An A320 flight attendant reports being forced to allow a non english speaking passenger in an exit r...

Narrative:

Issue exit seating. On this flight I was flight attendant #2 and my responsibility was to brief the exit rows. Out of my 12 passenger in my exit row there was 1 gentleman that I was not able to communicate with at all. I used the safety card and also pointed to the exit door and back to the safety card all the passenger would say was 'no comprende.' I had tried to find someone nearby that was able to situation at the exit and was not able to find anyone. It was getting close to time to shut the door. So I went to the purser; mrs X; explained what was happening; that I might need a little time to move this passenger. 2 supervisors were standing at the door; one of them; mr Y from in-flight; I think; said that they don't have to speak english. I told him that I knew that; but I picked up a safety card and showed him where it states that 'they must be able to understand crew members' verbal instructions.' both he and the customer service supervisor argued with me about me moving the passenger to another seat. They told the language person to brief with the passenger in spanish and if he understood he could remain in the exit seat. First; I explained that I was 'uncomfortable' with this as it was my exit row verification requirement and my doors to evacuate/evacuation. That we may not have the language person able to assist in an emergency. That I needed to get the verbal confirmation from the passenger; as it was part of my duties. They disregarded my concerns and told me that they knew what they were doing was ok with the FARS. I told them that I was 'not comfortable' with this decision and that I would be writing a report on it. As stated in the manual; the customer must respond verbally. It also states that the verification must be completed by the assigned flight attendant and must not be delegated except for safety reasons. If the passenger cannot communicate with the briefing criteria then that passenger does not meet the criteria for far 121.585! I feel that the supervisors overstepped their bounds by: 1) overriding and ignoring my CRM statements; 2) not allowing me to do my required exit verification the way it is stated in the manual as well as the far. Witnesses to this were the purser; the captain.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: AN A320 FLT ATTENDANT RPTS BEING FORCED TO ALLOW A NON ENGLISH SPEAKING PAX IN AN EXIT ROW EVEN THOUGH SHE COULD NOT VERIFY THE PAX UNDERSTOOD SAFETY INSTRUCTIONS.

Narrative: ISSUE EXIT SEATING. ON THIS FLT I WAS FLT ATTENDANT #2 AND MY RESPONSIBILITY WAS TO BRIEF THE EXIT ROWS. OUT OF MY 12 PAX IN MY EXIT ROW THERE WAS 1 GENTLEMAN THAT I WAS NOT ABLE TO COMMUNICATE WITH AT ALL. I USED THE SAFETY CARD AND ALSO POINTED TO THE EXIT DOOR AND BACK TO THE SAFETY CARD ALL THE PAX WOULD SAY WAS 'NO COMPRENDE.' I HAD TRIED TO FIND SOMEONE NEARBY THAT WAS ABLE TO SIT AT THE EXIT AND WAS NOT ABLE TO FIND ANYONE. IT WAS GETTING CLOSE TO TIME TO SHUT THE DOOR. SO I WENT TO THE PURSER; MRS X; EXPLAINED WHAT WAS HAPPENING; THAT I MIGHT NEED A LITTLE TIME TO MOVE THIS PAX. 2 SUPVRS WERE STANDING AT THE DOOR; ONE OF THEM; MR Y FROM INFLT; I THINK; SAID THAT THEY DON'T HAVE TO SPEAK ENGLISH. I TOLD HIM THAT I KNEW THAT; BUT I PICKED UP A SAFETY CARD AND SHOWED HIM WHERE IT STATES THAT 'THEY MUST BE ABLE TO UNDERSTAND CREW MEMBERS' VERBAL INSTRUCTIONS.' BOTH HE AND THE CUSTOMER SVC SUPVR ARGUED WITH ME ABOUT ME MOVING THE PAX TO ANOTHER SEAT. THEY TOLD THE LANGUAGE PERSON TO BRIEF WITH THE PAX IN SPANISH AND IF HE UNDERSTOOD HE COULD REMAIN IN THE EXIT SEAT. FIRST; I EXPLAINED THAT I WAS 'UNCOMFORTABLE' WITH THIS AS IT WAS MY EXIT ROW VERIFICATION REQUIREMENT AND MY DOORS TO EVAC. THAT WE MAY NOT HAVE THE LANGUAGE PERSON ABLE TO ASSIST IN AN EMER. THAT I NEEDED TO GET THE VERBAL CONFIRMATION FROM THE PAX; AS IT WAS PART OF MY DUTIES. THEY DISREGARDED MY CONCERNS AND TOLD ME THAT THEY KNEW WHAT THEY WERE DOING WAS OK WITH THE FARS. I TOLD THEM THAT I WAS 'NOT COMFORTABLE' WITH THIS DECISION AND THAT I WOULD BE WRITING A RPT ON IT. AS STATED IN THE MANUAL; THE CUSTOMER MUST RESPOND VERBALLY. IT ALSO STATES THAT THE VERIFICATION MUST BE COMPLETED BY THE ASSIGNED FLT ATTENDANT AND MUST NOT BE DELEGATED EXCEPT FOR SAFETY REASONS. IF THE PAX CANNOT COMMUNICATE WITH THE BRIEFING CRITERIA THEN THAT PAX DOES NOT MEET THE CRITERIA FOR FAR 121.585! I FEEL THAT THE SUPVRS OVERSTEPPED THEIR BOUNDS BY: 1) OVERRIDING AND IGNORING MY CRM STATEMENTS; 2) NOT ALLOWING ME TO DO MY REQUIRED EXIT VERIFICATION THE WAY IT IS STATED IN THE MANUAL AS WELL AS THE FAR. WITNESSES TO THIS WERE THE PURSER; THE CAPT.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of January 2009 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.

Attributes
ACN	683532
Time
Date	200511
Place
Locale Reference	airport : lax.airport
State Reference	CA
Altitude	agl single value : 0
Aircraft 1
Operator	common carrier : air carrier
Make Model Name	A320
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 121
Flight Phase	ground : parked
Flight Plan	IFR
Person 1
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight attendant : on duty
ASRS Report	683532
Person 2
Affiliation	company : air carrier
Function	flight attendant : on duty oversight : flight attendant in charge
Events
Anomaly	cabin event other non adherence : far non adherence : published procedure non adherence : company policies
Independent Detector	other other : 3
Resolutory Action	none taken : anomaly accepted other
Consequence	other
Supplementary
Problem Areas	Passenger Human Performance Cabin Crew Human Performance Company
Primary Problem	Company

An A320 flight attendant reports being forced to allow a non english speaking passenger in an exit row even though she could not verify the passenger understood safety instructions.