March 16, 2020

To the Aviation Consumer Protection Advisory Committee:

The U.S. Department of Transportation established the National In-Flight Sexual Misconduct 

Task Force (Task Force) as a subcommittee of the Aviation Consumer Protection Advisory 

Committee on February 11, 2019. As Chair of the Task Force, I submit to you the Task Force’s

report on inflight-sexual misconduct on commercial flights. 

The Task Force listened to first-hand accounts from passengers and flight attendants who 

experienced in-flight sexual misconduct, and about actions that airlines and law enforcement had 

taken after such incidents. The Task Force also reviewed complaints of in-flight sexual 

misconduct filed with the Federal government and considered the results of airline and airport 

surveys. The Task Force heard from law enforcement and Federal agencies on their efforts to 

address incidents of sexual misconduct and listened to the perspectives of consumers, labor 

unions, a provider of victim services, victim-centered nonprofits, and experts focused on training 

related to sexual violence and harassment. The Task Force carefully analyzed this information 

and the expertise and dedication of each member resulted in this comprehensive report. 

This report provides information on existing practices on reporting, data collection, and training 

on responding to and addressing allegations of in-flight sexual misconduct. This report also 

highlights aspects of awareness, reporting, data collection, and training that are suitable for 

enhancement and development. Finally, the report makes recommendations on actions that could 

be taken by the Federal government, law enforcement agencies, airlines, airports, and unions. 

The Task Force asks that the Aviation Consumer Protection Advisory Committee consider this 

report in making recommendations to the Secretary. The Task Force is confident that this report 

and adoption of its recommendations will lead to enhanced awareness, reporting practices, data 

collection, and training, thereby improving responses to incidents of sexual misconduct that take 

place onboard commercial aircraft and, over time, reducing incidents of in-flight sexual 

misconduct. The Task Force expects that, although this report is focused on passengers, 

implementation of the Task Force’s recommendations may also improve responses to reduce 

sexual misconduct experienced by flight attendants and reduce such incidents. 

Sincerely,

Judith S. Kaleta

Chair

National In-flight Sexual Misconduct Task Force

-original signed -
A Report on Sexual Misconduct on Commercial Flights 

By the National In-Flight Sexual Misconduct Task Force 

March 2020
TABLE OF CONTENTS

Chapter 1 Overview of the In-Flight Sexual Misconduct Task Force

1.1 Introduction

1.2 Background

1.3 Jurisdictional Matters

1.4 Task Force Review and Analysis

1.5 Scope of Task Force’s Review 

Chapter 2 Definition of Sexual Misconduct

2.1 Statutory Language

2.2 Definitions Used by Commercial Airlines

2.3 Other Definitions Provided by Task Force Members

2.4 Considerations in Defining Sexual Misconduct 

2.5 Definition of Sexual Misconduct

2.6 Recommendations on the Definition of Sexual Misconduct

Chapter 3 Awareness

3.1 Awareness Campaigns by the Federal Government

3.2 Awareness Campaigns by Airports

3.3 Awareness Campaigns by Airlines

3.4 Challenges to Awareness Campaigns by Airlines 

3.5 Recommendations on Awareness 

Chapter 4 Reporting 

4.1 Airline Information Survey on Reporting Practices 

4.2 Reporting by Passengers Who Experience In-Flight Sexual Misconduct 

4.3 Identifying Alleged Offenders and Potential Witnesses

4.4 Requesting Law Enforcement Assistance For Incidents Reported Onboard

4.5 Reporting Incidents of Sexual Misconduct After Landing 

4.6 Incidents Involving Minors 

4.7 Recommendations on Reporting

Chapter 5 Data Collection

5.1 Existing Government Data on Incidents of In-Flight Sexual Misconduct 

5.2 Purposes of Data Collection 

5.3 Task Force Discussions on Categorization of Sexual Misconduct Incidents 

5.4 Airline Data Collection Practices

5.5 Methodologies for Determining Prevalence of In-Flight Sexual Misconduct

5.6 Recommendations on Data Collection
Chapter 6 Training 

6.1 Industry Models 

6.2 Airline Information Survey on Training Practices

6.3 Assessing Current Training Models

6.4 Recommendations on Training

Chapter 7 Findings & Recommendations

7.1 General Findings

7.2 Definition of Sexual Misconduct

7.3 Awareness

7.4 Reporting 

7.5 Data Collection

7.6 Training 

Appendix A: FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018

Appendix B: Joint Explanatory Statement of the 2018 Transportation, Housing and Urban 

Development, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act

Appendix C: Charter of the In-Flight Sexual Misconduct Task Force

Appendix D: Membership of the In-Flight Sexual Misconduct Task Force

Appendix E: FBI Be Air Aware Campaign Poster

Appendix F: Alaska Airlines In-Flight Magazine (Crew and Guest Safety)

Appendix G: International Air Transport Association Sample Passenger Awareness Leaflet

Appendix H: FBI Active Shooter Event Quick Reference

Commonly Used Acronyms 

ASTA American Society of Travel Advisors

DOJ U.S. Department of Justice 

• OVC Office for Victims of Crime

• OVW Office on Violence against Women 

HHS U.S. Department of Health & Human Services

DOT U.S. Department of Transportation 

• FAA Federal Aviation Administration 

• OST Office of the Secretary of Transportation

FBI Federal Bureau of Investigation

IATA International Air Transport Association

RAINN Rape, Abuse, & Incest National Network

TSA Transportation Security Administration 
- 1 -

Chapter 1

Overview of the In-Flight Sexual Misconduct Task Force

1.1 Introduction

U.S. Secretary of Transportation Elaine L. Chao established the National In-Flight Sexual 

Misconduct Task Force (Task Force) on February 11, 2019. The Task Force was established in 

response to the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018 (FAA Act)1 and the Joint Explanatory 

Statement of the Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies 

Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2018 (Joint Statement)2 and in furtherance of the aviation

consumer protection responsibilities of the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT). 

In the Joint Statement, Congress expressed concern about the adequacy of the response to 

incidents of sexual assault and sexual harassment that take place onboard commercial aircraft. 

Congress noted that there is limited data on the prevalence of incidents of sexual assault and 

harassment on commercial aircraft and a lack of guidance and training for airline personnel to 

respond to such incidents. It requested the establishment of a task force to provide 

recommendations to the Secretary of Transportation on best practices and protocols for air 

carriers3 relating to training, reporting, and data collection. 

Subsequently, section 338 of the FAA Act, enacted on October 5, 2018, expresses the Sense of 

Congress that airlines should have policies and procedures in place to address sexual misconduct. 

This includes policies and procedures to report incidents to law enforcement, inform passengers 

and employees of their rights, and train employees on responding to sexual misconduct. It was 

also the Sense of Congress that individuals who perpetrate sexual misconduct should be held 

accountable under all applicable Federal and State laws.

Section 339 of the FAA Act provides DOT’s Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) the 

authority to assess a civil penalty for sexually assaulting or threatening to sexually assault a 

member of the flight crew, cabin crew or other individual on the airplane and increases the 

current civil penalty for interference from $25,000 to $35,000.4

Section 339A of the FAA Act requires the establishment of a task force to review current 

practices, protocols, and requirements of air carriers in responding to allegations of sexual 

misconduct by passengers onboard aircraft including training, reporting, and data collection.5

The FAA Act states that the task force is to provide recommendations on training, reporting, and 

data collection regarding allegations of sexual misconduct occurring on passenger airline flights

that are informed by the Task Force’s review of airline practices and first-hand accounts from 

passengers who have experienced sexual misconduct onboard aircraft. For purposes of this 

report, “airline” refers only to U.S. air carriers, which is consistent with the Task Force’s 

 1 FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018, 115 Pub. L. No. 254 § 339 (2018). (See Appendix A). 2 JOINT EXPLANATORY STATEMENT OF THE SENATE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS ON S.1655, 115th Cong., 1st 

Sess. Washington: U.S. Gov’t. Printing Off. (2017). (See Appendix B).

3 “Air carrier” is a statutorily defined term and includes only U.S. air carriers and not foreign air carriers. 49 C.F.R. 

§1510.3 (2015). 4 FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018 § 339(a). 5 Id. § 339A(a). For purposes of this report, the term air carrier is used interchangeably with “carrier” and “airline”. 
- 2 -

mandate under the FAA Act. Section 339A specifies that the Task Force’s recommendations on 

data collection should protect the privacy and confidentiality of individuals involved in incidents 

of alleged sexual misconduct and preclude the release of data that publicly identifies an 

individual air carrier.

Section 339B of the FAA Act requires the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) to establish a 

streamlined process for individuals involved in an incident of in-flight sexual misconduct to 

report such allegations to law enforcement.6 Under the FAA Act, the streamlined process is 

required to be based on the plan that DOT develops to address recommendations it receives on 

in-flight sexual misconduct incidents.7 Section 339B further requires that the streamlined process 

for reporting incidents of in-flight sexual misconduct to law enforcement be made available to 

the public by the DOJ’s Office for Victims of Crime (OVC) and the Office on Violence Against 

Women (OVW), the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and DOT. 

The Task Force included representatives of the Federal government, State and local law 

enforcement agencies, and various non-governmental organizations representing stakeholders. 8 

Specifically, the members included representatives of the following: DOT; DOJ (including OVC, 

OVW, and the FBI), U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), a national 

organization specializing in providing services to sexual assault victims, a national travel 

organization, and labor organizations representing flight attendants and pilots. The Task Force 

also included individuals representing the interests of consumers, local law enforcement, 

airports, and air carriers. 

The Task Force was charged with:

• Reviewing and evaluating existing ways for passengers involved in incidents of sexual 

misconduct by other passengers onboard commercial aircraft to report such allegations to 

the carrier;

• Reviewing and evaluating air carriers’ existing training protocols and identifying best 

practices to address incidents of sexual misconduct onboard commercial aircraft;

• Reviewing and evaluating existing reporting protocols and identifying best practices for 

air carriers timely to report (or to facilitate the timely reporting of) incidents of sexual 

misconduct by passengers onboard commercial aircraft to law enforcement authorities, 

ensuring privacy protections for victims;

• Reviewing and evaluating air carriers’ existing data collection practices, if any, and 

identifying effective methods to collect, maintain, and make publicly available data on 

incidents of sexual misconduct by passengers onboard commercial aircraft in a manner 

that maintains privacy protections for individuals and precludes the release of data that 

publicly identifies an individual carrier;

 6 FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018 § 339B(a). 7 Id.

8 Task Force Membership at Appendix D; see also FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018 § 339A(b). 9 The Task Force Charter provides a further description of member duties. See Appendix C.
- 3 -

• Reviewing and utilizing first-hand accounts from passengers who have experienced 

sexual misconduct onboard commercial aircraft; and 

• Reviewing any other air carrier practice addressing incidents of sexual misconduct by 

passengers on board commercial aircraft, if needed.9

Secretary Chao established the In-flight Sexual Misconduct Task Force as a subcommittee of the 

DOT’s Aviation Consumer Protection Advisory Committee (ACPAC) which was re-constituted10

in November 2018. 

The purpose of this report is to provide information on existing airline practices on reporting, 

data collection, and training on responding to and addressing allegations of in-flight sexual 

misconduct. This report also highlights aspects of awareness, reporting, data collection, and

training that are suitable for enhancement and development and makes recommendations. The 

Task Force expects that this report and adoption of its recommendations will lead to enhanced

awareness, reporting practices, data collection, and training, thereby improving responses to

incidents of sexual misconduct that take place onboard commercial aircraft and, over time, 

reducing incidents of in-flight sexual misconduct.

1.2 Background

Air travel impacts the lives of the vast majority of Americans. According to the latest data from 

DOT’s Bureau of Transportation Statistics, U.S. airlines and foreign airlines serving the United 

States carried more than one billion people in 2018.

11 While a majority of passengers travel 

without incident, there have been increased concerns of passenger misconduct. The Task Force 

learned that passenger misconduct in air travel is not new and were informed of an incident from 

1995 where a man pleaded guilty to fondling a 15-year-old girl sitting next to him on a flight 

from Los Angeles to Australia, which was highlighted in a 1998 Wall Street Journal article.12

In the last year, more than 20 years since the 1998 Wall Street Journal article, prosecutions of 

sexual misconduct cases on aircraft are continuing. In 2018, a passenger was convicted of 

sexually assaulting a woman while she was sleeping during an overnight flight from Las Vegas 

to Detroit.13 Only a few months after this incident, two other men were arrested on charges of 

 9 The Task Force Charter provides a further description of member duties. See Appendix C. 10 Formerly known as the Advisory Committee on Aviation Consumer Protection. The FAA Act extended the 

authorization for the Committee from September 30, 2018 to September 30, 2023. See FAA Reauthorization Act of 

2018, § 415. 

11 BUREAU OF TRANSPORTATION STATISTICS, U.S. DEPT. OF TRANSP., ANNUAL PASSENGERS ON ALL U.S.

SCHEDULED AIRLINES (DOMESTIC & INTERNATIONAL) AND FOREIGN AIRLINE FLIGHTS TO AND FROM THE UNITED 

STATES 2003-2018 (2018). 12 Asra Q. Nomani, A New Problem for the Airlines: Sexual Misconduct at 37,000 Feet, WALL STREET J. (1998), 

https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB897364901819356000. 13 Press Release, U.S. Dep’t. of Just., U.S. Attorney’s Off. for the Eastern District of Mich., Rochester Hills Man 

Sentenced on Charge of Sexual Abuse on an Aircraft, (December 13, 2018), https://www.justice.gov/usaoedmi/pr/rochester-hills-man-sentenced-charge-sexual-abuse-aircraft.
- 4 -

abusive sexual contact onboard an aircraft.14 One of the men was charged with sexually 

assaulting a woman while she was sleeping, and the other man was charged with abusive sexual 

contact after inappropriately touching and grabbing a woman.

According to the FBI, in Fiscal Year 2017, 63 investigations involving sexual assaults on aircraft

were opened, and that number rose to 84 in Fiscal Year 2018.15 The FBI explained that the 

number of investigations refers to investigations opened after FBI learns of an incident of inflight sexual misconduct. All reported incidents do not result in the FBI’s opening an 

investigation. Further, the FBI states that it does not have confidence that the number of 

incidents reported to the FBI are an accurate representation of the number of incidents of inflight sexual assaults, as many incidents are unreported.16 

FY 2017 FY 2018 FY 2019 

63 84 119

At times, members of the public contact DOT rather than the FBI when there is an in-flight 

sexual misconduct incident. DOT’s Office of Aviation Enforcement and Proceedings (Office of 

Aviation Enforcement) receives consumer complaints against airlines including complaints from 

passengers alleging in-flight sexual misconduct. In November 2016, DOT established a separate 

complaint category for allegations of in-flight sexual misconduct to enable DOT to track such 

incidents better. Since then, DOT has received 43 complaints of sexual misconduct on flights.17

Of these 43 complaints, two were received between November and December 2016, 17 were 

received in 2017, and 14 in 2018.

18 In calendar year 2019, DOT received 10 complaints of inflight sexual misconduct. 

DOT forwards complaints that it receives regarding in-flight sexual misconduct to the airline and 

directs the airline to respond directly to the consumer. Because complaints alleging in-flight 

sexual misconduct may involve potentially criminal conduct, in February 2020, DOT’s Office of 

Aviation Enforcement began sending complaints alleging in-flight sexual misconduct to the FBI 

for possible investigation. Previously, the Office of Aviation Enforcement informed passengers 

alleging in-flight sexual misconduct on how to contact the FBI but did not forward the 

complaints to the FBI. DOT’s Office of Aviation Enforcement does not have the authority to 

conduct criminal investigations.

 14 Press Release, U.S. Dep’t. of Just., U.S. Attorney’s Off. for the Western District of Wash., Two Men Charged in 

Separate Incidents of Sexual Assault Aboard Aircraft Destined for Sea-Tac Airport, (August 30, 2018), 

https://www.justice.gov/usao-wdwa/pr/two-men-charged-separate-incidents-sexual-assault-aboard-aircraft-destinedsea-tac-0. 15 Press Release, U.S. Fed. Bureau of Investigation, Sexual Assault Aboard Aircraft: Raising Awareness About a 

Serious Federal Crime, (April 26, 2018), https://www.fbi.gov/news/stories/raising-awareness-about-sexual-assaultaboard-aircraft-042618. The fiscal year is the accounting period for the federal government which begins on October 

1 of one calendar year and ends on September 30 of the next calendar year. 16 Id. 17 Data compiled by the Aviation Consumer Protection Division of the United States Department of Transportation, 

http://www.transportation.gov/airconsumer (last accessed November 1, 2019). 18 Id.
- 5 -

Sometimes, passengers report incidents of sexual misconduct to the FAA through the FAA 

Hotline Reporting Form, https://hotline.faa.gov (FAA Hotline). The FAA also learns of incidents 

of in-flight sexual misconduct through information relayed (in real time) to air traffic control 

from pilots and/or airline ground operations19 and through routine airline inspections, each 

housed in a different division of the FAA. The FAA has the authority under 49 U.S.C. § 46318 to 

investigate incidents of sexual assault or threats of sexual assault when such incidents are 

reported.20 However, the FAA does not maintain a database that segregates sexual assault 

incidents or threats from other prohibited incidents involving interference with a pilot or flight 

attendant.

21 

In the last five years, DOT’s Office of Inspector General (OIG) has received one complaint 

related to in-flight sexual misconduct, which was referred to the FBI and the FAA for further 

investigation. Generally, when criminal referrals are received by DOT’s OIG, either an OIG 

investigation is opened (when appropriate) or the initial complaint is closed and returned to the 

referring agency. DOT’s OIG informs the FBI of any criminal investigation that the OIG opens, 

and the FBI may or may not join the case. 

Passengers harassing, abusing, or assaulting other passengers in the close environment of an 

aircraft is not the only issue regarding sexual misconduct onboard aircraft.22 According to a 

survey conducted by the Association of Flight Attendants – CWA (AFA) in 2017, roughly 68% 

of flight attendants have reported being targets of sexual harassment and 18% experienced 

physical sexual harassment from passengers.23 The survey found that only 7% of flight 

attendants who have been victims of this widespread problem have reported it to their 

employers.24 According to the survey, the most common response to flight attendants 

experiencing physical harassment is to avoid further interaction with the passenger.25 

1.3 Jurisdictional Matters

Incidents of in-flight sexual misconduct pose unique jurisdictional challenges. The determination 

of whether a State, the Federal government, or another country has the authority to investigate 

in-flight sexual misconduct incidents and prosecute cases of this nature is based on where the 

incident occurred and whether the incident occurred on a U.S. air carrier or a foreign air carrier. 

 19 Ground operations centers may be called different names by different airlines. For example, ground operations 

centers may be referred to as a Network Operation Center, an Operation Control Center or a Flight Control 

Operations Center.

20 The FAA’s authority under 49 U.S.C. § 46318 is limited to incidents of physical or sexual assault or threats of 

physical or sexual assault. 21 See infra Chapter 4.5 for a full discussion of how FAA learns of incidents of in-flight sexual misconduct. 22 See FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION, U.S. DEP’T. OF TRANSP., Unruly Passengers Calendar Years 1995-

2019. (2019). 23 Press Release, Assoc. of Flight Attendants – CWA, Survey Reveals Widespread Harassment of Flight 

Attendants, (May 10, 2018), https://www.afacwa.org/survey_reveals_widespread_harassment_of_flight_attendants. 

According to the survey, physical sexual harassment included “having their breasts, buttocks and crotch area 

“touched, felt, pulled, grabbed, groped, slapped, rubbed, and fondled” both on top of and under their uniforms. Other 

abuse included passengers cornering or lunging at them followed by unwanted hugs, kisses and humping.” 24 Id. 25Id.
- 6 -

Generally, a crime committed aboard an aircraft falls within the jurisdiction of the FBI.

26 Acts 

that are ordinarily State crimes, such as sexual assault, can be prosecuted under federal law if 

they occur within the special aircraft jurisdiction of the United States.27 The criminal acts that 

can be prosecuted under special aircraft jurisdiction include, among others, assault

28 and sexual 

abuse offenses.

29 In addition, special aircraft jurisdiction extends to lewd, indecent, or obscene 

acts, as defined in the code of the District of Columbia.30 Therefore, acts that constitute sexual 

misconduct31 on aircraft are within the investigative purview of the FBI when they occur within 

the special aircraft jurisdiction of the United States. 

Special aircraft jurisdiction applies to an “aircraft in flight” that can be categorized as:

• a civil aircraft of the U.S.

• another aircraft in the U.S.

• another aircraft outside the U.S. that has its next scheduled destination or last place of 

departure in the U.S., if the aircraft next lands in the U.S.32

In other words, the special aircraft jurisdiction applies to an aircraft operated by a U.S. carrier, 

irrespective of its origin or destination, from the moment all external doors are closed following 

boarding through the moment that the external door is opened to allow passengers to deplane.33

However, when the U.S. carrier’s destination is a foreign country, it is more difficult for the FBI 

to investigate in that country and for the U.S. Attorney’s Office in the relevant jurisdiction to 

prosecute such cases despite having the authority. According to the FBI, if an incident of sexual 

misconduct occurs on a U.S. carrier arriving at a foreign airport, local law enforcement is the 

first to respond to the aircraft. As such, local law enforcement may gather preliminary 

information for foreign incidents even when the FBI has jurisdictional authority. With regard to 

an aircraft operated by a foreign air carrier, the special aircraft jurisdiction applies from the 

moment all external doors are closed following boarding through the moment that the external 

door is opened in the United States to allow passengers to deplane. The FBI does not have the 

authority to investigate or prosecute sexual misconduct incidents that occur on a foreign air 

carrier when its destination is a foreign country. 

Separately, the FBI can investigate incidents involving pilots or flight attendants under 49 U.S.C. 

§ 46504, which covers assault, intimidation, or interference with the pilot or flight attendant.

34

For example, simple assault, made criminal within the special aircraft jurisdiction of the United 

States by 49 U.S.C. § 46506, can be a lesser included offense of interference with pilots or flight 

attendants.35 It is worth noting that a State may also have concurrent jurisdiction with the Federal 

 26 49 U.S.C. § 46506(1). 27 Id. 28 18 U.S.C. § 113. 29 18 U.S.C. §§ 2241 – 44. 30 49 U.S.C. § 46506(2); see also, D.C. Code § 22-1112 (laws on indecent exposure). 31 See infra, Chapter 2 “Definition of Sexual Misconduct”. 32 49 U.S.C. § 46501(2). 33 49 U.S.C. § 46501(1). 34 49 U.S.C. § 46504 (applies to assault or intimidation of a “flight crew member or flight attendant”, interference 

with the performance of their duties or attempts or conspiracy to take such acts; this statute does not apply to 

passengers). 35 See United States v. Flores, 968 F.2d 1366, 1370‐72 (1st Cir. 1992).
- 7 -

government to investigate and prosecute in-flight sexual misconduct incidents in situations 

where the flight operated solely within one State. 

1.4 Task Force Reviews and Analysis

The Task Force had an organizational meeting by teleconference in March 2019, and held inperson meetings in April, May, June, July, and September 2019. During these meetings, the Task 

Force reviewed complaints of sexual misconduct filed with DOT, heard first-hand accounts from 

passengers and flight attendants who have experienced in-flight sexual misconduct, and learned 

about actions that airlines and law enforcement have taken after such incidents. The Task Force 

also reviewed the results of airline and airport surveys regarding reporting, training, and data 

collection. The Task Force heard from law enforcement and Federal agencies on their efforts to 

address incidents of sexual misconduct and listened to the perspectives of consumers, labor 

unions, a provider of victim services, victim-centered nonprofits, and experts focused on training 

related to sexual violence and harassment. The Task Force analyzed the information in 

connection with awareness, training, reporting, and data collection. 

a. April 2019 Meeting: The April 10 meeting had four areas of focus: (1) the definition of 

sexual misconduct, (2) training, (3) data collection, and (4) reporting. During this foundational 

meeting, members of the Task Force presented in their respective areas of expertise to ensure a 

better understanding of the problem. For example, DOT provided information on the complaints 

that it has received from members of the public alleging sexual misconduct during flights. The 

presentations led to discussions about current airline training practices for flight attendants, 

pilots, and others when responding to reported incidents of sexual misconduct. The Task Force 

also discussed current law enforcement and data collection practices and existing ways 

passengers report incidents.

b. May 2019 Meeting: At the May 22 meeting, the Task Force hosted an all-day listening 

session to hear first-hand accounts from individuals who have experienced sexual misconduct 

onboard a commercial aircraft. 

During the first listening session, a woman described her disbelief when she woke up to find a 

man grabbing her crotch in the middle of a flight and stated there was a lack of response from 

flight attendants and law enforcement authorities after she told them her account. In the second 

listening session, another woman spoke about having her breast groped by a male passenger 

seated behind her. During the third listening session, a woman stated that the female passenger 

sitting next to her was masturbating and she did not want to ring the call button for the flight 

attendant or get up to tell a flight attendant because the “fasten seatbelt” sign was illuminated in 

preparation for landing. During the fourth listening session, a flight attendant described her 

agitation when a passenger grabbed her breasts as she was assisting him in removing his bag 

from the overhead compartment.

