Source: USA Today
Author: George Hobica

Whenever I fly, I notice that virtually no one watches the pre-flight safety demo or video, despite the valiant efforts of airlines to make them more entertaining (the newest Air New Zealand entry, for example).

And most passengers probably last paid attention years ago, if ever, and have no idea where their life jackets are located. Which is why, when the US Airways plane landed on the Hudson River ten years ago, passengers exited the sinking aircraft without them. It's also why in survivable crashes you see video of people leaving the plane with their suitcases and other valuables, which the safety demo warns is a very bad idea.

Which brings me to how we refer to the airline employees who are there for our safety.

At first they were called stewards and stewardesses, perhaps a throwback to the early days of ocean travel. Some airlines used "cabin boy" to describe male cabin crew. Later, as more women took on the job, "air hostess" became a frequently used term to describe cabin staff.

And now we have the gender-neutral "flight attendants."

Less-flattering terms are also used to describe these hard-working employees. "Trolly dollies" comes to mind, a somewhat demeaning phrase that some flight attendants have themselves used on occasion.

But I think we need a more fitting job title, one that might make passengers take flight safety more seriously. After all, as we're constantly reminded, in-flight crew are primarily there for our safety. So how about something that reflects that? Flight safety crew? Flight safety staff? Cabin safety officers? Even safety attendants if we must. But "flight attendants" is just too vague and even belittling for my taste. Merriam-Webster defines "attendant" as a "servant" and I think that demeans the most important function that cabin crew serve, and perhaps leads some passengers to indeed treat them like servants.

Speaking of which, a few years ago I sat next to such a passenger in first class onAmerican Airlines. As a flight attendant passed our aisle, he raised his nearly empty glass and bellowed "More ice!" The flight attendant stopped in her tracks, turned around and asked, "Now, what's the magic word?" To which he replied, "Don't try to teach me manners, just get me more ice." Servants, indeed.

John Cox, the "Ask the Captain" columnist for USA TODAY Travel, agrees that "the term Flight Attendant is not representative of the importance of their job. Many airlines used 'cabin staff,' which I prefer. It more correctly defines the position."

Indeed, British Airways, to cite one example, uses "cabin crew" rather than "flight attendants." On a recent BA flight from London City Airport to New York, a cabin crew member told me that, " 'Flight attendant' doesn't reflect the job as well. Perhaps passengers would take safety more seriously if it went away."

But flight attendant Heather Poole, author of Cruising Attitude: Tales of Crashpads, Crew Drama, and Crazy Passengers at 35,000 Feet, argues that, "A job title won't change the way people behave. This is more about respect in general than a job title. People are so self absorbed these days. It's sad."

As an example of how airline policies can conflict with a flight attendant's "primary purpose," she notes that some airlines prohibit female crew from wearing pants, encouraging them instead to wear hose, which are flammable. "My job is about safety, and I can't wear pants?" she scoffs.

So while perhaps "flight safety crew" doesn't exactly roll off the tongue, it's at least a more accurate way to describe the primary function that these professionals serve. If you have any better ideas, I'd love to hear them.