Flight Attendant Fatigue and Working

Flight attendant fatigue and working conditions is one that has a fairly long and controversial history in the aviation industry. It is only recently that any real advances have been made towards some solutions to this issue, even though the unions and other bodies stated serious concerns about fatigue and its effects on aviation staff as early as 2004. In 2007, the report on this issue from the governmental bodies was finally released after a hiatus of approximately two years. This report indicates the importance of this issue and the real danger of fatigue in the working life of flight attendants.

The problem of fatigue is one that goes to the heart of safety as well as employee rights in the modern aviation labor environment. The essence of the problem is outlined in the following views expressed by the Association of Flight Attendant (AFA) at the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee's Subcommittee on Aviation in 2007

Fatigue is a very real and serious concern for the flight attendant workforce and poses a potentially dangerous risk for the safety of the aviation system. Multiple studies have shown that reaction time and performance diminish with fatigue and can ultimately cause an unacceptable situation for safety and security sensitive employees. (Congress Takes Up Safety Issues for Airline Passengers, First Responders)

These views are supported by many scientific studies in various fields and disciplines. For example, in 2006 the Civil Aerospace Medical Institute (CAMI) issued a report, which found that flight attendants are "...experiencing fatigue and tiredness and as such, is a salient issue warranting further evaluation." (Congress Takes Up Safety Issues for Airline Passengers, First Responders)

However, until fairly recently, the problem and the danger of fatigue to flight attendant staff has not been recognized and given the requisite amount of attention. As the President of the AFA, Patricia Friend, stated in her presentation before the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee's Subcommittee on Aviation (2007), while fatigue as a long-standing concern in the industry, this concern has been mainly directed at pilots and maintenance fatigue. The point she makes is that there has been comparatively little attention given to flight attendant fatigue. "No one questions that pilot and mechanic fatigue is a serious concern, but we're here to tell you that the industry also needs to realize the flight attendant fatigue is also a very real and serious concern" (TESTIMONY of PATRICIA a. FRIEND INTERNATIONAL PRESIDENT ASSOCIATION of FLIGHT ATTENDANTS...).

This paper will present an overview of the past and present situation with regard to flight attendant fatigue. It will also attempt to discuss the role that unions and associations have had in gaining the required attention from the authorities about this issue; as well as suggesting the possible reasons for the extreme delay in the publication of relevant research studies on the topic.

2. Overview

In 2004, the Flight Attendants Union launched a fatigue survey to, "...determine the pervasiveness of the problem among its members..." (Flight Attendants Union Launches Fatigue Survey). The survey was in response to numerous complaints from flight attendants with regard to flight schedules that were becoming increasingly demanding, with the concomitant demands on the energy and health of the flight attendants. As Candace Kolander, the Association of Flight Attendant's coordinator for safety, health and security, stated at the time; "We're getting a lot more complaints about fatigue than last year, as the industry is trying to get more productive..." (Flight Attendants Union Launches Fatigue Survey).

Central to the motivation behind the survey was the finding that many flight attendants were scheduled for a maximum of 14 hours of duty a day and "...we're seeing schedules of 13 hours and 45 minutes." (Flight Attendants Union Launches Fatigue Survey). This situation was also found to be on the increase, especially among regional airlines.

One obvious reason for this increase in fatigue levels, which will be expanded on in this paper, is that in order to maintain productivity in the face of increasing competition, many airlines were pressurizing their staff to work more hours and increasing schedules and workload. If this were the case, it would mean that schedules were being increased without the necessary regard for the rights of the staff for a work schedule that would not impact negatively on health and fatigue. The following quotation refers to the way that schedules had been increased and highlights the issues at stake.

