FAs Complain That AA Is Sending ‘Snitches’ On Board To Write Them Up

derg

Apparently a "terse" writer
Staff member
Wellllllll… Even SouthernJets uses "ghost riders", but ok.

From: Flight Attendants Complain That American Airlines Is Sending 'Snitches' On Board To Write Them Up - View from the Wing

Flight Attendants Complain That American Airlines Is Sending ‘Snitches’ On Board To Write Them Up
by Gary Leff on February 8, 2023

American Airlines is sending auditors on flights to monitor flight attendant safety performance. It’s a partnership with the flight attendants union – which doesn’t appear to have asked for anything in return, despite being in protracted negotiations and reporting out to members little progress.
Some flight attendants are calling LOSA-C, the Line Operations Safety Audit-Cabin program the “snitch” program, with crew
This new program will complement the existing Flight LOSA and Dispatch LOSA
programs, allowing for a more complete picture of operational safety.
What is Cabin LOSA?
This peer-to-peer program will observe cabin crew members’ natural behaviors in the operation in rder to quickly identify safety trends, mitigate risks, and make meaningful changes to our policies, procedures and training. American’s Cabin LOSA is unlike any other audit or observation program:
• Developed in partnership between American and the APFA
• All data collected is safety-related, confidential, and de-identified
• Observations are not check rides and are strictly non-punitive
• Participation in the program is voluntary Observations are completely voluntary, and all data collected is de-identified and non-punitive. The program ensures confidentiality and anonymity of all flight attendants observed. The observer will ask all flight attendants for their permission to observe the flight. If any flight attendant declines to be observed, the observer will not conduct the observation and any future discussion of the declination will be de-identified.
What a LOSA is not…
A LOSA is not a “check-ride” and is strictly non-punitive. All data collected is de-identified safety data. Collected data is securely maintained, and is shared through American Airlines’ Safety Management System (SMS) meetings where stakeholders drive changes based on such data. Cabin LOSA data is collected by line-qualified flight attendants who act as observers in the cabin. By observing normal processes, trends can be identified, and changes can be made to improve operational safety. Cabin LOSA is strictly a safety program, and as such, only data related to safety is recorded by the observer.


American Airlines re-assures crew that the audits are being performed by “non-threatening” employees riding in the jumpseat and taking notes on their behavior.
However some crew find working in new domestic ‘Oasis’ galleys, that have limited workspace (because it’s been condensed to make room for more seats) challenging enough as it is. American highlights that it hopes to see lower insurance costs out of the program, improved employee morale (?), and lower costs from workplace injuries. Here is one such communication:

Crew don’t seem to entirely believe the company that participation is voluntary, and that refusals are kept anonymous.
American Airlines is not monitoring cabin crew service. There’s no report on whether they serve predeparture beverages, address customers by name, or hang jackets in first class. After all, they believe flight attendants are here primarily for your safety.
 
You can sign up as a regular line joe to do LOSA when there's a big push. I have no idea what happens in the back of the airplane. FA's tend to go rogue just like pilots on occasion.
 
LOSA is a required element of the SMS that is also required.

The problem I saw with it was that they’d do the survey, analyze the data, then send it out to us a year later. How useful was tear old data for seeing current trends?

Sounds like the SouthernJets solution.

Collect data and, at best, release it when it's no longer actionable. But ya know, "It can all be mitigated with a good brief".

Less brief-y More do-y.
 
Kind of off topic, but I just love how these mega corporations use idyllic words like “Oasis” to describe their hell scape of a product.

The seats are thinner than a sheet of copy paper, and a cat litter box has more room than the “Oasis” lavatory.
 
Kind of off topic, but I just love how these mega corporations use idyllic words like “Oasis” to describe their hell scape of a product.

The seats are thinner than a sheet of copy paper, and a cat litter box has more room than the “Oasis” lavatory.
This triggered an old memory. I have a hazy memory that "OAASIS" was some kind of performance database the company used for flight planning and dispatch. But I feel like I'm making that up.
 
In my day we called them "auditors" at non-union SkyWest. And if the FAs were cool, I always warned them LOL.
 
Gary would make a good AA flight attendant. He's good at pushing credit card offes when you least want one.
 
They are describing a routine safety audit. It is not controversial. If someone is worried about "gotchas" then at least one party is doing something wrong.

There is no attribution about who is complaining. The excerpts above just say "Flight Attendants Complain." Nothing indicates a representative, a sub group, a union statement, or any other kind of attribution. I'm not gonna give clicks to this Gary Leff guy for throwing fud, but typical journalistic rigor would also depict industry-normative behavior and what might be different here. Bad Gary!
 
This could be FA's just complaining or it could be a culture thing AA has fostered.

PSA for example made line checks far worse than they needed to. They literally had required items for LCAs to pull a pilot off the line and trigger a Section 18 discipline action.

Don't hit the sync button that morning on Comply365? Grounded and CP meeting with a rep.

BTW, nothing Comply downloaded after a sync was ever required to be read day of. They had listed compliance dates that were usually several weeks in the future. They also had an active threat of section 18s for not accepting part 117 extensions for items they don't approve of.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top