The Task Force heard about the process these individuals followed to report incidents of in-flight 

sexual misconduct to the airline or law enforcement, learned about the action the airline or law 

enforcement took, or did not take, to act on those reports, and heard from the victims on what 

actions they believe the airline or law enforcement could have taken to address the incidents. The 
- 8 -

Task Force discussed training, data collection, passenger awareness campaigns, and reporting

protocols in light of the incidents shared during the listening session.

c. June 2019 Meeting: The June 26 and June 27 meetings of the Task Force included a listening 

session and further discussions on defining sexual misconduct, data collection, reporting, and 

awareness. During the listening session, a flight attendant shared her experience with incidents of

in-flight sexual misconduct, which included instances where she was the victim and others where 

passengers were the victims. She described an incident where a young boy seated next to his 

father was inappropriately touched by another passenger seated behind them. She also shared her 

experience with passengers taking inappropriate or suggestive photos of other passengers.

A consumer rights organization, not represented on the Task Force, also presented regarding its 

concerns about in-flight sexual misconduct and shared recommendations to address it. The Task 

Force continued to discuss ways to increase awareness about in-flight sexual misconduct, and 

worked to develop a definition of sexual misconduct in light of the incidents shared during the 

listening sessions. In addition, the Task Force discussed data collection purposes and practices. 

Through a collaborative discussion, the Task Force developed a preliminary working definition 

of sexual misconduct for purposes of its work and recommendations. The Task Force also 

identified purposes of data collection and continued its discussion of awareness campaigns 

conducted by airports and airlines.

d. July 2019 Meeting: The Task Force held its fourth meeting on July 24. During this meeting, 

the Task Force focused on reporting practices, including how passengers who experience inflight sexual misconduct communicate with airline staff, how best to obtain relevant contact 

information from victims and alleged offenders, and how and when to contact law enforcement. 

Lastly, the Task Force discussed additional data collection practices by airlines and reviewed 

airline definitions of sexual misconduct. The Task Force continued to take into consideration 

information shared during the listening sessions in May and June during these discussions.

e. September 2019 Meeting: The Task Force met on September 24 and 25 to discuss current 

training practices and limitations of such trainings’ application, including sexual misconduct 

training in other industries. The FAA presented information about reporting, coordination with 

law enforcement, and the FAA’s purview over sexual misconduct. The Task Force also reviewed 

all prior suggestions and areas of agreement for purposes of its report, to reach consensus on 

recommendations and discussion topics.

f. October and November 2019 Teleconferences: The Task Force had telephone conferences

in October and November to discuss the contents of this Report. 

The Task Force established an email address where members of the public could contact the 

Task Force and posted periodic updates on the Task Force’s webpage.36 

 36 The Task Force’s webpage can be accessed at https://www.transportation.gov/airconsumer/ACPAC/in-flightsexual-misconduct-task-force
- 9 -

1.5 Scope of Task Force’s Review

The focus of the Task Force’s work has been on in-flight sexual misconduct incidents involving 

passengers; however, the Task Force also heard first-hand accounts from flight attendants who 

have experienced incidents of in-flight sexual misconduct and reviewed survey data from a flight 

attendant association.

37 The Task Force recognizes that, according to the survey, most flight 

attendants have been subjected to sexual misconduct in the course of their duties and, as a result, 

may have experienced trauma that affects their ability to respond when incidents involving 

sexual misconduct are reported by passengers. The Task Force expects that, although this report 

is focused on passengers, implementation of the Task Force’s recommendations may also 

improve responses to reports of sexual misconduct experienced by flight attendants and reduce 

such incidents.

 37 Press Release, Assoc. of Flight Attendants – CWA, Survey Reveals Widespread Harassment of Flight 

Attendants, (May 10, 2018), https://www.afacwa.org/survey_reveals_widespread_harassment_of_flight_attendants. 
- 10 -

Chapter 2 

Definition of Sexual Misconduct

Ms. B stated that she was seated by the window on a night-time flight. She explained that when 

she leaned her head against the window to sleep, she felt something on the side of her seat. She 

expounded that the male passenger behind her had reached his hand forward, between the seat 

and the window to grope her breast.

Ms. B, meeting #2

Ms. E recounted an incident where a male passenger approached her in the back galley and 

began a conversation with her. She stated that the male passenger asked her to join the milehigh club with him. 

Ms. E, meeting #3

Ms. C described an incident that she experienced on a flight she took with her husband. Ms. C 

stated that she was seated in the middle seat next to her husband and the female passenger in the 

window seat next to her began to masturbate. 

Ms. C, meeting #2

The term “sexual misconduct” can encompass a variety of actions. The Joint Statement requests

the establishment of a task force to address “sexual assault” and “sexual harassment” onboard 

aircraft.38 The FAA Act mandates the establishment of the National In-Flight Sexual Misconduct 

Task Force. The FAA Act does not provide a definition for the term “sexual misconduct.”39

Moreover, there is also no Federal definition for sexual misconduct in the U.S. Code and 

definitions vary State by State. Because there is no definition of sexual misconduct in the FAA 

Act, the Task Force deliberated on what sexual misconduct should mean in connection to its 

efforts to address training, reporting, awareness, and data collection. 

2.1 Statutory Language

The United States Code defines several terms that may be considered sexual misconduct, but the 

term “sexual misconduct” is not defined. The FBI explained that it relies on the following code

definitions when pursuing cases of in-flight sexual misconduct:

Simple Assault40 ⟶ “[I]n a prosecution for simple assault under 18 USC § 

113(a)(5), it is sufficient to show that the defendant 

 38 See Joint Statement attached at Appendix B, p. 11. 39 See generally, FAA Act. 40 The statute for simple assault does not include a definition for simple assault, but rather, it sets out the punishment 

for the crime of simple assault. The common law understanding of the term is that only a showing that the defendant

“deliberately touched another in a patently offensive manner without justification or excuse” is required. United 

States v. Bayes, 210 F.3d 64, 69 (2000).
- 11 -

deliberately touched another in a patently offensive manner 

without justification or excuse.”41

Sexual Abuse ⟶ Causing another to engage in a “sexual act” through threats or 

fear; OR 

Engaging in a sexual act with someone incapable of consent 

or physically incapable of declining participation or 

communicating unwillingness.42

“Sexual act”: requires direct physical contact with genitalia, 

not through clothing.43

Sexual abuse of a 

minor or ward 

⟶ Whoever knowingly engages in a sexual act with another 

person who has attained the age of 12 years but has not 

attained the age of 16 years; and is at least four years younger 

than the person so engaging.44

Aggravated sexual 

abuse 

⟶ Knowingly causing another person to engage in a sexual act 

by using force against that other person; or by threatening or 

placing that other person in fear that any person will be 

subjected to death, serious bodily injury, or kidnapping;

OR

Knowingly rendering another person unconscious and thereby 

engaging in a sexual act with that other person; or 

administering to another person by force or threat of force, or 

without the knowledge or permission of that person, a drug, 

intoxicant, or other similar substance and thereby 

substantially impairing the ability of that other person to 

appraise or control conduct and engaging in a sexual act with 

that other person.45

Abusive Sexual 

Contact

⟶ Knowingly engaging in sexual contact with another without 

permission.46

“Sexual contact”: intentional touching, directly or through the 

clothing, of genitalia, anus, groin, breast, inner thigh, or 

buttocks of any person with an intent to abuse, humiliate, 

harass, degrade, or arouse or gratify sexual desire.47

 41 Bayes, 210 F.3d at 69. 42 18 U.S.C. § 2242. 43 18 U.S.C. § 2246(2). 44 18 U.S.C. § 2243. 45 18 U.S.C. § 2241. 46 18 U.S.C. § 2244. 47 18 U.S.C. § 2246(2).
- 12 -

Lewd, indecent, or 

obscene acts 

⟶ An obscene or indecent exposure of his or her genitalia or 

anus, to engage in masturbation, or to engage in a sexual 

act.48

2.2 Definitions Used by Commercial Airlines

The Task Force airline representatives reached out to the major U.S. airlines49 to request 

information on how they define sexual misconduct. The airlines surveyed represent 

approximately 95% of all domestic air traffic. The airlines were asked whether or not they define 

sexual assault or sexual misconduct and if they do not, how those incidents should be defined. 

Nine out of the fifteen airlines that responded to the survey stated that they define sexual 

misconduct or sexual assault and shared their definitions with the Task Force.

Airline #1 ⟶ Behavior that may include unwelcome sexual advances, requests for 

sexual favors, verbal remarks or physical conduct of an intimate or 

sexual nature.

Airline #2 ⟶ Sexual misconduct is a broad term encompassing any unwelcome 

behavior of a sexual nature that is committed without consent or by 

force, intimidation, coercion, or manipulation.

Airline #3 ⟶ Sexual misconduct is a broad term encompassing any unwelcome 

behavior of a sexual nature that is committed without consent or by 

force, intimidation, coercion, or manipulation. 

Sexual misconduct can be committed by a person of any gender, and 

it can occur between people of the same or different gender while on 

duty or on Company property. It also extends to off duty and offproperty situations if it involves sexual harassment or any conduct 

of a sexual nature that is without consent, or has the effect of 

threatening or intimidating the individual.

Airline #4 ⟶ Sexual harassment is defined as any unsolicited or unwelcome 

sexual advance, or other verbal or physical conduct of a sexual 

nature towards another individual, when submission to the conduct 

is made explicitly or implicitly a term or condition for employment 

or interferes with an individual’s performance or creates a hostile or 

offensive work environment.

Sexual harassment includes, but is not limited to:

• Suggestive comments, gestures, threats, or insults.

• Flirting, touching, advances, or propositions.

• The display of sexually suggestive objects or pictures, 

including texts and emails. 

 48 D.C. Code § 22-1312. 49 The airlines contacted were the 17 U.S. air carriers that have at least 0.5 percent of total domestic scheduledservice passenger revenues. See Chapters 4.1, 5.4, and 6.2 for more information on the airline surveys.
- 13 -

• Physical conduct such as assault, unwelcomed touching, 

blocking normal movement, or interfering with work when 

such conduct is engaged in on the basis of sex, race, or any 

other protected basis.

Airline #5 

and Airline 

#6

⟶ Unwelcome touching or advances of a sexual nature 

OR

Unwelcome touching or sexual assault by another passenger

Airline #7 ⟶ Unwelcome touching or advances sexual in nature.

Airline #8 ⟶ Sexual misconduct is defined under “inappropriate behavior” 

(sexual or otherwise).

Airline #9 ⟶ Sexual misconduct is the unwelcome touching or advances of a 

sexual nature, or the inappropriate conduct of a sexual nature.

The remaining six airlines responded that they do not have a definition of sexual misconduct or 

sexual assault. 

Five of the six airlines that do not define sexual misconduct did note, however, that they follow 

Transportation Security Administration (TSA)-approved security protocols50, or other existing 

procedures to address disruptive passenger behavior when handling incidents of sexual 

misconduct. One airline stated that incidents of in-flight sexual misconduct fall under the broader 

definition of “physically abusive behavior” under the TSA security program. Another airline 

stated that it is in the process of reviewing internal policies, procedures, and training related to 

sexual misconduct. This airline further stated that it will consider defining terms such as sexual 

misconduct or sexual assault if it would be helpful for its employees. A third airline stated that 

while it does not define sexual misconduct or sexual assault, the issue is being addressed through 

initial and recurrent flight attendant training to raise awareness and facilitate discussion on the 

best way to handle incidents of sexual misconduct. 

The Task Force noted throughout the meetings that increased social activism (such as the 

“#MeToo” movement) and attention on this issue have resulted in widespread efforts to address 

sexual misconduct, and have prompted airlines to review their policies and response protocols. In 

turn, many airlines have indicated a willingness to revise applicable policies and procedures. The 

Task Force aims to provide guidance on effective ways to do so.

 50 The TSA-approved security protocols adopted by the airlines contain Sensitive Security Information (SSI) that, if 

released, would be detrimental to transportation security, as defined by 49 C.F.R. Part 1520. Generally, TSAapproved security protocols focus on whether or not the misconduct at issue may be considered a security threat and 

do not address passenger-on-passenger misconduct specifically. 
- 14 -

2.3 Other Definitions Provided by Task Force Members

In addition to airline and statutory definitions relating to sexual misconduct, the Task Force 

member from a labor organization representing flight attendants presented additional 

terminology to facilitate the discussion. 

Sexual 

Misconduct

⟶ Sexual misconduct encompasses a range of behavior used to obtain 

sexual gratification against another’s will or at the expense of 

another. Sexual misconduct includes sexual harassment, sexual 

assault, and any conduct of a sexual nature that is without consent, or 

has the effect of threatening or intimidating the person against whom 

such conduct is directed.

Sexual 

Harassment

⟶ Behavior characterized by the making of unwelcome and 

inappropriate sexual remarks or physical advances in the workplace 

or other professional or social situation.

Sexual Assault ⟶ Unwanted sexual contact that stops short of rape or attempted rape. 

This includes sexual touching and fondling.

Lastly, the Task Force member representing a national organization that provides services to 

sexual assault victims, the Rape, Abuse, & Incest National Network (RAINN), shared that 

RAINN does not define sexual misconduct specifically as the organization uses the term “sexual 

violence” as an all-encompassing, non-legal term that refers to crimes like sexual assault, rape, 

and sexual assault. Legal definitions of these crimes vary from State to State, but RAINN shared 

its definitions relating to sexual violence and harassment. 

Sexual Assault ⟶ The term sexual assault refers to sexual contact or behavior that 

occurs without explicit consent of the victim. Some forms of sexual 

assault include:

 Attempted rape

 Fondling or unwanted sexual touching

 Forcing a victim to perform sexual acts, such as oral sex or 

penetrating the perpetrator’s body

 Penetration of the victim’s body, also known as rape

Sexual Harassment ⟶ RAINN’s website states that sexual harassment is a broad term, 

 including many types of unwelcome verbal and physical sexual 

 attention, which may include: 

 Unwelcome sexual advances

 Requests for sexual favors

 Other verbal or physical harassment of a sexual nature

It specifically mentions that sexual harassment laws do not generally 

cover teasing or offhand comments.
- 15 -

2.4 Considerations in Defining Sexual Misconduct 

The Task Force agreed that a simple, understandable definition with non-legal terminology

would be most useful. Therefore, to begin its deliberations, the Task Force rejected the statutory 

definitions and used a definition provided by an airline as a working model to adapt for its 

purposes. That definition reads: “sexual misconduct is a broad term encompassing any 

unwelcome behavior of a sexual nature that is committed without consent or by force, 

intimidation, coercion, or manipulation.”

Task Force deliberation addressed specific language and terms that could be incorporated into a 

definition of sexual misconduct. 

“Broad term”: The Task Force noted that if the definition of sexual misconduct was limited to 

acts identified in the criminal code, it might not capture incidents of unwelcomed conduct that do 

not rise to the level of being a crime. However, the Task Force noted that if the definition is too 

broad, it will capture conduct that perhaps should not be included for purposes of data collection, 

blurring lines between the roles of airline personnel and law enforcement. The Task Force agreed 

that a definition that is broad for the purpose of deterring passengers from committing acts of 

sexual misconduct, but narrow for the purpose of collecting consistent data and providing a 

consistent baseline for airlines to consult, would be a good balance. 

“Any Behavior or Attempted Behavior”: The Task Force noted that some of the definitions 

discussed by the Task Force left out attempted behavior. The Task Force discussed how the 

definition should encompass any behavior or attempted behavior. 

“Sexual in Nature”: In trying to define acts of a sexual nature, the Task Force differentiated 

between touching and non-touching conduct, and discussed examples of each. In the touching 

category were unwelcome shoulder rubs, repeatedly brushing up against legs or arms, touching 

or grabbing hips or breasts, and groping/fondling genitalia or the genital region. In the nontouching category, the Task Force noted that making sexual comments, requests, or verbal 

advances, displaying pornographic material in plain view, “up-skirting” (taking a photograph up 

someone’s skirt without permission), air-dropping sexually explicit content via cell phones, 

masturbation, and exposure of genitalia should be captured. The Task Force faced a challenge in 

coming up with a working definition that encompassed touching and non-touching sexual acts 

that may not necessarily be crimes, although many are.

51 The Task Force discussed whether 

making sexual comments, verbal advances, or viewing pornographic material in plain view 

should be considered sexual misconduct even though most these actions alone may not result in a 

criminal prosecution.

“Consent”: Definitions of consent vary from State to State. However broadly defined, consent is 

an agreement between participants to engage in sexual activity. In general, there are three main 

ways States analyze consent in relation to sexual acts - was there affirmative consent? was the 

 51 See, e.g., 18 U.S.C §§ 113, 2242, 2244; D.C. Code § 22-1312.
- 16 -

consent freely given (without fraud, coercion violence, or threats)? and did the individual have 

the capacity to consent?52

“Without Consent”: The Task Force discussed that the definition should address actions that 

are non-consensual and added as acts done by force, intimidation, coercion, or manipulation. 

“Incapable of Consent”: The Task Force debated the need for a definition that addressed 

persons with intellectual disabilities, who cannot consent, or individuals who are incapable of 

consent because of prescription medicine (Xanax, Ambien, etc.) taken to help them sleep and/or 

reduce anxiety. For that reason, the Task Force considered adding “committed without consent 

or with someone incapable of consent” to the definition. 

“Physical or Verbal Harassment of a Sexual Nature”: The Task Force deliberated over 

concern expressed by a flight attendant that she was verbally harassed by a passenger. The flight 

attendant described being called a sexually suggestive nickname and asked repeatedly to join the 

“mile high club.” Although verbal harassment might already be encompassed in the definition of 

sexual misconduct because it is non-consensual behavior that is sexual in nature, adding the term 

“physical or verbal harassment” in the definition was important to the Task Force in order to 

encompass this behavior specifically. The Task Force also recognized that harassment, not only

assault, can be physical and wanted to be clear that both are included in the definition.

“Manipulation”: The Task Force addressed whether the term “manipulation” was overly broad 

and appropriate in this context, since manipulation usually takes place over an extended period 

of time. The law enforcement representatives on the Task Force explained that, in the context of 

sexual misconduct on an aircraft, the term “manipulation” refers to the process of making a 

victim think the contact or conversation is normal, and manipulating a situation so sexual 

misconduct seems less of a crime, and more of a simple mistake (e.g., they wanted it, they were 

into me, we were both having fun). On an aircraft, this process could last a few minutes or hours. 

The law enforcement representatives shared examples where a seemingly innocent exchange at 

the start of the flight leads to physical contact, such as a hand grab or a touch of the knee, and 

that contact changes from innocent to sexual in nature—either when the victim is awake or 

asleep. 

2.5 Definition of Sexual Misconduct

After deliberations, the Task Force produced a working definition of sexual misconduct:

Sexual misconduct is a broad term. It encompasses any behavior or attempted behavior of a 

sexual nature that is committed without consent or with someone incapable of consent, or by 

force, intimidation, coercion, or manipulation. Sexual misconduct also includes physical or 

verbal advances or harassment of a sexual nature, or public indecent exposure.

 52 See Rape, Abuse & Incest National Network, Legal Role of Consent, https://www.rainn.org/articles/legal-roleconsent (last visited Dec. 12, 2019). 
- 17 -

This definition informed the majority of the Task Force discussions about awareness, reporting

data collection, and training. This definition is intended to provide context for the 

recommendations made by the Task Force in this report, as well as to guide airlines and other 

organizations adopting them in the best way to prevent and respond to incidents of sexual 

misconduct.53

2.6 Recommendation on the Definition of Sexual Misconduct

The Task Force noted that the FAA Act does not define “sexual misconduct” and there is no 

other federal statute that defines this term. Therefore, the Task Force determined that, to address 

sexual misconduct aboard passenger aircraft better, there needs to be a definition of the term that 

the Federal government, the airlines, law enforcement, and passengers can use for the sake of 

consistency in policies and procedures to handle and report incidents of in-flight sexual 

misconduct.

Through collaborative discussions, the Task Force reviewed a variety of definitions relating to 

non-consensual sexual acts. These included statutory definitions, and definitions provided by the 

airlines, RAINN, and flight attendants unions. The Task Force agreed on the following definition

and adopted it for purposes of this report:

Sexual misconduct is a broad term. It encompasses any behavior or attempted behavior of a 

sexual nature that is committed without consent or with someone incapable of consent, or by 

force, intimidation, coercion, or manipulation. Sexual misconduct also includes physical or 

verbal advances or harassment of a sexual nature, or public indecent exposure.

Recommendation: Widespread adoption of a standardized definition will facilitate better data 

collection, reporting, and training within the airline industry. The Task Force encourages airlines 

to incorporate the Task Force’s definition of sexual misconduct in their operation manuals, 

training, data collection, and reporting policies and procedures as appropriate. 

Recommendation: The Task Force encourages law enforcement responding to reported incidents 

of in-flight misconduct to be made aware of the Task Force’s definition. 

 53 See infra, Chapter 7 for findings and recommendations.
- 18 -

Chapter 3

Awareness

Ms. A stressed the importance of increasing awareness that the FBI has jurisdiction to 

investigate in-flight sexual misconduct incidents.

Ms. A meeting #2

Ms. C stated she told an airline representative at the gate what had happened on the plane but 

was told to speak with customer care. She stated that customer care was unhelpful and she was 

told that nothing could be done because the incident was not reported on the plane. She stated 

that she did not know what she should have done to report the incident. 

Ms. C meeting #2 

Section 338 of the FAA Act expresses the Sense of Congress that airlines should have policies 

and procedures in place to inform personnel and passengers of their rights with respect to sexual 

misconduct.54 The Task Force considers public awareness to be fundamental for reporting. In the 

course of discussions, it became apparent that when passengers do not know that sexual 

misconduct may be a crime and are unaware of how to report incidents as soon as they happen, 

they fail to report (or report belatedly) the incidents to airlines and law enforcement, which limits 

the possibility for effective responsive action. In addition, it is also important to increase 

awareness of the potential severity of these incidents within airlines and law enforcement, to 

ensure that they are aware of appropriate response procedures when faced with such incidents. 

Therefore, the Task Force discussed ways to enhance passenger awareness of in-flight sexual 

misconduct and reporting methods. Informing passengers about standards of behavior, airline 

sexual misconduct policies, and how to report an incident of in-flight sexual misconduct are 

necessary actions to combat the problem. 

3.1 Awareness Campaigns by the Government

In April 2018, the FBI launched the Be Air Aware campaign to help combat instances of in-flight 

sexual assault. The FBI designed, produced and distributed posters55 to airports to be displayed 

across the United States. The posters state that sexual assault on an aircraft is a federal crime and 

included the FBI hotline telephone number. The FBI provided the posters to airports in paper and 

digital form which allowed the airports to customize the poster with local phone numbers. The 

digital form also gave airports the opportunity to display the poster on their website. The 

campaign, which cost under $5,000, alerts potential offenders that sexual assault is a crime and 

informs victims of a means to report the crime. The Be Air Aware campaign raised awareness 

nationwide, a benefit that outweighed the cost to the Federal government.

In Fiscal Year 2017, there were 63 investigations involving in-flight sexual misconduct. In Fiscal 

Year 2018, that number rose to 84. During Fiscal Year 2019, the FBI implemented a new 

designation code specifically for sexual misconduct on board an aircraft to help facilitate better 

incident tracking, and the number of investigations handled by the FBI rose to 119. The number

 54 See FAA Act, attached at Appendix A. 55 See FBI Be Air Aware Campaign poster, at Appendix E.
- 19 -

may reflect a higher number of incidents occurring, or a higher number of people reporting 

incidents of sexual misconduct due to greater awareness as a result of campaigns, such as the Be 

Air Aware campaign which began in 2018, and media reporting on the issue.

DOT’s Office of the Secretary has taken steps to raise awareness of the potential criminal nature 

of incidents of in-flight sexual misconduct and ensure that any reported incidents are referred to 

the appropriate authorities. In particular, DOT has adopted the Task Force’s definition of sexual 

misconduct and has incorporated this definition into its revised on-line consumer complaint 

form.56 The consumer complaint form now states:

INCIDENTS OF SEXUAL MISCONDUCT 

If your complaint relates to or includes allegations of sexual misconduct, a copy of 

your complaint will be sent to the FBI. Sexual misconduct is a broad term. It 

encompasses any behavior or attempted behavior of a sexual nature that is 

committed without consent or with someone incapable of consent, or by force, 

intimidation, coercion, or manipulation. Sexual misconduct also includes physical 

or verbal advances or harassment of a sexual nature, or public indecent exposure.

Ensuring that incidents of in-flight sexual misconduct are reported to the FBI will result in a 

better understanding of the nature and extent of the problem and increase opportunities to hold 

offenders accountable.

The FAA will also raise awareness about incidents of in-flight sexual misconduct. The FAA 

plans to direct users to the FBI when they receive a report of in-flight sexual misconduct. In 

addition, the FAA recently revised its Compliance and Enforcement Handbook to update the 

civil penalty sanctions as it relates to in-flight sexual assault as provided in Section 339 of the 

FAA Act. 

3.2 Awareness Campaigns by Airports

The Task Force member representing airports reached out to member airports of Airports 

Council International-North America to assess existing awareness campaigns (if any) and 

willingness to engage in awareness campaigns addressing in-flight sexual misconduct. 