In many cases, when the rest period includes exiting the airport, time to transit to and from a hotel, a meal, preparation for bed at night and preparation for the next duty day, flight attendants may be getting only four to five and a half hours of sleep in between duty days. The distinction between "rest time" and time actually asleep in bed was made strongly at a recent National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) symposium on fatigue in transportation

Flight Attendants Union Launches Fatigue Survey)

This distinction between 'rest time' and actual sleep is another aspect that was elaborated on in the survey and in subsequent reports and studies. The 2004 survey also included a form that employed a "sleepiness scale" created by researchers at Stanford University. The survey was intended to provide sufficient data to the FFA so that the AFA could make the case that, "...regulations for flight attendants need to be modified to prevent scheduling abuse and sleepiness on the job for employees... (Flight Attendants Union Launches Fatigue Survey). In other words, the regulations that were in place by the FFA were seen as being not adequate or sufficient to deal with the problem of flight fatigue in the case of flight attendants.

As noted, central to the concerns and intentions of the AFA survey about the increase in flight fatigue was the view that the situation had developed as a direct result of tight budget constraints in the industry. An article on this aspect provides the following summation.

As airlines restructure and cut corners to make ends meet, flight attendants are being forced to work to the point of exhaustion because of poorly scheduled duty time, lengthened duty days due to concessionary bargaining, or flagrant company violations of flight attendants' schedules.

Flight Attendants Union Launches Fatigue Survey)

There has even been conjecture that these economic issues were also the main reason for the delay in the initial governmental study into flight attendant fatigue.

It should also be noted that the concern expressed by the AFA and other flight attendant bodies was not only directed at the personal health and welfare of the flight attendants but was also part of a larger concern related to national safety and security. The issue of flight attendant fatigue has a profound impact on issues such as safety regulations and the flight attendant's response to an emergency. It was felt that flight fatigue could have dramatic and far-reaching consequences in terms of emergency and evacuation duties. This aspect was particularly pertinent in the light of the threat of terrorism in the post 9/11 environment in the country. Simply stated, "In an era of heightened security, with the need for constant vigilance, we cannot afford to be exhausted on the job" (Flight Attendants Union Launches Fatigue Survey)

These points were to be re-emphasized later by the President of the AFA at the House of Representatives hearing on the issue in 2007. A good example from the hearing of the way that fatigue among flight attendants could have a detrimental affect on aviation safety is as follows.

For example, on July 9, 1995, an ATR72 operated by Simmons Airlines, as American Eagle Flight 4127, experienced the loss of the rear cabin entry door during the takeoff climb. The flight crew was able to circle around and land successfully. The aircraft received minor damage and one flight attendant received minor injuries. The flightdeck crew, the other flight attendant and the 61 passengers reported no injuries. The probable cause of the incident was the flight attendant inadvertently opening the door inflight due in part to flight attendant fatigue from a lack of sleep and the long duty day.

TESTIMONY of PATRICIA a. FRIEND INTERNATIONAL PRESIDENT

ASSOCIATION of FLIGHT ATTENDANTS - CWA, AFL-CIO)

As a result of the 2004 survey, concerns within the industry increased about the problem of fatigue. In 2005, these concerns were further exacerbated by the dismissal of many staff members in staff reduction and rationalization procedures in the industry. As a result of these staff reductions there was the possibility that remaining staff members and flight attendants were being "stretched to the limit" (Unions worry about flight attendant fatigue).

This view was also one that was adopted by the various bodies that supported flight attendants. As Tommie Hutto-Blake, president of the Association of Professional Flight Attendants, stated in a news report in 2005,

Flight attendants are guaranteed eight hours between flights, but... union officials say that means attendants often get only four to five hours of sleep when they're scheduled for back-to-back shifts. That eight-hour downtime includes time to get out of the airport, travel time to the hotel, time to eat a meal

Unions worry about flight attendant fatigue).

