Air travel has gotten more violent. Flight attendants want training to fight back.
Air travel has gotten more violent. Flight attendants want training to fight back.
Unions for flight attendants have been pursuing a self-defense training mandate for years.
The Covid era’s surge in air rage incidents is aiding flight attendants’ demand for a benefit they’ve been seeking since 9/11 — legally mandated self-defense training.
A provision in a major Senate aviation policy bill would require airlines to train flight attendants to “subdue and restrain” an attacker and defend themselves against weapons. The proposal comes after an unprecedented upswing in confrontations with unruly air passengers since 2020, which have forced flight crews to contend with everything from near-stabbings to broken teeth.
“Obviously the last three years have given us ample reasons for why self defense is an important part of training for flight attendants,” said Taylor Garland, a spokesperson for the Association of Flight Attendants, a union that has pushed for the training mandate.
Airlines in the past have argued that the costs of federal security mandates, including additional training, should fall on the government rather than private enterprise. The major U.S. airlines and their main trade group did not comment when asked their positions on the current Senate language.
“The airlines were always loath to pay for it,” said former Rep. Peter DeFazio (D-Ore.), who chaired the House Transportation Committee until early this year and led its aviation panel in 2001. DeFazio is now senior strategic advisor to lobbying firm Summit Strategies, though he has said he has no plans to register as a lobbyist.
He called airline opposition to paid self-defense training “irresponsible,” saying that “giving the training — particularly given the uptick of incidents — could be very, very useful and potentially avoid an incident at some point that could be catastrophic.”
Airlines for America, a trade group representing most major commercial airlines, said in a statement that “safety and security of passengers and employees is the top priority.” The group did not answer directly when asked if it supports or opposes the updated flight crew training requirement as written in the Senate bill.
The group said its members “train their crew members and other frontline employees in de-escalation techniques so that self-defense is used as a last resort,” and noted that its airlines “have partnered” with the Transportation Security Administration in support of an optional self-defense training course “for many years.”
United Airlines declined to comment. Delta Air Lines, American Airlines and Southwest Airlines directed POLITICO to Airlines For America. Spirit Airlines and Frontier Airlines did not respond to requests for comment.
Existing law already requires airlines to train their flight crews, including on self defense. But some flight attendants say the current requirement, as written, allows too much room for interpretation.
You're viewing a single thread.
Nice. Yet another unaccountable pseudo-police force.
So glad I don’t live in the US. But for those of you who do, consider that you live in a country where private security killing shoplifters is legal.
Gonna think twice about complaining over those not warm enough nuts, won’t you?
So, you're okay with flight crews dealing with near-stabbings and broken teeth then?
I think we can find some balance between not killing someone over cold nuts and letting an abused worker class defend themselves.
But don’t you find it interesting that these incidents don’t happen in first class? Maybe there’s a hint there at what might be getting these passengers so pissed off to the point of violence.
(It’s the Real. You’ve paid money to be packed in a tin can, to have your anus digitally breached, you need to take off your belt, in the security line everyone is a criminal. When the Real has revealed itself, violence most usually follows. Being in the presence of the Real is torture.)
(It doesn’t happen in first class because the luxury does a better job of obscuring the Real.)
wtf is “the Real”?
the vast moronity of ai travelers can behave like civilized people, even when annoyed by the burdens of air travel, and news flash: it always sucked. I’ve flown for over 40 years, and even before 9/11 TSA security theater, before the shrinking seats and legroom and lack of inflight meals, flying was uncomfortable, tedious and awful. The difference today? an increasing sector of society believe they’re entitled to act like selfish assholes all the time and that the price of an airline ticket entitles them to treat the entire plane like their own home where they’re allowed to act, do, and say whatever they want, regardless of how the actions and behaviors affect anyone else— worse, because they know (or think) that, once in the air, there’s nothing anyone can do to stop them. It’s that kind of entitled, selfish, and childish mindset that makes them believe they can lash out and attack others without consequences when the flight crew tries to hold them accountable.
THAT is the problem now, and the discomfort of flying just makes these horrible people worse, it’s not what caused them in the first place. And people who act this way on flights also act this way in restaurants, subways and busses, movie theaters, and other public spaces where they selfishly don’t give a damn how there behavior affects others.
the airlines can be blamed for making flying uncomfortable but not for the fact that these people are selfish assholes who resort to violence when confronted.
Remind me not to fly whatever airline you're using..
I think that you have come to the wrong conclusion here. People who can spend first class money are generally less likely to stab somebody just because they're frustrated.
I have ridiculously long legs, and am uncomfortable every time I fly, but I have never felt the desire to assault anybody over it.
consider that you live in a country where private security killing shoplifters is legal.
LOLNO. What are you talking about?