Out of the over 173-member airports asked to participate in the survey, 18 member airports 

responded. Regarding ways the airports currently inform passengers about how to report in-flight 

sexual misconduct, two stated that they share information on the airport website, five stated they 

share information on signs posted in public areas throughout the airport, and ten stated “none of 

the above.” When asked which entities assist in public awareness campaigns about how to report 

in-flight sexual misconduct, two stated the FBI, another two airports stated local law 

enforcement, one stated “other,” and the remaining 11 stated “none of the above.” Lastly, 

airports were asked if in the future, they would be willing to inform passengers about how to 

report incidents of in-flight sexual misconduct. One airport stated they would be willing to do so 

through airport announcements, eight airports stated they would be willing to put information on 

 56 See https://www.transportation.gov/airconsumer/file-consumer-complaint
- 20 -

their airport website, five stated through signs posted in public areas within the airport, and two 

stated “none of the above.”

The Task Force discussed the benefits of airports supporting the awareness campaign but also 

acknowledges the challenges mentioned associated with awareness campaigns in airports. 

a. Competing Interests: Campaigns against sexual misconduct aboard aircraft are 

competing against other awareness campaigns. For example, human trafficking and 

homelessness in airports are both issues that have gained increased attention at airports.

b. Private versus Public Space: Space within airports is divided between commercial and

public ad space. The precise division of this space differs from airport to airport. Some

airports might have a large amount of space for awareness campaigns while others might 

not.

c. Visual Aspects: Whether it be digitally or through posters displayed in airports, the word 

“sexual” might trigger negative imagery if shown on posters throughout airports, 

especially with young children. 

d. Effectiveness: The effectiveness of an airport passenger awareness airport campaign on 

incidents occurring in-flight would be difficult to measure.

3.3 Awareness Campaigns by Airlines

In addition to discussing awareness campaigns in airports, the Task Force also discussed 

awareness campaigns by airlines. The Task Force airline representatives reached out to the 

largest U.S. airlines to request information on their practices and procedures, as they related to 

incidents of sexual misconduct. The airlines surveyed account for approximately 95% of the 

domestic air traffic in the United States. Eleven out of seventeen airlines responded to the portion 

of the survey related to awareness.

57 When asked how airlines currently inform passengers about 

how to report incidents of in-flight sexual misconduct, one airline stated it informs passengers 

about how to report incidents of in-flight sexual misconduct through its website, and the 

remaining ten stated they currently do not inform passengers about how to report incidents of inflight sexual misconduct. The survey had asked whether airlines inform passengers on how to 

report in-flight sexual misconduct incidents through the use of onboard announcements, airline 

apps, airline in-flight magazines, or seat back pocket brochures. The Task Force is aware of one 

airline that informs passengers about how to report incidents of in-flight sexual misconduct 

through the use of onboard announcement.

When the surveyed airlines were asked if they would be willing, in the future, to inform 

passengers on how to report an incident of in-flight sexual misconduct through onboard 

announcement, airline apps, airline in-flight magazines or seat back pocket brochures, most of 

them responded that they would not. 

 57 Questions seeking information on airline practices to inform passengers about how incidents of sexual misconduct 

may be reported were included in the survey of airlines focused on reporting practices because the Task Force 

considered awareness a precursor to reporting.
- 21 -

Figure 1 below provides greater detail.

Figure 1: Airline Survey on Reporting Practices (Willingness to Inform Passengers on Reporting)

58

The Task Force discussed the effectiveness of each means of communication with passengers. 

a. Onboard Announcements: The survey indicated that airlines are not willing to include 

information about how to report incidents of sexual misconduct through onboard 

announcements, as illustrated in Figure 1. The Task Force noted that a representative from 

Alaska Airlines spoke at a Task Force meeting about the airlines’ current practices in 

combating in-flight sexual misconduct. The representative explained that Alaska Airlines 

currently makes in-flight announcements directing passengers to reach out to flight 

attendants when they observe or experience unwelcome behavior. 

Alaska Airlines’ announcement is as follows: “Federal law requires you to comply with all 

crewmember instructions, lighted signs, and posted placards. Your safety and well-being are 

important to us. Please report any unwelcome behavior to a crewmember. Smoking, vaping, 

using chewing tobacco, and consuming your own alcohol are prohibited ... as are tampering 

with, disabling, or destroying lavatory smoke detectors.” 

The Task Force noted that an onboard announcement like this might be a good option for an 

airline that wishes to relay the message that flight attendants can assist passengers if they are 

subjected to unwelcome behavior on the aircraft.

 

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Announcements Website App Magazine Seat Back Pocket

1 1

4

2

1 1

0

4

3

2

1

9

2

6 6

9

1

2

Continue Yes Maybe No Unanswered or N/A
- 22 -

b. Information in the Seat Back Pocket: The Task Force discussed the option of airlines 

providing material in the seat back pocket to inform passengers that sexual misconduct is 

prohibited by including adding information in the in-flight magazine, or having a separate 

brochure or leaflet in the seat back pocket. 

In 2015, the International Air Transport Association (IATA), a trade association representing 

290 airlines, released a report titled “Guidance on Unruly Passenger Prevention and 

Management.”59 The primary purpose of the report was to emphasize prevention, 

management, and deterrence measures for unruly passengers aboard aircraft. The report 

included a passenger awareness leaflet60 that could potentially be used by airlines to promote 

the safety and security of all passengers. 

The leaflet itself describes unruly behavior that is prohibited in-flight, and provides examples 

of offensive acts such as harassment, verbal abuse, physical assault, and sexual offenses/lewd 

behavior. Additionally, the leaflet includes friendly pictograms to illustrate what offensive 

acts to avoid. Adding awareness materials like this in a seat back pocket might be helpful in 

determining what behavior is prohibited on an aircraft. Moreover, this is a good example of 

multiple issues being addressed in one document.

Currently, Alaska Airlines is the only airline that addresses sexual misconduct in its in-flight 

magazine under “Crew and Guest Safety” and states its zero-tolerance policy on verbal, 

digital, or physical harassment of any kind including sexual harassment. 61 In addition, the 

Alaska Airlines notice states that any unwelcome behavior should be reported to an 

employee immediately. As such, it describes the policy in writing, and flight attendants can 

present the policy to an alleged offender to persuade them to discontinue inappropriate 

behavior.

c. Airline Website/App: The Task Force discussed various electronic platforms that could be 

used for awareness campaigns such as the airline’s primary website, webpages, or pop ups 

related to accessing in-flight Wi-Fi or entertainment devices (accessed on the aircraft), and 

airline apps. As noted in the survey and illustrated in Figure 1, one airline uses its airline 

website to inform passengers on how to report an incident of in-flight sexual misconduct, 

however, none of the airlines that responded indicated that they share such information 

through their mobile app.

The survey also asked airlines if they would be willing to share information on how to report 

incidents of sexual misconduct. Six airlines responded that they would be willing to share 

such information via their website or app, and seven indicated that they would consider 

sharing such information via their website or app. To the extent airlines are willing to post 

resources to their websites and/or apps, this could be an efficient and non-invasive way of 

increasing passenger awareness. 

 59 IATA UNRULY PASSENGER PREVENTION AND MANAGEMENT 2ND EDITION, JANUARY 2015. 60 See Appendix G, IATA Sample Passenger Awareness Leaflet, Appendix K, IATA UNRULY PASSENGER 

PREVENTION AND MANAGEMENT. 61 See Alaska Airlines in-flight magazine excerpt, at Appendix F. 
- 23 -

d. Resource Card: The Task Force discussed having resource cards available for victims with 

information on what to look for in identifying sexual misconduct on a flight, how to report 

the incident to the appropriate authorities, and what victim support services are available for 

the passenger through the airline, law enforcement, or non-profit organizations.

The FBI shared a pocket-sized resource card for active shooter incidents62 as an example and 

the Task Force discussed the merits of developing a similar resource card for incidents of 

sexual misconduct. Having a small, physical reminder of the options available either in the 

seatback pocket, at airline gates, or for flight attendants and other airline personnel to hand 

out to passengers reporting sexual misconduct in flight or after landing could increase 

awareness, enable greater support of victims, and improve reporting outcomes. To the extent 

that airlines are willing to share resources on their website or apps, it would be possible for 

this resource card to be shared electronically as well. 

e. Passenger Code of Conduct: The Task Force discussed whether a passenger code of 

conduct might be an appropriate recommendation. A code of conduct would highlight the 

importance of appropriate conduct on flights and document what is expected out of each 

passenger and what will not be tolerated. In addition, that passenger code of conduct could be 

provided on a website, when purchasing a ticket, or even contained in the in-flight magazine. 

The airline survey did not ask if the airlines have codes of conduct in place, or if they would 

be willing to do so. However, one airline indicated an interest in developing a code of 

conduct that would incorporate issues relating to sexual misconduct and another suggested 

that it would include such language in its contract of carriage. Although airlines have rules 

against unruly passengers, the Task Force is not aware of any airline that has adopted 

passenger “codes of conduct” to address the issue of in-flight sexual misconduct. The Task 

Force noted that others in the transportation industry have adopted codes of conduct that 

patrons must abide by while using their service.

63

f. Passenger Survey: The Task Force discussed the feasibility of post-flight passenger surveys 

sent out via email as a way to raise awareness about in-flight sexual misconduct while also 

enhancing data collection. Airline representatives noted that individual airlines surveys are 

rare and are usually to assess passenger experiences, but industry wide surveys are conducted 

annually. The Task Force discussed whether a survey on sexual misconduct may make 

people uncomfortable and ways to adapt surveys to incentivize participation. Additional 

discussion on the use of passenger surveys focused on the data collection aspect, and is 

addressed in that section. 

 62 See U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, Active Shooter Event Quick Reference 

Guide attached at Appendix H. 63 See e.g., Uber Community Guidelines (https://www.uber.com/legal/community-guidelines/us-can-en/); see also 

Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority 

(https://media.metro.net/about_us/ethics/images/codeofconduct_customer.pdf). 
- 24 -

3.4 Challenges to Awareness Campaigns by Airlines

In response to the survey, airlines noted a few anticipated challenges to sharing information with 

passengers about how to report incidents of in-flight sexual misconduct:

• Perception that sexual misconduct is common or the issue impacts only that airline (i.e., it 

is not industry wide).

• Passenger facing material and/or content is controlled by mainline partners (fee for 

service carriers lack control over decision making about what information is 

communicated to passengers). 

The Task Force discussed these and other challenges airlines and passengers might face in regard 

to awareness campaigns on airplanes. 

a. Onboard Announcements: In response to the survey, airlines indicated that current in-flight 

announcements are lengthy and the cost of re-doing an in-flight announcement video is steep. 

Additionally, airlines expressed concern that including “in-flight sexual misconduct” in the 

in-flight announcement could create a negative atmosphere for passengers, and open the 

floodgates for additional in-flight announcements. The airline representatives also stated that 

there are equally important issues involving airline travel (e.g., human trafficking), and 

expressed concern that too much information would overload passengers and dilute the 

message. Ultimately, airlines stated that in-flight announcements serve the primary purpose 

of informing passengers about in-flight safety. 

b. Information in the Seat Back Pocket: The airline representatives shared with the Task 

Force that current sustainability efforts in the airline industry to reduce unnecessary weight

are leading to less paper on airplanes and the possibility that airlines might get rid of in-flight 

magazines as a whole. Furthermore, the Task Force discussed that, as passengers spend more 

time reading material on electronic devices, including information in the in-flight magazines 

or brochures in the seat back pocket might not be effective. Similar sustainability concerns 

were raised about physical copies of the resource card. The Task Force also discussed 

whether it is reasonable to burden flight attendants with the additional responsibility of 

keeping and distributing the cards. 

c. Passenger Code of Conduct: The Task Force members discussed the feasibility of a 

standard code of conduct and noted that lack of a standard code of conduct across the 

industry may be problematic. Determining where it should be displayed and how it would be 

enforced would also be up to individual airlines, reinforcing the lack of standardization.

d. Airline Website/App: Airline representatives also raised a concern that information on 

airline websites/apps would create a negative perception of flying and mislead passengers 

about the prevalence of sexual misconduct. Airlines indicated that having sexual misconduct 

so prominently displayed defeats goals relating to customer service and sense of security.

e. Passenger Surveys: Each airline develops passenger surveys independently, meaning that 

there is no common methodology to survey passengers. Without that consistency across 
- 25 -

airlines, passengers may receive conflicting information about various airline policies, which 

could increase confusion rather than awareness. Data collection for public use could also be 

hindered by this inconsistency, although airlines would have more information to inform 

their own internal training and reporting processes.

3.5 Recommendations on Awareness

The Task Force addressed passenger awareness of sexual misconduct because it is an aspect of 

the reporting process. Awareness campaigns are intended both to deter offenders and to inform 

victims of available resources (including recourse), how to report incidents and the availability of 

victim support services. Options for awareness campaigns include in-flight verbal or video 

announcements, inclusion of information in the in-flight magazine or other seat back pocket 

materials, posters or other signage, adopting and posting a passenger code of conduct (which 

may include the definition of sexual misconduct and the existence of civil and criminal 

consequences), and/or posting resources or statements on websites or Wi-Fi landing pages.

In its discussions, the Task Force recognized the challenges to awareness programs but 

determined that these educational and awareness efforts are vital to achieving better training,

reporting and data collection outcomes.

Recommendation: Airlines, airports, and appropriate Federal agencies should engage in 

awareness campaigns. The Task Force recognizes that there are various methods for the airlines 

to do so and encourages airlines to consider the methods mentioned in this chapter and use the 

methods that best fit with their policies and practices on sexual misconduct. Federal agencies 

should also take steps to ensure that passengers are aware that acts of sexual misconduct are 

punishable under Federal law, subject to civil penalties, and raise awareness of how incidents 

involving in-flight sexual misconduct should be reported. 
- 26 -

Chapter 4

Reporting

Ms. C shared that she was told that the airline could do nothing about the sexual misconduct 

incident because she failed to report the incident to a flight attendant during the flight.

Ms. C meeting #2

Ms. D stated that when a passenger grabbed her breasts she told a crew member, a flight officer, 

and a supervisor what happened to her and filed an incident report. Ms. D describes her 

frustration when she was told months later that nothing could be done because she never filed a 

police report. 

Ms. D meeting #2

Ms. B stated that at one point she was more upset and frustrated with the airline’s corporate 

representatives than with the man who groped her on the plane. She said that the airline made 

her feel like she was making it up. 

Ms. B meeting #2 

Section 338 of the FAA Act expresses the Sense of Congress that airlines should have policies 

and procedures in place to report incidents of sexual misconduct to law enforcement. Section 

339A requires the establishment of the Task Force to review and evaluate current air carrier 

reporting practices, protocols, and requirements in responding to allegations of sexual 

misconduct by passengers onboard aircraft. It also specifies that the Task Force is to provide 

recommendations on reporting allegations of sexual misconduct occurring on passenger airline 

flights that are informed by the Task Force’s review of airline practices and first-hand accounts 

from passengers who have experienced sexual misconduct onboard aircraft. 

The Task Force heard directly from individuals who experienced incidents of in-flight sexual 

misconduct and reported these incidents to a flight attendant during the flight or to another 

airline representative after landing. The Task Force learned that incidents of sexual misconduct 

may occur at times when it is not feasible to report them immediately, such as when an aircraft is 

in descent prior to landing and flight attendants have taken their seats. The Task Force also 

recognized that individuals may react to traumatizing events in different ways (fight-flight-freeze 

response) and some may need time to process the situation. For these reasons, delayed reporting 

is not uncommon. 

The Task Force also reviewed passenger complaints (submitted to DOT and the FBI) alleging inflight sexual misconduct and examined the process of reporting such incidents. Furthermore, the 

Task Force surveyed the major U.S. airlines on their current reporting practices to identify areas 

that could be enhanced to ensure that incidents of in-flight sexual misconduct are identified and 

addressed. Finally, the Task Force considered recommendations made by a consumer rights 

organization, not represented on the Task Force, regarding the importance of a reporting system. 

4.1 Airline Information Survey on Reporting Practices

To assist the Task Force in understanding and evaluating current reporting practices used by air 

carriers, the Task Force airline representatives reached out to the major U.S. airlines to request 
- 27 -

information on their reporting practices. The airlines surveyed make up approximately 95% of 

the domestic air traffic in the United States. The survey focused on airlines’ current reporting 

practices and their willingness to change their reporting practices. The airlines were also asked to 

identify potential challenges to changing their reporting practices. 

Eleven airlines64 responded to the reporting practices survey, and the general findings from that 

survey are described below. 

a. Obtaining Information About the Incident: The survey asked how airlines learn about 

incidents of sexual misconduct onboard the aircraft and how they collect this information. 

In response to the question, airlines shared that they learn of incidents of in-flight sexual 

misconduct from passengers in several ways:

• verbal discussions with a flight attendant; 

• written note aboard the aircraft; 

• complaints to gate agents or customer service representatives; 

• social media; 

• DOT/Federal Aviation Administration hotline; 

• pilots contacting dispatch; and 

• cabin walkthroughs.

Airlines noted that they currently face or foresee certain challenges in obtaining 

information regarding incidents of in-flight sexual misconduct from passengers. These 

challenges include: 

• lack of privacy on board to capture pertinent information; 

• lack of training for appropriately engaging other possible witnesses to minimize 

“he-said, she-said” situations; 

• risk of passenger discomfort or false allegation; 

• placing flight attendant in the role of law enforcement; 

• unwillingness of passenger to provide sensitive information; 

• involving employees in potential legal action to record or report information; and

• risk of escalating the situation on board the aircraft, as passengers are not required 

to show or present identification. 

b. Obtaining Alleged Offender Contact Information: Airlines were asked how they 

collect the identity and contact information of the alleged offender of sexual misconduct

and offered several options: 

• Obtain information directly from the alleged offender on board; 

• Contact law enforcement to meet the aircraft and rely on law enforcement to 

obtain information; 

• Use seat map and reservation information; 

• Other; or 

• None of the above. 

 64 Although 11 airlines responded to the survey, some airlines did not respond to every question. 
- 28 -

Eleven airlines responded to this question. As Figure 2 illustrates, virtually all the airlines rely on 

law enforcement to obtain the information, some use seat map and reservation information, but 

very few obtain the information directly from the alleged offender. 

Figure 2: Airline Survey on Reporting Practices (Ways to collect identity and contact information)65

When asked how the airlines would consider collecting the identity and contact information of 

the alleged offender in the future, most of the airlines responded that they would be willing to 

continue their existing practices to contact law enforcement to obtain the information, and use 

seat map or reservation information. Airlines do not always collect identity and contact 

information directly from the alleged offender. Nine airlines responded that they would not 

consider changing their practice. 

Figure 3: Airline Survey on Reporting Practices (Willingness to collect information)66

 65 Eleven airlines responded to this question. 66 Eleven airlines responded to this question. 

0

2

4

6

8

10

Directly Law enforcement Seat map or

Reservation

system

2

10

7

3

1

2

6

0

2

Yes Maybe/Sometimes No

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

Directly Law enforcement Seat map or

reservation system

9

10

7

1

3

1 1 1

0

Continue Practice

Yes

Maybe/Sometimes

No
- 29 -

c. Contacting Law Enforcement – Incident Reported During Flight: The airlines were 

asked if they contact law enforcement to report incidents that may not involve the 

physical touching of others, such as: 

• Making sexual comments; 

• Displaying indecent materials (e.g., pornography); 

• Engaging in sex act in presence of others (e.g., masturbation);

• Taking picture or video of someone’s sexual body part without consent (e.g.,

down shirt, up skirt); 

• Engaging in indecent exposure (e.g., exposing genitals); 

• Making sexually explicit gestures; and

• Other.

The airlines’ responses demonstrate that most of them currently contact law enforcement for 

these types of incidents. Figure 4 provides greater detail.

Figure 4: Airline Survey on Reporting Practices (Contacting Law Enforcement for non-touching incidents)67

When asked whether the airlines would consider contacting law enforcement in the future for 

these actions, virtually all the airlines stated that they would. They either already do so and plan 

to continue this practice or would be willing to do so in the future, as illustrated in Figure 5. 

 67 Eleven airlines responded to this question. 

0

2

4

6

8

10

Sexual

Comments

Displaying

indecent

materials

Engaging in

sex act in

public

Taking picture

or video

without

consent

Indecent

Exposure

7 7

10

9 9

2

3

1

2 2 2

1

Yes In certain situations No
- 30 -

Figure 5: Airline Survey on Reporting Practices (Contacting Law Enforcement for non-touching incidents)68

d. Contacting Law Enforcement – Incident Reported After Aircraft Landed: Airlines 

were asked how often they report incidents to law enforcement when they learn of them 

after the aircraft has landed. Only one airline stated that it always contacts law 

enforcement when it becomes aware of a sexual misconduct incident after the aircraft has 

landed. Only six airlines responded to this question, as illustrated in Figure 6. 

Figure 6: Airline Survey on Reporting Practices (Informing law enforcement about later reported incidents)69

Airlines were also asked what factors they take into consideration when determining whether to 

contact law enforcement for later-reported incidents of in-flight sexual misconduct. The survey 

results showed that the passenger’s preference and the apparent severity of the incident were the 

two factors that most impacted the airlines’ decision on whether to contact law enforcement. 

Other factors that were considered include the availability of information, ability to follow up 

with passenger, and the amount of time since the incident. 

 68 Eleven airlines responded to this question. 69 Six airlines responded to this question. 

0

2

4

6

8

10

Sexual

Comments

Displaying

indecent

materials

Engaging in sex

act in public

Taking picture

or video

without

consent

Indecent

Exposure

7 7

10

9 9

1 1 1 1

4

3

1 1

Continue Practice No change Change to yes or maybe No response

1

1

3

1

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5

Always

Most of the Time

Some of the Time

Never
- 31 -

Figure 7: Airline Survey on Reporting Practices (Reasons airlines do not report incidents)70

4.2 Reporting by Passengers Who Experience In-Flight Sexual Misconduct 

Based on data obtained through the airline survey, the Task Force learned that airlines become 

aware of incidents of in-flight sexual misconduct through passengers, who most often report to 

the flight attendant verbally. Nevertheless, the Task Force recognized that passenger preferences

on how to report vary. For example, during the listening session one individual shared with the 

Task Force that after she experienced an incident of sexual misconduct, she reported it to the 

flight attendant and was asked to repeat what had happened to multiple flight attendants in the 

galley. She commented that sharing the details in a place that lacked privacy was hard and 

embarrassing and that it was difficult to repeat it over and over. However, she also stated that she 

did not think that writing it down at that time would have been helpful either. She stated that she 

needed time to process what had just happened. In contrast, another passenger expressed a strong 

opinion that airlines should have provided her a way to relay the incident to the airline in writing.

Due to the confined space and likelihood of other people overhearing the conversation, some 

victims may prefer to write things down. A written communication provides a private way to 

alert a flight attendant about what has transpired and also allows for passengers to report 

incidents when they may not feel safe to do so verbally. It also prevents the repeated retelling of 

the incident which may re-traumatize the victim. 

There are a number of challenges to reporting incidents of sexual misconduct in writing. As a 

practical matter, the Task Force noted that airlines do not always have a pen and paper onboard 

to offer to an individual. The Task Force also discussed the feasibility of capturing this 

information through the use of electronic devices or an online reporting mechanism, but 

recognized that Wi-Fi may not always be accessible in-flight. The Task Force also discussed the 

 70 Six airlines responded to this question. 

2

5

2

4

5

0 1 2 3 4 5 6

Amount of time since incident

Apparent severity of incident

Ability to follow up with customer

Availability of information

Customer’s preference 

Law Enforcement not necessary

Passenger Flight Attendant
- 32 -

possibility that a written statement could be used against the victim in a future legal proceeding. 

The Task Force’s law enforcement representatives stated that most people do not write down 

their account because they are still calming down from the event. Some Task Force members 

noted that, although passengers generally report incidents of sexual misconduct verbally, airlines 

should permit victims to present the information in the way that is most comfortable to them. 

The Task Force also considered how passengers with limited English proficiency could report 

incidents of in-flight sexual misconduct. The Task Force learned that airlines have access to 

interpreters and often staff their flights with multilingual flight attendants that speak the language 

of the destination and origin cities. There was discussion about airlines considering requesting 

passengers provide a written account of the incident in their own language, which could be 

translated later, if the flight does not have a multilingual crew. 

4.3 Identifying Alleged Offender and Potential Witnesses

There are several ways in which airlines can determine the identity of an alleged offender or 

witness, including by asking for identification in-person or through an available seat map. 

Airlines may request a passenger’s boarding pass as a form of identification. A boarding pass has 

vital passenger information, such as the passenger’s name and seat assignment, which the cabin 

crew needs to file an incident report or call the authorities. Requesting a boarding pass may be 

the least confrontational option as it is not unusual for flight attendants to request the document. 

However, the Task Force recognized that there are drawbacks to requesting to see a passenger’s 

boarding pass. Many people now use digital boarding passes on their mobile devices, which 

cannot be collected. In addition, airlines are moving toward using biometric technology that 

could replace boarding passes in the future.

Requesting to see a passenger’s government issued identification, such as a driver’s license or 

passport, is another option, because it provides detailed information and is not an unusual or new 

method of identification. In fact, the Task Force member representing flight attendants noted that 

if a passenger is suspected of tampering with a smoke detector, the flight attendants are told to 

request the person’s government-issued identification to proceed with an incident report. The 

Task Force’s law enforcement members affirmed that flight attendants often obtain the alleged 

offender’s contact information and provide it to law enforcement, and that they believe this 

happens more often than the airline survey reflects. 

