On March 4, 2019, Virgin Atlantic took a “small but symbolic step” when it eliminated the mandatory makeup requirement imposed on its female flight attendants. Virgin Atlantic’s new company guidelines grant its female flight crew the autonomy to choose whether or not to wear makeup. However, if they choose to wear makeup, some restrictions still apply, such as adherence to the suggested color palette articulated in the company handbook.
Additionally, Virgin Atlantic took their efforts a step further and modified the standard red shirt and skirt uniform to include an option to wear pants provided by the company. Prior to this new company guideline, crew members needed to place special requests for a pant uniform from Virgin Atlantic.
Virgin Atlantic adopted these changes to its styling and grooming policy in light of employees expressed opinions and its desire to foster a more inclusive corporate environment. Virgin Atlantic’s Executive Vice President Mark Anderson stated that “not only do the new guidelines offer an increased level of comfort, but they also provide our team with more choice on how they want to express themselves at work.”
Virgin Atlantic’s new guidelines serve as a breath of fresh air in an industry plagued by a lengthy history of objectification, sexual harassment and sexual assault of its female employees. One study shows that roughly two-thirds of U.S. flight attendants experience some form of harassment or assault during their careers. The Huffington Post article, For flight attendants, sexual assault isn’t just common, it’s almost a given, provides insight into the egregious treatment female flight attendants face from both their co-workers and airline passengers.
The article sheds light on the sexual harassment flight attendant Caroline Bright endured in 2017 at the hands of a pilot she worked with. She recalls noticing how the pilot’s facial features reminded her of her father and showing a picture of her father to the pilot. She told the pilot “You look just like my dad!” The pilot crassly responded by saying “It’s been a long time since a girl like you called me daddy.”
In addition, the article highlights how the industry’s “the customer is always right attitude” and the discouragement of causing inflight delays inherent in the nature of the flight attendant’s job deters female flight attendants from confronting their perpetrators and ultimately drives them out of the industry. Lanelle Henderson, a former flight attendant, describes how an intoxicated male passenger made unwanted sexual advances toward her. The male passenger repeatedly grabbed and rubbed her hands, legs, and butt until another passenger intervened.
In the article, Dawn Arthur, a flight attendant for eight years, articulates sentiments similar to Henderson’s. During her career, male passengers often “pushed her into a corner and felt her up.” She never felt supported by her colleagues in the industry to come forward and cites the failure of airlines to train their employees in handling instances of sexual harassment and assault as exacerbating the problem.
Moreover, Arthur emphasizes how passenger perpetrators face limited to no consequences for their actions because “airlines are on a tight timetable and they’re not going to stop the plane.” She notes that if a flight attendant complains, “everyone’s just going to be mad at [her] because [she’s] not a team player and [she’s] just being difficult.”
The objectification, sexual harassment, and sexual assault of female flight attendants continues to be a rampant issue even in 2019. As recently as two weeks ago, two JetBlue flight attendants filed suit against the airline and two of their pilots for drugging and raping them during a flight layover. The airline failed to take any sort of action when the two flight attendants brought forward their sexual assault and rape claims.
Virgin Atlantic hopes that the modifications it incorporated into its new uniform and makeup policy will help combat this continued objectification, sexual harassment, and sexual assault female airline employees face. The company believes that the policies can serve as a step towards mitigating the toxic masculinity and misogyny inherent in the flight attendant job and airline work environment.
Following Virgin Atlantic’s footsteps, other airlines such as American Airlines, Delta Airlines, and Aer Lingus have eliminated their makeup requirements. They only maintain specifications for the type of makeup flight attendants wear if their flight attendants choose to wear makeup. Airlines such as Southwest and British Airways have also eliminated their skirt requirement and incorporated a pant option into their flight attendant uniforms.
However, not all airlines share the sentiments of those who have undertaken these changes. Despite removing its makeup requirement, United Airlines continues to heavily scrutinize its flight attendant’s attire and grooming choices. In an accidentally leaked internal email, United Airlines “expressed concern for skirts with improper lengths, shirts with wrinkles or stains, visibly worn-out shoes, and other personal grooming issues.”
Moreover, many Middle Eastern and Asian air carriers also continue to uphold their stringent appearance standards. For example, Singapore Airlines’ requires that its flight attendants, commonly known as “Singapore Girls”, wear a skin-tight uniforms, get their hair cut into one of the five approved styles, and apply the approved lipstick, blush and nail polish prior to arriving on the plane. Similarly, airlines such as Malaysia’s AirAsia and Vietnam’s Viet Jet require female flight attendants to wear tight-fitting or revealing clothing while in flight or filming for promotional videos.
With airlines opting to take different approaches, the question still remains: Are changes to styling and grooming policies enough to combat the objectification, sexual harassment, and sexual assault female flight personnel face? On one hand, providing women the autonomy to make clothing and grooming choices that might “deter” objectification or harassment in their workplace may seem empowering. However, on other hand, the choice feels arbitrary because the burden of consequences of their clothing and makeup choices ultimately rests with them in an industry where there is no support or training to stop such conduct.
Without establishing formal training for airline personnel to learn how to constructively deal with instances of objectification, sexual harassment, and sexual assault, the egregious treatment of female flight attendants will persist. Forums must be established to ensure female flight attendants can bring forward claims and airlines must develop in-flight procedures for handling situations as they arise, even if they do cause delays or inconveniences.
Female flight attendants’ safety in the workplace should be of utmost importance to air carriers. Their clothing and grooming decisions should not dictate the treatment they face at the hands of their male colleagues and passengers.
Additionally, Virgin Atlantic took their efforts a step further and modified the standard red shirt and skirt uniform to include an option to wear pants provided by the company. Prior to this new company guideline, crew members needed to place special requests for a pant uniform from Virgin Atlantic.
