Date: 202005
Aircraft: Commercial Fixed Wing
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Flight Attendant (On Duty)
Reporter qualification: Flight Attendant Current
Human factors: Communication Breakdown
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Company Policy; Environment - Non Weather Related; Human Factors; Manuals
Primary problem: Company Policy

Narrative: Due to new FAA exemptions; concerns arise from the jumpseat alternative being away from the interphone and the cabin. Flight attendants sitting in passenger seats are not and have not been listening to the phone when it rings. If you're in a seat during a critical phase of flight issue; we are unable to receive the proper communication about the incident without making it known to the whole cabin in the area around the cabin seat allocated for the flight attendant. Social distancing has more negative issues than positive. Safety is being compromised as not being able to see outside the airplane and understand any potential evacuation responsibilities. Window shades are asked to be raised and is not enforceable. Medical conditions exist that prevent people from wearing a mask; and it's not enforceable. Flight deck jumpseat has not [been] restricted with X people in the flight deck is severe social proximity and international flights with X to Y pilots in the flight deck also engage in safety of flight issues which is why social distancing policy is not mandated. By allowing flight attendants to sit outside of our jumpseats; it is a safety of flight issue and should not be allowed.Also anytime sitting on a jumpseat; is a safety issue during safety of flight times aka sterile flight. Due to the need to have to be able to speak; yell; and command an evacuation at a moment's notice with instant communication from the flight deck; face covering policy should be exempted from times performing criticism functions. The current policy does not address this in specific form and needs to be addressed.Flight Attendant Operations Manual announcement per aircraft is not updated regarding removal of masks during decompression and needs to be added to specific language of every live demo and updated in safety video. Adding announcement outside of the Flight Attendant Operations Manual announcement is not as effective.Not properly demonstrating the oxygen mask and demo life vest is compromising safety due to distance measure of passengers not being able to see the demonstration. CDC now says that the virus does not have reasonable transmission from surfaces.Mask policy face covering should also be considered revised as mandatory due to the time of useful consciousness at high altitudes. Due to the 6-10 seconds at high altitudes; we could have more severe issues with the time it takes to remove a face covering; mask; shield; etc.; and endangering the lives of our crew and passengers. In addition; there has been no CDC testing that has proven people without symptoms have transmitted to another person. In addition; there is not documented test that has proven this to be effective. There are documented health concerns; however; regarding the mandatory face covering of the nose and mouth with high altitude limited oxygen for extended periods of time. Face covering cannot be considered an essential safety of flight issue when it is determined that other safety concerns or duties would warrant its removal. It is not then an essential job function when the face covering would need to be removed for the most critical parts of our flight.




Synopsis: Air carrier Flight Attendant expressed multiple concerns regarding company COVID-19 protocols; including alternative jumpseat locations; social distancing in the flight deck; safety equipment demonstrations; and the wearing of protective masks.