Flight Attendant V Cabin Crew - Legality Difference?

[Tray Surfer]

Hello All,

First of all, a very happy new year to one and all. I hope it is filled with everything you wish.

I apologise again, but this is one of my "pondering" thoughts/questions.

Whilst I understand the difference in requirements for the operation of an aircraft to have actual legal "Cabin Crew" onboard, based on the number of passengers (19+) carried, in terms of operating, maybe as freelance crew, is there a legality issue involved in calling yourself a Flight Attendant versus Cabin Crew?

i.e. If calling yourself Cabin Crew, are you placing a legal requirement on yourself to have a particular level of safety training?

Or, is it simply which turn of phrase you chose to use?

Sorry for another odd one.

Warmest Regards,

TS
:)

[FerrypilotDK]

In some operations the people in the back have a certificate as required by EASA. In some, the people in back have the same training, for example ESET at Swiss, but no certificate, as it simply is extra expense.
In some, they are basically untrained in a formal manner and are more like a waitress, drink-pourer etc.
We call category 2 and 3 "Inflight service providers" and they are legally passengers(!) Like with any passenger, even on an airline, you can ask them to operate an emergency exit etc. I prefer category 1 or two, as we are then in fire-fighting, CRM, first aid etc together and we know to what level they are trained and what to reasonably expect. That they have or do not have the certificate doesn´t bother me. The last category is more a pain in the ass as they in general have no clue, just some owner´s idea of eye candy. MHO

[Tray Surfer]

Thanks for the reply FerrypilotDK… Made for interesting reading, especially your preference for which you prefer to have in the back.

So, all be it that on the vast majority of Corp/Private aircraft, there is no legal requirement to have someone of (as you call it…) Cat.1 or Cat.2 trained in the back, it is always an additional string to someones bow?

Do others feel the same?

After a long investigation process with both EASA and the CAA, it appears that my Cabin Crew Initial training is, in a form, transferable by attestation, but all other training is nil and void in terms of being "backed up" by CAA record. All held independently by the airline.

So, as freelance crew in the back, it does not matter if you call yourself Cabin Crew of a Flight Attendant?

Thanks.

TS
:)

[EMB170]

As far as i understand it , there are 3 options .

1., privately operated aircraft no training is required.

2., commercial ops on AOC there are two options: either the operator has an traing manual, ops manual and so on, for cabin crew and you have to do regular training as in airline and if aircraft has special crew seat you are allowed to sit there.
If you are freelancing for such companies you should have training for each company to operate legally. if the have special cabin crew manual everybody operating has to be trained.

AOC and no training manual, who ever is in the back of aircraft they are classed as passanger. not allowed to sit on any crew seats. in these companies you can freelance without any training.

hope that helps

[Booglebox]

The difference is that Inflight Service People are not responsible for passenger safety, are not necessarily licensed, don't have to follow SOPs / FTLs whereas Flight Attendants are / do.
If you're a FA, you can probably use whatever term you like (FA, CC, Purser, CSD, CSM, etc. etc.) or as dictated by your employer BUT: as an ISP, you must avoid using any terms like those above to describe yourself, and you must not wear a uniform.
:}

[Tray Surfer]

Ok. So, if I have safety training to CAA/EASA standards, maybe through a provider like TAG at FAB etc. Then I can call myself whatever I want.

Thanks for the replies.

I think I have understood what you are all saying.

TS

[Gulfstreamaviator]

This was the name given to her down the back.....


By a well know X fractional European operator...


Glf

[PURPLE PITOT]

Regardless of your qualifications, if you are operating on a type that does not legally require cabin crew, then you are an ISP. You can wear whatever uniform your company provides, just like they do in macdonalds.

If you are operating on a type that requires cabin crew (BBJ/ACJ etc), then you need to be qualified as cabin crew.

It's not rocket science!

[Gulfstreamaviator]

A G550 requires cabin crew, when installed with +19 seats.



Thus


Does a BBJ with 4 seats, (for arguments sake) require CC, if so how many.

Private operations only.



Glf

[PURPLE PITOT]

Depends what the manufacturer declares as required crew. Iirc, the G550 requires the flan flinger to be qualified to operate the emergency exit.:)

[Tray Surfer]

It's not rocket science!

Thanks for that extra tidbit PURPLE PITOT…

As I stated in the OP, I am very well aware of the legal requirements that relate to number of pax, type of aircraft in terms of them legally requiring operating cabin crew to be onboard. However, I was asking in relation to the use of the term "Cabin Crew" as a freelance/contractor as a title, and if this encroached on any legality of the terminology, for example, claiming to be something i would not be, by using said term. And, if I independently undertook my safety training at an approved company, it would allow the use of Cabin Crew versus, Flan Flinger, or Entertainer etc…

But, no worries. I will stick with avoiding rocket science instead.

[PURPLE PITOT]

I think you have answered your own question. It is the word "crew" that has the legal implications. If you use it at the wrong time on a ramp check you may get your captain and company into a spot of bother. The industry wide accepted term is "flight attendant". Referring to yourself as cabin crew will make you stand out as "airline", which could perhaps hinder your prospects with some operators.
Operators that require "crew" usually have their own approved training programs/providers. Some may be able to "tick box" transfer your previous qualifications, but that is not common.

Good luck.

[Tray Surfer]

Yes. That is what I was wishing to ascertain.

Thank you.

[mutt]

Flight Attendant V Cabin Crew The question was about legality differences, i would say that the answer is NONE...... We can call them whatever we wish, as a private operator. In all cases their duty time is unlimited :)

If we were a 121/125 or 135 operator, the answer might be different :)

[Tray Surfer]

Thanks mutt…

I appreciate all the responses and peoples time.

TS

[con-pilot]

Tray Surfer

Sorry, just saw this thread. In the US under FAR Part 91 there is no requirment for any training for Flight Attendants or Cabin Crew.

However, about every operator that uses the above do require training. Case in point, when we bought our Falcon 900EX my boss decided to hire my wife and the cabin attendant. She atteneded Flight Safety International Flight Attendant's school and went to recurrency school once a year, just as we pilots did. Even though there is no legal requirment to do so in her case, under Part 91.

Also, I know of some operators that use company mechanics (engineers) as the cabin attendant.