Virgin Atlantic adopted these changes to its styling and grooming policy in light of employees expressed opinions and its desire to foster a more inclusive corporate environment. Virgin Atlantic’s Executive Vice President Mark Anderson stated that “not only do the new guidelines offer an increased level of comfort, but they also provide our team with more choice on how they want to express themselves at work.”
Virgin Atlantic’s new guidelines serve as a breath of fresh air in an industry plagued by a lengthy history of objectification, sexual harassment and sexual assault of its female employees. One study shows that roughly two-thirds of U.S. flight attendants experience some form of harassment or assault during their careers. The Huffington Post article, For flight attendants, sexual assault isn’t just common, it’s almost a given, provides insight into the egregious treatment female flight attendants face from both their co-workers and airline passengers.
The article sheds light on the sexual harassment flight attendant Caroline Bright endured in 2017 at the hands of a pilot she worked with. She recalls noticing how the pilot’s facial features reminded her of her father and showing a picture of her father to the pilot. She told the pilot “You look just like my dad!” The pilot crassly responded by saying “It’s been a long time since a girl like you called me daddy.”
In addition, the article highlights how the industry’s “the customer is always right attitude” and the discouragement of causing inflight delays inherent in the nature of the flight attendant’s job deters female flight attendants from confronting their perpetrators and ultimately drives them out of the industry. Lanelle Henderson, a former flight attendant, describes how an intoxicated male passenger made unwanted sexual advances toward her. The male passenger repeatedly grabbed and rubbed her hands, legs, and butt until another passenger intervened.
In the article, Dawn Arthur, a flight attendant for eight years, articulates sentiments similar to Henderson’s. During her career, male passengers often “pushed her into a corner and felt her up.” She never felt supported by her colleagues in the industry to come forward and cites the failure of airlines to train their employees in handling instances of sexual harassment and assault as exacerbating the problem.
Moreover, Arthur emphasizes how passenger perpetrators face limited to no consequences for their actions because “airlines are on a tight timetable and they’re not going to stop the plane.” She notes that if a flight attendant complains, “everyone’s just going to be mad at [her] because [she’s] not a team player and [she’s] just being difficult.”
The objectification, sexual harassment, and sexual assault of female flight attendants continues to be a rampant issue even in 2019. As recently as two weeks ago, two JetBlue flight attendants filed suit against the airline and two of their pilots for drugging and raping them during a flight layover. The airline failed to take any sort of action when the two flight attendants brought forward their sexual assault and rape claims.
Virgin Atlantic hopes that the modifications it incorporated into its new uniform and makeup policy will help combat this continued objectification, sexual harassment, and sexual assault female airline employees face. The company believes that the policies can serve as a step towards mitigating the toxic masculinity and misogyny inherent in the flight attendant job and airline work environment.
Following Virgin Atlantic’s footsteps, other airlines such as American Airlines, Delta Airlines, and Aer Lingus have eliminated their makeup requirements. They only maintain specifications for the type of makeup flight attendants wear if their flight attendants choose to wear makeup. Airlines such as Southwest and British Airways have also eliminated their skirt requirement and incorporated a pant option into their flight attendant uniforms.
However, not all airlines share the sentiments of those who have undertaken these changes. Despite removing its makeup requirement, United Airlines continues to heavily scrutinize its flight attendant’s attire and grooming choices. In an accidentally leaked internal email, United Airlines “expressed concern for skirts with improper lengths, shirts with wrinkles or stains, visibly worn-out shoes, and other personal grooming issues.”
Moreover, many Middle Eastern and Asian air carriers also continue to uphold their stringent appearance standards. For example, Singapore Airlines’ requires that its flight attendants, commonly known as “Singapore Girls”, wear a skin-tight uniforms, get their hair cut into one of the five approved styles, and apply the approved lipstick, blush and nail polish prior to arriving on the plane. Similarly, airlines such as Malaysia’s AirAsia and Vietnam’s Viet Jet require female flight attendants to wear tight-fitting or revealing clothing while in flight or filming for promotional videos.
With airlines opting to take different approaches, the question still remains: Are changes to styling and grooming policies enough to combat the objectification, sexual harassment, and sexual assault female flight personnel face? On one hand, providing women the autonomy to make clothing and grooming choices that might “deter” objectification or harassment in their workplace may seem empowering. However, on other hand, the choice feels arbitrary because the burden of consequences of their clothing and makeup choices ultimately rests with them in an industry where there is no support or training to stop such conduct.
Without establishing formal training for airline personnel to learn how to constructively deal with instances of objectification, sexual harassment, and sexual assault, the egregious treatment of female flight attendants will persist. Forums must be established to ensure female flight attendants can bring forward claims and airlines must develop in-flight procedures for handling situations as they arise, even if they do cause delays or inconveniences.
Female flight attendants’ safety in the workplace should be of utmost importance to air carriers. Their clothing and grooming decisions should not dictate the treatment they face at the hands of their male colleagues and passengers.
"Virgin Atlantic hopes that the modifications it incorporated into its new uniform and makeup policy will help combat this continued objectification, sexual harassment, and sexual assault female airline employees face. The company believes that the policies can serve as a step towards mitigating the toxic masculinity and misogyny inherent in the flight attendant job and airline work environment."
ReplyDeleteWhile I'm glad that they have relaxed their policies and made air hostesses/hosts more comfortable, the first thing that the airline's stance made me wonder is how they think changing the victim's attire will prevent sexual assault. This is just plain victim blaming. I appreciate their efforts in changing the uniform rules, but saying that this will stop objectification is quite a stretch.