Cabin Crews: Poor Training Affects Quality and Safety

Points to consider the next time you’re airborne

I recently met a good friend who works as a junior member of a cabin crew for a well-known airline. I won’t disclose its name or hers for obvious reasons; you’ll see why as you read on.

Suffice to say that working conditions for flight attendants have degenerated badly, for this company and doubtless others. My friend had much to say about this, but the key issues follow.

Flight attendants undergo long, intensive training but despite that, safety measures aren’t ingrained in the crew culture. The written exam that attendants take at the end of their training serves as the sole assessment of competency. However, high scores alone can’t guarantee the effectiveness of any cabin crew when it faces a real emergency, just as a doctor isn’t considered qualified until he gains practical experience during residency.

…

Want to continue?

By logging in you agree to receive communication from Quality Digest. Privacy Policy.

Create a FREE account

Forgot My Password

Comments

This is consistent with my knowledge of the airlines

My previous article on ISO 9001 pointed out how airlines have continued to stand passengers on runways, with overflowing toilets and no access to water. I would rate this as a 9 severity on an FMEA's 1-10 scale, noting that 9 and 10 are reserved for threats to human life and safety. (10 would be a plane crash.) I am surprised that stranded passengers have yet to open emergency exits to get off (under the doctrine that the conditions onboard, like poor sanitation, are clear and present dangers to their safety that justify such an action) and/or call 911 for emergency responders for the same reason: a clear and present danger to health and safety. There was in fact an incident in which emergency responders did come to a stranded aircraft because the conditions were causing obvious problems for certain passengers, including a diabetic. Lack of closed loop corrective action for this and other problems shows why no U.S. airline is, as far as I know, registered to ISO 9001. I would certainly not approve any of them, due to obvious failure to meet the requirements for closed loop corrective action. The conditions under which flight attendants must work is more evidence of management teams that put the dollar before the job.

Concern about review process

A little concerned that the author would be able to indict an entire industry based on the observations of one junior employee working for one company. I am sure the same would not be acceptable evidence to draw conclusions for a quality management systems audit of any company. And the conclusion is to "Ride a bicycle or a horse"? Not all of us are so fortunate to have all of our work opportunities and engagements within 5 miles of home.

I understand the article is clearly opinion, but expect something more constructive from Quality Digest.