and DVDs, and it seems that the other studios have begun embracing it on a more prevalent frequency.

You WOULD think that it would be as easy as depressing the “Disc Menu” button or the “Title Menu” button on the remote to bypass this. Foiled again! All I get in response to this is the little red circle with a slash through it in the upper right corner of the screen. So I have to plod along, using the “Forward Skip” button five or six times until the main menu finally appears and I have wasted a microscopically (but utterly irritatingly) small amount of time to get to where I want to be.

I’m not sure if this is the studios way of being “in control” but come on, already!

First off, I will usually view the trailers that are available on a new disc, when I get them, but 2-3 years down the line, when I want to watch the video again for my own enjoyment, I have no desire to re-watch those damn trailers! And then, half the time, they are for movies I have absolutely no interest in, which makes this all the more irritating!

So I put it out there in the electronic universe: To all movie-releasing studios! PLEASE stop this inane practice! I’ll watch your trailers on the “special features” part of the menu, but I abhor being “force-fed” this stuff when I pop the disc into my player! Gimme my menu!

Or else…check please!