Risk perception, crew confidence, and decision-making in an era of geopolitical tension
How crew experience risk
Aircrew today do not simply fly across the world; they fly into it. Escalating geopolitical tensions, fragmented airspace, and rapidly shifting threat environments have fundamentally reshaped what it means to operate a flight.
From the outside, geopolitical risk can appear abstract – a line on a map, an overflight restriction, a rerouting decision made by operations or security departments. For cabin crew, however, exposure is far more immediate and tangible. It extends beyond airspace into layovers in politically sensitive regions, ground transport between airport and hotel, and interactions with passengers who may be anxious, fearful, or agitated.
The need for adequate and timely information
Crew do not require classified briefings or intelligence-level detail. What they need is credible, timely, and coherent information that helps them understand decisions affecting their safety.
Clear explanations of routing choices, overflight permissions, destination risks, and potential diversions are essential. Equally important is alignment across pilots, dispatch, and cabin crew. When communication is fragmented – or when elevated risks are downplayed to avoid concern – uncertainty quickly fills the gap. Crew then turn to news reports, social media, passenger conversations, or worried messages from family members. The result is not reassurance, but erosion of trust.
Including crew in geopolitical risk decisions
A persistent perceptual gap often exists between company risk assessments and crew risk perception. Organizational assessments understandably focus on airspace restrictions, threat intelligence, and mitigation strategies. Crew, by contrast, experience risk through lived reality.
These perspectives are not contradictory, but when one is prioritized at the expense of the other, confidence suffers. Dismissing crew concerns as purely emotional or subjective is counterproductive. Feeling unsafe is, in itself, a safety issue. Acknowledging heightened risk openly strengthens safety culture rather than undermining it.
A robust safety culture is built on dialogue, not one-way messaging. This makes the structured inclusion of cabin crew in geopolitical risk discussions essential. Engagement with crew representatives and unions should not be seen as a concession of authority, but as an investment in operational insight, alignment, and mutual trust.
The right to refuse
One of the most sensitive questions today is whether crew are genuinely empowered to say no.
Recent cases have shown crew expressing reluctance to operate certain routes due to personal background, public visibility, or general threat perception. For some, these concerns are linked to identity; for others, to a broader sense of vulnerability. In such moments, the protections offered by an organization reveal its true values.
Crew must be able to refuse a flight without fear of disciplinary action, reputational harm, or stalled career progression. This is not about encouraging refusal – it is about reinforcing trust. Organizations that operate from a position of suspicion weaken their safety culture. Those that trust their people strengthen it.
Mental health under pressure
Operating flights in or near conflict zones places a significant mental and emotional burden on cabin crew. Unpredictable rosters, last-minute route changes, geopolitical tension, and highly stressed passengers mean crew are expected not only to ensure safety, but also to manage fear, anger, and grief on board.
This requires sustained vigilance and emotional control, often without space to process their own stress.
Supporting crew in this environment requires robust safeguards. These should include limiting repeated exposure to high-stress operations, improving roster predictability, and ensuring meaningful recovery time between assignments.
Cabin crew are already highly skilled in de-escalation and routinely apply these techniques in demanding situations. However, additional practical training is needed to recognize signs of stress, trauma, and panic in passengers. As emotional care is an integral part of the role, it must be supported by confidential, independent mental health services that can be accessed without fear of career consequences.
Looking ahead: keeping the conversation going
As the aviation risk landscape continues to evolve, sustained dialogue and cooperation between decision-makers and crew will be critical.
In this context, the European Transport Workers’ Federation (ETF) participated in the World Overflight Risk Conference (WORC) 2026, organized by EASA in Malta. During the panel “Crew confidence and risk perception in a changing geopolitical environment,” Ilse Berghmans, ETF Policy Officer for Aviation, presented the cabin crew perspective to an engaged audience.
ETF emphasized the importance of timely and transparent information for crew and their families, meaningful involvement of cabin crew in risk assessments, respect for the right to refuse, and stronger support for mental health, fatigue management, and targeted training.
