"If she does a good job, her age and her marital status are none of the passenger's business."

"How asinine can you get! What difference does age or marriage make so long as they do their job and do it pleasantly? One would think you are running a 'beauty' contest and not about [sic] doing a serious and useful job."

*

*

*

*

*

"The age, etc., has nothing to do with the job requirements-to be pleasant and efficient."

"There is need for maturity, 'know-how', training for helpful service instead of flirtaceous 'cuties'-this means a differnt age span for developing career personnel with experience, savior faire.”

It is not only the Airways Club which has surveyed the traveling public on this subject. On December 23, 1965, the New York Daily News "Inquiring Fotographer" asked a sampling of the public the following question:

"Many airlines will not permit stewardesses to remain on the job beyond the age of 35. Does a woman lose her glamor at 35?"

The response? A resounding and unanimous NO! (Exhibit 16) To the extent that the airline age discrimination policies are founded on a contrary assumption they are open to serious question. The public seems emphatically to believe that : "There is an intriguing quality about women in their mid-thirties and beyond. It is an appeal that enhances their natural beauty."

"There is no woman more attractive than a well groomed woman in her 40's."

"There's more to glamor than mere beauty. It involves a woman's personality. That's why I think the airlines are dead wrong. I travel 50,000 miles a year. Most flights are of no more than three or four hour's duration. I'm satisfied with an efficient, pleasant hostess, not a Miss America." (Exhibit 16)

Directly relevant to the views of passengers concerning age limitations for stewardesses are the observations of Russell Baker in the New York Times on September 5, 1965. (Exhibit 17) In his view, a substantial segment of airline passengers ". would prefer to have stewardesses kept off airplanes until they are at least 32." "These are men who are utterly indifferent to women under 32, and in many cases even to women under 35."

Baker says members of this group are "absolutely terrified by women under 27." His conclusion: the airline policy for compulsory retirement of stewardesses at age 32 "is the kind of blunder that results from too much abstract psychological thinking about passenger motivation and too little basic research."

It seems equally necessary to conclude that airline passengers, like the Departments of Defense and Labor, like many foreign and domestic airlines, like the New York State Human Rights Commission, and probably like the FAA as well, agree that age is not a bona fide occupational qualification for the position of flight attendant.

Whether or not the compulsory retirement policy reflects prudent management (and the available evidence tends to indicate that it does not), we urge the Congress to brand it once and for all as unlawful.

Discrimination against female flight attendants based on age is not a matter which has generally been dealt with in our collective bargaining relationships with carriers, and none of the agreements between my organization and the air carriers covering some 8,000 flight attendants contain provisions which outlaw such discrimination. Congress has not insisted that protection against racial discrimination be left to private contracts or agreements; it has properly considered the discriminatory abuse of civil rights, to be an appropriate public matter for remedial legislation. It should follow the same course here.

Any implication that ground employment is always made available to flight attendants when their flight careers are terminated by the carriers is also misleading. The availability of such substitute employment is subject to the discretion of each individual carrier, and it is far from universally true that such employment is always made available. On one carrier which employs several thousand flight attendants, a flight attendant was recently retired involuntarily

tive hearing that other employment was not available to her, and that other employment was made available under such circumstances only where "possible," in the carriers words.

We strongly disagree that ground employment, even if the carriers were to make it available at a stated chronological age, would be a solution to this problem. Discrimination would still be present, notwithstanding that the carriers, instead of discharging stewardesses, practiced the discrimination by moving them to different jobs, like pawns on a chessboard. Career stewardesses take the same pride, and develop the same intense interest in their special work as others whom you would protect. They can still demonstrate at ages 32, 37, 45 and thereafter, under every relevant test of occupational qualification, that they remain fully capable of fulfilling the demands of flight attendants' careers. When they can no longer demonstrate such capability, then they will voluntarily yield their careers.

More than that, an involuntary transfer to other employment at age 32 or at any other age would summarily cancel the valuable employment rights and protections which accrue to female flight attendants under the collective bargaining agreements between ALPA and the air carriers, and would in all likelihood place them in employment where they would not be represented, and would be without any such rights or protections; consequently their continued employment thereafter would be wholly at the pleasure of the carrier.

