Date: 201502
Aircraft: No Aircraft
Reporter organization: Air Carrier
Reporter function: Off Duty
Reporter qualification: Flight Attendant Current
Second reporter function: Off Duty
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Other / Unknown; Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown
Detector: Person Flight Attendant
When detected: Other In class
Result: General None Reported / Taken
Contributing factors: Company Policy
Primary problem: Company Policy

Narrative: This is my second report regarding training and this one is more about the training resources that are provided to Flight Attendant. The videos that are provided for Flight Attendants to review scenarios has incorrect commands being given; does not have the Flight Attendant assessing prior to opening door; one Flight Attendant is out of the jump seat while the plane is still heard crashing; it shows Flight Attendant on the Airbus standing blocking the pilots from coming out of the cockpit and show several who are yelling for passengers to come this way prior to ensure that the aircraft door is fully opened and locked to aircraft. Although this may appear that I am being picky; yet these videos are being provided as guidance to assist us in our proficiency for when we are tested on our aircraft doors. One of the video scenarios needs to be explained. We were told after others had issues during practice; that it was to simulate a bird strike; instead instructors had to advise us that we were getting up while the aircraft was still in flight this resulted in frustration for Flight Attendants who were about to be tested on their door skills. The scenario needs to be explained prior to the drills or needs to be changed. Also in the video audio; you can hear commands being yelled in the background; this was also heard while I was doing my door drill. Adding goggles for door testing is an accident waiting to happen. We are told that we are being tested on our proficiency; how can I be tested on proficiency on something that I have never used before? It is important to note that the goggles vary in darkness; the one I had for my door drill allowed me to make out outlines and shapes but my depth perception was off. The goggles were given to us after we had sat down and were strapped into the jump seat. So when I get up to open the door in emergency mode; I blindly felt around trying to find the assist strap and came close to the edge of the platform that the door sits on which is several inches off the floor. Please STOP the door testing with the goggles it is extremely unsafe. I do believe that they were useful during the firefighting and recommend that they continue to be used for these types of training simulations; but only when Flight Attendants are being tested and when their actions are more controlled. The goggles I had for firefighting were extremely dark; I could not make out what was directly in front of me. The video used in the firefighting is problematic as it once again contradicts prior training and information that we are to fight the fire by aiming the fire extinguisher at the base of the fire. In the video it shows a Flight Attendant fighting a fire from behind the oven door and NOT looking into the oven; so they were unaware where the base of the fire was. It is disappointing that something that is being provided to assist us in training does not accurately depict what we have been trained; this places the aircraft; passengers and crew at risk. My group had a lot of sit time; and the class went over; the instructors were great but I believe that the content needs to be reviewed. I was disappointed that there was no mention that one infant had already been saved by Flight Attendant or information about a recent decompression that I heard that occurred. In the past; the instructors always relayed this kind of information; made the training current and relevant. I am disappointed in the recent class and hope that my feedback will be considered to improve this one as well as future classes.


Second narrative: This report is to address concern that I have regarding training; this is the second time that I have received training information inflight that differs significantly from my FAOM. In the most recent training there is a class titled; commanding exits. During this training we were advised of new Inflight procedure that contradicts all my previous safety training. We were told that when two Flight Attendants are at dual exits and one of the doors is blocked that the one with the blocked exit is to lower our voice while yelling evacuation commands because it confuses the passengers. They also advised that we should try not to use the command 'exit blocked' and instead use directional commands. It unrealistic to expect anyone to be able to lower their voice during an evacuation and doing so could actually hinder the evacuation. Secondly; to advise a Flight Attendant to try and not use the command 'exit blocked' is contrary to what we have been taught. If a passenger is at a door that is open but unusable door and the Flight Attendant does not make it clear that the door is not usable and provide directional commands to the passenger; I believe that the passengers will disregard the Flight Attendant and try to use the unusable exit and put themselves and others at risk. I am surprised that FAA would allow this information in training; especially since for the last 8 years it has been FAA who made us have not only timed evacuations that ensured that we yelled in a urgent; authoritative manner and were timed opening doors. Please reevaluate this training as I believe that it places passengers and Flight Attendants at risk during an evacuation. The second part of training that conflicts with my FAOM is that we keep being told to inform not enforce; but my FAOM says to ensure.


Synopsis: Flight attendants do not believe that their current ground school training philosophy is in compliance with the flight attendant manual procedures.