I'm sure there is a lawyer on here that will correct me if I'm wrong but I beleive that the employment discrimination laws cover:

Sex
Religion
National orgin
Handicap
Race
and in some states sexual preference.

I do not beleive that there is a law against not hiring someone because she is ugly.

I don't know if it's because of the unions or because airline management doesn't care, but mrakant is right: attitude, not physical description, is the key differentiator. If those SQ girls were predominantly rude, bitter, and confrontational, they wouldn't have many fans no matter how good they looked. But examine trip reports for any US carrier serving the Pacific (NW, UA mostly) and the recurring refrain is: minimal, rude, perfunctory service from senior flight attendants who time and time again go out of their way to make their customers feel worse. That's the REALLY unattractive trait, and it's the REAL reason experienced travelers would rather be on Asian carriers... why travel with people who don't like you?

On what do you base that assertion?

The way an FA interacts with the passengers is a bona fide job performance issue. The carrier can set, train to, and enforce such standards. That most US airlines fail to do so in the manner that will produce the type of results you want has nothing to do with the unions. It is management's failure to train, review and follow up.

The union can be effective in preventing arbitrary discipline or termination but it can't prevent a carrier from enforcing bona fide job performance standards nor terminating those who will not, or can not, comply.

Problem is how do you train people who have been doing the job for 20 years to suddenly start being nice?

What I find really strange is that customer service in the US is typically very good. Part of this comes (in a lot of cases) from the need to earn tips but I think a lot comes from the fact that your average American is actually a pretty pleasant individual.

Typically when I travel in the US it is a good experience (sometimes but not always with the exception of customs immigration, TSA etc). Check-in and other ground staff are normally very friendly and polite and cabin crew are invariably charming too.

However - on international routes it is a whole new story. I don't know if this is because the staff on these flights feel they have earned the right to be rude or think that they have now "made it" and therefore the passengers should be working for them. The difference is HUGE. I feel like I am an inconvenience on long-haul flights with the US carriers and that's why I do everything I can to avoid flying with them.

The same problem exists on the European carriers too - it is just not nearly as bad.

The same way you train anyone else.

1. Establish standards
2. Train the employees to the standards
3. Provide the resources that the employee needs to meet the standards
4. Monitor compliance and provide additional training as necessary
5. Counsel, discipline, terminate those who can not, or will not, meet the standard.

When it comes to customer interaction employee moral will have a big effect on how well the employees perform. In an industry where the employees are facing serious career retrenchment it is quite challenging for management to keep morale high. Most management teams in the US airline industry have failed to meet that challenge.

..when the airlines downsized after 9/11 seniority was the defining factor of who stayed and who went. Thus the older, and generally less attractive (please dont kill me ) FA's were the ones who remained. Alot of Asian airline have contracts that only last a few years and its almost unheard of to get one past 35 years of age, so even the ones with "seniority" are under 35. The attitude part however I have no explanantion for.

You know, I think that it's number 4 that's the sticking point. How do you monitor F/As? We already have check-rides, but I think most carriers under-utilize ghost-riders. One thing I do on board if a passenger mentions to me that she had a rude check-in/gate agent/f/a, I will offer them a comment card and a pen and ask if they wouldn�t mind writing a quick note. Enough notes in someone�s file, and management really does pay attention. Most people are very happy to fill one out, but very few think of doing it on their own.

Also, here is a trick I am surprised more people don�t use. At the beginning of your flight, get a customer comment card. We have them inside our in-flight magazine. Most airlines will have them at the customer service desk. Fill in your name/address/etc. Leave the rest blank, and place it on your tray table where an f/a will see it. You�ll often be amazed at the service you receive for the flight. If you want to make extra sure the f/a sees the note, ask to borrow a pen.

I feel that feedback is very, very important in this area. If we could just educate our passengers to take five seconds to write �uneventful flight, pleasant service� or �very rude, only came through for trash once� I think all airlines could improve their product.

So my advice would be to start filling out those cards! Encourage people around you to do so. Make sure to put down the date, flight number and city pairing, and first names if applicable to ensure it will reach the right people. If it�s negative, the prudent thing might be to mail it in, but if it�s positive, handing it to a f/a might just make his/her day.

I think the sticking point is #5. In a union environment, termination for something as basic as "failure & unwillingness to meet standards" is virtually impossible. Unless the F/A is berating passengers, showing up drunk or threatening the safety of the plane, there is little that management can do. Just another example of unions protecting the weakest employees.

Yes, I believe that you are right. The standards are certainly there but the follow up is lacking. Certainly a problem that those multi-million dollar execs should be able to figure out, though...

No, it's not. It's very easy. All management has to do is document the problem, document the counseling and retraining, and document the continued problem. If they do, there's nothing the union can do to stop them.

The union is obligated to provide a defense but, just like a defense attorney who's client was caught on video tape, there's not much that can be done. The problem the airline's tend to have is that they do a poor job of documenting the problem. That isn't the union's fault.

Short of physically assualting a passenger, anyone in a union working for an airline is never going to get fired. That is how unions work be it an airline, the UAW, teacher's union, doesn;t matter. Once you're in, you're in for life no matter how incomptenet a worker you are. US steel was destroyed because of it, US auto is close to death because of it and airlines are following in their footsteps.

And physical assault of a customer may not even do it! Recently, near my hometown, a teacher walked in on another teacher "engaging in inappropriate sexual behavior" (that's as specific and the news reports will get) with a 6th grade student (male on male, FWIW). The news story went on to indicate that the teacher had been put on leave with pay, pending the outcome of an investigation.

Touche�
Documentation is key. I doubt most Singaporeans can avail themselves of basic protection against arbitrary discharge, based on some fatcat's idea of "respect".

Don't worry, that's just a standard first step. If there is a hint of truth to the story you relate, rest assured the teacher will never work again, and will likely be behind bars.

Point is, an employer (and in this case, taxpayers) shouldn't have to putz around with paying some schlep while a perfunctory "investigation" is conducted. The presumption of innocence keeps you out of jail, it doesn't keep you employed.