Crewed Talk: Is the Latest “Breastfeeding” Flap REALLY About Breastfeeding?
Sarah Steegar June 23, 2015
I knew it would happen. I knew that during the one vacation I decided not to write through, loads of crew-oriented stories happen. LOADS! But I’m back now, and today I’m just going to charge forward with the latest story that has me rather frustrated — the milk-pumping mother on JetBlue.
With the usual, necessary disclaimer that I can only discuss this story as told by the press, I’m not sure outrage was necessary here. First, there is noticeably loaded and vague language in this story, regardless of which media source I’m reading it in. Complaints are that the nursing mother, Molly Guy, was “shamed” and/or “banished” to the bathroom by a JetBlue flight attendant when she tried to pump on the six-hour flight from New York to California, but was she really?
I ask this question for a couple of reasons.
Reviewing multiple sources on this story leaves me feeling like the major conflict from the flight attendant’s side is being obfuscated or ignored altogether — namely: where, exactly, Guy wanted to do it. Many say she was disallowed from doing it “in the cabin” or was forced to do it in the bathroom. Neither of these claims is strictly true, according to the wording of Guy’s own story.
The conflict here was not about her pumping “in public” or “in the cabin”. Depending on which source you pull from, Guy reportedly wanted to pump in a specific spot referred to as “the pit” (I presume that means “the galley”) at the back of the plane, “where the crew gather,” as she described it, referred to by other sources as an “empty seat” or an “empty jumpseat”. However worded, all sources point to a jumpseat, which the flight attendant allegedly told Guy the crew needed it in case of turbulence even though there was “no turbulence” when he confronted her.
As I recently discussed with fellow flight attendant Heather Poole on Twitter, passengers are not allowed to sit on jumpseats. This is not us being mean, this is an industry policy in the U.S. (Before I get a ton of “I once saw…” stories, yes, there are a few airline employee-specific exceptions, but those are not relevant here.) This rule is not contingent upon the passenger’s planned activity in the jumpseat or there being “no turbulence” at the time, because that’s not how turbulence works! It doesn’t always come with advance warning!
So why doesn’t JetBlue just come out and say that? Staying mum in these situations must be a standing PR rule among airlines or something, because this is a familiar trend. Airlines seem to always allow the crew to be blamed and issue a public apology on their behalf. But this situation is different because JetBlue could’ve stood strong and hid behind FAA policy!
Even if it was just in the galley area, the denial was not about breastfeeding. The airline allowed it to be made about that though which, it seems, just fed the story.
Another issue to acknowledge is less clear-cut and perhaps a bit controversial, but I don’t want to skirt around it. It’s an honest question that I think merits exploring: Does this policy really amount to making life difficult for a breastfeeding mother?
Guy is the one who did not want to pump in her seat. She was the one seeking privacy. That’s understandable, yet she didn’t want lavatory privacy. She wanted very specific privacy — that of the crew’s work area. Some might have allowed it, but there’s no current crew obligation (contrary to what JetBue’s statement suggested) to concede their work area in this manner.
I hate that the mother was uncomfortable. I sympathize with the many trials of breastfeeding. It just seems like she wanted particular accommodation that is not suited to an aircraft. Even if I were breastfeeding I wouldn’t be entitled to accommodations that female employees would get on the ground. Aircraft are different, they’re not even an OSHA-covered workspace.
Furthermore, I wonder, does pumping milk equate to actual breastfeeding? Maybe it does! It’s a grey area for sure. I’ve never really thought about it, and I welcome your thoughts on the matter, but I would have leaned towards “no” in this context. Pumping is not included in the legal protections for public breastfeeding, and although I see many reasons why a bathroom can be an problematic setup for breast-feeding, pumping doesn’t seem to present the same issues.
Guy does mention not wanting to make a lavatory unavailable for so long, a thoughtfulness which I appreciate, but why didn’t she discuss that concern with the flight attendant if it was at the heart? Maybe, with that sentiment in mind, the two could have come up with a solution that recognized the conflicting needs of all parties (e.g. the crew coordinating to direct traffic to First Class during her occupation). You know, the kind of communication and cooperation that would ideally happen in a cramped space that hundreds of people must share for hours at a time.
[Photo: iStock]
You’re Reading
JetBlue knows that there is no win against a person with such a Hindenburg-sized sense of entitlement who is literally on a full time quest to make others uncomfortable with actions - which few years ago would have been attributed to a sex offender only - and then 'milk' the oppressed-mother-narrative @ max PR setting. She could have done it pre-flight or anywhere on the plane where pax usually dwell when brining sufficient cover. But no, that wasn't a option. She had to corner a male flight attendant, ask a wish that could not be granted and then label him a sexist pig for all media she could get her hands on.
In my opinion.... The woman had already decided what she wanted the answer to be. Any answer or solution or compromise that did not end up with her in the jumpseat was going to be unacceptable Lack of communication - mostly hers
Why didn't she pump before she got on the plane?
like I said in the original incident. I think its more about making a scene than anything. We now see stories of peoiple claiming to be mad because they couldnt pump at a restaurant table etc..