wesmills

Spiff is akin one of those fictional characters like Jack Bauer, James Bond or Michael Westen; regardless of gender, it's OK to have a crush.

I must live an exceptional life, because I've only run into a "surly" FA once. The rest of the time--WN or AA--the FAs have been good. On the other hand, the "we're first and foremost here for your safety" refrain is getting really, really old, even from otherwise nice FAs. If that's true, then let me get my own drinks and snacks from the galley, feeding a dollar-bill acceptor as necessary.

BearX220

Oh, yes, you do. Casual, reflexive lying is part of the whole problem with flight attendants. FAs make up so much stuff, so obviously, to try to control or get rid of their customers, they shouldn't be surprised when people stop respecting them.

I have -- and I've almost been thrown off airplanes for my trouble. (An FA whom I'd seen at the layover hotel the night before, and greeted cheerily, tried to have the captain eject me.) Now I assume FAs are out of their minds until I see otherwise.

The whole self-righteous we're-here-to-save-your-butt line wears thin when you see how many FAs forget to arm or disarm doors, happily get passengers drunk and disorderly, giggle through the safety demo, etc. -- and you should read NTSB accounts of inflight emergencies to see the shockingly high percentage of FAs who become worse than useless (weeping, catatonic, etc.) in a really serious situation.

I don't buy it, and I don't have much sympathy for a class of American worker that abuses so many people so blithely with no recrimination possible.

DenverJoe

THANKS! I think I've stumbled across my home away from home here.

theblakefish

I wouldn't know....I fly CO.

Spiff, I know that you are always the first to pipe up on statements like those said in the letter that I posted, and I totally agree with a lot of what you say. Flying has become a test of violating our civil and personal rights -- this is true.

There are some of us that have lived under the threat of terror -- Middle East, Northern Ireland, parts of Asia -- and they might say the same things that you say (or not...I wouldn't know). However, most of us did not grow up in a terror-prone area...we were lucky enough to be brought up in a society that was not terrorized.

The events of 9/11 were really the first time that I was exposed to terror on a first-hand scale. I have been to the targeted areas, I had friends that were hurt and killed, and to say "get over it" or "get some counseling or stay home" while to call people's legitimate concerns over terrorism "disgusting, cowardly" is irresponsible and completely out of line for a long-time moderator and a talk board member. Honestly, it still scares me, and although I agree that 60% of what goes on in the name of terror is unnecessary and made for politicos to get re-elected (and will continue to be for some time ), to totally discount someone else's view -- especially those men and women that run the airlines and keep us safe -- is exactly the type of attitude that makes me sick.

Extremism in any form -- whether it is the "Terror -- be scared! Run and hide and don't question our decisions!" attitude that permeates our society right now, or that "You all are idiots, scardy-cats, and need help because you are overreacting!" attitude that you have displayed for some time now are not conducive to proper discussion of the subject here on FT, imho.

num1bearsfan

Ok, let me sort of slide in here and perhaps settle things down a bit..

People need to understand that sometimes things are more complicated than black and white..

I can definitely empathize with someone who's life has been touched closely by the events of 9/11, and to hear someone say something that could be construed as insensitive might be a bit annoying.

ON THE OTHER HAND, I can sort of see what spiff is saying as well.. While 9/11 was a world changing event for the American people, there is no question that certain bodies have taken the events of 9/11 and turned it into a vehicle to be used to shorten the leash on our civil liberties for reasons that may not be entirely for the purposes of national security. This should be equally annoying for most Americans.

People who are affected by the compromise in our civil liberties and not so much by the events of 9/11 itself would have one perspective, and people who were more closely affected by 9/11 would have another..

Instead of engaging in a mindless flame fest, try to empathize with the other party, and maybe you'll see that the comments made were not intended to be hurtful, but simply come from someone with another point of view..

In this case, both point of views are correct IMO..

theblakefish

I see the differing perspectives too...I just wish that I had a different one these days...we all do...c'est la vie

CABNcrew

I don't understand everyone bring up 9/11 in regards to FA attitude or FA's making up rules etc. They're Apple/Oranges.

Yes, security is NOW, THANKS TO 9/11, a much larger part of training than it ever was before but it has little to do with HOW I do service. It has more to do with the fact that my carrier doesn't let you stand at the FWD part of the cabin for ANY reason during flight. It also has to do with security screening. It has to do with flight deck entry procedures....etc.

Amenities aside, flying is relatively the same in terms of the "rules" as it was well before 9/11.