If the flight attendant is not able to ascertain the identity of the alleged offender or witness by 

requesting to see his or her boarding pass or a form of identification, a seat map is the next best 

option to obtain this information. The seat map includes the name of every passenger and a 

corresponding seat number. The Task Force’s airline representatives shared that flights are often 

completely booked, with no seats open, and seating fees and fare class restrictions limit the 

amount a passenger can change seats in-flight. However, this method also has a few drawbacks. 

If a flight is not full, individuals may still change seats and it is incumbent upon the flight 

attendant to check their boarding pass to confirm their seat. Also, not all airlines have assigned 

seating, and therefore, in certain circumstances, flight attendants will not be able to identify 
- 33 -

passengers using a seat map. Although the cabin crew may have access to a flight manifest, it 

would be difficult to determine the identity of a passenger from a list of names. 

The Task Force discussed the importance of flight attendants gathering contact information from 

the alleged offender and witnesses to the incidents to strengthen law enforcement’s ability to 

pursue and resolve the case. The Task Force noted that while obtaining contact information, 

flight attendants should avoid full interview-type discussions with the alleged offender or witness 

because law enforcement is trained to conduct interviews. The Task Force’s flight attendant 

representative shared that some on-board manuals may require that law enforcement be asked to 

meet the aircraft if a passenger fails to provide identification upon request. 

4.4 Requesting Law Enforcement Assistance for Incidents Reported Onboard 

The Task Force learned that after a flight attendant becomes aware of an incident of sexual 

misconduct, the flight attendant informs the captain. The captain then determines whether to 

report the incident to the ground security and if law enforcement should be asked to meet the 

aircraft upon arrival. 

In determining whether law enforcement should be contacted, pilots consider whether the 

incident involved physical contact. When an incident involves physical contact, airlines have 

stated that they report it to law enforcement and request that law enforcement meet the aircraft at 

the gate. Incidents that do not involve physical contact are harder to identify as sexual 

misconduct. Although the airline survey indicated that airlines do inform law enforcement of 

incidents of sexual misconduct where there is no physical contact, law enforcement 

representatives shared that this response was not consistent with their experience. 

Some Task Force members expressed uncertainty about whether airlines should contact law 

enforcement for sexual misconduct incidents that do not rise to the level of physical touching 

including making sexual comments, displaying indecent material, engaging in sex acts in the 

presence of others, taking pictures or videos of someone’s sexual body parts, engaging in 

indecent exposure, and making sexually suggestive gestures. The airline survey reflected a 

willingness on the part of airlines to call law enforcement for certain types of incidents (e.g. 

public sex acts, indecent exposure, and taking pictures or videos without consent). The survey 

reflected less of a willingness to call law enforcement for incidents involving sexual comments 

and displaying indecent materials. Law enforcement representatives on the Task Force reiterated 

that law enforcement should also be contacted for incidents of sexual misconduct that do not 

involve physical contact. 

Passenger Flight 

Attendant

Lead Flight 

Attendant Pilot

Corporate 

Security or 

Ground 

Operations 

Law 

Enforcement 
- 34 -

The Task Force agreed that flight attendants should not take on the role of law enforcement by 

determining whether or not a crime has occurred. The Task Force members representing law 

enforcement emphasized that every in-flight sexual misconduct incident should be reported to 

law enforcement so that law enforcement can make the determination as to whether the incident 

constitutes a crime. This would also ensure that all incidents are properly investigated. 

4.5 Reporting Incidents of Sexual Misconduct After Landing

The individuals who shared their experiences at the Task Force’s listening sessions expressed 

various challenges, including not knowing how to report an incident as well as being dismissed 

when attempting to report an incident after landing. The Task Force considered reasons that 

passengers may report an incident of in-flight sexual misconduct after the flight has landed. For 

example, an incident that occurs during a critical phase of flight, such as landing, may not be 

reported immediately to a flight attendant. Ideally, if the incident is reported to the flight 

attendant while passengers are onboard, the flight crew could delay deplaning to address the 

incident. However, it is more likely that the incident would be reported to a gate agent or 

customer service agent. The Task Force discussed the experience shared during one of its 

listening sessions, where an individual stated that the passenger next to her was masturbating 

during the flight’s descent while the seat-belt sign was on and she could not get up to inform the 

flight attendant. This individual also did not feel comfortable reporting the incident to the flight 

attendant while exiting the aircraft because the offending passenger was behind her. She reported 

the incident to the airline staff at the gate. 

The Task Force also recognized that people may react to traumatizing events in different ways 

(fight-flight-freeze response) and some may need time to process the situation, resulting in 

passengers not disclosing their experience on board the flight immediately after it happens. The 

airline survey indicated that when passengers do report incidents of in-flight sexual misconduct 

after the flight has landed, they usually inform an airline representative on the ground, report the 

incident to law enforcement, or submit a complaint to DOT. 

Passenger

Airline 

(Gate Agent or Customer 

Service Representative)

Law Enforcement 

(Airport Police or FBI)

Department of 

Transportation
- 35 -

The Task Force considered what an appropriate airline response would be for incidents of inflight sexual misconduct reported after landing. The Task Force’s law enforcement 

representatives stated that passengers should be referred to the FBI or local law enforcement as 

soon as possible. 

If airlines do not have a process available for capturing incidents of in-flight sexual misconduct 

reported after the aircraft has landed and referring such incident to law enforcement, then the 

alleged offenders are less likely to be investigated and may commit similar acts in the future. In 

addition, lack of reporting increases gaps in the in-flight sexual misconduct data being collected

by the FBI, making it less reliable. 

The Task Force discussed each airline having its own policy regarding what steps to take when 

someone reports an incident of in-flight sexual misconduct after the aircraft has landed. Some 

passengers reach out either to a gate agent or to a customer service representative, who should 

report the account to law enforcement either through the airline’s internal security or directly. 

The Task Force generally agreed that when contacted by a victim of in-flight sexual misconduct 

after the plane has landed, the airline should contact law enforcement directly and refer the 

passenger to the FBI phone number presented on the Be Air Aware campaign poster, 1-800-

CALL-FBI.71 

In addition, some victims report to sources other than airlines – for example, DOT, airport 

police, or local law enforcement. DOT receives passenger complaints on various issues, 

including incidents of in-flight sexual misconduct, through the Office of Aviation Enforcement. 

The Office of Aviation Enforcement does not have jurisdiction to investigate criminal matters 

and now sends the complaints it receives alleging in-flight sexual misconduct to the FBI. 

Previously, that office informed consumers how to contact the FBI but did not forward such 

complaints to the FBI. 

The FAA may also learn of incidents of in-flight sexual misconduct. When a pilot reports an 

incident of in-flight sexual misconduct to the airline’s ground operations, ground operations may 

relay that information to air traffic control (ATC).

72 If ATC learns of an incident from an airline,

specifically an incident where law enforcement officers are asked to meet the aircraft, the 

information is relayed to the Domestic Events Network, and is also reported to the FAA’s 

Washington Operations Center. The DEN is a 24/7 FAA-sponsored recorded telephonic 

conference call network that includes all of the Air Route Traffic Control Centers in the United 

States. The purpose of the Domestic Events Network is to provide timely notification to the 

appropriate authorities that there is an emerging air or ground related problem or incident 

involving the National Air Space. Generally, the FAA’s Washington Operations Center 

distributes information about in-flight incidents to various government agencies. Incidents of inflight sexual misconduct that are reported to ATC are shared with the FBI and the appropriate

FAA Regional Operations Center, where the matter may be referred to an FAA Aviation Safety 

Inspector for investigation.

 71 See Appendix E. 72 See supra footnote 17 for note on ground operations. 
- 36 -

In addition to the ATC reporting process, individuals may submit complaints through the FAA 

Hotline. When a complaint alleges an incident of sexual assault or interference with a pilot or 

flight attendant, the complaint is sent to the Law Enforcement Assistance Program in the FAA’s 

Office of Security & Hazardous Material Safety. In the context of incidents of in-flight sexual 

misconduct, the role of the Law Enforcement Assistance Program is to provide aviation-related 

support to law enforcement agencies seeking criminal prosecution. If the incident involves a 

potential criminal matter, the complaint is sent to DOT’s OIG for possible referral to the FBI. 

Currently, the Law Enforcement Assistance Program does not refer incidents of in-flight sexual 

misconduct to FAA Aviation Safety Inspectors for investigation. 

FAA Aviation Safety Inspectors may learn of incidents of in-flight sexual misconduct through 

the FAA Regional Operations Center reports, during routine air carrier inspections, or through 

air carrier reports submitted to the FAA. Those reports would be assigned to an FAA Aviation 

Safety Inspector for investigation of potential violations of federal statutes and regulations 

relating to interference with the pilot or flight attendant(s).

73 If the investigating inspector 

believes there is adequate evidence to prove a violation, a report with evidence is compiled, 

logged into the FAA’s Enforcement Information System, assigned a case number, and ultimately 

handled under appropriate agency enforcement policies. Typically, such cases would be referred 

to the FAA’s legal office for consideration of enforcement action in the form of a civil penalty. 

Finally, some victims report directly to local law enforcement or airport police. The Task Force

suggested that training local police and airport police to report cases to the FBI and developing 

standard operating procedures could help improve coordination and address underreporting of 

such incidents by the FBI. 

4.6 Incidents Involving Minors

Although neither the Federal government nor the airline industry collect data on the number of 

incidents of in-flight sexual misconduct involving minors, the Task Force recognized that minors 

may be particularly vulnerable. The Task Force discussed unaccompanied minors in particular 

and airline protocols for their transport, such as seating assignments.74 At a Task Force listening 

session, a flight attendant shared an incident where a three-year old boy, who was seated next to 

his father, was touched inappropriately by another passenger seated behind him. The flight 

attendant intervened and had the passenger moved to another seat. The flight attendant then 

informed the captain, who asked for law enforcement to meet the aircraft on arrival. This 

incident highlights how an in-flight sexual misconduct incident involving a minor is handled.

4.7 Recommendations on Reporting 

The Task Force considered ways to enhance reporting of in-flight sexual misconduct. The Task 

Force discussed and analyzed airlines’ current reporting practices, including how airlines address 

 73 See 49 U.S.C. § 46318 and 14 C.F.R. Part 91.11. 74 During its review of this Report, HHS noted that while there are no DOT regulations concerning travel by 

unaccompanied minors, DOT provides on its website a booklet summarizing some of the most common airline 

policies to protect the well-being of children flying by themselves. That booklet is available at 

https://www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.dev/files/docs/Kids_Fly_Alone.pdf.
- 37 -

privacy concerns on an aircraft, the role of flight attendants versus law enforcement, passenger 

discomfort in reporting incidents and delays in passenger reporting. The Task Force also 

considered how other entities such as DOT or local law enforcement respond to allegations or 

reports of sexual misconduct by passengers onboard aircraft.

1. Enable Passengers to Report Incidents in Various Ways: The Task Force explored 

various passenger reporting methods, which led to discussions of certain methods that may 

re-traumatize victims, the fight-flight-freeze response that victims may experience, the 

possibility that misconduct could occur at times when it is not feasible to report it

immediately, and airlines’ practices and procedures for accepting passenger reports of sexual 

misconduct after the plane has landed. 

Recommendation: The Task Force encourages airlines to establish clear policies and 

procedures around reporting methods to enable the airline to accept and appropriately 

respond to passenger reports of sexual misconduct whether the airline learns of it on the 

aircraft or after the aircraft has landed, and disseminate the information as appropriate. 

Additionally, the Task Force suggests airlines consider allowing passengers more than one 

way to report such incidents to allow passengers to select the method that is most 

comfortable for them. 

2. Obtain Alleged Offender and Witness Contact Information: In order for the FBI to 

successfully investigate and resolve a case involving an incident of in-flight sexual 

misconduct, in addition to the victim’s contact information, the identity and contact 

information of the alleged offender and any witnesses to the incident are crucial. There are 

several ways that such information can be obtained, including requesting a passengers’ 

boarding pass or government issued identification, or consulting the seat map (if available). 

The Task Force noted that while obtaining contact information, flight attendants should avoid

interviewing the alleged offender or witness and leave it to law enforcement who are trained 

to conduct interviews. 

Recommendation: The Task Force recommends that airlines have a procedure to identify 

and to obtain the contact information of the alleged offender and any witnesses to provide to 

law enforcement to help support the investigation. Applicable employees should be trained 

on the policy and procedure around the collection of the information. 

3. Segregate Sexual Misconduct Incidents in Airline Records: Whenever an incident 

involving passengers occurs on an aircraft, most airlines require the flight attendant to file an 

incident or irregularity report with the details of the incident. However, the Task Force found 

that these forms rarely allow for the identification of “sexual misconduct,” which contributes 

to the difficulty in identifying data points and establishing the prevalence of sexual 

misconduct. The Task Force discussed whether airline incident or irregularity reports should 

include a subcategory for in-flight sexual misconduct incidents involving minors, indicate if 

the passengers were intoxicated or other relevant information. The Task Force also noted that 

Federal regulations do not require airlines to maintain incident or irregularity reports but if an 

airline develops its own processes for incident or irregularity reporting, the FAA ensures that 
- 38 -

the airline handles the reports in accordance with these processes through approved/accepted 

operating manuals. 

Recommendation: The Task Force encourages airlines to ensure that any incident or 

irregularity report specifically allows for the identification of an incident of sexual 

misconduct, whether the incident involved a minor, and whether law enforcement was 

requested. This would allow airlines to better track the handling of sexual misconduct 

allegations.

4. Contact Law Enforcement When Incidents of Sexual Misconduct are Reported: The 

Task Force agreed that airline employees should never be in the role of making a legal 

judgment as to whether certain conduct constitutes a crime or is legally actionable. The Task 

Force also noted that airlines sometimes need to balance between respecting a victim’s 

request not to report and the importance of informing law enforcement of the incident. The 

airline survey further revealed that airlines generally do not contact law enforcement every 

time that they learn of an in-flight sexual misconduct incident, especially if they learn of it 

after the aircraft has landed. At the same time, the Task Force recognized that, at times, 

passengers may report incidents of in-flight sexual misconduct to gate agents or customer 

service representatives and not the flight attendant. There was also a recognition that some 

victims report to sources other than airlines (for example, DOT, airport police, or local law 

enforcement) and these entities do not always forward such reports/complaints to the FBI. 

Recommendation: The Task Force encourages airlines to have a policy and procedure of 

informing law enforcement when incidents of sexual misconduct are reported to the airline 

irrespective of the incident being reported to the airline during the flight or after the flight. To 

ensure the effectiveness of reporting, airlines may find it beneficial to consult with their local 

law enforcement agency when developing the airline’s reporting policies. 

Recommendation: The Task Force recommends that local law enforcement, airport security, 

and DOT forward any complaints that they receive, alleging in-flight sexual misconduct, to 

the FBI.
- 39 -

Chapter 5

Data Collection

Ms. E stated that she has observed sexual misconduct by passengers against other passengers. 

She added that she has also experienced sexual misconduct while carrying out her flight 

attendant duties. Ms. E. stated that her story is not uncommon and expressed her belief that 

nearly one quarter of all flight attendants have experienced sexual misconduct.

Ms. E meeting #3

In its Joint Statement, Congress noted that there is limited data on the prevalence of incidents of 

sexual assault and harassment on commercial aircraft and requested the establishment of a task 

force to provide recommendations to the Secretary of Transportation on best practices and 

protocols for air carriersrelating to data collection. 

Section 339A of the FAA Act, which requires the establishment of the Task Force, charges the 

Task Force with issuing recommendations on how most effectively to collect data on instances of 

alleged sexual misconduct onboard aircraft in a way that protects the privacy and confidentiality 

of victims involved in such incidents and precludes the release of data that publicly identifies an 

individual air carrier to enable better understanding of the frequency and severity of such 

conduct.75

Section 339B of the FAA Act requires the DOJ to establish a streamlined process for individuals 

involved in an incident of in-flight sexual misconduct to report such allegations to law 

enforcement. Under the Act, this process is to be based on the plan that DOT develops to address 

recommendations it receives from the Task Force on in-flight sexual misconduct incidents. 

For purposes of the Task Force’s discussions, the Task Force agreed that data collection refers to 

the information that airlines and government agencies collect about incidents of sexual 

misconduct.

5.1 Existing Government Data on Incidents of In-Flight Sexual Misconduct 

Currently, Federal agencies have the only publicly available data on the prevalence of in-flight 

sexual misconduct. DOT’s Office of Aviation Enforcement) has received 43 complaints of 

sexual misconduct on flights since it began tracking these complaints in November 2016.76 Of 

these 43 complaints, two were received between November and December 2016, 17 were 

received in 2017 and 14 in 2018.77 In calendar year 2019, the office received 10 complaints of 

in-flight sexual misconduct.

78

 75 115 P. L. 254 § 339 (2018). 76 Data compiled by the Aviation Consumer Protection Division of the United States Department of Transportation. 

Website: http://www.transportation.gov/airconsumer. 77 Id. 78 Id. 
- 40 -

Passengers may also report incidents of in-flight sexual misconduct to the FAA through the FAA 

Hotline, http://hotline.faa.gov. The FAA also learns of such incidents through information 

relayed (in real time) to ATC from pilots and/or airline ground operations and FAA inspectors. 

However, the FAA does not maintain a database that segregates sexual assault incidents from 

other incidents involving interference with pilots or flight attendants.

79 

In Fiscal Year 2016, the FBI conducted a review of the number of incidents of in-flight sexual 

misconduct going back to 2014. At that time, the FBI identified incidents of sexual misconduct 

primarily through a manual review.80 In Fiscal Year 2017, the FBI opened 63 investigations into 

incidents of sexual misconduct on aircraft, and that number rose to 84 in Fiscal Year 2018.81

Since that time, the FBI has enhanced its data collection practices in an effort to capture the 

number of incidents more reliably. On October 1, 2018, the FBI implemented a new designation 

code specifically for sexual misconduct onboard an aircraft, which will facilitate better incident 

tracking. The FBI is training agents that are assigned to airports on using the new designation 

code. Since the implementation of the new designation code, the FBI reported that it opened 119 

investigations involving incidents of in-flight sexual misconduct in Fiscal Year 2019. 

Nevertheless, the number of sexual misconduct incidents reported to the FBI is likely 

substantially lower than the actual number because many incidents go unreported.82 

The Task Force discussed the possible reasons the number of FBI investigations have increased. 

The increase could be attributed to more incidents occurring today than in the past --possibly as 

result of an increase in the number of travelers overall. It is possible that increased passenger 

awareness regarding how to report incidents to law enforcement after the implementation of the 

FBI’s Be Air Aware Campaign in April 2018, as well as overall public awareness of the issue in 

the aftermath of the “#MeToo” movement, also contributed to the increase. 

5.2 Purposes of Data Collection

The FAA Act states that the Task Force is to issue recommendations on how most effectively to 

provide data on instances of alleged sexual misconduct on board aircraft and to whom the data 

collected should be reported, in a manner that protects the privacy and confidentiality of 

individuals involved and precludes the release of data that publicly identifies an individual air 

carrier. The purpose is to enable better understanding of the frequency and severity of such 

misconduct. 

The Task Force focused on three different purposes to collecting data on sexual misconduct 

aboard aircraft: (a) determining the prevalence of incidents of in-flight sexual misconduct; (b) 

supporting law enforcement investigations and prosecutions; and (c) helping airlines develop 

effective training programs.

 79 See infra Chapter 4.5 for a full discussion of how FAA learns of incidents of in-flight sexual misconduct. 80 All reported incidents of in-flight sexual misconduct do not result in the FBI opening an investigation. 81 See supra, Chapter 1.2. The fiscal year is the accounting period for the federal government which begins on 

October 1 of one calendar year and ends on September 30 of the next calendar year. 82 See Press Release, U.S. Fed. Bureau of Investigation, Sexual Assault Aboard Aircraft: Raising Awareness About a 

Serious Federal Crime, (April 26, 2018), https://www.fbi.gov/news/stories/raising-awareness-about-sexual-assaultaboard-aircraft-042618.
- 41 -

a. Determining the Prevalence of In-Flight Sexual Misconduct: The Task Force 

considered what data should be collected to determine the prevalence of in-flight sexual 

misconduct. The Task Force agreed that the data should include the flight details, time frame 

and date of the occurrence, arrival airport (or location), whether or not law enforcement was 

called, and the nature of the incident (touching or non-touching incident). 

b. Supporting Law Enforcement Investigations and Prosecutions: Another central 

purpose of data collection is to obtain information that can be used for pursuing law 

enforcement investigations and prosecutions. The Task Force discussed what specific data is 

needed to accomplish that purpose, and determined that law enforcement needs the contact 

information and identities of the victim, alleged offender, and any witnesses. This information 

can also be helpful in identifying repeat offenders.

c. Helping Airlines Develop Effective Training Programs: The Task Force considered 

how airline data can identify how and when in-flight sexual misconduct occurs that can help an 

airline develop more effective training programs. Collecting data could highlight patterns and 

identify risk factors that contribute to in-flight sexual misconduct. The Task Force identified 

several types of information that airlines may find useful: 

• Source of information (e.g., incident reports, passenger complaints);

• Type of incident (e.g., unwanted touching, indecent exposure);

• Involvement of drugs or alcohol;

• Type or duration of flight (e.g., flight time, domestic or international, red-eye); 

• Victim (e.g., passenger, minor, crew member);

• Information about the offender; and 

• Law enforcement involvement. 

5.3 Task Force Discussions on Categorization of Sexual Misconduct Incidents

The Task Force discussed the importance of collecting good data and ensuring that any proposed 

data collection processes are not overly burdensome. The Task Force acknowledged that a 

standard definition of sexual misconduct, adopted industry wide, could help improve the quality 

of the data collected. In the course of discussions, the Task Force also considered the 

presentation by a consumer rights organization, not represented on the Task Force, regarding the 

importance of data collection and recommendations in that regard.

To enhance the FBI data collection, the Task Force’s law enforcement representatives noted that 

airlines should request that law enforcement meet an arriving aircraft immediately upon learning 

of an incident of in-flight sexual misconduct onboard. They noted that law enforcement only 

needs basic information to begin an investigation: the names and contact information of the 

individuals involved (including any witnesses) and a summary of the incident. 

The Task Force considered the benefits of using a simple categorization of incidents of sexual 

misconduct focusing on contact. The incidents could be categorized as either “touching” (such as 

groping) or “non-touching” (such as verbal harassment or incidents involving technology like 

“up-skirting” or viewing pornography). The airline representatives on the Task Force noted that 
- 42 -

this distinction is widely used in the industry and is consistent with the security-based assessment 

that is conducted upon learning of an incident of sexual misconduct when in flight. 

The Task Force also considered the importance of categorizing the type of victims, particularly 

identifying when a victim is a minor, understanding when a victim is an airline employee, and 

noting whether a perpetrator was under the influence of alcohol or other substances, if known. 

These discussions informed the Task Force’s surveys on airline data collection practices. 

 

5.4 Airline Data Collection Practices 

The Task Force airline representatives reached out to the major U.S. airlines to request 

information on their data collection practices.83 The 17 airlines contacted for the survey account 

for approximately 95% of the domestic air traffic in the United States. The airlines were asked to 

respond to a variety of questions including how they learn about incidents of in-flight sexual 

misconduct and whether they track such incidents and if so, how they categorize and use the 

data. 

Fifteen airlines responded to the data collection survey84, and the general findings from that 

survey were: 

a. Source of Data: Generally, airlines learn about incidents of sexual misconduct through 

reports to a flight attendant by either a victim or a witness during a flight. Airlines also 

learn about incidents of sexual misconduct through passenger complaints after a flight. 

Airlines are less likely to learn about incidents of sexual misconduct through ground staff 

or social media though that happens on occasion. Airlines also stated that they sometimes 

learn about incidents from law enforcement, DOT’s Office of Aviation Enforcement, or 

the FAA. 

b. Internal Data Tracking: Most airlines record information about sexual misconduct 

incidents in their individual airline in-flight reporting system.85 Airlines generally do not 

have a system for recording sexual misconduct incidents that are reported after the flight 

has landed. Few airlines have a separate data category specifically to identify incidents of 

sexual misconduct. However, several airlines stated that they are considering creating a 

method to identify such incidents.

c. Data Categorization: When recording information about sexual misconduct incidents, 

airlines distinguish these incidents based on the following factors: 

• law enforcement involvement; 

• victim category (e.g., minor, passenger, flight crew);

• type of flight (e.g., red-eye, domestic, international); 

 83 See Chapters 4.1, 5.4, and 6.2. 84 Although 15 airlines responded to the survey, some airlines did not respond to every question. 85 Airlines typically use some type of in-flight reporting system which varies from airline to airline. This system 

may also be known as an incident reporting system or safety reporting system. 
- 43 -

• type of incident (e.g., unwanted touching, indecent exposure); and 

• source of information (e.g., complaint, employee incident report). 

The figure below provides information about the number of airlines that distinguish sexual 

misconduct incidents based on these factors. 

