FA suit over PAX with electronics
 

Had not hear anything about this suit until now, seems FA think that allowing electronics out during take off / landing is dangerous.

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/money/5...union.html.csp

Power Trip - FA union wants you to stow your electonics..
 

http://www.columbian.com/news/2014/o...w-electronics/

I always wondered if this bothered FAs since they can no longer tell people to turn off their electronics. To me, it always seemed like they enjoyed this part of their job.

Although I find it odd, even before I could listen to musics below 10k feet, I never was told to physically put my device away. I don't understand the difference.

Maybe this was symbolic of their power and they want this one thing back..

Or maybe they just, you know, want people to pay attention to the safety briefings.

From now on all dangerous projectiles will be stored. No dinner rolls with meals!

No lap kids.

except that the rules have always allowed them to keep talking into the dictaphone while using their electric shaver... probably just as distracting to the person, and more distracting to everyone else

I don't think that is it, I think they just want to be able to tell people to turn them off. I think it is psychological.

I never paid attention before, left my ear-buds or headphones on irregardless of what they where saying. Others wear ear plugs.

There's at least one current thread on this in the more apt travel security family of forums, (see http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/pract...ectronics.html) and I'll move this thread there as well. Ocn Vw 1K, Moderator, TravelBuzz.

Come on people, is it really that hard to give 3 minutes of attention before burying yourself back into your own little electronic world?

I agree.

The thing is most of us have been up many times, there's nothing new in the safety briefing. That's why we keep on with what we are doing when it comes on.

One should not talk, though, so as to not interfere with the few people that actually do need it.

I'm going with the "power trip" theory - either the FAs themselves or maybe the union itself trying to make some sort of point.

By way of comparison, Qantas and Virgin Australia started allowing the use of small electronics (laptops still have to be stowed) during takeoff and landing in late August.

I've had about 10 flights since then - including one a day or so after the new policy - and haven't noticed any attitude or resistance on the part of the FAs. They've just changed the announcement appropriately, and they don't interfere with passengers who are complying with the new rules.

You are biased to this situation.

I think you mis-understood, I don't think there is currently a problem.

Yes? Is that the answer you where looking for?

Have you flown recently? When ever is it only ever 3 minutes? Even the safety videos have turned into 10 minutes of trying to hard at comedy.

I think FAs have a need to gain a submissive edge over the pax on the plane in the same way you might have said "keep your hands on the wheel". Exerting command authority to gauge a reaction. FAs at that point could either diffuse situations with trouble makers, or make examples out of them.

They lost this option and seat belts do not work, most pax want that false sense of security.

I don't think it is all FAs of course, but there are some I have met where I could see this being an issue for them.

Command authority? Those who actually have and use command authority do not "exert" it to gauge a reaction. They do so to take command of a situation.

Doesn't matter. Your mind is made up. Your desires are more important than anything anyone else might do or say.

Have a nice life.

They enjoy saying no for anything and want a reason back to say it

So my hardback book is fine, but my hardback kindle isn't?

Now the FAs just go down the aisle asking "airplane mode"?

Sour much? That's a rather far-reaching conclusion based on someone pointing out that they don't listen to the safety briefing after pushback. I don't think I've actively listened to one since I was a kid in the 80s. It's background noise to most frequent flyers. We only notice when the safety video is long or if an FA is cracking jokes while doing a live briefing.

The question is, in the unlikely event of an emergency, would a passenger (frequent or not) know where the closest emergency exit was? How about where all the emergency exits are in case one or two of them are obstructed? That's the $10K question!

If you flew as a kid in the 80's, then you know that FA's yelled at you back then if you dared to get when the "Fasten Seat Belt" sign was on. Now, we just worry about texting/emailing our friends during the entire flight. :rolleyes:

Weird.

"The court will issue a ruling". Regarding a regulation a regulatory body introduces? Courts (and flight attendants) should enforce regulations, not try to rule about them.

Am I missing something?

What's weird? Regs are subject to judicial review, like any other governmental action. They tend to cut the agency a lot of slack, but not always.

