Why do FA's get anal about seat backs?

One of the things I could never quite understand is why is it so important to put your seat up when you are taking off? Where is the logic behind this and why is it such a big deal for the FA's to mention this and go around enforcing this? How is a slight lean back going to effect operations? Is this some useless thing gone too far? The only logic I can think of is when the plane makes a crash landing, assuming the "POINT OF IMPACT POSITION" like it shows on the card where you basically grab your legs and kiss your behind goodbye, which, by the way, seems like more of a quicker way to break your neck from the seat in front of you. So why do flight attendants get all anal about putting seats up or down when landing and taking off? If its standard procedure and is basically meaningless, I would maybe mention it once or twice to please the Captain and the Feds if they are flying and look the other way. STUPID RULE.

I'm not positive, but pretty sure it is the same reason carryon has to be placed under the seats. In case of an evacuation (which is most likely at takeoff or landing) you need as little obstruction as possible to get out of your row and to the exits. Same reason the lights are dimmed, so we are accustomed to natural light and can escape if there is a power loss.

Maybe some FAs can confirm this, but i'm pretty sure this is why

Shoot. There will be utlimate mass confusion in a crash landing, the seats won't make a difference on their position. It doesn't take much force to break the seat back anyway. And significant force foward will break it.

I flew for a couple of years and I agree with you. It is silly. However, it is an FAR and we never knew if there were an FAA inspector on board giving us a check ride. They would watch for specific things, including seat backs, carry-on luggage, emergency exit row briefing, and safety anouncements. I work for an airline and don't make enough to pay a $10,000 fine so I was very anal about it too.

Those FAA inspectors hinder more than they do good. They look for anything to justify their existence. They don't even have training in the plane they inspect. Most are in the AIR FORCE retirement club, turned a wrench for one or two years and sat behind the desk the rest of the time. What a lost cause, but that is just my opinion. I think they should recruit FAA inspectors based on actual line maintenance work from an airline on that particular piece of equipment.

I am happy to have the seatback issue enforced--even tho I am shrinking from my usual 5'!2" height, somehow, my legs have not shortened. I am never pleased to have my bony kneecaps bruised. I wish I could remember the old FA joke about seatbacks...

I am happy to have the seatback issue enforced--even tho I am shrinking from my usual 5'!2" height, somehow, my legs have not shortened. I am never pleased to have my bony kneecaps bruised. I wish I could remember the old FA joke about seatbacks...wait--that was tray tables in first class...

They don't seem to enforce it when the person in front of you has his seat back while food is being served. That's when it seems like they should enforce it. .

food--what food?

We still serve food in our flights. I'll have to call RIPLEY'S and tell them about it.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (29Palms @ Dec 2 2008, 08:19 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div>

Quote:

---

They don&#39;t seem to enforce it when the person in front of you has his seat back while food is being served. That&#39;s when it seems like they should enforce it. .[/b]

---

Because it&#39;s only an FAA rule during takeoff and landing.

As far as them being "anal" about it, they are just doing the job that they&#39;re required to do by the FAA. As was said before, they never know when there MAY be an inspector on board. Not a good time to be selective about the regulations you want to enforce.