Narrative:

Aircraft had arrived from abq as flight zz, with 5 through passenger. Cockpit and cabin crew originated in den. 120 originating passenger were scheduled to board. Since there was the minimum far 121.391 flight attendant complement on board (3) I told them to stay on board for passenger enplaning. Flight attendant #1 told the gate agent that either customer service would take tickets at the jetway, or the flight attendants would take tickets on board. The agent wanted a flight attendant to take tickets in the terminal, but I told customer service that I wanted all 3 of my minimum far 121.391 complement of flight attendants on board the aircraft for safety reasons. At about XA05, a customer service supervisor mr X came down the jetway to question my actions. I tried to explain my reasoning to him, as I viewed this as a safety issue. Mr X kept insisting that it was a customer service/boarding issue. He said 'the FAA says that is all we need and we are understaffed.' I reiterated that I consider it a safety issue. Mr X said, 'you've done this before, disregarding corporate policy.' I stated that as captain, I considered it a safety issue and my flight attendants were staying on board. He argued for 5-10 mins, stating that it would delay the flight. (The flight was 3 mins late departing, and if he hadn't spent all that time arguing and helped take tickets, there would not have been a delay.) this issue has been brought up to airline X over the past 2 yrs with no acknowledgement or response. It is quite obvious to me that airline X is more concerned with on-time performance than safety. Rather than address the problem, they try to intimidate and threaten cockpit/cabin crews.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: PLT RPT, B727, ABQ-DEN-LAX. CAPT REFUSED TO LET GATE AGENTS BOARD PAX WITH LESS THAN FAA MINIMUM CABIN CREW ON BOARD (FAR PART 121 PT 393).

Narrative: ACFT HAD ARRIVED FROM ABQ AS FLT ZZ, WITH 5 THROUGH PAX. COCKPIT AND CABIN CREW ORIGINATED IN DEN. 120 ORIGINATING PAX WERE SCHEDULED TO BOARD. SINCE THERE WAS THE MINIMUM FAR 121.391 FLT ATTENDANT COMPLEMENT ON BOARD (3) I TOLD THEM TO STAY ON BOARD FOR PAX ENPLANING. FLT ATTENDANT #1 TOLD THE GATE AGENT THAT EITHER CUSTOMER SVC WOULD TAKE TICKETS AT THE JETWAY, OR THE FLT ATTENDANTS WOULD TAKE TICKETS ON BOARD. THE AGENT WANTED A FLT ATTENDANT TO TAKE TICKETS IN THE TERMINAL, BUT I TOLD CUSTOMER SVC THAT I WANTED ALL 3 OF MY MINIMUM FAR 121.391 COMPLEMENT OF FLT ATTENDANTS ON BOARD THE ACFT FOR SAFETY REASONS. AT ABOUT XA05, A CUSTOMER SVC SUPVR MR X CAME DOWN THE JETWAY TO QUESTION MY ACTIONS. I TRIED TO EXPLAIN MY REASONING TO HIM, AS I VIEWED THIS AS A SAFETY ISSUE. MR X KEPT INSISTING THAT IT WAS A CUSTOMER SVC/BOARDING ISSUE. HE SAID 'THE FAA SAYS THAT IS ALL WE NEED AND WE ARE UNDERSTAFFED.' I REITERATED THAT I CONSIDER IT A SAFETY ISSUE. MR X SAID, 'YOU'VE DONE THIS BEFORE, DISREGARDING CORPORATE POLICY.' I STATED THAT AS CAPT, I CONSIDERED IT A SAFETY ISSUE AND MY FLT ATTENDANTS WERE STAYING ON BOARD. HE ARGUED FOR 5-10 MINS, STATING THAT IT WOULD DELAY THE FLT. (THE FLT WAS 3 MINS LATE DEPARTING, AND IF HE HADN'T SPENT ALL THAT TIME ARGUING AND HELPED TAKE TICKETS, THERE WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN A DELAY.) THIS ISSUE HAS BEEN BROUGHT UP TO AIRLINE X OVER THE PAST 2 YRS WITH NO ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OR RESPONSE. IT IS QUITE OBVIOUS TO ME THAT AIRLINE X IS MORE CONCERNED WITH ON-TIME PERFORMANCE THAN SAFETY. RATHER THAN ADDRESS THE PROB, THEY TRY TO INTIMIDATE AND THREATEN COCKPIT/CABIN CREWS.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.