Agree ++. Just give a few moments of attention. If something happens, will ya all complain they should not have let you? Too late. Sit back and relax for a few moments. I once had a small seizure on a flight (I am ok). People around me wanted the FA to come but she had to stay seated. Once all clear and she was allowed to get up, she came checking. So just pay attention for 2-3 minutes until you know all is ok or when the plane is safely parked at the gate.

If it were about a few minutes I would be much more inclined to let the FA union have their way. Asking pax to put away electronic devices during the safety briefing is fair enough IMHO.

But that is not what they are asking for. They are asking for electronic devices to be stowed during takeoff and landing. IMO their arguments are just not strong enough for this. Surely they would then also have to ask for books to be stowed as these distract pax from the safety video and can make for very nasty projectiles. The fact that they are focussing exclusively on electronic devices suggests to me that another motivation is at play. I may be wrong, of course.

I am very sorry to hear you had a seizure, but I'm not quite sure what the relevance to this discussion is.

Airline employees who make announcements need training how to speak clearly into a microphone. Too much of what comes out of the microphone is garbled and rushed. It's a good thing safety instructions are prerecorded and/or filmed.

Yes as the kindle can become a dangerous projectile and the book cannot

I don't see how electronic devices affect people paying attention to safety videos much.
By far the single biggest reasons for not paying attention are "I know all this" or "I am too cool to look like I care about this".
(My wife wrote her master thesis on inflight safety videos - I read more statistics and research on this than I thought existed.)

That said, and to comment on one of the posters remarks that we have all seen it often enough - we actually haven't - most of us anyhow. Yes, we know where the exits are - but do you really know how to put that life jacket on properly? - do you really know you have to pull hard to start the flow of oxygen (and not just take the mask?) etc...

Maybe 16 years ago I was on a Lufthansa flight where we ended up putting life jackets on (we landed on ground but were not sure we could fully stop before the water) - I had been Senator for several years (LH's 150K status) - and guess what, putting this life jacket on was way harder than I thought. There was plenty of time and of course I figured it out - still - I then realized that we don't know as much as we think.

Take off the insulting crap about how to fasten a seat belt and people might take the rest of the stuff a little more seriously.

Agreed, reminding people to know where their nearest exit is is useful (I do this as I get on), and the oxygen mask might come in handy one day. Life jacket? I'm on the fence there. I'm not sure there's any commercial aviation incident where peoples lives have been saved by this device.

Honestly, my 4 year old could fasten a seat belt without instructions.

Three minutes here, three minutes there. According to my flightmemory page I have taken 524 flights since I started tracking. At three minutes per I have listened to a bit more than a full day's worth of safety briefings.

How about this. Since they are profiling and tracking everything about us anyway, how about they have us sign a safety briefing acknowledgement & liability waiver, or check a box online. Once. There. Now you know we know. And now you know we know that everyone else on the plane knows, or they would not be allowed to board. Save everyone some time and get rid of this antiquated ritual.

I've taken 102 flights this year, over 6 hours of safety briefings. Yet I still watch every time.

However banning my kindle for the 20 minutes taxi/take off and 30 minutes approach/landing/taxi would mean I'd have lost 85 hours of valuable reading time so far this year, and that's just not on.

As a frequent flyer (50+ flights this year), I count the number of rows forward and backward to the emergency exits long before the FAs start instructing people on how to use a seat belt. By the time the safety briefing has begun I'm listening to music and reading. When I couldn't listen to music, before being plugged in to my phone was allowed at takeoff, I read and ignored the safety briefing nearly as effectively.

Jeez, give me a break. I want my Kindle and my iPad. When I fly economy I sit in the exit row. I know how to open every door I sit beside. I once had a FA quiz the economy row on how to open the window exit. I was the only one who answered. Then she asked, "Is she right" No one had a clue. I don't need to listen to the safety briefing. I could give the safety briefing. And if everyone panics (or anyone panics) all bets are off anyway.

