bocastephen

Oh good grief! Give me a break. Let's not even go there, ok?

Firstly, it's not for security purposes. Hijackers can buy F tickets too, right?

Second, keeping Y pax in Y is for the comfort and privacy of F/J customers - and the airline should start looking at it this way, and not playing this security card nonsense.

If 9/11 is really on your mind that much, I might suggest finding a less risky occupation on the ground - we need less paranoia in the air, not more.

I am dismayed every time another crew member starts harping the 9/11 card again. Honestly, it needs to stop.

ralfp

You forgot the .

The fact that those in charge say "This is for your security/safety." doesn't mean it's true. A population of sheep blindly believing such pronouncements is good for neither security nor freedom.

Much as it was a terrible event, 9/11 is basically a single event/data point. The tragedy provides opportunities for lessons learned, but basing/justifying entire security policies off that one event is foolish; doing so ignores a host of other known & unknown threats. It also results in policies that address weaknesses that may no longer exist.

sbm12

Ironically being in the air is safer than most options on the ground. Go figure

Chicken or Beef

This policy is for security purposes in and out of DCA only. Read the post. Passengers cannot use the forward lav in and out of DCA when the seatbelt sign is on. That is the only airport in the system that requires this procedure. bocastephen you are correct that on any other flight, we ask persons to use the lav in their respective cabins for comfort. However, in and out of DCA is strictly for SECURITY purposes. This is a TSA rule, not an airline rule.

Furthermore, there is no 9/11 card playing going on. Think about it...do you really think that most of us FAs and pilots would be flying if we were that worried? Most of the people who were paranoid never came back.

netsc

except this rule isnt in effect any more... and AA doesnt enforce it... only CO (In my experience).

TSA Suspends 30-Minute Rule for Reagan National Airport
http://www.tsa.gov/press/releases/20...ease_0607.shtm

sbm12

Sorry, but it is hard to believe the top quote when also reading the bottom one.

Moreover, the rule is clearly related to the seat belt sign at this time. That is all. If the pilots choose to leave the sign on, so be it. But to announce a policy that does not actually exist takes away from the ones that actually exist. Enforcing non-rules takes awaay from your integrity and makes those who know want to ignore everything you say, since they already know that you're misinformed about some things. There is a real risk there that you propogate by disseminating false information.

Chicken or Beef

The point of mentioning 9/11 is so we do not become too complacent. I know we cannot live our lives thinking "when will there be another attack," but we cannot forget about it. The minute we become too relaxed is when we have the rug pulled out from underneath us again.

And actually, yes netsc, this rule is in effect and it is very clear in the inflight manual. It is a policy that CAL FAs are supposed to enforce as per the TSA. As a crew member, I cannot deviate from what the manual states. And it doesn't matter what AA does or does not do when you are flying on CAL metal. (if you read my previous post, you would have noticed that the policy has nothing to do with 30 minutes)

sbm12, I do not know what your crew announced, but if they told you that you cannot use the lav when the seatbelt sign is on, they were correct.
However, if they gave you some 30 minute mumbo jumbo s*it they were wrong. I agree with your last statement: However, since this is an existent rule it does take away from my integrity if I don't enforce it because people don't like it. It also takes away from your integrity if you don't follow the direction.

If the TSA has abolished this policy, CAL has not sent us a directive. My suggestion is that one of you call the TSA if you are so sure of yourself; if they tell you this rule has been abolished, you need to call CAL and your congressman.

There is no sense arguing with the literature which I have quoted from.

ralfp

Do you know that the CO rule reflects a current TSA rule and not just a CO rule, or a CO rule based on an old TSA rule?

Before it's brought up, I know that passengers have to follow crew instructions; I'm not talking about that.

sbm12

My comment was on your initial post about the 30 minutes pre-arrival/post-departure for DCA, which is not actually a valid rule AFAIK. I haven't flown CO in/out of DCA in over a year, so I haven't had to deal with this. I fly DL where it isn't an issue at all and people use the front lav, though they do wait for the light to go off generally.

I do see that you retracted the part about the 30 minutes in a follow-up post (I missed that previously) so I'll also take a step back from the brink here.

S.

Chicken or Beef

As far as I know, the original rule has been amended to what it is now. Originally, all persons were to remain seated for the first 30 minutes leaving DCA and the last 30 mins. if flying into DCA. That is no longer the rule. The directive now is the lav rule (I quoted that in a previous post) It has nothing to do with 30 minutes, but generally the seatbelt sign is on for the first and last 30 minutes of flight and you shouldn't be walking around anyway regardless of this mandate...this is where I believe crew members are confused. I will try to find out if CAL adopted this as a permanent rule or if is a TSA mandate.

I understand the bitterness that some of you feel because some crews enforce "non-rules." I would be confused also if I heard a rule from one crew and a completely different rule from another. Unfortunately this happens sometimes.

Hope this clears up some of the inconsistencies that some of you have heard. Safe travels...have a good week!

cova

I have seen the text in the CO manual - and it states as you indicate - something to the effect that on flights in/out of DCA that passengers are to remain seated when the seat belt sign is on.

I did not see anything about the lavatory use. Flying in/out of DCA a lot, CO is the only one which still mentions special rules for DCA - what ever they mean them to be.

The fact is the TSA rescinded the DCA rule and did not amend it as I understand it - and thus flying in/out of DCA is no different than any other city.

CO is extreme in locking the restroom doors. On a flight from EWR-GRU a few months ago - the FA's keep locking the BF restrooms in the middle of the flight - while you are flying over the Amazon. And they forgot to unlock them.
I do not know why CO is obsessed with locking the restrooms in the front. Even domestically the FA sometimes forget to unlock. In the case of this ERW-GRU flight - which had lots of non-rev in BF - the non-rev'ers would get up and unlock the door from the outside, use the restroom, and then relock it from outside.

bocastephen

Why are the lavs being locked on the GRU flight?

cova

1. Locked for take off - left locked for at least 30 minutes from EWR. Had to remind FA to unlock - FA thought someone was in there - but the FAs never unlocked. Non-rev'ers knew to just unlock and relock.

2. During mid flight - FA said doors to all up front restrooms had to be locked (762) if someone from the flight deck was going to use a restroom (for security). Problem FAs forget to unlock. While I waited out front of the restroom - another BF passenger told me no one was in there. At least the BF passengers keep track of when someone is really in the restrooms - the FA are too lazy to remember to unlock - and when you tell them - they say that someone is in there only to find out no one is in there.

I had the BF FA call the Head FA and I expressed my concern that the BF FAs where constantly locking the doors and not unlocking them and that this was a big inconvenience to those of us who purchased BF tickets. It simply degrades the BF product to the point - were I would rate BF as unsatisfactory.

jwlowry

Amen! ^

CO 1E

This is negligible in comparison to my IAH-HNL flight yesterday, where the seatbelt sign was on for eight hours out of a total 8.75 hour flight. The seatbelt sign was turned off after we reached cruising altitude. About half an hour later, we experienced about three minutes of light turbulence, and the seatbelt sign was turned on and (literally) was not turned off for the rest of the flight, despite that there was a total of one minute of turbulence for the rest of the flight