Though nearly all major airlines make provisions for retirement benefits for other classes of employees, there is no airline of which I am aware of that provides retirement benefits for flight attendants at age 32 or 35. These same airlines, while providing no retirement benefits for female flight attendants, apply compulsory and discriminatory early retirement policies to that group.

That minority group of carriers which seeks to preserve this discriminatory practice argues that:

"... everybody who has ever flown on an airplane and everybody who has ever looked at an airplane advertisement knows that this is a girl's job, and that what makes it a girl's job makes it a young and a pretty girl's job." (Statement of Attorney for Air Transport Association of America before U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, May 10, 1966, Official Transcript at p. 72.) Such statements, which are spaced with great frequency throughout the arguments of the carriers in several forums, are not only inconsistent with the views of the vast majority of air travelers; they also suggest that the ability of the stewardess to demonstrate FAA required qualifications to deal with safety measures, ill or dangerous passengers, and emergency and evacuation situations is of little or no importance, and should be ignored. One typical illustration of the inherent weakness in the carrier position is the experience of Nancy Taylor, recipient of ALPA's Gold Medal Award for Heroism for effectively controlling an armed hijacker aloft while serving as a National Airline hostess on November 17, 1965. The details of this experience are contained in the report annexed as Exhibit 18. Miss Taylor was 36 years of age at the time, with more than 15 years experience as a National stewardess. Had a less experienced flight attendant, even one with more youthful sex appeal, found herself in Miss Taylor's shoes on that day, the disastrous possibilities are obvious.

The carrier arguments suggest that they no longer believe that a relationship exists between the qualifications of a flight attendant and their continuing public obligation is to provide the safest and most efficient possible air transportation. Their preoccupation with sex and beauty above all other considerations is more consistent with show business theatrics than with responsible and conservative air transportation services. It should not be necessary to remind these carriers that they are certificated by public authority for one purpose and one purpose only to sell safe air transportation service, not sex, or fantasies of sex, or to run beauty contests or fashion shows or dating bureaus. To cut short the career of an experienced, competent, efficient, and indeed attractive stewardess, whose only failing is her date of birth, in order to replace her with one who is less experienced, less competent, less efficient, and probably no more attractiveonly younger-is not only a flagrant abuse of civil rights, but also a diservice to airline passengers and a potentially dangerous impairment of the highest possible degree of safety in air transportation. In situations, not infrequent, where passenger survival in an accident or emergency depends upon the competence, ability and coolness of the flight attendant, nothing is less important than her age, her sexual allure, her measurements-and nothing is more important than her ability to function with calm efficiency when others are unable

to do so. The consequences of carrier discrimination, viewed in these terms, could well be tragic.

In summary, we believe that the reasons for outlawing discrimination based upon age with respect to female flight attendants are as compelling as the arguments supporting other civil rights legislation and, in terms of the implications of such conduct upon air safety, even more compelling. Such discrimination is not only offensive to principles supporting the safeguard of individual civil rights; it is also a potentially dangerous trespass upon the obligation owed to airline passengers to provide the highest possible degree of safety in air transportation.

We urge this Committee to delete those provisions of Section 13 of the pending legislation which would exclude female flight attendants from the scope of its protection, and, as so modified, we urge its prompt enactment by the Congress.

Miss RICKEY STEVENS,

EXHIBIT 1

CONTINENTAL AIRLINES,

LOS ANGELES INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT,

Los Angeles, Calif., March 15, 1966.

Master Executive Chairman, CAL, Air Line Pilots Association, Steward and Stewardess Division, Playa del Rey, Calif.

DEAR MISS STEVENS: We are writing to advise you that in our opinion compulsory retirement of hostesses at age 32 is contrary to Executive Order 11141. This matter has recently been reviewed by various governmental officials, including the Deputy Chief of Staff, Materiel, Department of the Air Force, Brig. General W. H. Reddell. All are in accord with our opinion that any stated policy to this effect should be discontinued immediately.

As you know, while we have required new hostess trainees to sign statements that they will retire at age 32, as a practical matter we have never implemented such a policy on this airline. In view of the foregoing, the practice of requiring such statements is discontinued as of this date, and any such statements presently outstanding are of no further force or effect.

You will, of course, appreciate that the foregoing cannot be construed as limiting in any manner the right of the Company to terminate any hostess for any valid reasons, including deterioration of personal appearance.