The "fatigue summit " was held in 2005 and hosted by the Association of Professional Flight Attendants, representing flight attendants at American Airlines, and Transport Workers Union Local 556, representing flight attendants at Southwest Airlines. The meeting was held at American Association of Flight Attendants-CWA headquarters outside Dallas. (Flight Attendants Hold Summit on Job Fatigue, Hours)

One of the central issues on the table was a critique of the Federal Aviation Administration regulations promulgated in 1996, which required flight attendants to have eight to nine hour rest periods. However, as has already been referred to, these 'rest periods' included time taken for transportation to and from airports as well as the time taken for meals etc. Therefore, this FAA regulation was seen as being insufficient to deal with the very real problem of fatigue. (Flight Attendants Hold Summit on Job Fatigue, Hours) at this meeting, the AFA-CWA President, Patricia Friend, stated that, "

Flight attendants end up with only five or six hours to sleep, and oftentimes less. Airlines are cutting every corner to keep flight attendants on duty, and that's affecting our health and raising concerns over our ability to properly safeguard our passengers.

Flight Attendants Hold Summit on Job Fatigue, Hours)

In other words, while the airlines were in line with the FFA regulations, these regulations did not take into account the designation of these rest periods -a fact that did not allow for sufficient time to deal with fatigue. The meeting concluded with a proposal to the FFA to revise the standard regulations with regard to the rest period for flight attendants. "They would like the FAA to reduce the maximum duty time for flight attendants, and increase the minimum rest period "(Flight Attendant Fatigue).

Another very important outcome of this meeting was that feeling or impression that the authorities and the 'powers that be' were not as concerned about the situation as they could or should have been. This was a feeling that was expressed at subsequent meetings and discussions by various unions about the failure to the FFA and government to deal with this issue with any sense of real immediacy.

For example, one report stresses that, "...there is hardly a more important topic than fatigue. I can't help but wonder, though, if "the powers that be" will listen to the flight attendants about their need for more rest," which led to the assumption that "..."they" do not really care" (Flight Attendant Fatigue). These feeling and suspicious were increased by certain events that took place in 2004 and 2005. One of the most significant from the point-of-view of the flight attendants unions was that in march, 2005, the Department of Transportation held a scheduled "Fatigue in the Workplace" seminar but did not invite and Flight Attendant representatives to that conference. (Flight Attendant Fatigue).

In 2006, the AFA-CWA won a legal action with regard to the Fatigue Study, which led to the Senate Transportation Appropriations Committee authorizing $500,000 for a research study on the effects of flight attendant fatigue, based on a report by the Federal Aviation Administration. This would be followed up when the results were submitted to Congress by December 31, 2008. (AFA-CWA Wins Action on Fatigue Study, 2006) However, the publication and approval of the much-delayed report came about only through the intense efforts and pressures exerted by the flight attendant unions. In fact, the AFA-CWA flight attendants demonstrated and slept outside the FAA headquarters to motivate the release of the study.

After more than a year of concerted lobbying and pressure for the unions, the FAA released the Flight Attendant Fatigue Study to congress. The study had been due for release to the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee in 2005 but repeated calls for its release by the AFA-CWA had been ignored. "The FAA delayed release of the report for over one year, even though the study itself was completed. The FAA repeatedly ignored requests from AFA-CWA and members of Congress to release the report and explain the delay in reviewing the study by the Administrator's office" (TESTIMONY of PATRICIA a. FRIEND INTERNATIONAL PRESIDENT ASSOCIATION of FLIGHT ATTENDANTS...)

