PICTURE this: Our iconic Singapore Girl dressed in her sarong
kebaya holding a cigarette between her well-manicured fingers and
puffing away.
One traveller asked: Is this an image of the Singapore Girl we
want to see?
He was concerned enough to e-mail a photograph he took of three
Singapore Airlines (SIA) flight attendants lighting up in public to
citizen journalism website Stomp.
Identifying himself as LCS, he said: "I came back from a
business trip on Saturday, July 31, and saw three (SIA) girls
smoking in their uniform at the arrival hall of Terminal 2.
"I have nothing against smokers. In fact, I am a smoker too. But
I think these girls should have some pride and discipline when they
are in their uniform." From the picture, it appears that the women
were smoking outside the airport.
Visitors cannot smoke inside the airport unless it's at
designated smoking areas.
When contacted, an SIA spokesman said: "Singapore Airlines has
high expectations of the conduct of our cabin crew while in
uniform, and we are conscious that it shapes public perception of
the airline's image and standards.
"Crew are reminded to be well-groomed and to be on their best
behaviour when in uniform.
"Where smoking is concerned, we actively promote a healthy
lifestyle to our crew, and while there is no outright prohibition
on smoking, we do have internal regulations which crew are required
to abide by, and in accordance with laws governing non-smoking
zones."
Would the sight of SIA flight attendants smoking have a negative
impact on the airline's image?
Said Ms Jo Clary Maughan, leading image consultant for F3 Image
Consultants: "It's not a good look because people associate its
squeaky clean image with the nice-looking girls and great customer
service. It sort of contradicts its branding and image.
"A uniform brands a person to a particular company - that's how
companies distinguish themselves. When you're branded, people take
notice and take more note of you than when you're just wearing
everyday clothes."
The solution, she suggested, would be for SIA to designate a
smoking area for its staff that is closed off from the public.
Alternatively, the airline could ban its employees from smoking
in public when in uniform, she said. But this may not go down well
with the employees as the company could be seen as dictating what
they do in their own free time.
Ms Jill Lowe, of image consultancy Jill Lowe International, said
that smoking in public while in uniform might be acceptable if one
is working for a tobacco company.
"But since smoking is such an anti-social action, it has no
place in any company's brand-building."
A check with other airlines showed there is no hard and fast
rule on staff smoking in public.
While Cathay Pacific has a set of policies and guidelines in
place for uniformed staff in terms of their appearance and
behaviour, it does not impose a ban on smoking in public.
The spokesman said: "In essence, staff in uniform are expected
to exercise good manners, so as to maintain our corporate image and
the good reputation of the airline.
"As for smoking, as it is a personal choice, our guideline is
that (members of) our uniform(ed) staff (are) allowed to smoke only
in designated areas if they wish."
The same goes for Jetstar, which does not impose a ban on staff
smoking in public.
But its cabin crew are expected to be on good behaviour at all
times, regardless of whether or not they are on flight duty, said a
spokesman.
Stricter guidelines
Thai Airways has a stricter set of guidelines on staff
behaviour. Its employees are not allowed to smoke in public, drink,
gamble or even shop while in uniform, a spokesman said.
Employees who get caught are given a warning. If they are
recalcitrant, a committee will decide on appropriate action against
them, she added.
Other uniformed organisations such as Certis Cisco, Aetos and
the Singapore Armed Forces (SAF) are stricter. SAF personnel in
uniform caught smoking in public are fined $50 for the first
offence and $100 for a repeat offence.
Officers from Certis Cisco and Aetos are not allowed to smoke in
public when in uniformand on duty.
A Certis Cisco spokesman said failure to obey standing
instructions may result in disciplinary action in accordance with
the severity of the misconduct.
An Aetos spokesman said the behaviour of its officers is
governed by an Auxiliary Police Standing Order on general conduct
and action can be taken against offenders.
-- Asiaone
