Let me see if I understand this.
- Flight service was excellent/to standards
- FAs chose a flat surface for resting (floor of galley)
- Rows 17 were unused
If this is indeed the case (OP doesn't say what went on with row 17), then it appears that the crew traded places where to take their scheduled rest.
This highlights the trade-off that AA and the FA's union made on agreeing on the type of crew rest areas available on AA's planes for them (more money to the FAs in exchange for less space dedicated to crew rest area and therefore less cost/revenue loss to AA).
In this optic I think it's very unprofessional of the crew not to upheld their part of the contract.
Personally I think AA did a piss-poor job in its flight attendants contract as AA should have NEVER bargained away crew meals, the size/quality of crew rest areas, and the ability to promote/punish/set pay based on merit and professionalism instead of seniority. Those should be sacred cows as they directly affect the quality of service, hence the profitability of the airline. If AA gained control over these, everyone would be raving about how good AA is, as the 80% of superb employees would no longer be tarnished by the 20% of dufuses out there, or those working under stressful situations (hungry, tired).
Discuss further