The report confirmed many of the views and the suggestions made by the AFA, among others. The results of the report were that flight attendants are frequently "...experiencing issues consistent with fatigue and tiredness" and that "fatigue appears to be a salient issue warranting further evaluation." (FAA RELEASES FLIGHT ATTENDANT FATIGUE STUDY AFTER HEAVY PRESSURE FROM AFA-CWA) the report goes on to make some important recommendations. "...based on the incident reports, flight attendant comments, and the outcomes from the sampling of actual duty and rest time, it appears that the opportunities for adequate rest for flight attendants need to be further evaluated." (FAA RELEASES FLIGHT ATTENDANT FATIGUE STUDY AFTER HEAVY PRESSURE FROM AFA-CWA)

The emergence of the report after such a long period raises the question, why had it taken so long for its release even after repeated requests by the flight attendant unions and bodies. Nevertheless, the release of the report was seen by many as the "first step" towards the resolution of the problem. "Now it is time to move forward and take the steps necessary to end flight attendant fatigue and enact meaningful regulations that would help solve this problem" (FAA RELEASES FLIGHT ATTENDANT FATIGUE STUDY AFTER HEAVY PRESSURE FROM AFA-CWA).

An important aspect to emerge from this report was that the congress as well as the general public was now fully aware of the importance and the risk of fatigue for flight attendants in for the industry." Flight Attendants, Congress and the flying public can finally see the compelling facts that support AFA's efforts to improve rest requirements for Flight Attendants" (Flight Attendant Fatigue Report Available).

Another important aspect of the findings was that there was an acknowledgment of the fact that the existing FFA regulations with regard to flight attendant fatigue and safety were inadequate. Furthermore, it was found in the report that in order to address fatigue realistically it was important to combine regulations with "sound and realistic operational practices," and personal strategies. (Flight Attendant Fatigue Report Available) Another important recommendation was that, the FAA-imposed six to eight-month period for researchers to conduct the study was found to be inadequate and a more detailed study was needed. (Flight Attendant Fatigue Report Available)

As welcome as the report was, it did not however implement any practical measures as such and only suggest that more "detailed studies" are undertaken. Therefore, efforts continued on the part of the unions to work towards the actual acceptance and implementation of concrete measure to reduce fatigue among flight attendants. For instance at the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee's Subcommittee on Aviation in 2007, the AFA-CWA President, Patricia Friend, and others reiterated the view that, "... Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) rules on flight crew fatigue fall far short of what is needed to ensure passenger safety" (Congress Takes Up Safety Issues for Airline Passengers, First Responders).

On the other hand it must also be noted the FFA is under no obligation to accept the recommended list of improvements by the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB).

Towards recommendations and solutions

Central to the debate about fatigue in the aviation industry is the assertion that the FAA regulations in this regard are not adequate. One of the reasons given for this state of affairs is that these regulations governing duty and rest times dates back to the 1930s. In other words, FAA regulations relate to an older world before the contemporary advances in aviation industry, which includes the changes in the concomitant demands on aviation staff. "Other than a modest revision in 1985, they still reflect the era before globe-spanning jetliners replaced piston-powered fleets" (Pilots and Fatigue). As a result, the regulations of the FAA do not "... reflect the extensive research by NASA in the 1990's into fatigue. " (Pilots and Fatigue).

The fact that the FAA regulations are based on an older view of the industry may go someway to account for their lack of relevance in the contemporary aviation environment today - although this still does not explain the reluctance to the release the recent research study. This perspective is also supported by the views expressed to the 2007 Transportation and Infrastructure Committee's Subcommittee on Aviation

Airliners can cover 12 to 14 time zones, for more than 16 hours of continuous flight, easily traveling more than 9,000 miles. And so-called regional jets fly coast to coast. This different world requires different rules. Unfortunately, current FAA rules do not adequately address fatigue research, circadian rhythms, and realistic sleep and rest requirements. (Congress Takes Up Safety Issues for Airline Passengers, First Responders)

It is clear that the present situation can lead to sleep deficit, chronic health and attention problems in both pilots and crew in modern aviation. As one expert states, there is a serious need for the National Transport Safety Board to investigate the issue further and make recommendations or deal with the problem of flight attendant fatigue before there are serious accidents. (TESTIMONY of PATRICIA a. FRIEND INTERNATIONAL PRESIDENT ASSOCIATION of FLIGHT ATTENDANTS - CWA, AFL-CIO...)