Figure 8: Airline Survey on Data Collection (Method of Tracking)86

d. Law Enforcement Involvement: Airlines contact law enforcement to respond to 

incidents of in-flight sexual misconduct, but the frequency with which law enforcement is 

called varies. Half of the airlines surveyed responded that they always contact law 

enforcement. Law enforcement representatives indicated that the survey response was not 

consistent with their experience. 

e. Reasons not to contact Law Enforcement: Airlines shared various reasons why they 

may not contact law enforcement, such as: 

o Victim’s request; 

o Airline learned of incident after the aircraft landed; 

o Aircraft landed in a city outside the US;

o Limited law enforcement presence at arrival airport; 

o Failure by station operations to contact law enforcement; and 

o Lack of knowledge/awareness that law enforcement must be requested.

f. Use of Data (Internal): Some airlines87 prepare internal data summaries on the number 

of in-flight sexual misconduct incidents, with varying frequency (e.g., weekly, monthly, 

quarterly). It is not apparent how the data summaries are used by the airlines. 

 86 This figure is based on the responses of twelve airlines that track incidents of in-flight sexual misconduct. 87 Nine airlines responded to this question and four airlines stated that they do prepare internal data summaries.

9

9

4

4

7

6

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Source of Information

(e.g., incident reports, complaints)

Type of Incident

(e.g., unwanted touching, indecent exposure)

Alcohol Involvement

Type of Flight

(e.g., length, red-eye or daytime)

Victim

(e.g., Minor, passenger, flight crew)

Law Enforcement Involvment
- 44 -

g. Willingness to share data with DOT: Some airlines88 stated that they would consider 

sharing data summaries on the number of in-flight sexual misconduct incidents with 

DOT. The airlines also noted the challenges they foresee in sharing data with DOT. 

These challenges consist of: 

o Law enforcement being better equipped to share data; 

o Confidentiality of data and privacy of passengers and employees;

o Data is collected manually, which takes time and effort; 

o Public dissemination of carrier specific statistics, which could contribute to 

negative publicity; 

o Lack of consistency of data collection and reporting across industry; and 

o Potential liability/increased litigation risk. 

In sum, data collection on incidents of in-flight sexual misconduct is limited within the airline 

industry. Where airlines do collect data on these incidents, data categorization methodology 

varies. Few airlines have a separate data category specifically to identify incidents of in-flight 

sexual misconduct. Airlines also vary in how they share and use data on incidents of in-flight 

sexual misconduct internally. 

5.5 Methodologies for Determining Prevalence of In-Flight Sexual Misconduct

The Task Force considered different ways to measure the prevalence of in-flight sexual 

misconduct incidents, including data from law enforcement and data from the airline industry. 

A representative from the DOJ’s Office for Victims of Crime (OVC) shared information about 

how DOJ collects data related to incidents of sexual crimes in the United States. The 

representative spoke about incidents involving sexual misconduct and the difficulty of collecting 

data on these incidents because they are underreported. For context, in 2017, there was an 

estimated 393,980 incidents of rape/sexual assault nationwide.89 However, only 40.4% of these 

incidents were reported to law enforcement.90 With this in mind, the representative shared four 

methodologies that the Task Force could consider using to measure the number of incidents of 

in-flight sexual misconduct – (a.) reports to Federal law enforcement; (b.) reports to airline 

personnel; (c.) reports to local law enforcement; and (d.) total victimization. The Task Force 

considered each method. 

a. Reports to Federal Law Enforcement 

The Task Force considered the feasibility of data collection using incidents reported to the FBI. 

The data collected by the FBI is the most comprehensive data set on incidents of in-flight sexual 

 88 Nine airlines responded to this question and five airlines indicated a willingness to share data with DOT. 89 Press Release, U.S. Fed. Bureau of Investigation, Sexual Assault Aboard Aircraft: Raising Awareness About a 

Serious Federal Crime, (April 26, 2018), https://www.fbi.gov/news/stories/raising-awareness-about-sexual-assaultaboard-aircraft-042618. 90 BUREAU OF JUSTICE STATISTICS, Data Collection: National Crime Victimization Survey, 2017 (available at 

https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/cv17.pdf) (page 7) (last visited November 11, 2019). 
- 45 -

misconduct publicly available. Collecting data through the FBI has several advantages. 

Primarily, the FBI has an existing nationwide database and data collection process. It has a 

nationwide presence with agents posted around the country with authority to investigate criminal 

incidents that occur on an aircraft in the special aircraft jurisdiction of the United States.91 As a 

practical matter, FBI agents posted at or near airports have working relationships with local law 

enforcement which are beneficial when responding to requests to meet the aircraft. Moreover, in 

addition to reports received directly from the victims, the FBI receives reports from local law 

enforcement, airlines, and DOT (OST and FAA). 

One challenge to this methodology is that there are gaps in the current FBI data on in-flight 

sexual misconduct. Generally, the FBI reports publicly the number of investigations of in-flight 

sexual misconduct. All reported incidents of in-flight sexual misconduct do not result in the

FBI’s opening an investigation. Further, there is underreporting of incidents of in-flight sexual 

misconduct to the FBI and the rate of underreporting is not known. The Task Force identified 

several situations where the FBI may not capture the data: 

• Victim asks airline not to contact law enforcement; 

• Victim reports after the fact (e.g., to an airline employee at the airport, after the flight 

has landed); 

• Local law enforcement is requested by the airline but the police either do not show up 

or arrive too late, allowing the relevant individuals to leave without a police report 

being filed; 

• Local law enforcement does not follow up with the FBI; 

• The FBI lacks jurisdiction, where local law enforcement is the lead investigative and 

prosecutorial agency (as is the case with some intrastate flights), or in the case of 

some outbound international flights; and 

• The FBI does not pursue non-criminal incidents, such as verbal harassment or 

viewing pornography. 

The Task Force noted that these gaps can be closed through enhanced awareness and better 

coordination. Law enforcement representatives emphasized that if airlines request law 

enforcement any time they learn of an incident involving sexual misconduct, and local law 

enforcement is advised that all reports of in-flight sexual misconduct must be provided to the 

FBI, these actions will address the coordination gap. The Task Force also acknowledged that 

many of these gaps may close over time as awareness campaigns should enhance reporting and 

streamlined reporting practices facilitate data collection. 

b. Reports to Local Law Enforcement

Similarly, the Task Force considered obtaining data from local law enforcement. In theory, this 

data set would include all incidents of in-flight sexual misconduct reported to local law 

enforcement by victims or airline staff to whom the incident was reported. This data set would 

not include incidents where a victim does not want police involvement and the airline does not 

 91 See discussion supra, Chapter 1.3.
- 46 -

inform law enforcement. While law enforcement reports contain high quality data, there is no 

infrastructure in place to coordinate data collection from various local law enforcement agencies, 

including airport police, across multiple jurisdictions. The FBI and law enforcement associations 

are focusing their efforts on establishing relationships between federal and local law enforcement 

authorities, to ensure that the FBI is informed of any reported incidents of sexual misconduct. 

The Airport Law Enforcement Agencies Network (ALEAN) is a non-profit professional 

association that supports law enforcement agencies involved in policing at airports both in the 

United States and internationally. It brings together airport law enforcement leaders and 

investigators to address mutual problems, educates members, and provides input into public 

policy concerning matters of aviation security. It is not a data collection repository but members 

may share information regarding data collection among other topics. Recently, DOT participated 

in the 2019 ALEAN conference to advise local law enforcement of the importance of following 

up on reports of incidents of in-flight sexual misconduct. 

c. Reports to Airline Personnel 

The Task Force discussed obtaining data directly from the airlines. The members acknowledged 

that airlines are in a better position to collect more complete data since these incidents take place 

on their aircraft and involve their passengers and/or employees. The Task Force also learned that 

incidents of in-flight sexual misconduct, if reported, are usually reported first to flight attendants. 

In addition, airlines learn about incidents of sexual misconduct after the aircraft has landed 

through ground staff, passenger complaints and even social media. 

There are challenges to relying on airlines to be the primary source of data collection. The 

responses to the airline survey suggest that incidents reported to airline personnel may not be 

documented internally and it is not clear that data is categorized in such a way that the incidents 

can be isolated and retrieved. It is also not clear how often incidents reported after a flight has 

landed are included in airline data collection efforts. The Task Force also found that airline 

reporting practices differ, which could result in unreliable data because of lack of standardization 

across the industry. To mandate a standardized reporting protocol, an agency rulemaking would 

be required and the rulemaking process is generally a lengthy one. 

The Task Force also recognized that flight attendants are not law enforcement officials and 

should not be tasked with collecting evidence or interviewing the individuals involved. The Task 

Force identified a need for airline personnel to capture basic information that law enforcement 

needs to identify the individuals involved (victim, offender, and witnesses) so that further action 

can be taken to investigate. This is especially important when law enforcement is not able to 

meet the aircraft at the gate or in an instance where a victim does not want to call law 

enforcement but later decides to report the incident. 

The Task Force is also mindful of the potential data collection gap resulting from the number of 

incidents of in-flight sexual misconduct reported to the airline after the flight has landed, which 

may not be currently captured. 
- 47 -

The Task Force also considered whether airline associations could aggregate information based 

on anonymous submissions from airlines to determine the prevalence of in-flight sexual 

misconduct. This method of collecting data could be of benefit because the airline associations 

can collect data in a standardization form and do so in a more efficient manner than a 

government agency. Moreover, centralized data collection by associations could alleviate 

airlines’ concerns because the airline information would be industry-wide and not airline 

specific. There are several drawbacks to aggregating information through the airline associations. 

Primarily, there is not one association to which all airlines are members and associations would 

have to engage in a high level of coordination to centralize the information. Airline associations

also have limited resources and are concerned that this approach may set a precedent of asking

associations to collect data.

d. National Survey to Determine Total Number of Victimizations

The best way to measure prevalence of a crime is to identify the total number of incidents 

regardless of how they are reported or whether an investigation is opened, through a national 

survey to determine the total number of victimizations. This information can be obtained through 

the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) of the Bureau of Justice Statistics.92 This 

survey is conducted annually to estimate incidents of all crimes in the country. The NCVS 

estimates, including the total number of victimizations (i.e., incidents not victims), are based on 

interviews with a nationally representative sample of persons in U.S. households. 

Each year, the NCVS obtains data from a nationally representative sample of 90,000 households 

representing 160,000 persons on the frequency, characteristics, and consequences of criminal

victimizations in the United States.93 It collects information on nonfatal personal crimes such as 

rape or sexual assault and household property crimes such as burglary. The NCVS is a selfreported survey and captures data that may or may not have been reported to law enforcement. 

The lifecycle of a national survey is three to four years and involves funding, creation, testing, 

validation, deployment, and analysis. 

The Task Force considered whether questions relating to in-flight sexual misconduct could be 

added in supplemental surveys. This type of survey obtains data directly from individuals who 

may have experienced incidents of sexual misconduct, and is generally considered the best 

 92 During its review of this Report, HHS noted that the Violence Against Women Act in the 1994 Crime Bill 

established the Rape Prevention and Education Program at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), 

which is the only national program devoted to sexual violence prevention. The CDC’s National Intimate Partner and 

Sexual Violence Survey is an ongoing nationally representative survey that assesses information including sexual 

violence and detailed information about the context of occurrence. In 2014, the CDC published updates to 

recommended data elements for record-based and survey surveillance of sexual violence, which includes a data 

element on the physical location of the most recent incident of sexual violence. Options for this data element include

motor vehicles and public transportation/station/railroad tracks. HHS also noted that it could consider updating the 

survey data elements to include incidents of sexual violence on flights. Additional information available at 

https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/sv_surveillance_definitionsl-2009-a.pdf. 93 See generally BUREAU OF JUSTICE STATISTICS, Data Collection: National Crime Victimization Survey, 2017

(available at https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/cv17.pdf) (page 7) (last visited November 11, 2019). 
- 48 -

measurement of victimization. However, the NCVS is sent out to the general population (who 

may or may not have recent travel experience) and may be too broad to measure effectively the 

prevalence of incidents of in-flight sexual misconduct. The Task Force also learned that it would 

take several years to develop appropriate questions and get them into the survey cycle at a 

substantial cost. Recognizing the potential cost and time associated with this survey, the Task 

Force explored other methods to obtain data on the prevalence of in-flight sexual misconduct. 

At the conclusion of the discussion, the Task Force focused on four options: 

Option 1: Data collection through incidents reported to the FBI. 

Option 2: Data collection through incidents reported to the airlines. 

Option 3: Data collection through incidents reported to the FBI with a passenger survey to fill 

underreporting gaps. 

Option 4: Data collection based on airline reports to be aggregated by airline associations. 

5.6 Recommendations on Data Collection 

The Task Force considered different data collection methodologies and sources of data that 

would effectively provide data on instances of alleged sexual misconduct onboard aircraft. The 

Task Force focused on how best to collect data on incidents of in-flight sexual misconduct in a 

manner that protects the privacy and confidentiality of individuals involved in incidents of 

alleged sexual misconduct and precludes the release of data that publicly identifies an individual 

air carrier to enable better understanding of the frequency and severity of such misconduct. 

1. Sources of Data:94 The Task Force recognized the FBI’s commitment to track such 

incidents consistently and effectively. The Task Force also recognized that good 

coordination among the FBI, local law enforcement, airlines and DOT (OST and FAA) is 

imperative to improving the quality of data collected on incidents of this nature. The Task 

Force recognized that there could be gaps in the FBI data if a victim only reported the 

incident to the airline, and discussed airlines’ reviewing internal data to ensure their 

policies and procedures are effective. Similarly, the Task Force recognized that DOT 

(OST and FAA) does not currently refer all reported incidents of in-flight sexual 

misconduct to the FBI. The Task Force noted that national surveys, such as the NCVS, 

are the best method to determine prevalence but recognizes that such surveys are 

expensive and time consuming. 

Recommendation: The Task Force recommends that the FBI maintain data on the 

number of reported in-flight sexual misconduct incidents received from members of the 

 94 Under Section 339B, the Attorney General of the United States is required to establish a streamlined process for 

individuals involved in incidents of alleged sexual misconduct onboard aircraft to report such allegations to law 

enforcement in a manner that protects the privacy and confidentiality of the individuals involved. The FBI maintains 

a tip line where members of the public can report incidents of in-flight sexual misconduct. The toll-free tip line is 1-

800-call-FBI and tips can also be submitted online at https://tips.fbi.gov. Additionally, the FBI has a process in place 

to track the information reported and assess for any action deemed appropriate.
- 49 -

public, airlines, local law enforcement, other Federal agencies, airports or other interested 

parties. The Task Force also recommends that DOT (OST and FAA) refer all incidents of 

in-flight sexual misconduct to the FBI. The Task Force is not opining on whether a 

national survey should be conducted to supplement this data. 

2. Identify Sexual Assault Incidents in FAA records: The Task Force learned that the 

FAA receives reports of incidents of in-flight sexual assault through a number of ways, 

including passenger complaints, reports to ATC, or through routine airline inspections. 

The Task Force also learned that the FAA does not coordinate internally to share 

information or data related to incidents of in-flight sexual assault, and there is currently 

no system in place by which these incidents can be identified and tracked separately from 

general complaints involving interference with pilots and flight attendants. 

Recommendation: The Task Force recommends that the FAA review its complaint intake 

process and ensure that incidents of in-flight sexual assault can be identified. 

3. Use of Data for Law Enforcement Referrals: The Task Force concluded law 

enforcement is better able to investigate incidents of in-flight sexual misconduct when 

airlines collect contact information from the individual who experienced in-flight sexual 

misconduct, the alleged offender, and witnesses if any. 

Recommendation: The Task Force encourages the airlines to have a policy and 

procedures to identify the victim, alleged offender and any witnesses and obtain their 

contact information to provide to law enforcement. 

4. Use of Data for Airline Training Programs: The Task Force found that airlines could 

use internally held data to highlight patterns and identify ways to develop more effective 

training programs. The Task Force identified various data points that would be useful for 

airlines, such as how the airline became aware of the incident; the type of incident and 

whether drugs or alcohol were involved; flight information; information about the victim 

(passenger, employee, minor) and offender; and whether law enforcement was requested 

and/or involved. The Task Force also found that airlines that rely on regional code share 

partners do not always share data on in-flight sexual misconduct with its codeshare 

partners. Especially where an incident of in-flight sexual misconduct is reported after the 

flight has landed, passengers are more likely to contact the airline with whom they 

purchased their ticket, as they are not aware of the code share agreement. Shared data 

among an airline’s partners will serve to enhance training and reporting procedures. 

Recommendation: The Task Force encourages airlines to utilize data on incidents of 

sexual misconduct that are reported to the airline to inform the airline’s training and 

policy development on in-flight sexual misconduct. The Task Force also encourages 

airlines to share their data, and resulting policies and procedures, with their regional 

airline partners. 
- 50 -

Chapter 6

Training

Ms. E stated that it appeared to her that the flight crew did not know what to do. She stated that 

the crew should have proper procedures to address these incidents.

Ms. E meeting #3

Section 338 of the FAA Act expresses the Sense of Congress that airlines should train their 

personnel to recognize and respond appropriately to incidents of in-flight sexual misconduct, and 

to notify the appropriate law enforcement entities of such incidents.95 Section 339A of the FAA 

Act, which requires the establishment of the Task Force, charges the Task Force with issuing 

recommendations on how to address incidents of in-flight sexual misconduct by passengers 

through training.96 It also specifies that the Task Force is to provide recommendations on 

training practices for personnel responding to incidents of sexual misconduct occurring on 

passenger airline flights that are informed by the Task Force’s review of airline training practices 

and first-hand accounts from passengers who have experienced sexual misconduct onboard 

aircraft. 

The Task Force heard directly from individuals who experienced incidents of in-flight sexual 

misconduct during listening sessions in May and June 2019, and reviewed passenger complaints 

alleging in-flight sexual misconduct that had been submitted to DOT and the FBI. The Task 

Force took into consideration information contained in the passenger complaints and information 

shared during the listening sessions when discussing how to address incidents of in-flight sexual 

misconduct by passengers through training. Also, the Task Force, through its airline 

representative members, conducted a survey to learn about industry training practices regarding 

in-flight sexual misconduct. Airlines that have developed robust programs to address incidents of 

sexual misconduct shared details about their training programs with the Task Force. The Task 

Force also examined DOT’s requirements for airlines to provide disability training to their 

employees and contractors to assist in its deliberations on how an airline sexual misconduct 

training program may be designed. Further, the Task Force considered sexual assault training 

practices used by other industries. The Task Force recognized the interrelationship between 

training, reporting and data collection as training airline employees on skills and strategies for 

preventing and responding to allegations of in-flight sexual misconduct and on maintaining 

records of such incidents when they occur improves reporting and data collection.

6.1 Industry Models

All airlines train their employees on handling unruly passengers but most do not train their 

employees specifically on handling incidents of sexual misconduct. The Task Force learned that 

other industries have training programs that specifically address incidents of sexual misconduct. 

The Task Force looked at training practices in the cruise and hotel and restaurant industries as 

part of its discussion on airline training programs to address in-flight sexual misconduct. The 

Task Force heard presentations about cruise lines’ sexual misconduct training from RAINN and

 95 115 Pub. L. 254 § 338 (2018). 96 Id. § 339 (2018). 
- 51 -

the American Society of Travel Advisors (ASTA), and Futures Without Violence, a nonprofit 

committed to creating communities free from violence, provided an overview of the sexual 

misconduct training in the hotel and restaurant industries. 97

In addition, DOT informed the Task Force of its airline disability training requirements. The 

Task Force believed that it would be beneficial to hear about which airline personnel are required 

to receive disability training, the frequency of the training, the content of the training program, 

and the standard used to determine that individuals have acquired an acceptable level of skills 

and knowledge. 

a. Airline Disability Training Requirements 

The Air Carrier Access Act (ACAA) makes it unlawful for airlines to discriminate against 

passengers because of their disability. DOT is responsible for enforcing the ACAA, which 

applies to flights of U.S. and foreign air carriers to, from, or within the United States. DOT has 

issued regulations in 14 CFR Part 382 (Part 382) to implement the ACAA. Part 382 includes 

training requirements for covered airlines. 

Under Part 382, the training requirements are more stringent if an employee has been designated 

as a Complaints Resolution Official (CRO). CROs are the airlines’ experts on disability-related 

issues in air travel and have the authority to resolve complaints on behalf of the airlines. The 

training for CROs must cover all the requirements in Part 382 and the duties of the CRO. 

Airlines must have a CRO available either by telephone or in person during operating hours. 

CROs are required to receive annual refresher training.

Part 382 requires public contact employees and contractors, who are not CROs, to be trained as 

appropriate to their job function. Public contact personnel include gate agents, flight attendants, 

and ramp/baggage employees. Part 382 requires that these employees and contractors be “trained 

to proficiency,” which DOT interprets as “well-advanced, adept, or skilled.” DOT expects that 

an airline employee or contractor who is trained to proficiency is one who provides services or 

accommodations to passengers in the right way, the first time.98 The training of public contact 

personnel includes training as appropriate to the duties of the employee/contractor on DOT’s 

disability regulation, airline’s procedures concerning travel for individuals with disabilities, and 

communication with passengers with disabilities. In developing the training program, airlines are 

required to consult with disability organizations. Public contact personnel are required to receive 

refresher training at least once every three years. 

 97 During its review of this Report, HHS noted that according to the CDC’s best available evidence to stop sexual 

violence, organizations can create protective environments in the workplace. This can be done by establishing and 

consistently applying proactive sexual harassment prevention policies and procedures designed to help employees 

and managers know what is expected of them with respect to standards of behavior. Additional information is

available at https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/SV-Prevention-Technical-Package.pdf. 98 U.S. Department of Transportation, Answers to Frequently Asked Questions Concerning Air Travel of People 

with Disabilities Under the Amended Air Carrier Access Act Regulation, 

https://www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/docs/FAQ_5_13_09_2.pdf (Issued May 13, 2009.)
- 52 -

Other than the general requirements in DOT’s disability regulation, airlines are free to choose the 

method, length and specific content of their training programs. Generally, airlines use a mix of 

classroom and computer-based training. 

To ensure compliance, DOT periodically reviews carriers’ CRO training programs by observing 

training sessions. DOT also reviews airlines’ training modules when passenger complaints 

indicate possible problem. DOT may take enforcement action against airlines when they fail to 

follow the training requirements. Enforcement actions include issuing warning letters to airlines, 

issuing cease and desist orders with or without fines, or litigating the matter before an 

administrative law judge.

b. Sexual Misconduct Training Practices of Cruise Industry 

In 2010, Congress passed the Cruise Vessel Security and Safety Act (CVSSA),99 which 

addresses the response to and prevention of sexual assault on cruise lines. Individual cruise lines 

developed training programs with respect to prevention and response efforts. Cruise lines 

enlisted the assistance of subject matter experts to develop specific employee training programs 

that included sexual misconduct education, awareness and response efforts. Although the 

different cruise lines do not collaborate on specific projects related to sexual assault, they do 

discuss safety initiatives during quarterly safety and security meetings coordinated through the 

Cruise Line International Association (CLIA). This discussion could include lessons learned 

about sexual assault education, awareness, and response efforts, and what organizations each 

cruise line has partnered with to meet safety and security goals. 

All cruise lines train their crew on topics related to sexual assault and this training is conducted 

annually. Most trainings related to sexual assault are conducted at two different times. First, 

newly hired crew complete basic computer-based training prior to boarding the ship. This 

training gives the broad overview of rules, regulations, and who to go to if a problem should 

arise. The second training is more in-depth and occurs within the first thirty days of the crew 

being on-board a ship. This training is conducted in-person, on-board with all new crew. This is 

the time when crew get the bulk of safety and security training, including the training on sexual 

assault prevention and response. 

 

Employee training generally includes definitions of sexual assault to align an international 

population on acceptable conduct, conduct expectations of crew and passengers, what behaviors 

are violations of the cruise line's conduct expectations, to whom and how to report sexual assault, 

prohibition of retaliation after reporting, and potential employment outcomes for those found in 

violation of conduct expectations. Trainings also include information on federal and international 

criminal reporting requirements. The training focuses on the general role of employees in 

responding to an incident of sexual misconduct that occur on the ship and on land at ports of call 

to ensure that law enforcement can do their job. In addition, crew involved in the response 

process, such as medical and security, are trained on national and international reporting 

obligations, as well as the expected response procedures, to ensure the safety of the victim. These 

response staff also receive training on cruise line specific reporting expectations. For ease of 

communication with shore side departments and local law enforcement, the cruise lines use 

 99 Cruise Vessel Security and Safety Act of 2010, Pub. L. No. 111-207(codified at 46 U.S.C. §§ 3507 and 3508). 
- 53 -

electronic reporting systems. Most cruise lines require an immediate process by which shore side 

departments are informed of the assault to involve the FBI and any necessary local law 

enforcement organizations without delay. 

Crew members complete this training at the start of every new contract and contracts vary based 

on position from three months to over nine months. As such, this training is most frequently 

provided to crew members at least once a year and the cruise lines update the training content 

and scenarios annually. Policy manuals with requirements, reporting processes, and other 

components from training are also available to employees through the intranet for reference such 

as a checklist or guide to use when an incident occurs. The cruise lines also have information

posted in crew areas that indicate what sexual assault is, what to do if you hear or experience 

something inappropriate, and both anonymous and confidential ways of reporting sexual assault 

both on-board and when an employee is back in their home country.

Since definitions of sexual assault vary State by State, cruise lines most typically choose the 

State definition based on their headquarters location, however, they all use the FBI’s definition 

of rape.100 These definitions are discussed and clarified for all crew during training to ensure an 

understanding of what is a criminal act and what may be a company conduct violation. 