On life jackets. I bet you could listen 100 times and unless you've actually taken out a life jacket and looked at it, you could easily be stymied at how to put it on.

Have all reading material banned during take off and landing, ban all conversation during take off and landing and ban all day dreaming if you want passengers full attention.

The safety briefing is played out. By the time they show you how to put on your seat belt, they have already been through the cabin making sure you are buckled in. If a time traveler from the 50's is on the plane, just remind them they cannot smoke. No one cares for the word placard.

Then comes the flight times, the pilot is going to tell us that eventually, double effort. Oh don't forget to mention soft drinks are complimentary but the overpriced listeria wraps are not. The FC bathroom is not yours and you are missing out by not signing up for their CC.

If it was quick and informative maybe.............

You make a good point about actually executing some of these actions not always being as straightforward as we think. But is watching the safety video for the umpteenth time going to change any of that? No, because watching a video and/or listening to a verbal description will only ever go so far. What would really be helpful is to occasionally offer passengers a chance to actually practice pulling the O2 mask tube, donning the life jacket, opening the door, etc. in a training environment. Though I'd guess that the majority of the public wouldn't avail themselves of the opportunity if it were offered.

I do think this FA union suit is not about safety, otherwise they ought to be advocating for stowing books and other objects that could just as readily become a dangerous projectile and/or distract someone from the safety briefing.

I never worry about counting, I don't figure I would remember it at the time of need if there was a problem. Rather, I look for what the terrain is like near the exits--no counting needed. Usually there's something different about the aircraft that you can detect from the aisle in the vicinity of the exit. (Things such as seat spacing, bathrooms, galleries etc.)

Yeah, if I ever got exit row I would certainly look at how to deal with the door. It's never happened, though.

Agreed. The demo isn't adequate but it should be pretty obvious--it goes over your head, the straps fasten somehow, there's simply not much variety in how it can be built. If worst comes to worst I figure I could take care of myself in the water long enough to get it on.

The only parts of it that I would feel any reason to practice would be the life vests and the overwing exits.

Yup. My Kindle is lighter than a typical book. The case I have it in is also a bit softer than a book.

I can only speak with my recent experience with UA, but I always leave my headphones in now during the safety briefing. The problem with the "safety briefing" is that it's not only about safety. First there's 2 minutes of CEO propaganda about all the good things United does for Veterans or for the Disabled. Then there's a 4-5 minute safety video, followed by commercials with some lady waving her hands around saying how she can "see Brazil in [her] future" with this amazing credit card, and then a commercial for DirecTV. It's ridiculous. I'm going to take my headphones and music any time over this series of amplified commercials that I can't otherwise turn off.

If it's about safety, play a video and move on with it. If I'm going to be subjected to 10 minutes of commercials, I'm going to listen to my own music thank you very much.

This shows how poor the focus is at the union. They should file suit to prevent "service animals" and bare feet on the plane. They should do whatever they can to return civility to the skies. Let business people use their devices. They represent the bread and butter of the airline and they are the ones the FA's should be looking after.

If the concern is really about safety, how about the FA's quit half azzing the demo like just stretching the elastic on the face mask instead of really putting it on your face... or just pointing in general to somewhere down the plane while saying the plane has overwing exits. Or my latest favorite, the United video where the woman in the cab makes the driver put on his seatbelt, but isn't wearing hers when the "turbulance" hits. Nice move United, back seats have shoulder belts too.

I spent a good chunk of my formative years sitting in the back of Hercs and/or Chinooks where having to get the f*** out in a hurry was an ever-present possibility.

Old habits die hard. Even nowadays I still can't help myself counting seat backs and reaching under my seat to check the life-jacket is actually there - better to have these things and never need them etc. etc.

P.S. The first time I ever rode in a VC-10 (as a cadet), I was given the jump seat. The Capt said "Welcome aboard. If it all goes to s*** I will be out of that window and down the rope like a rat on an anchor-chain. You'll need to sort yourself out. Now sit there and don't speak until you're spoken to!"

Ahh, the good old days :)