DEAR MISS WALLACE: In accordance with Executive Order #11141 and with public policy regarding early age retirement for stewardesses:

Slick Airways has cancelled your "Agreement to Terminate at Age 32" which you signed upon employment with this Company.

Yours very truly,

CHARLES H. KRAUSE,

Superintendent of Flight Operations.

EXHIBIT 3

UNITED AIR LINES

NOTICE OF STEWARDESS EMPLOYMENT CONDITIONS

Company Regulations Pertaining to Duration of Stewardess Employment: 1. It is a condition of stewardess employment that stewardesses remain un

stewardess job. It is the Company's practice to consider stewardesses who give advance notice of marriage for ground jobs with the Company; however, such other employment is not guaranteed.

2. It is a condition of stewardess employment that applicants who enter training after October 1, 1965 may not continue in employment as stewardesses beyond the end of the month in which they reach their thirty-second birthday. The Company at that time will transfer such stewardesses, Company seniority unbroken, into other employment with the Company.

Such stewardesses will be paid in their new position an amount equal to their average monthly earnings during their last six months as a stewardess. If no positions are available at the location at which the stewardess is domiciled when she reaches her thirty-second birthday, she will be transferred at Company expense to another location where a position exists.

I acknowledge that I have read and understand the foregoing summary of regulations pertaining to the duration of stewardess employment.

The Company policy associated with maximum age and the marital status of Flight Attendants has recently undergone a review to ascertain its necessity and adequacy.

Generally, it is believed that these policies are necessary, and certainly beneficial to all concerned. It is, however, necessary to consider the current environment, versus the circumstances in existence when the policy was initially adopted. In this regard, it has been determined that it is now feasible to increase the maximum age limit to thirty-five (35), from the current age thirty-two (32) provision.

For reasons that are obvious to all concerned, there will be no modification in the marital provision of the policy.

Relaxing the age provision should not be construed to change the current standards associated with the personal appearance, attitude, or productivity expected of Flight Attendants.

These policies do not now, or in the future, intend to terminate employees by their application. Employees so affected will be offered continued employment in another classification for which they are qualified, with full seniority credit for pay purposes.

"KEEP YOUR BEST FOOT FORWARD."

W. L. WICKHAM, Director of Personnel.

ALLEGHENY AIRLINES, WASHINGTON, D.C.

Subject: Allegheny Airlines Hostess Personnel Policy.

In consideration for the hiring of the undersigned by Allegheny Airlines, it is agreed:

Whereas, it is the policy of Allegheny Airlines that only single girls will be assigned to flight duty as Hostesses.

Whereas, it is also the policy of Allegheny Airlines that when a Hostess becomes married or reaches the age of 32 years, she will no longer be assigned to flight duty.

Therefore, this letter and my signature will acknowledge that I understand and agree to Allegheny Airlines personnel policies relating to Hostesses as stated above and will not expect or request continued flight duty after my marriage or when I reach the age of 32 years.

AGREEMENT: I understand that in accepting a position as hostess with Bonanza Air Lines, Inc., due to the nature and hazards of the position, I agree that should I marry during such employment, I will resign my position as hostess prior to such marriage and will not fly married or pregnant. It is further understood that after reaching thirty-two (32) years of age I will voluntarily tender my resignation as a hostess. If it is felt such is in the best interests of the company, I may be retained on flying status for a period of time or may indicate my desire to be transferred to a non-flying position and will receive preferential consideration for any vacancy for which I am qualified. In addition, I agree to observe all company regulations regarding uniforms both during my employment and after it has ceased. Signature of applicant:

MOHAWK AIRLINES, INC., PRE-EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT, UTICA, N.Y.

TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF EMPLOYMENT

In part consideration for the employment of the undersigned by Mohawk Airlines, Inc. (hereinafter called the Company) and for wages to be paid to the undersigned employee by the Company, the undersigned promises and agrees as follows:

A. That he will disclose to the Company all inventions and improvements which he may make on Company time or on his own time where the inventions or improvements could not have been made except for his employment by the Company.

B. That he will on demand assign to the Company all of his interest in any such inventions and improvements, executing any papers and doing any acts which the Company may consider necessary to secure to it or its successors or assigns any and all rights relating to such inventions and improvements, includ