I recently spent a week at the FAA's Civil Aeromedical Institute in OKC doing Cabin Safety Training. I was working with people who have PhD's in things like ergonomics, statistics, biodynamics etc. They specialize in testing aircraft seats, child-restraint devices, cabin evacuations, luggage restraint, seatbelts, brace positions, safety information cards, safety demos, ditching procedures.. the list goes on and on. Suffices to say THESE people don't just "make stuff up" they're professionals entirely dedicated to every facet of aviation safety so what I learned only reenforced what I do on a daily basis and that it has a purpose!

Regardless of the degradation in onboard service, the changes in security since 9/11, the lack of amenities offered, many of the FAR's regarding cabin safety are the same and have been for a long time (a newer one would be no articles in the seat-back pocket other than reading material).

In my experience, I don't have problems with pax breaching security or with ANYTHING related to 9/11 (therefor I have never had to use 9/11 as any type of excuse..as you all say) what I consistently have problems with is pax being noncompliant with cabin safety issues that hace always existed!!!

People STILL don't want to stow their bags, they STILL don't turn off their phones etc, they STILL won't put seatbacks up and none of that has anything to do with anything but that person's personal choice to not follow the rules. So as much as it is said that we blame things on 9/11 what would pax like to blame their lack of respect for the FAR'S and crewmembers instructions on?

There ARE FA's who makeup crazy rules and just plain shouldn't be FA's but I don't think they're the majority. I for one work VERY hard at providing the best customer service that I can yet I STILL cannot get pax to comply with the FAR's on a daily basis. Was it always this way? Has it changed in the last few years because these things we did not make up.

Just as the letter points out, I too want a good flight. I want to enjoy your company, I'd like you to enjoy mine, I want to make sure you smile, I want to provide you with the best service I can with what I have onboard. I work hard to do this everyday yet STILL I get coldness at the FWD boarding door (and I DO say hello to everyone), I get noncompliance and just plain NASTINESS when I politely ask pax to do something that's probably already been announced 4 times via PA's (that I make VERY clearly thank you). I even get attitude TRYING to do service. Sometimes people get annoyed when I offer them a snack!!!!!

Sometimes I, myself feel as if I damned if I do and I'm damned if I don't!

This is very much "Chicken or Egg" but just as much as pax like to say they're surly because of us....I get surliness on a daily basis and I am nothing but kind, courteous and friendly. SO, it very much works both ways and all I ask is that people realize much of what we ask is OUR JOB. If your crew is nice is it so hard to be nice back? I'm not excusing poor service or attitude from crews, NOT acceptable, it's my JOB to handle it tactfully and move on. However, it's also your job as a pax to follow all FAR's and crewmember instructions, not to question WHY your phone has to be off, WHY you can't have your laptop on your lap or in the seatback pocket, WHY your seat has to be up...... it all has to do with cabin safety and I promise there is a reason.

Nobody likes to admit that they're wrong so when you hear FA's say they're mad because they've had paycuts or pensions robbed from them or whatever other excuse comes to mind, remember that pax do it too! We're rude to crew because we don't get good service anymore, because security's a joke, because the flight is delayed....on and on. There are excuses on both sides always, it's like a dog chasing his tail.

Point is. Be respectful and if you're consciously CHOOSING to not follow a rule that's been asked of you then you have no legs to stand on in terms of being rude back. Try it, compliance and a smile. You might be surprised at the lack of confrontation you receive and remember, everything is a two-way street.

Spiff

My position as a volunteer moderator and advisory board member is irrelevant. If someone feels a post I've made violates the TOS, then the correct action is to use the RBP button in the lower left-hand corner of the post.

People who are concerned about terrorism are welcome to be concerned and should take appropriate measures for their personal well-being. That includes being careful when one travels. However, as soon as one starts advocating or supporting the disgusting destruction of my civil liberties and uses harassment at airports as 'necessary' or part of 'the post 9/11 world', I take great offense. Sorry about what may have happened to people you knew but that's no excuse to deprive the rest of us who believe in civil liberties and the right to travel without government harassment. People who are frightened of terrorism and advocate that others act based on their fears implicitly support terrorism by accepting the terrorists' agenda that we either give into their demands or change our lifestyle. I refuse to give up my civil liberties to appease some murderous little cowards and I think that those who willingly do so should be ashamed of themselves, especially if they are citizens of nations like the United States and the United Kingdom, who are supposedly nations that value and cherish freedom, as well as have a stated policy of not negotiating with terrorists.

People and governments have been over-reacting since 9/11. I am sick of that day being used as a convenient excuse for stupidity and cowardice. If we do not call stupidity and cowardice for what it is, things will never change back to that way they were.

Christopher

I think a lot of can be summed up as an attitude, which seems to have developed over the past 10 years or so, of regarding the passengers (at least the passengers travelling "economy") as nuisances rather than as people, or customers. This attitude is not unique to the airlines, since it is felt in airports in the areas that have nothing to do with the airlines as well as at check-in and in the air.