Importantly, cruise lines also clarify the conduct expectations of guests, to ensure that crew 

understand how to handle or whom to report inappropriate comments, actions, or behaviors from 

guests.

Most cruise lines provide passengers information on appropriate conduct expectations during the 

initial safety meeting when guests first board the ship. Many cruise lines also inform guests of 

appropriate conduct expectations, safety and security tips, and reporting strategies through 

messaging on the free cruise line TV channel, by having this information printed out in the guest 

rooms, and available at the guest services desk. Both crew and guests are provided free, 

confidential, and anonymous methods of reporting sexual assault on-board and once the 

individual has returned to their home. Crew areas have more visible posters and printed 

documents that refer to employee assistance programs, whereas guests are provided information 

on the security department, guest services, and how and to whom to report this behavior while 

on-board.

Cruise lines do not have a quantitative measure for the effectiveness of sexual assault training. 

Effectiveness is measured by feedback provided from law enforcement and those involved in the 

response process. Qualitatively, response teams have indicated that the changes in training, 

including more detailed training on roles, responsibilities, and how to respond to victims of 

sexual assault, has made the process smoother for both the response staff and those involved in 

the reports. Response teams have indicated that they feel more comfortable and prepared to 

handle cases of sexual assault, and that the increased awareness of all crew on appropriate 

conduct has assisted in creating safer environments on the cruise ships. Most cruise lines will 

also provide victims information on a shore side advocate to whom they can reach for support 

and information after debarking from the ship. Qualitative feedback from these individuals 

 100 The FBI’s definition of rape, used in the FBI’s Uniform Crime Reporting Program, can be found 

https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2018/crime-in-the-u.s.-2018/topic-pages/rape.
- 54 -

indicates that the more trained response staff are, the more they are able to take care of the 

emotional needs of the victim, and provide a more effective response.

c. Sexual Misconduct Training Practices of Hospitality Industry 

The Violence Against Women Act of 2005 authorizes DOJ’s Office on Violence against Women 

(OVW) to fund a nonprofit entity to establish and operate a national resource center to assist 

victims of domestic and sexual violence in the workplace. OVW funds Workplaces Respond, a 

project of Futures Without Violence, to operate the national resource center. Workplaces 

Respond provides technical assistance to public agencies, private employers, labor unions, and 

advocates to promote workplace cultures of support for survivors, and engages in prevention of 

domestic violence and sexual violence, harassment, and stalking affecting the workplace. 

The Workplaces Respond program has helped establish training programs for restaurant worker 

unions and others in the hospitality industry. The unions in the restaurant and hotel industries 

have incorporated the trainings and are developing an industry-wide approach. The program uses 

an individualized approach in developing training programs – for example, doing needs 

assessments specific to the industry, meeting with leaders to determine goals and outcomes, 

testing and revising the training, and then training those appointed employees who would train 

the rest of the industry. Workplaces Respond trains individuals through the use of role-play, 

small group exercises, and experiential learning.

The content of the trainings generally follows the “4 R’s”: Recognize, Respond, Refer, and Reengage. 

1. Recognize: This foundational aspect of the training focuses on defining gender-based 

violence, its prevalence, and its impacts on workers and workplaces. 

2. Respond: This aspect of the training focuses on creating a work place culture of safety 

and accountability. For example, training on how to provide victim support grounded in 

trauma-informed and victim/survivor-centered practices. 

3. Refer: The training focuses on connecting individuals to resources and assistance, 

specifically local service providers who can both provide support for training and interact 

with victims. 

4. Re-Engage: Finally, this component of the training addresses the need to build a culture 

of support within the organization. 

Workplaces Respond conducts post-training evaluations, which identify unmet needs and 

challenges in knowledge, attitudes, and behavior. The entire process – from initial assessment, 

curriculum development, and implementation - takes about 1 year. The program also provides 

clients with safety cards and posters for awareness campaigns, which are adaptable to 

incorporate specific corporate policies. 
- 55 -

d. Airlines with Specific Sexual Misconduct Training

Two airlines that have developed robust programs to address incidents of sexual misconduct, 

Alaska Airlines and Delta Air Lines, shared information about their training practices with the 

Task Force. 

Generally, both airlines train pilots and flight attendants to respond to incidents of in-flight 

sexual misconduct by taking certain steps, based on the nature of the incident. The primary focus 

is to deescalate the situation and separate the passengers involved by moving one passenger to 

another seat. Flight attendants are also trained to use their airline’s in-flight event reporting 

system to report incidents of sexual misconduct internally and, based on the circumstances, may 

elevate the incident to the captain for further action. Both airlines train flight attendants to report 

incidents of in-flight sexual misconduct for internal purposes, although reporting to law 

enforcement is a separate process. Flight attendants are also trained to obtain statements from 

victims and witnesses. 

Both airlines indicated that flight attendant initial training takes place in-person and includes 

handling incidents of physical or disruptive behavior. Recurrent training is usually web-based or 

in an online format. While one of the airlines relied primarily on internal resources for the 

development of its training, the other used outside consultants for training development, in 

conjunction with its internal human resources team. 

6.2 Airline Information Survey on Training Practices

After considering training models and procedures adopted in different industries, the Task Force 

focused on existing training practices within the airline industry. The Task Force airline 

representatives reached out to the major U.S. airlines to request information on their data 

collection practices.101 The airlines that were contacted account for approximately 95% of the 

domestic air traffic in the United States. The airlines were asked to respond to a variety of 

questions about their employee training practices. The survey distinguished between incidents of 

sexual misconduct reported in-flight and those reported after landing.

For this survey, airline respondents were given the Task Force’s working definition of sexual 

misconduct as context for their answers. The airlines were also advised that, for purposes of this 

survey, a person is incapable of consent if they are unable to understand the facts, nature, extent, 

or implications of the situation due to drugs, alcohol, a mental disability, or being asleep or 

unconscious. Finally, the survey stated that the Task Force was interested in incidents between 

passengers or between a passenger and a crewmember, but not incidents between two 

crewmembers or airline employees which would normally fall under workplace issues. 

Fourteen airlines responded to the training practices survey.102 The general findings from that 

survey are described below.

 101 See Chapters 4.1, 5.1, and 6.1. 102 Although 14 airlines responded to the survey, some airlines did not respond to every question. 
- 56 -

i. Types of Airline Employees Who are Trained. When asked which employees (flight 

attendants, flight crew/flight deck, or ground security) are trained on how to handle incidents 

of sexual misconduct that are reported in-flight (in contrast to an incident reported on the 

ground, after the flight lands), 14 airlines responded. Most airlines responded that they do 

train flight attendants on how to handle incidents of sexual misconduct reported in-flight. 

Some airlines clarified that their training was not designed to solely address sexual 

misconduct, but rather included sexual misconduct in flight attendant training to address 

other types of in-flight incidents or otherwise encompassed in other trainings. Most of the 

airlines that responded indicated that pilots, ground security and other personnel on the 

ground do not receive training. 

When asked if airlines train customer service representatives, gate agents or ticket agents, or 

supervisors to handle incidents of in-flight sexual misconduct reported after the flight has 

landed, only three airlines responded stating that these personnel are trained. The remaining 

11 either stated they do not train personnel or did not respond to the question. 

ii. Frequency of Training. Generally, airlines conduct training at the start of employment 

(initial training), on an annual basis (annual training) or at other intervals (other periodic 

training). Airlines were asked how frequently their employees are trained on how to handle 

incidents of sexual misconduct reported in-flight. Eleven airlines responded to share the 

frequency with which their employees are trained on how to handle incidents of sexual 

misconduct that are reported on the flight. 

Figure 9: Airline Training Survey103

 103 Based on 11 airlines’ responses to this question. 

11

10

4

5

6

2

4 4

0

1 1

0

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

Initial Training Annual Training Other Periodic

Flight Attendants Flight Crew Ground Security Other Personnel
- 57 -

iii. Method of Training. Airlines were also asked how flight attendants, flight crew, ground 

security, customer service representatives, gate/ticket agents and supervisors were trained 

and given the option to select: in-person, web based, written, or other. Responses varied, but 

most airlines indicated that flight attendants were trained in-person, via web modules, and/or 

through written trainings. 

Figure 10: Airline training survey104

iv. Willingness to Train in the Future. Most airlines indicated a willingness to conduct 

training on handling incidents of sexual misconduct either through in-person or web-based

training. Airlines that responded to the survey were less willing to conduct such training for 

customer service personnel, gate agents or supervisors, specifically where incidents are 

reported after the flight lands. 

Figure 11: Airline training survey105

 104 Based on ten airlines’ responses to this question. 105 Based on 11 airlines’ responses to this question.

8

6

2

1 1 1

7

5

2 2 2

1

8

3

0

1 1 1 1

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Flight

Attendants

Flight Crew Ground

Security

Customer

Service

Gate/Ticket

Agent

Supervisors

In-Person Web Based Written Other

6

3

4

2 2 2

7

5

6

4

5 5 5

4

3

4

3 3

2 2

1 1 1 1

5

6

7

9

8 8

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

Flight Attendant Flight Crew Personnel on the

Ground

Customer Service

Representatives

Gate

Agents/Ticket

Agents

Supervisors

In-Person Web Based Written Training Exists No response
- 58 -

v. Challenges to Implementing Training. Airlines shared challenges they anticipated in 

implementing training on how to handle incidents of sexual misconduct. These included: 

• Lack of understanding of training requirements;

• Time constraints of conducting in-person or web training; 

• Varied training across airlines when airlines share service providers; 

• Difficulty in developing and implementing policies; 

• Implementation of non-biased training; and 

• Impact of the length and frequency of training on operation. 

Some airlines noted that they do not foresee challenges and that training on the issue of 

sexual misconduct would be beneficial. One airline stated that it is in process of rolling 

out new policies and procedures on handling incidents of in-flight sexual misconduct, 

with training to follow. 

vi. Other Areas for Training. Airlines were asked about existing policies and procedures 

relating to unaccompanied minors and unruly passengers. The airlines were also asked 

about their willingness to incorporate training related to in-flight sexual misconduct into 

those trainings. In addition, the airlines were asked how frequently training is conducted 

and in what manner the training is conducted.

a. Unaccompanied Minor Programs. All but one of 14 airlines provide training on issues 

concerning unaccompanied minors to flight attendants and flight crew. Less than half the 

airlines train other personnel on unaccompanied minor policies and procedures. 

Moreover, flight attendants are trained using in-person classes, web-based training and 

receive written training. 

Similarly, in terms of frequency of training, thirteen airlines include training on 

unaccompanied minors in flight attendants initial training and twelve airlines also train on 

the topic annually. Approximately one-third of the airlines provide initial and/or annual 

training on unaccompanied minors to other employees. 

When asked if airlines would be willing to incorporate voluntarily training related to 

handling incidents of sexual misconduct into their existing training on unaccompanied 

minors, twelve airlines responded. Most of these airlines indicated a willingness to 

incorporate sexual misconduct training into their unaccompanied minor training. 

 

b. Handling Unruly Passengers. All 14 airlines train flight attendants on how to handle 

unruly passengers. Certain personnel on the ground, customer service representatives, 

and supervisors receive this training as well. 

Most airlines include training on how to handle unruly passengers in flight attendant and 

flight crew initial training but other employees are trained less frequently. Airlines were 

also asked if they would be willing to voluntarily incorporate training related to handling 

incidents of sexual misconduct into their existing training on handling unruly passengers. 

Ten airlines responded that they would be willing to do so, and one airline indicated that 
- 59 -

it has already incorporated training on handling incidents of sexual misconduct into its 

existing training on unruly passengers. 

Airlines were also asked how they defined “unruly passenger”, and responses included: 

• physically or verbally abusive; 

• noncompliant; 

• causing disruption; 

• interfering with flight attendant duties; 

• intoxication; 

• threatening the safety or comfort of others; and 

• perceived to be a security threat. 

The Task Force noted that many of these behaviors could also describe sexual misconduct. 

vii. Standard Operating Procedures. Generally, airlines’ standard operating procedures are 

published in airlines’ employee manuals, such as the flight attendant manual, the flight 

operations manual, and the station operations manual. The Task Force discussed whether 

standard operating procedures (SOPs) on addressing unruly passengers, managing 

passengers who change seats, asking passengers to change seats to accommodate another 

passenger’s request/incident, and handing of a passenger’s personal property where 

passenger is suspected of a crime were in employee manuals. Fourteen airlines responded 

and all indicated that SOPs on addressing unruly passengers were in employee manuals. 

Most airlines also had SOPs in employee manuals on managing passengers who change 

seats and asking passengers to change seats. Few airlines had SOPs in employee manuals 

on handling of passenger’s personal property where the passenger is suspected of a crime. 

Airlines were also asked if they would be willing to develop voluntarily SOPs on 

addressing in-flight sexual misconduct incidents. Most airlines indicated that they would 

be willing to put in SOPs for identifying sexual misconduct and informing the flight 

captain to request law enforcement involvement. Most airlines also indicated a 

willingness to incorporate sexual misconduct training into existing flight attendant 

training programs for unaccompanied minors and unruly passenger training, and some 

expressed a willingness to do the same for other personnel. 

viii. Flight Attendant Training. The training survey asked if the airlines provided flight 

attendants with training on specific topic areas, and the method in which this training was 

conducted (i.e., in-person, computer or web-based, or other written training). The survey 

requested information on the following specific topic areas:

• Sensitivity training on engaging with passengers who have experienced traumatic 

or unusual events in-flight (e.g., medical trauma, adjacent to a passenger that 

experienced a medical trauma);

• Handling unruly passengers; 

• Handling passengers who change their seat from their assigned seat; 

• Requesting passengers to change their seat to accommodate another passenger’s 

request; 

• Identifying incidents of sexual misconduct when reported; 
- 60 -

• Identifying when an incident of sexual misconduct should be elevated to the flight 

crew for further action; and 

• Identifying when an incident of sexual misconduct should be elevated to 

corporate security and/or a request for law enforcement to meet the plane upon 

landing. 

The survey results indicate that airlines generally train flights attendants on how to handle unruly 

passengers and the training is conducted in-person and on the web. 

Figure 12 below provides greater detail about this training as well as the other topic areas where 

flight attendants are trained and how that training is conducted. 

Figure 12: Airline training survey106

ix. Other Training Areas. Finally, airlines were asked if employees were trained on how to 

handle unique situations they come across. Responses varied, but airlines stated that 

flight attendants were generally trained to de-escalate and use their best judgment. Some 

airlines use conflict resolution management training, but the majority provide no specific 

training except that they should collaborate with other flight attendants and follow the 

captain’s directives.

 106 Based on 11 airlines’ responses to this question.

4

13

9

9

6

7

5

3

12

7

7

6

7

6

3

8

5

5

4

4

4

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14

Sensitivity Training

Handling Unruly Passengers

Handling Passengers Who Change Seats

from Assigned Seats

Requesting Passengers To Change Seats

Identifying Incidents of Sexual Misconduct

Identifying when to Elevate To Captain

Identifying When to Elevate to Corporate

Security and/or request Law Enforcement

Other Web Based In Person
- 61 -

6.3 Assessing Current Training Models

After considering the data collected through the airline training practices survey and 

presentations about how other industries train employees to respond to incidents of sexual 

misconduct, the Task Force considered the following questions: 

• Who should be trained on handling incidents of in-flight sexual misconduct?

• How often should they be trained?

• What content should they be trained on? 

• How can airlines ensure that the training is effective? 

1. Which Employees Should Be Trained? 

The Task Force considered the chain of reporting to identify which airline employees should be 

trained to handle incidents of sexual misconduct. As discussed previously, passengers often 

report incidents of in-flight sexual misconduct to the flight attendant during the flight, but it is 

not uncommon for such incidents to be reported after landing to a gate agent or customer service 

representative. Even when incidents are reported during the flight, employees on the ground 

assist the flight crew in informing law enforcement. 

In response to the airline training practices survey, most airlines stated that they provide training 

to flight attendants and flight crew on how to handle incidents of in-flight sexual misconduct. 

The airline survey results showed that few provide this training to employees in other positions 

such as ground security personnel, gate agents, customer service representatives or 

supervisors.107 The Task Force recognized that each employee in the reporting chain plays a 

different role with varying degrees of involvement, and need not receive the same type or level 

of training; however, employees within the chain of reporting should receive some training. 

The Task Force also considered challenges to developing and implementing training addressing 

incidents of sexual misconduct for different types of employees and recognized the need for a 

thoughtful assessment of employees’ roles and responsibilities. The Task Force discussed the 

benefit of training employees according to their specific job responsibilities and extent of 

passenger contact. For example, appropriate training for a gate agent could include 

understanding how to interact with the victim, what information needs to be gathered, and when 

and how to contact law enforcement. In contrast, a systems operator responsible for relaying 

information between the flight deck and corporate security (or law enforcement), may only need 

training on the airline policies and procedures for handling such incidents but need not be trained 

on interpersonal communication with passengers. 

The Task Force also considered the benefits of training certain employees to be “experts” in 

handling incidents of sexual misconduct, particularly for incidents reported after the flight lands. 

This would be similar to the role of a CRO, which is required under DOT’s disability 

regulations. In the context of handling disability related passenger complaints, the CRO is an 

expert on disability issues and is empowered to resolve passenger concerns. Employees with 

 107 The airline training survey did not ask airlines what type of training is provided, or the content of such training. 

The survey reflected, however, that twelve out of fourteen airlines do not provide any training for customer service 

representatives and gate agents on how to handle incident of sexual misconduct that are reported to them. 
- 62 -

specialized training to address incidents of sexual misconduct could serve as a resource for 

employees and/or victims.

The Task Force concluded that flight attendants and pilots should be trained on how to handle 

incidents of sexual misconduct. The Task Force also concluded that airlines should train other 

personnel charged with or involved in responding to and/or reporting incidents of sexual 

misconduct as appropriate. Airlines may also want to consider the benefit of training supervisors 

or others as CRO-type experts. 

2. What should the content of the training be? 

The airline training survey highlighted that most airlines do not have training specifically 

designed to address incidents of sexual misconduct. Airlines that have developed robust 

programs to address incidents of sexual misconduct shared details about their training program 

with the Task Force. Based on the survey results and the presentations provided by airlines with 

robust in-flight sexual misconduct training programs, it appears that flight attendants are 

generally trained to obtain statements from victims and witnesses, and if the incident involves 

physical contact, flight attendants are trained to report that incident. Flight attendants are also 

trained to separate the passenger and the alleged assailant by moving one of them to another seat. 

Flight attendants often use their airline’s in-flight event reporting system to report incidents of 

sexual misconduct and this data is captured internally. Pilots and flight attendants are also trained 

to report to law enforcement. One airline has developed a reporting procedure through a 24-hour 

hotline number and includes instructions on how to report sexual misconduct incidents in its 

employee manual. 

The Task Force distinguished between training on psychological components (e.g., sensitivity 

training, recognizing boundaries and biases) versus procedural components (e.g., policies and 

procedures, checklists). Due to the sensitive nature of the situation, discretion and situational 

awareness are important when responding to the incident. The following training areas were 

discussed to address both the psychological and procedural needs for a training. 

Training on Essential Response Skills and Communications. The Task Force discussed the 

importance of “trauma-informed” training, i.e., to have flight attendants trained to respond in a 

trauma-informed, victim-centric way.108 The goal is to obtain information necessary for law 

enforcement to pursue a case without unintentionally revictimizing the individual, or skewing 

information due to personal biases. Victim centered training allows response staff to 

acknowledge and prioritize the needs of the victim to ensure a compassionate, empathetic, and 

nonjudgmental response. The Task Force discussed the purpose of taking steps to make a victim 

feel safe, supported, and empowered so that they are able to play a contributing role in the 

response process. The Task Force learned that trauma-informed training provides response staff 

with an understanding of how trauma affects the brain which impacts how a victim will respond 

 108 During its review of this Report, HHS noted that the HHS Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services 

Administration provides a framework for becoming a trauma-informed organization, system, or sector, including six 

key principles and ten implementation domains. Additional information is available at 

https://store.samhsa.gov/product/SAMHSA-s-Concept-of-Trauma-and-Guidance-for-a-Trauma-InformedApproach/SMA14-4884.html?WT_mc_id=EB_20141008_SMA14-4884. 
- 63 -

and react during and after the incident. This is particularly relevant when determining credibility 

as trauma can present in ways that appear to be deception on behalf of the victim.

These components of response training are critical in the emotional recovery of a victim, and 

provides response staff with strategies for how to work with individuals in crisis. It is important 

that the airline’s actions are sensitive to the victim and do not result in the victim being blamed 

or the incident being dismissed. In this context, the Task Force discussed the training in the 

cruise industry, where employees learn how to communicate and interact with victims and how 

to combat potential bias that may influence an employee’s response. 

In addition, the Task Force discussed the importance of communication between flight attendants 

on the flight and between pilots and flight attendants in support of recognizing the need for 

discretion when responding or discussing these types of situations.

Training on Procedures. The Task Force also focused on two key roles for flight attendants: (1) 

being able to identify that an incident has occurred and (2) knowing how to respond to it, which 

includes identifying the key individuals in a sensitive manner. The Task Force also 

acknowledged that if the incident occurs in the middle of the flight, training should include the 

procedures to ensure that the passengers involved are separated and remain separate. The Task 

Force recalled that one individual who shared her account of in-flight sexual misconduct with the 

Task Force expressed concern that, although she was reseated after the incident, she was asked to 

return to her original seat next to the alleged offender before landing. 

The Task Force also discussed the importance of reporting incidents of in-flight sexual 

misconduct to law enforcement to support law enforcement investigations and prosecutions. A 

Task Force member suggested that it may be beneficial for airlines to consult with law 

enforcement when developing the airline’s reporting policies and procedures. 

Standardized Response Thresholds. The Task Force considered the benefits to having 

standardized responses to incidents of sexual misconduct in the same way flight attendants have 

standardized responses to security threats. This may be helpful, particularly when responding to 

overt physical acts. The Task Force acknowledged, however, that sexual misconduct may not 

involve actual contact between passengers and may not fit in the airlines’ existing security threat 

thresholds. The Task Force also noted that an airline’s response may differ depending on 

whether it considers an incident involving sexual misconduct to be a security matter or a code of 

conduct matter. 

Adapting Existing Training. The Task Force considered the benefits to incorporating sexual 

misconduct training into existing training on unruly passengers. For example, airlines shared that 

their definitions of an unruly passenger include a passenger who is physically or verbally 

abusive, causes disruption, and threatens the safety or comfort of others. The Task Force noted 

that the actions that airlines consider to be unruly behavior include commonalities with elements 

of sexual misconduct. 

Generally, airlines train flight attendants and the flight crew on how to handle unruly passengers. 

Some airlines also train personnel on the ground, customer service representatives, and 
- 64 -

supervisors on handling unruly passengers in flight as well. The airline training survey showed 

that most airlines provide initial and annual training on unruly passengers to flight attendants and 

that some airlines also provide this training to flight crew and ground personnel. Airlines also 

expressed a willingness to incorporate training on incidents of sexual misconduct into their 

existing training on handling unruly passengers. 

Airline Manuals: The Task Force discussed the importance of the employee manuals, 

recognizing that flight attendants rely heavily on their flight attendant manuals for guidance 

when addressing issues during a flight. The Task Force member representing flight attendants 

shared that manuals are the single most important resource for flight attendants and it is where 

information about handling incidents of sexual misconduct could be easily accessed. The Task 

Force member representing pilots affirmed that including guidance on addressing incidents of 

sexual misconduct in the flight attendant and pilot manuals would be the best way to implement 

any widespread change and the best way to ensure compliance. 

The Task Force discussed the various employee manuals and the FAA requirements applicable 

to them.109 Airline manuals include a wide range of information, such as safety related policies 

and procedures that may be subject to review and/or approval by the FAA and security related 

policies and procedures that may be subject to review and/or approval by the TSA. Airline 

manuals also include information that is not required by either FAA or TSA, but is important in 

enabling flight attendants and pilots to carry out their duties. Airline employees are trained on 

information included in their manuals. 

For instance, FAA requires airlines to train pilots and flight attendants on how to handle 

passenger misconduct. Although there are regulations setting minimum standards for what must 

be included in the airline manuals, U.S. airlines prepare their own manual content based on their 

individual policies and procedures, which then must be submitted to their Principal Operations 

Inspectors at the FAA for approval. 

The Task Force discussed the possibility of airlines including a standard definition of sexual 

misconduct and the procedures for addressing sexual misconduct in airline manuals to further 

consistency in the way airlines address these incidents. The Task Force also considered the 

challenge to incorporating the definition of sexual misconduct and procedures for addressing inflight sexual misconduct in such manuals, notably that it may be more difficult for airlines to 

adapt their policies and procedures because those revisions would need to be reviewed by the 

FAA. While the Task Force recognized that revising airline manuals may be burdensome on the 

industry, some Task Force members asserted that the benefit of including the procedures and 

definition in airline manuals outweighs the burden as their inclusion would make the information

readily available for flight attendants and pilots to use as a resource when responding to 

incidents. 

 109 Federal requirements for airline manuals are applicable to air carriers operating under the certification 

requirements of 14 C.F.R. parts 121, 125 and 135. Foreign air carriers, operating under the certification 

requirements of 14 C.F.R. part 129, would not typically have as robust manual requirements.
- 65 -

3. What Training Method, Frequency, and Length Should be Considered? 

The Task Force discussed various training tools, methods, frequency and length of training. 

