How much rest should flight attendants get? New proposal ignites fight in the skies

A federal proposal that could change meal and rest-break rules for flight attendants is drawing opposition from major airline unions even as aviation experts applaud the plan.

The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is proposing a nationwide rule that would prevent state and local governments from setting their own meal and rest-break requirements for flight attendants and pilots.

Instead, federal aviation rules would apply — according to the agency's proposed rule document.

HIGHER FARES COULD SLAM FLIGHT PASSENGERS TO POPULAR REGION AS AIRLINES SHIFT COSTS: 'NOT A FAN' The proposal would affect existing state protections, including meal and rest requirements that have applied to some California-based flight attendants, the document states.

Under California law , employees generally must receive a 30-minute meal break when working more than five hours, according to the California Department of Industrial Relations.

Employees generally must be relieved of all duties during that period for it to qualify as an off-duty meal break.

In its proposal, the FAA argues that different state requirements could interfere with airline operations and conflict with the safety responsibilities of flight attendants.

Flight attendants are responsible for handling emergency situations, including fires, medical incidents, evacuations and unruly passengers , according to the FAA document.

Requiring a flight attendant to be completely off duty during a break could create a safety risk.

The Association of Flight Attendants-CWA (AFA), however, opposes the proposal — arguing that it could remove state protections without establishing a federal guarantee for meal and rest breaks.

The union said some flight attendants already work for hours without adequate opportunities to eat, drink, use the restroom or take care of other basic needs.

"While we understand compliance with state laws is not without its challenges, we are far more concerned about the safety impacts of flight attendants working under onerous working conditions," the unions wrote in their joint comments to the FAA.

The unions also argued that the proposed protections are "extremely vague" and do not provide enough assurance that airline policies will address both safety and flight attendants' needs.

"The proposed rule does little to ensure protections for flight attendants without specific contractual protections," the unions wrote.