Of course, no one working for an airline would say this out loud, nor would they probably think it consciously, but it does seem to be a subconscious view.

To be fair, not all staff give this impression, and indeed not all airlines do either: as someone noted above, some of the Asian airlines do much better than some from other parts of the world.

gre

To "author unknown" - what a self-serving load of excrement.

Grog

Well, I think theblakefish's points in the previous post were sound. I think yours are too, unless one of them is that you've decided that theblakefish's points aren't sound.

theblakefish

First of all, you can be assured that if I had a problem with your posts violating the TOS, I would have already reported them before I posted. Secondly, you better believe that your position as a volunteer moderator and advisory board is relevant. If you are in a position to guide and police this website, but you use name-calling and grandiose statements to get your opinion across, than this is not conducive to healthy arguments and discussions here on FT, IMO. You said that the statements from the FA in the letter, and legitimate concerns of people like me (but not specifically directed towards myself) were -- and I am quoting directly -- "disgusting, cowardly" and that we who are concerned need to "get some counseling."

Excuse me? Just who do you think you are?

How am I supposed to trust that you will do your best in the name of FlyerTalk and support and assist me and my fellow FTers as a mod and as a member of the advisory board if you degrade your fellow members with name calling? What is this....the loudest person with the strongest opinions runs the show?

Like I said in my earlier post, I agree with a lot of what you say. I overheard you at one event saying that you ask the TSA for a complaint form every single time that you go through a checkpoint and submit a form. This is a great example of how we, as travelers, can alert the government to changes that we feel need to be made, so I throw mucho kudos to you for taking this step. However what else should be done, in your opinion? What were we doing right before 9/11 that we should go back to, because it really worked well.... You seem to act like 9/11 never happened, and that the security measures that were in-place on 9/10 were just fine and we should go back to it. You are sick of people using that as an excuse, but you are failing to realize that 9/11 was a watershed moment in commercial air travel and safety and security in this country forever.


Okay,so what exactly do you propose? No metal detectors? No x-rays? You obviously have someone's support as a leader around here due to your status, so you must have an opinion and a plan for what needs to be done....so please, do tell. Lead us. I get really tired of taking my shoes off, bagging up my 3oz. liquids, and submitting my jacket to the wonders of the black rubber conveyer belt too, so if you have a better plan, I want to help you get yourself elected to Congress. :-:


Okay, so I and most Americans are cowards and stupid. I get it, and you are so much smarter and brave than the rest of us. Yet again, back up your oh-so-mature name calling with facts and recommendations or spare us your whining and don't say anything.

Spiff

Most of the security measures that were in place on 9/10/2001 were just fine. Security failures didn't cause 9/11. Cooperation with terrorists and pilots opening cockpit doors caused 9/11. Argenbright should still be at the checkpoints and most of the procedures should be exactly the same.

I have typed this information in over in the TS&S forum literally hundreds of times. However, I like you, so here goes.

• WTMD
• x-ray carryons
• ETP/ETS
• NOTHING else without clear, probable cause

No ID checks, no BP checks, no haraSSSSment, no SPOT, no liquid restrictions, no Shoe Carnival, and most of all, NO TSA. The federal government should be evicted from every US airport.

I don't think you personally are a coward. I think many Americans are. We really as a nation need to buck up and quit sniveling about the boogeyman and tell the terrorists that NO, we will not piss away our civil liberties because they tell us to and NO, we will not fear little murderous cowards who attack civilians and innocent people. Instead of squandering billions on the security charade at the airport, we could have spent the money catching, killing, and preventing real, actual terrorism instead of the largely imaginary threat at airports. The number of terrorists at US airports and in the US is just not that big.

And when we do grow that spine, we should invest a significant amount of money prosecuting scummy little domestic terrorists like Michael Chertoff, Kip Hawley, and other pieces of human garbage who have left the filthy fingerprints of Communism all over our airports and air travelers. Scum like Hawley and Chertoff should never, ever see the light of day again. They are even bigger threats to the United States of America than bin Laden or any of the other terrorists around the planet.

ajax

Spare me. I work 12-hour days on 5-6 hours of sleep all the time. Occasionally I wake up at 4:00 in the morning to get the first flight from LHR to ARN or FRA, work all day in another country, and get back home at 20:00.

If I didn't like it, I would get a new job. I certainly wouldn't act like it's my clients duty to compromise for me, nor should they.

I have no time for FAs who complain about the hours. It's like priests who complain that they have to work on Sundays.

KSinNYC

I was closely affected by the events of 9/11 and still believe that it is being used as a b.s. excuse to trample on our civil liberties.