Although the Task Force agreed that it would not recommend the specifics with respect to the 

method, frequency, or length of the airline training, the Task Force discussed various methods 

that may be useful in the development and implementation of the training. 

Method: Based on presentations to the Task Force on sexual misconduct training conducted by 

the cruise and hospitality industry as well as airlines’ disability training programs, the Task 

Force discussed a variety of in-person training methods including scenario-based, lecture based 

and role-play. The Task Force also considered how online training could be implemented. The 

Task Force acknowledged that training related to sensitivity and inter-personal communication is 

usually better conducted in-person. The Task Force acknowledged that different types of 

employees may be trained in different ways, based on the content and the employees’ 

availability, and airlines should take that into consideration. For example, pilots may find that 

computer-based trainings that focus on response procedures to be more helpful while flight 

attendants may find that in-person empathy training is more appropriate as they interact more 

directly with passengers. 

The Task Force discussed the benefits of building upon existing training modules and 

incorporating sexual misconduct as a component of other training modules. This approach would 

allow for airlines to maintain their independent policies and methods but still effectively address 

sexual misconduct in training. The training survey indicated that airlines were generally willing 

to incorporate specific training on sexual misconduct in existing programs addressing unruly 

passengers and unaccompanied minors. 

Frequency: The Task Force generally agreed that initial sexual misconduct training for new 

hires and existing employees was important. Outside of the initial training, the Task Force 

recognized that flight attendants and pilot have scheduled recurrent training cycles which can 

vary based on their approved training programs tied to regulatory requirements. Flight attendant 

training is typically on a twelve-month cycle while pilot training can vary between 6, 9, or 12 

month visits in a 12, 24, or 36-month cycle. The Task Force also learned that when a manual is 

changed, employees are usually trained on the changes within the year. The Task Force 

considered the frequency with which training is conducted in other industries, and noted that in 

the disability realm, public-facing employees are trained every three years and CROs are trained 

every year. In the cruise industry, the frequency of training depends on whether the employee is 

a security officer (annual), a medical officer (two to three years), or a general employee (annual). 

One Task Force member suggested that airlines consider how frequently the training information 

is updated and scenarios are modified. Periodic updates to training programs and modifying 

scenarios help ensure that employees who review the training aren’t bored and scenarios are 

reflective of changing circumstances that flight attendants and other airline employees may 

experience. Periodic training updates also allow for the airline to use tough but realistic examples 

that employees are challenged to think about.
- 66 -

Length of Training: The Task Force was cognizant that airline employees receive training on 

various subjects, some of which are required by regulation and others are prescribed by the 

airline, and determined that the amount of time spent in training is a matter best left to the airline. 

Each airline may adopt a different training schedule based on the method of training, subjects to 

be addressed in those trainings, and other considerations. For context, the Task Force considered 

how much time other industries spent training on sexual misconduct. The Task Force learned 

that training in the cruise industry varies by position. Initial security training for most cruise lines 

is extensive, sometimes over a period of days, and this training may include a sexual assault 

component that runs anywhere from five to eight hours. For other employees, initial onboard 

training is six hours and refresher trainings are two hours. The cruise industry differs from the 

airline industry in that cruise lines do not have much turnover in staff so initial trainings are 

infrequent. 

6.4 Recommendations on Training 

The Task Force noted that data on incidents of sexual misconduct collected by public sources 

such as the FBI, as well as internal airline data that is not shared with outside sources, are 

important tools for training development and updates. The Task Force recognized that training 

on the issue of addressing sexual misconduct will evolve over time based on what is learned 

from the data. As the data collection improves, airlines will be better able to determine how best 

to design or update training for its employees.

The Task Force considered ways that airlines can enhance their training programs to prepare 

their employees better to identify and report incidents of in-flight sexual misconduct. The Task 

Force discussed and analyzed airlines’ current training practices. The Task Force also considered 

how other industries respond to allegations or reports of sexual misconduct by passengers 

onboard aircraft.

1. Training Airline Employees on How to Address Incidents of In-Flight Sexual 

Misconduct: The Task Force recognized that training of airline employees, as 

appropriate to their duties, on addressing in-flight sexual misconduct is a best practice. 

Recommendation: The Task Force recommends that airlines provide training on 

addressing in-flight sexual misconduct to their flight attendants, pilots and other 

personnel charged with or involved in responding to and/or reporting incidents of sexual 

misconduct. 

2. Key Elements of Training: The Task Force acknowledged that trauma-informed 

training on communicating with individuals who have experienced in-flight sexual 

misconduct, as well as policies and procedures on how to respond and report incidents of 

sexual in-flight misconduct, are important. The Task Force considered recommending 

training content, length and method (in-person, web based, etc.) but recognized the 

benefits of providing airlines flexibility in these areas. 

Recommendation: The Task Force agreed that the key elements of training should

include as appropriate to the duties of the airline employee: (i) the standardized definition

of “sexual misconduct”, as adopted by the airline; (ii) sensitivity training, (iii) policies 
- 67 -

and procedures on responding to incidents of in-flight sexual misconduct, and (iv) 

policies and procedures on airline reporting (internal and external) and data collection 

practices. 
- 68 -

Chapter 7

Findings & Recommendations

The Task Force recognizes that while progress has been made by the many responsible 

stakeholders in preventing and responding to incidents of in-flight sexual misconduct, the 

occurrences of such incidents is an issue that requires continued attention from and should 

remain an ongoing priority for both the ACPAC and the Secretary of Transportation. With regard 

to specifics, in accordance with the FAA Act, the following are the findings and 

recommendations of the In-flight Sexual Misconduct Task Force.

7.1 Findings

a. There is no common definition of sexual misconduct across the airline industry.

b. The rise of social activism and increase in public attention on the issue of in-flight sexual 

misconduct have prompted airlines to review their policies and response protocols. In turn, 

many airlines have indicated a willingness to revise applicable policies and procedures. 

c. Flight attendants and pilots are often the first responders to incidents of in-flight sexual 

misconduct. 

d. Data collection serves three purposes:

a. Determining the prevalence of in-flight sexual misconduct;

b. Supporting law enforcement investigations and prosecutions; and

c. Helping airlines develop effective training programs. 

e. There are gaps in the data on incidents of in-flight sexual misconduct, collected by the 

Federal Government. 

f. Airlines have standardized policies on reporting of possible threats or regulatory violations, 

and may record some information about sexual misconduct incidents in their individual 

airline reporting system, however, airlines do not have standardized policies on training, data 

collection, or reporting practices that specifically address incidents of in-flight sexual 

misconduct.

g. Training serves as an important foundation for accurate recognition, response and reporting 

for data collection, and is an imperative part of addressing incidents of sexual misconduct on 

commercial aircraft. 

h. The ability of airlines to make certain changes in policies and procedures to prevent and 

respond to allegations of sexual misconduct may depend on the airline size, resource 

capacity, and other considerations that may vary from airline to airline.

i. Allowing airlines to retain some flexibility in implementing changes to improve data 

collection, training, and reporting is important. As a result, some recommendations to the 

airlines represent a broad range of approaches for addressing in-flight sexual misconduct.
- 69 -

j. The Task Force finds that there are specific actions that the Federal government, law 

enforcement, the airlines, airports, and the unions may take based on reviews of current 

practices.

k. The Task Force did not make specific recommendation in certain areas because the current 

data on prevalence does not justify recommending onerous requirements. The Task Force’s 

report focuses on ways to enhance passenger awareness and training, which will improve 

reporting and data collection within the industry and law enforcement, and provide better 

data to determine whether additional action is warranted. 

7.2 Definition of Sexual Misconduct

The Task Force noted that the FAA Act does not define “sexual misconduct” and there is no 

other statutory definition for this term. Therefore, the Task Force determined that, to address 

sexual misconduct aboard passenger aircraft better, there needs to be a definition of the term that 

the Federal government, the airlines, law enforcement, and passengers can use for the sake of 

consistency in policies and procedures to handle and report incidents of in-flight sexual 

misconduct.

Through collaborative discussions, the Task Force reviewed a variety of definitions relating to 

non-consensual sexual acts. These included statutory definitions, definitions provided by the 

airlines, RAINN, and the flight attendants unions. The Task Force agreed on the following 

definition:

Sexual misconduct is a broad term. It encompasses any behavior or attempted behavior of a 

sexual nature that is committed without consent or with someone incapable of consent, or by 

force, intimidation, coercion, or manipulation. Sexual misconduct also includes physical or 

verbal advances or harassment of a sexual nature, or public indecent exposure.

The Task Force adopted this definition for purposes of this report. 

Recommendation: Widespread adoption of a standardized definition will facilitate better data 

collection, reporting, and training within the airline industry. The Task Force encourages airlines 

to incorporate the Task Force’s definition of sexual misconduct in their operation manuals, 

training, data collection, and reporting policies and procedures as appropriate. 

Recommendation: The Task Force encourages law enforcement responding to reported incidents 

of in-flight misconduct to be made aware of the Task Force’s definition. 

7.3 Awareness

The Task Force addressed passenger awareness of sexual misconduct and reporting options 

because it is an aspect of the reporting process. Awareness campaigns are intended both to deter 

offenders and to inform victims of available resources, including recourse, how to report 

incidents and the availability of victim support services. Options for awareness campaigns 
- 70 -

include in-flight verbal or video announcements, inclusion in the in-flight magazine or other seat 

back pocket materials, posters or other signage, adopting and posting a passenger code of 

conduct (which may include the definition of sexual misconduct and the existence of civil and 

criminal consequences), and/or posting resources or statements on websites or Wi-Fi landing 

pages.

In its discussions, the Task Force recognized the challenges to awareness programs but 

determined that these educational and awareness efforts are vital to achieving better training, 

reporting and data collection outcomes.

Recommendation: Airlines, airports, and appropriate Federal agencies should engage in 

awareness campaigns. The Task Force recognizes that there are various methods for the airlines 

to do so and encourages airlines to consider the methods mentioned in Chapter 3 and use the 

methods that best fit with their policies and practices on sexual misconduct. Federal agencies 

should also take steps to ensure that passengers are aware that acts of sexual misconduct are 

punishable under federal law and how incidents involving in-flight sexual misconduct should be 

reported. 

7.4 Reporting 

The Task Force considered ways to enhance reporting of in-flight sexual misconduct. The Task 

Force discussed and analyzed airlines’ current reporting practices, including how airlines address 

privacy concerns on an aircraft, the role of flight attendants versus law enforcement, passenger 

discomfort in reporting incidents and delays in passenger reporting. The Task Force also 

considered how other entities such as the FBI, DOT or local law enforcement respond to 

allegations or reports of sexual misconduct by passengers onboard aircraft.

1. Enable Passengers to Report Incidents in Various Ways: The Task Force explored 

various passenger reporting methods, which led to discussions of certain methods that may 

re-traumatize victims, the fight-flight-freeze response that victims may experience, the 

possibility that misconduct could occur at times when it is not feasible to report it 

immediately, and airlines’ practices and procedures for accepting passenger reports of sexual 

misconduct after the plane has landed. 

Recommendation: The Task Force encourages airlines to establish clear policies and 

procedures around reporting methods to enable the airline to accept and appropriately 

respond to passenger reports of sexual misconduct whether the airline learns of it on the 

aircraft or after the aircraft has landed, and disseminate the information as appropriate. 

Additionally, the Task Force suggests airlines consider allowing passengers more than one 

way to report such incidents to allow passengers to select the method that is most 

comfortable for them. 

2. Obtain Alleged Offender and Witness Contact Information: In order for the FBI to 

successfully investigate and resolve a case involving an incident of in-flight sexual 

misconduct, in addition to the victim’s contact information, the identity and contact 

information of the alleged offender and any witnesses to the incident are crucial. There are 

several ways that such information can be obtained, including requesting a passengers’ 
- 71 -

boarding pass or government issued identification, or consulting the seat map (if available). 

The Task Force noted that while obtaining contact information, flight attendants should avoid 

interviewing the alleged offender or witness and leave it to law enforcement who are trained 

to conduct interviews. 

Recommendation: The Task Force recommends that airlines have a procedure to identify 

and to obtain the contact information of the alleged offender and any witnesses to provide to 

law enforcement to help support the investigation. Applicable employees should be trained 

on the policy and procedure around the collection of the information. 

3. Segregate Sexual Misconduct Incidents in Airline Records: Whenever an incident 

involving passengers occurs on an aircraft, most airlines require the flight attendant to file an 

incident or irregularity report with the details of the incident. However, the Task Force found 

that these forms rarely allow for the identification of “sexual misconduct,” which contributes 

to the difficulty in identifying data points and establishing the prevalence of sexual 

misconduct. The Task Force discussed whether airline incident or irregularity reports should 

include a subcategory for in-flight sexual misconduct incidents involving minors, indicate if 

the passengers were intoxicated or other relevant information. The Task Force also noted that 

Federal regulations do not require airlines to maintain incident or irregularity reports but if an 

airline develops its own processes for incident or irregularity reporting, the FAA ensures that 

they handle the reports in accordance with these processes through approved/accepted 

operating manuals. 

Recommendation: The Task Force encourages airlines to ensure that any incident or 

irregularity report specifically allows for the identification of an incident of sexual 

misconduct, whether the incident involved a minor, and whether law enforcement was 

requested. This would allow airlines to better track the handling of sexual misconduct 

allegations.

4. Contact Law Enforcement When Incidents of Sexual Misconduct are Reported: The 

Task Force agreed that airline employees should never be in the role of making a legal 

judgment as to whether certain conduct constitutes a crime or is legally actionable. The Task 

Force also noted that airlines sometimes need to balance between respecting a victim’s 

request not to report and the importance of informing law enforcement of the incident. The 

airline survey further revealed that airlines generally do not contact law enforcement every 

time that they learn of an in-flight sexual misconduct incident, especially if they learn of it 

after the aircraft has landed. At the same time, the Task Force recognized that, at times, 

passengers may report incidents of in-flight sexual misconduct to gate agents or customer 

service representatives and not the flight attendant. There was also a recognition that some 

victims report to sources other than airlines (for example, DOT, airport police, or local law 

enforcement) and these entities do not always forward such reports/complaints to the FBI. 

Recommendation: The Task Force encourages airlines to have a policy and procedure of 

informing law enforcement when incidents of sexual misconduct are reported to the airline 

irrespective of the incident being reported to the airline during the flight or after the flight. To 
- 72 -

ensure the effectiveness of reporting, airlines may find it beneficial to consult with their local 

law enforcement agency when developing the airline’s reporting policies. 

Recommendation: The Task Force recommends that local law enforcement, airport security, 

and DOT (OST and FAA) forward any complaints that they receive, alleging in-flight sexual 

misconduct, to the FBI.

7.5 Data Collection 

The Task Force considered different data collection methodologies and sources of data that 

would effectively provide information on instances of alleged sexual misconduct onboard 

aircraft. The Task Force focused on how best to collect data on incidents of in-flight sexual 

misconduct in a manner that protects the privacy and confidentiality of individuals involved in 

incidents of alleged sexual misconduct and precludes the release of data that publicly identifies 

an individual air carrier to enable better understanding of the frequency and severity of such 

misconduct. 

1. Sources of Data: The Task Force determined that the FBI is best suited to receive data 

on incidents of in-flight sexual misconduct reported by members of the public, airlines, 

local law enforcement, other Federal agencies, airports or other interested parties.110 The 

Task Force recognized the FBI’s commitment to track such incidents consistently and 

effectively. The Task Force also recognized that good coordination among the FBI, local 

law enforcement, airlines and DOT (OST and FAA) is imperative to improving the 

quality of data collected on incidents of this nature. The Task Force recognized that there 

could be gaps in the FBI data if a victim only reported the incident to the airline, and the 

Task Force discussed whether airlines should review internal data to ensure their policies

and procedures are effective. Similarly, the Task Force recognized that DOT (OST and 

FAA) does not currently refer all reported incidents of in-flight sexual misconduct to the 

FBI. The Task Force noted that national surveys, such as the NCVS, are the best method 

to determine prevalence but recognizes that such surveys are expensive and time 

consuming. 

Recommendation: The Task Force recommends that the FBI maintain data on the 

number of reported in-flight sexual misconduct incidents received from members of the 

public, airlines, local law enforcement, other Federal agencies, airports or other interested 

parties. The Task Force also recommends that DOT (OST and FAA) refer all incidents of 

in-flight sexual misconduct to the FBI. The Task Force is not opining on whether a 

national survey should be conducted to supplement this data. 

 110 Under Section 339B, the Attorney General of the United States is required to establish a streamlined process for 

individuals involved in incidents of alleged sexual misconduct onboard aircraft to report such allegations to law 

enforcement in a manner that protects the privacy and confidentiality of the individuals involved. The FBI maintains 

a tip line where members of the public can report incidents of in-flight sexual misconduct. The toll-free tip line is 1-

800-call-FBI and tips can also be submitted online at https://tips.fbi.gov.In addition, the FBI has a process in place 

to track the information reported and assess for any action deemed appropriate.
- 73 -

2. Identify Sexual Assault Incidents in FAA records: The Task Force learned that the 

FAA receives reports of incidents of in-flight sexual assault through a number of ways, 

including passenger complaints, reports to ATC, or through routine airline inspections. 

The Task Force also learned that the FAA does not coordinate internally to share 

information or data related to incidents of in-flight sexual assault, and there is currently 

no system in place by which these incidents can be identified and tracked separately from 

general complaints involving interference with pilots and flight attendants. 

Recommendation: The Task Force recommends that the FAA review its complaint intake 

process and ensure that incidents of in-flight sexual assault can be identified. 

3. Use of Data for Law Enforcement Referrals: The Task Force concluded law 

enforcement is better able to investigate incidents of in-flight sexual misconduct when 

airlines collect contact information from the individual who experienced in-flight sexual 

misconduct, the alleged offender, and witnesses if any. 

Recommendation: The Task Force encourages the airlines to have a policy and 

procedures to identify the victim, alleged offender and any witnesses and obtain their 

contact information to provide to law enforcement. 

4. Use of Data for Airline Training Programs: The Task Force found that airlines could 

use internally held data to highlight patterns and identify ways to develop more effective 

training programs. The Task Force identified various data points that would be useful for 

airlines, such as how the airline became aware of the incident; the type of incident and 

whether drugs or alcohol were involved; flight information; information about the victim 

(passenger, employee, minor) and offender; and whether law enforcement was requested 

and/or involved. The Task Force also found that airlines that rely on regional code share 

partners do not always share data on in-flight sexual misconduct with its codeshare 

partners. Especially where an incident of in-flight sexual misconduct is reported after the 

flight has landed, passengers are more likely to contact the airline with whom they 

purchased their ticket, as they are not aware of the code share agreement. Shared data 

among an airline’s partners will serve to enhance training and reporting procedures. 

Recommendation: The Task Force encourages airlines to utilize data on incidents of 

sexual misconduct that are reported to the airline to inform the airline’s training and 

policy development on in-flight sexual misconduct. The Task Force also encourages 

airlines to share their data, and resulting policies and procedures, with their regional 

airline partners. 

7.6 Training 

The Task Force noted that data on incidents of sexual misconduct collected by public sources 

such as the FBI, as well as internal airline data that is not shared with outside sources, are 

important tools for training development and updates. The Task Force recognized that training 

on the issue of addressing sexual misconduct will evolve over time based on what is learned 

from the data. As the data collection improves, airlines will be better able to determine how best 

to design or update training for its employees.
- 74 -

The Task Force considered ways that airlines can enhance their training programs to prepare 

their employees better to identify and report incidents of in-flight sexual misconduct. The Task 

Force discussed and analyzed airlines’ current training practices. The Task Force also considered 

how other industries respond to allegations or reports of sexual misconduct by passengers 

onboard aircraft.

1. Training Airline Employees on How to Address Incidents of In-Flight Sexual 

Misconduct: The Task Force recognized that training of airline employees, as 

appropriate to their duties, on addressing in-flight sexual misconduct is a best practice. 

Recommendation: The Task Force recommends that airlines provide training on 

addressing in-flight sexual misconduct to their flight attendants, pilots and other 

personnel charged with or involved in responding to and/or reporting incidents of sexual 

misconduct. 

2. Key Elements of Training: The Task Force acknowledged that trauma-informed 

training on communicating with individuals who have experienced in-flight sexual 

misconduct, as well as policies and procedures on how to respond and report incidents of 

sexual in-flight misconduct, are important. The Task Force considered recommending 

training content, length and method (in-person, web based, etc.) but recognized the 

benefits of providing airlines flexibility in these areas. 

Recommendation: The Task Force agreed that the key elements of training should 

include as appropriate to the duties of the airline employee: (i) the standardized definition

of “sexual misconduct,” as adopted by the airline; (ii) sensitivity training, (iii) policies 

and procedures on responding to incidents of in-flight sexual misconduct, and (iv) 

policies and procedures on airline reporting (internal and external) and data collection 

practices. 
APPENDIX A

Section 339 A of the 

FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018 
17 SEC. 339A. NATIONAL IN-FLIGHT SEXUAL MISCONDUCT

18 TASK FORCE.

19 (a) ESTABLISHMENT OF TASK FORCE.—The Sec20 retary of Transportation shall establish a task force, to 

21 be known as the ‘‘National In-Flight Sexual Misconduct 

22 Task Force’’ (referred to in this section as ‘‘Task Force’’) 

23 to— 

24 (1) review current practices, protocols and re25 quirements of air carriers in responding to allegaVerDate Nov 24 2008 12:01 Sep 24, 2018 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00241 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 C:\USERS\KEANDE~1\APPDATA\ROAMING\SOFTQUAD\XMETAL\7.0\GEN\C\H302_SUS.X

APPENDIX A: FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018 
242 

1 tions of sexual misconduct by passengers onboard 

2 aircraft, including training, reporting and data col3 lection; and 

4 (2) provide recommendations on training, re5 porting and data collection regarding allegations of 

6 sexual misconduct occurring on passenger airline 

7 flights that are informed by the review of informa8 tion described in paragraph (1) and subsection 

9 (c)(5) on passengers who have experienced sexual 

10 misconduct onboard aircraft. 

11 (b) MEMBERSHIP.—The Task Force shall be com12 posed of, at a minimum, representatives from— 

13 (1) Department of Transportation;

14 (2) Department of Justice, including the Fed15 eral Bureau of Investigation, Office of Victims for 

16 Crimes, and the Office on Violence Against Women; 

17 (3) National organizations that specialize in

18 providing services to sexual assault victims; 

19 (4) labor organizations that represent flight at20 tendants; 

21 (5) labor organizations that represent pilots;

22 (6) airports;

23 (7) air carriers;

24 (8) State and local law enforcement agencies;

25 and 


APPENDIX A: FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018 
243 

1 (9) such other Federal agencies and stakeholder

2 organizations as the Secretary of Transportation 

3 considers appropriate. 

4 (c) PURPOSE OF TASK FORCE.—The purpose of the

5 Task Force shall be to— 

6 (1) issue recommendations for addressing alle7 gations of sexual misconduct by passengers onboard 

8 aircraft, including airline employee and contractor 

9 training; 

10 (2) issue recommendations on effective ways for

11 passengers involved in incidents of alleged sexual 

12 misconduct to report such allegation of sexual mis13 conduct; 

14 (3) issue recommendations on how to most ef15 fectively provide data on instances of alleged sexual 

16 misconduct onboard aircraft and to whom the data 

17 collected should be reported in a manner that pro18 tects the privacy and confidentiality of individuals 

19 involved in incidents of alleged sexual misconduct 

20 and precludes the release of data that publically 

21 identifies an individual air carrier to enable better 

22 understanding of the frequency and severity of such 

23 misconduct; 

24 (4) issue recommendations for flight attend25 ants, pilots, and other appropriate airline personnel 


APPENDIX A: FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018 
244 

1 on law enforcement notification in incidents of al2 leged sexual misconduct; 

3 (5) review and utilize first-hand accounts from

4 passengers who have experienced sexual misconduct 

5 onboard aircraft; and 

6 (6) other matters deemed necessary by the

7 Task Force. 

8 (d) REPORT.—Not later than 1 year after the date

9 of enactment of this Act, the Task Force shall submit a 

10 report with its recommendations and findings developed 

11 pursuant to subsection (c) to the Secretary of Transpor12 tation. 

13 (e) PLAN.—Not later than 180 days after receiving

14 the report required under subsection (d) the Secretary of 

15 Transportation, in coordination with relevant federal 

16 agencies, shall submit to appropriate committees of Con17 gress a plan to address the recommendations in the report 

18 required under subsection (d). The Secretary of Transpor19 tation shall make changes to guidance, policies and regula20 tions, as necessary, within 1 year of submitting the plan 

21 required in this subsection. 

22 (f) REGULATIONS.—Not later than 1 year after sub23 mitting the plan required in this subsection, the Secretary 

24 of Transportation may issue regulations as deemed nec25 essary to require each air carrier and other covered entity 


APPENDIX A: FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018 
245 

1 to develop a policy concerning sexual misconduct in ac2 cordance with the recommendations and findings of the 

3 Task Force under subsection (c). 

4 (g) SUNSET.—The Task Force established pursuant 

5 to subsection (a) shall terminate upon the submission of 

6 the report pursuant to subsection (d). 


APPENDIX A: FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018 
APPENDIX B

Senate Report (115-138) accompanying 

the Joint Explanatory Statement of the 

2018 Housing and Urban Development, 

and Related Agencies Appropriations Act 
DIVISION L- TRANSPORTATION, HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, AND 

RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 2018 

CONGRESSIONAL DIRECTIVES 

Unless otherwise noted, the language and allocations set forth in the House report (House 

Report 115-237) and the Senate report (Senate Report 115-138) carry the same weight as the 

language included in this joint explanatory statement and should be complied with unless

specifically addressed to the contrary in this division orjoint explanatory statement. House 

report language and Senate report language, neither of which is changed by this joint 

explanatory statement, is a result of the 2018 appropriations agreement. The joint explanatory 

statement, while repeating some report language for emphasis, does not intend to negate the 

language referred to above unless expressly provided herein. In cases where the House or the 

Senate has directed the submission of a report, such report is to be submitted to both the 

House and Senate Committees on Appropriations. The Department of Transportation and the 

Department of Housing and Urban Development are directed to notify the House and Senate 

Committees on Appropriations seven days prior to the announcement of a new program, 

initiative, or authority. Any reprogramming requests must be submitted to the Committees on 

Appropriations no later than June 30, 2018. 

1 

APPENDIX B: Joint Explanatory Statement 
Calendar No. 185 

115TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! SENATE 1st Session 115–138

TRANSPORTATION, AND HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 

2018 

JULY 27, 2017.—Ordered to be printed 

Ms. COLLINS, from the Committee on Appropriations, submitted 

the following 

R E P O R T 

[To accompany S. 1655] 

The Committee on Appropriations reports the bill (S. 1655) making appropriations for the Departments of Transportation, and 

Housing and Urban Development, and related agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2018, and for other purposes, reports favorably thereon and recommends that the bill do pass. 

Amounts of new budget (obligational) authority for fiscal year 2018 

Total of bill as reported to the Senate .................... $60,058,000,000 

Amount of 2017 appropriations ............................... 61,437,017,000 

Amount of 2018 budget estimate ............................ 47,928,180,000 

Bill as recommended to Senate compared to— 

2017 appropriations .......................................... ¥1,379,017,000 

2018 budget estimate ........................................ ∂12,129,820,000 

APPENDIX B: Joint Explanatory Statement 
11 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $1,040,000 for the Immediate Office 

of the Deputy Secretary, which is equal to the fiscal year 2017 enacted level. 

OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Office of the General Counsel provides legal services to the 

Office of the Secretary, including the conduct of aviation regulatory 

proceedings and aviation consumer activities, and coordinates and 

reviews the legal work in the chief counsels’ offices of the operating 

administrations. The General Counsel is the chief legal officer of 

the Department and the final authority on all legal questions. 

COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

The Committee recommends $20,555,000 for expenses of the Office of the General Counsel for fiscal year 2018. The recommended 

funding level is $217,000 less than the fiscal year 2017 enacted 

level. 

Sexual Assault Rules and Guidelines.—The Committee remains 

concerned about the adequacy of response to incidents of sexual assault and sexual harassment that take place onboard commercial 

aircraft. All passengers should be able to travel without the worry 

of being sexually assaulted. However, there is limited data on the 

prevalence of sexual assault and sexual harassment committed on 

commercial aircraft and a lack of guidance and training for airline 

personnel to respond to such incidents. 

The Committee directs the Office of Aviation Enforcement and 

Proceedings, in conjunction with the FAA, to establish Federal 

rules and guidelines, based on best practices, for air carriers to respond to and address sexual assault and sexual harassment onboard commercial aircraft within 1 year of enactment of this act. 

The Federal rules and guidelines shall include: (1) initial and annual recurrent training for flight attendants, pilots, and other individuals who are employees or contractors of the air carrier that respond to or address sexual assault and sexual harassment of passengers, employees, and contractors of the air carrier onboard commercial aircraft; (2) timely reporting by air carriers of sexual assault and sexual harassment onboard commercial aircraft, which 

incorporates privacy protections for victims; and (3) a program to 

collect, maintain, and make publically available data from air carriers on the incidence of sexual assault and sexual harassment onboard commercial aircraft in a manner that maintains privacy protections for individuals and allows for confidential reporting. 

To develop these Federal rules and guidelines, the Office of Aviation Enforcement and Proceedings shall establish the National InFlight Sexual Assault Task Force [Task Force] to provide recommendations to the Secretary on best practices and protocols for 

air carriers relating to training, reporting, and data collection. The 

task force shall include the Department of Justice, including the 

Office on Violence Against Women; the Department of Health and 

Human Services; national organizations which specialize in proAPPENDIX B: Joint Explanatory Statement 
12 

viding services to sexual assault victims and responding to and addressing sexual assault and sexual harassment; national consumer 

protection organizations; national travel organizations; labor organizations which represent flight attendants and pilots; State and 

local law enforcement agencies; airports; and air carriers. Within 

180 days of enactment of this act, the Office of Aviation Enforcement and Proceedings shall submit an initial report to the House 

and Senate Committees on Appropriations on the Task Force’s recommendations. 

Consumer Protections.—The Department has the authority and 

duty to protect consumers from unfair or deceptive practices and to 

ensure safe and adequate service related to air transportation. To 

that end, the FAA Extension, Safety and Security Act Authorization bill of 2016 directed the Department to promulgate regulations 

to require air carriers to refund fees for delayed baggage, as well 

as to address adjoining seats for children and their parents within 

1 year of the date of enactment. There has been no action taken 

to address these consumer fairness issues, which were due to be finalized by July 16, 2017. The failure to address these Congressional mandates in a timely manner is unacceptable and allows airlines to continue to take advantage of the traveling public with unreasonable fees on baggage, and on parent’s ability to sit with and 

care for their children in flight. Therefore, the Committee directs 

the Secretary to take immediate action to implement these two regulatory actions. 

Further, there have been recent high-profile incidents in which 

commercial airline employees have allowed conflicts to escalate into 

violent acts against customers. These incidents have led to increased demand for additional consumer protection measures, particularly with regard to overbooked flights. DOT’s regulations require airlines to inform and compensate passengers who are 

bumped from their flights involuntarily. Air carriers are also required to provide boarding priority rules and criteria for determining which passengers will be denied boarding on oversold 

flights, and airlines must provide compensation to customers who 

are involuntarily bumped from their flights. The Secretary testified 

that she is evaluating commercial airline policies on this issue and 

whether additional limitations should be placed on overbooking by 

commercial airlines. The Committee is interested to know these 

findings and conclusions and directs the Secretary to report to the 

House and Senate Committees on Appropriations once such assessment is completed. 

OFFICE OF THE UNDER SECRETARY FOR POLICY

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

The Under Secretary for Policy is the chief policy officer of the 

Department and is responsible for the analysis, development, and 

review of policies and plans for domestic and international transportation matters. The Office administers the economic regulatory 

functions regarding the airline industry and is responsible for 

international aviation programs, the essential air service program, 

airline fitness licensing, acquisitions, international route awards, 

APPENDIX B: Joint Explanatory Statement 
APPENDIX C

Charter of the National In-Flight 

Sexual Misconduct Task Force
CHARTER OF THE NATIONAL IN-FLIGHT SEXUAL MISCONDUCT TASK FORCE

A SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE 

AVIATION CONSUMER PROTECTION ADVISORY COMMITTEE

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

1. SUBCOMMITTEE’S OFFICIAL DESIGNATION: The subcommittee shall be

known as the National In-Flight Sexual Misconduct Task Force (Task Force).

2. AUTHORITY: This charter establishes the Task Force as a subcommittee of the

Aviation Consumer Protection Advisory Committee, which is an advisory committee

established in accordance with provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act

(FACA), as amended, 5 U.S.C., App. 2.

3. OBJECTIVES AND SCOPE OF ACTIVITIES: The Task Force shall review current

practices, protocols and requirements of air carriers in responding to and reporting

allegations of sexual misconduct by passengers on board aircraft. If appropriate, the Task

Force will also provide recommendations to the ACPAC for consideration for the

Secretary of the U.S. Department of Transportation (the Secretary) on best practices

relating to training, reporting, and data collection regarding incidents of sexual

misconduct by passengers onboard commercial aircraft.

4. DESCRIPTION OF DUTIES: The Task Force will carry out the following tasks,

issuing specific recommendations where necessary:

a. Review and evaluate existing ways for passengers involved in incidents of sexual

misconduct by other passengers onboard commercial aircraft to report such

allegations to the carrier;

b. Review and evaluate air carriers’ existing training protocols and identify best

practices to address incidents of sexual misconduct onboard commercial aircraft;

c. Review and evaluate existing reporting protocols and identify best practices for air

carriers to timely report (or facilitate the timely reporting of) incidents of sexual

misconduct by passengers onboard commercial aircraft to law enforcement

authorities, ensuring privacy protections for victims;

d. Review and evaluate air carriers’ existing data collection practices, if any, and

identify effective methods to collect, maintain, and make publicly available data on

incidents of sexual misconduct by passengers onboard commercial aircraft in a

manner that maintains privacy protections for individuals and precludes the release of

data that publicly identifies an individual carrier;

e. Review and utilize first-hand accounts from passengers who have experienced sexual

misconduct onboard commercial aircraft; and

APPENDIX C: Task Force Charter 
f. Review any other air carrier practices addressing incidents of sexual misconduct by

passengers on board commercial aircraft, if needed.

5. OFFICIAL TO WHOM THE TASK FORCE REPORTS: The Task Force shall

report its recommendations and findings to the ACPAC through the ACPAC Chair. The

report will be made available to the public.

6. SUPPORT: The Office of the General Counsel serves as Sponsor of the Task Force.

7. DESIGNATED FEDERAL OFFICER AND TASK FORCE CHAIRPERSON:

a. The Assistant General Counsel for Aviation Enforcement and Proceedings, or

designee, will serve as the DFO for the Task Force.

b. The Chairperson(s) of the Task Force shall be designated by the DOT General

Counsel from among the individuals appointed to the Task Force.

c. The DFO approves or calls the Task Force meetings, develops and approves the

agenda in advance in consultation with the Task Force Chairperson(s). The DFO or a

delegate must be present at each Task Force meeting. The DFO chairs meetings

when directed to do so by the official to whom the Task Force reports and has the

authority to adjourn meetings whenever such action is deemed to be in the public

interest. The DFO works with the Chairperson(s) to maintain order.

d. The Chairperson conducts each meeting using generally accepted meeting

management techniques, provides an opportunity for participation by each member

and, ensures adherence to the agenda, works with the DFO to maintain order, and

prepares any recommendations to be submitted to the ACPAC.

8. MEETINGS:

a. Frequency: Meetings will be held in Washington, D.C., at the discretion of the DFO.

It is anticipated that the Task Force will meet at least twice during a 12-month period

following the Task Force establishment.

b. Participation of the Public: Meetings may not be open to the public to the extent

necessary to protect the privacy of victims of sexual assault. Subcommittee meetings

are not required to be open to the public so long as the subcommittee is not reporting

its recommendations directly to a Federal agency or official, and its recommendations

will not be adopted by its parent committee (i.e., the ACPAC) without further

deliberations by that parent committee. 41 CFR § 102-3.145.

9. DURATION: One Year.

10. TERMINATION: The Task Force shall terminate within 1 year of formation or earlier

at the discretion of the Secretary or designee.

APPENDIX C: Task Force Charter 
11. MEMBERSHIP AND DESIGNATION:

a. The Task Force will comprise individuals appointed by the Secretary or designee and

will include representatives of:

i. Department of Transportation;

ii. Department of Justice, including the Federal Bureau of Investigations, Office

of Victims of Crime, and the Office of Violence against Women;

iii. Department of Health and Human Services;

iv. National organizations specializing in providing services to sexual assault

victims;

v. National consumer protection organizations;

vi. National travel organizations;

vii. Labor organizations representing flight attendants and pilots;

viii. State and local law enforcement agencies;

ix. Airports; and

x. Air carriers.

b. Members serve at the pleasure of the Secretary or designee and may be replaced at

any time for any reason, including non-participation. Members’ terms shall

commence when they are appointed by the Secretary or designee and shall not exceed

1 year.

12. REPORTS: The Task Force shall submit a report to the ACPAC with recommendations,

if any, concerning best practices and protocols on training, reporting, and data collection

related to incidents of sexual misconduct by passengers on board commercial aircraft.

The contents of this report shall be public and will receive full review, deliberation, and

proper consideration by the ACPAC before any final recommendations are reported to

any Federal officer.

13. FILING DATE: The filing date of this charter is February 11, 2019. Unless renewed, it

will expire on February 11, 2020.

APPENDIX C: Task Force Charter 
APPENDIX D

National In-Flight Sexual Misconduct 

Task Force Membership
National In-Flight Sexual Misconduct Task Force

Membership 

1. Allison Ausband, Senior Vice President for In Flight Service, Delta Air Lines, as

representative of airlines.

2. Christopher Bidwell, Vice President of Security, Airports Council International-North

America (ACI-NA), as representative of airports.

3. Katherine Chon, Director of Office on Trafficking in Persons, HHS, as representative of

HHS.

4. Darlene Hutchinson Biehl, Director of Office for Victims of Crime, DOJ, as

representative of DOJ’s Office for Victims of Crime.

5. Judith S. Kaleta, Deputy General Counsel, DOT, as DOT representative and Chair of

Sexual Misconduct Task Force.

6. David L. Maggard, Chief, Los Angeles Airport Police, as representative of state and local

law enforcement agencies.

7. Sunitha Menon, Chief of Consulting Services Operations, Rape, Abuse and Incest

National Network (RAINN), as representative of national organizations providing

services to sexual assault victims.

8. Lyn Montgomery, President, Transport Workers Union – Local 556, as representative of

labor organizations representing flight attendants.

9. Kaori Paris, United Airlines Pilot, Air Line Pilots Association (ALPA), as representative

of labor organizations representing pilots.

10. Eben Peck, Executive Vice President of Advocacy, American Society of Travel Advisors

(ASTA), as representative of national travel organizations.

11. Sharon Pinkerton, Senior Vice President for Legislative and Regulatory Policy, Airlines

for America, as representative of airlines.

12. Special Agent Gabriela Betance, Program Manager of International Violent Crimes, FBI,

as representative of the FBI (replaced Special Agent Matthew Ploskunak).

13. Frances Smith, Adjunct Fellow, Competitive Enterprise Institute, as representative of

consumers.

14. Laura Rogers, Acting Director of Office on Violence Against Women, DOJ, as

representative of DOJ’s Office on Violence Against Women (replaced Katherine

Sullivan).

APPENDIX D: Task Force Membership
APPENDIX E

FBI Be Air Aware 

Campaign Poster
BE

AIR AWARE

SEXUAL ASSAULT 

on an AIRCRAFT 

is a FEDERAL CRIME

If you think you are a victim of sexual 

assault aboard an aircraft, report the 

incident to your flight crew and to the

FBI at tips.fbi.gov or 1-800-CALL-FBI, 

or contact your local FBI office. April 2018

APPENDIX E: FBI Be Air Aware Campaign Poster
APPENDIX F 

Alaska Airlines In-flight 

Magazine (Crew and Guest 

Safety)
our safety and com ort 

SEATS 

• Seat belts must be fastened whenever the

"FASTEN SEAT BELT" sign is on. Keep your 

seat belt fastened at all other times when seated, 

in case of rough air.

• Seatbacks and tray tables must be in the upright,

locked position during taxi, takeoff and landing. 

• Seat-belt extenders are not allowed in exit rows.

They can tangle and obstruct access to exit

doors.

CARRY-ONS 

• All carry-on bags must be placed under a seat 

or in an overhead bin for takeoff and landing.

• Prior to takeoff and landing, service items provided by our inflight team must be picked up.

LAVATORY 

• Guests are requested to use the lavatory in

their assigned cabin.

PETS 

• Pets must remain in carrier for entire flight.

Carrier must be stowed for taxi, takeoff and

landing.

CREW AND GUEST SAFETY 

• Under federal law, no person may assault,

threaten, intimidate or interfere with crew

members in the performance of their duties

aboard an aircraft. Penalties for crew interference .include fines up to $11,000, imprisonment or both. An incident report may be filed

with the FAA regarding a guest's behavior.

• We respect the� pnwcy·.� weU�being of our

guests and ·eltip-l�es. · We �jl;I.Ot tolerat�

inappropl!'i.ate,-�enlaail, d�gitai�.r•physicaJ

conduct orany-.�d, fu"'llludiiig :Sexual

harassment; itf'ijasi�e'.:�£otography, and

assault. Please-rep>f!,l;!:··�welcome behavior to 

an employee·imm�diately:-iA;ny crime committed

onboard is considered a federal offense.

USING YOUR DEVICES 

TRAVELING WITH INFANTS AND CHILDREN 

• To be used onboard, your child-restraint system

must conform to all applicable federal motor

vehicle""'.safety conditions, and the restraint must

be certified for use in motor vehicles and aircraft

with an FAA-approval sticker.

• Some restrictions for child-restraint systems

apply based on seat locations and flight numbers.

Visit http://bit.ly/InfantTravel for details.

ALCOHOLANDTOBACCO 

• Alcohol may not be consumed aboard an aircraft

unless it has been provided by a flight attendant.

No alcohol may be served to any person who

appears to be intoxicated, or who is under 21 

years of age.

• Guests are expected to drink responsibly and

behave in a safe and respectful manner at all

times:

• Smoking, chewing tobacco and electronic

cigarette use are not permitted on any Alaska

Airlines flight.

DEVICES 

• During taxi, takeoff and landing, larger electronic

devices, such as laptops, must be stowed.

• Cellphones may be used while the boarding door

is open until advised by your flight attendant

that cell service must be turned off. Upon landing, your flight attendant will advise when cell

service can be enabled.

• During flight, electronic voice communications

of any kind (e.g., cell, FaceTime, Skype) are

prohibited.

• Headphones must be worn when using electronic

devices such as personal music players, Inflight

Entertainment Tablets, handheld games, etc.

OTHER PROHIBITED ITEMS 

• We prohibit the use of items that do not meet

FAA Regulations or Company regulations. This

includes the use of seat-belt extensions not

provided by Alaska Airlines, devices that

restrict the recline of seats, self-heating meals

or beverages, air filters placed on overhead

vents and personal air-purifying devices.

We know use of your electronic devices is important, and we've adjusted our procedures 

to give you more time with those devices. 

Allowed on the ground and in the air 

• Laptops (must be stowed for taxi/

takeoff/landing)

• Tablets/smartphones (Airplane Mode

after door closure)

,. Wireless mouse/keyboard 

• e-readers

• Media/CD/DVD players

• Noise-canceling and Bluetooth headphones

• Cellphones (prior to door closure only)

Not allowed during flight 

• Voice calls of any kind, including VoIP

• Devices with cell service enabled

• AM.{FM radios or TVs

• Person,al air purifiers

• Remote-control toys

• Electronic cigarettes

FLYER GUIDE 

The Federal 

Aviation 

Administration 

(FAA)and 

Alaska Airlines 

have ,;et these 

rules and 

egulations to 

assure your safety 

and comfort. 

CONTACT US 

Customer care: 

800.654.5669 

(Mileage Plan, 

Customer Care) 

Toll-free 

reservations: 

Within the U.S. 

and Canada: 

800,ALASKAAIR 

(800.252.7522) 

(TTY 800.682 .2221) 

alaskaair.com 

En Espanol: 

800.858.5525 

From Mexico: 

001.800.252.7522 

Alaska Airlines 

Vacations: 

844.762 0087 

vacations.alaskaair.com 

199 

APPENDIX F: Alaska Airlines In-flight Magazine (Crew and Guest Safety) 
APPENDIX G

IATA Sample Passenger Awareness 

Leaflet, IATA UNRULY 

PASSENGER PREVENTION AND 

MANAGEMENT 2ND EDITION, 

JANUARY 2015. 
Welcome on board!

We hope that you will enjoy your flight and of 

course allow others to enjoy theirs. 

All passengers have the right to safe, secure and 

comfortable travel on board our aircraft. Unruly 

or disruptive behavior would ruin this experience 

and could also be traumatizing for 

passengers or crew.

Unruly behavior prior to flight:

If unruly or disruptive behavior is noticed prior to 

the flight, please be aware that transport may 

be denied. 

Unruly behavior during the flight:

If such behavior is demonstrated during the 

flight, please be aware that there may be serious 

consequences to these actions. The aircraft may 

divert and make an unscheduled landing, the 

authorities may meet the flight, and the person 

responsible for the unruly or disruptive behavior 

may be arrested, fined, charged and/or 

prosecuted.

It is for this reason that we ask all passengers 

to always:

1. Follow crewmember instructions promptly;

2. Respect your crewmembers and fellow

passengers;

3. Behave in a safe and appropriate manner;

4. Refrain from endangering the safety of the

aircraft or its occupants.

Sione, 38, is

leaving his island 

to find medical 

care abroad.

Hazel, 54, is

moving abroad 

to start a new 

nursing job.

Solveig, 29, 

has seen the 

world, working for 

her airline.

Kay-li, 26, is a 

medical researcher 

on a field-work 

assignment.

Dina, 21, is 

part of a university 

cultural exchange 

program.

Rosario, 41, 

is on a disaster 

relief mission for 

UNICEF.

Komi, 32, is a 

farmer taking his 

cargo of flowers to 

market and visiting 

new clients.

Raj, 35, is off 

to the U.S.A to 

do a Masters in 

Geology.

Carole, 73, 

is travelling to 

Cambodia with 

her best friend.

Khaled, 46, is 

a construction 

materials trader 

visiting a client.

Enjoy your flight 

and allow others 

to enjoy theirs!

APPENDIX G: IATA Sample Passenger Awareness Leaflet

Reproduced with permission from IATA
Offences and other 

acts committed 

on board aircraft

Under the [insert applicable law(s) and/or regulation(s)] the following are considered as unacceptable behaviors on board:

1. Assault and Other Acts of Interference

Against a Crew Member on Board

a Civil Aircraft

2. Assault and Other Acts Endangering

Safety or Jeopardizing Good Order and

Discipline on Board a Civil Aircraft

3. Other Offences Committed on Board

a Civil Aircraft

Examples of these offences or acts include:

• Harassment

• Verbal abuse

• Physical assault

• Sexual offences and/or lewd behavior

• Intimidating behavior

• Intoxication or disorderly conduct

• Refusing to follow crew instructions

• Ignoring smoking regulations

• Tampering with smoke detectors

• Damaging the aircraft or on board equipment

(includes theft)

• Endangering an aircraft occupant and/or the

safety of flight

• Using a portable electronic device when

prohibited to do so

Engaging or 

displaying in any 

indecent or 

lewd behavior

Removing or 

damaging safety 

or emergency 

equipment, 

the aircraft or 

property on board EMERGENCY

Intoxicated or 

disorderly conduct 

or consuming 

alcohol which was 

not provided by 

crew members

Using a portable 

electronic device 

when not permitted to do so

Refusing

to follow

instructions 

from the crew

Tampering with 

the smoke 

detectors

Assaulting, 

intimidating, 

threatening a 

crew member 

or passenger

Smoking 

anywhere on 

board, including 

in the lavatories

 Offenses to avoid:

APPENDIX G: IATA Sample Passenger Awareness Leaflet

Reproduced with permission from IATA
APPENDIX H: FBI Active 

Shooter Event Quick Reference
When law enforcement arrives: 

• Remain calm and follow instructions.

• Drop items in your hands. (e.g., bags, jackets)

• Raise hands and spread fingers.

• Keep hands visible at all times.

• Avoid quick movements toward officers,

such as holding on to them for safety.

• Avoid pointing, screaming or yelling.

• Do not ask questions when evacuating.

Information to provide to 911 operators: 

• Location of the active shooter.

• Number of shooters.

• Physical description of shooters.

• Number and type of weapons shooter has.

• Number of potential victims at location.

For questions or additional assistance contact: 

Your local FBI Office: 

FBI Headquarters National Press Office: (202) 324-3691 

Federal Bureau of Investigation 

935 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW 

Washington, OC 20535 

ACTIVE SHOOTER EVENTS

When an Active Shooter is in your vicinity, 

you must be prepared both mentally and 

physically to deal with the situation. 

You have three options: 

.... • Have an escape route and plan in mind.

• Leave your belongings behind,

• Evacuate regardless of whether others

agree to follow.

• Help others escape, if possible.

• Do not attempt to move the wounded.

• Prevent others from entering an area

where the active shooter may be.

• Keep your hands visible.

• Call 911 when you are safe.

■II HIDE

• Hide in an area out of the shooter's view.

• Lock door or block entry to your hiding place.

• Silence your cell phone (including vibrate

mode) and remain quiet.

FIGHT QI 

• Fight as a last resort and only when your

life IS in imminent danger.

• Attempt to incapacitate the shooter.

• Act with as much physical aggression as 

possible. 

• Improvise weapons or throw items at the

active shooter.

• Commit to your actions .. your life 

depends on it.

The first officers to arrive on scene will not 

stop to help the injured. Expect rescue 

teams to follow initial officers. These rescue 

teams will treat and remove the injured. 

Once yo

_

u have reached a safe location, you

likely will be held in that area by law 

enforcement until the situation is under 

control and all witnesses have been 

identified and questioned. Do not leave the 

area until law enforcement authorities have 

instructed you to do so. 

... 

APPENDIX H: 

FBI Active Shooter Event Quick Reference