有兩個乘客在為同一個座位爭執，然後有一群小孩再走道奔跑，有一個乘客向妳抱怨廁所很髒，還有一個乘客向你說胃有一點不舒服,  你會如何處理？

A:  I will approach the quarreling passengers first. I will try to know what exactly they are quarreling for and calm them at the same time. I understand that air rage  is a huge threat to the safety onboard. If the fight gets uncontrollable , other passengers may be affected and the aircraft might have to divert . I remember there was a news about air rage and the flight ended up having an unscheduled  landing with several crew and passengers badly injured.

B:  I don’t actually agree with A. Quarreling passengers usually do not pose  immediate threat to the safety. Instead, I will approach the sick passenger first. I have a medical background. I know that a simple sign of upset stomach can lead to internal bleeding, which can be vital. My friend Lucy was hospitalized  for a week because she ignored that she’s been having stomach pain for 3 days. Dirty toilets can always be cleaned any time later. Running kids will stop after they are tired. But any signs and symptoms  on health can never be neglected.

C: B made her point. However, if the passenger is having minor discomfort, I will ask one of my colleagues to attend the passenger, another to clean the toilets and yet another to control the running kids. I will personally go to the quarreling passengers and tell them, “Sir, please don’t fight. You may not aware that you are disturbing  other passengers.” If it seems getting into  physical , I will say, “If we see any sign of threat to the safety onboard, we will immediately land and let you meet the security on ground.”

D: I totally agree with C. Air rage should always be handled first. If I am the one who is asked to take care of the toilets. I will first apologize to the complaining passengers as having untidy  toilets is deteriorating  the image of the airline. I will say to the passengers, “Ma’am, we are sorry about the inconvenience we’ve caused to you. Please kindly give us a moment. We will make them serviceable  again.”

A: 我會先處理爭執的乘客，試著了解他們在爭執什麼，並同時緩和他們的情緒。我了解空中憤怒衝突情緒是航機安全的一大威脅，如果衝突一發不可收拾，其他乘客會被影響到，航班也許必須改航。我記得之前有一篇關於空中憤怒衝突的報導，結果該航班改降機場，機上有些許的組員及乘客受傷。

B: 我不完全同意 A 所說的，發生爭執的乘客通常不見得會成為對飛安的直接威脅，反倒是我會先處理那個身體不舒服的乘客。我有醫學背景，我知道單單胃痛徵兆，可能是內出血的警訊，而且可能攸關性命。我的朋友露西就是因為她忽視了長達三天的胃痛，結果住院整診療了一個星期。廁所髒總是可以等等再清理，到處亂跑的小孩子也是會跑累的，但任何健康上的徵兆及症狀是絕對不能忽略的。

C: B 說得有道理，但如果乘客只是一點點的不舒服，我會請一位同事照顧他，一位同事清廁所，另一位去控制亂跑的小孩，自己則會上前去爭執的乘客那並跟他們說：「先生們，請別爭執，你們也許沒注意到你們已經打擾到其他的乘客了。」如果看似快起肢體衝突，我會說：「如果有任何行為對於機上安全造成威脅，我們會馬上降落並起交給地面警方處理。」

D: 我完全同意 C 所說的，空中憤怒衝突必須優先處理。如果我被請去處理剛髒廁所這件事，我會先跟乘客道歉，因為廁所髒實在是有損公司形象，我會跟乘客說：「 這位女士，很抱歉造成您的不便，請等一下，馬上就可以使用了。」

身為一個乘務員， A 第一重視的會是飛航的安全（safety comes first），A 正點出航空公司的最高期許，並舉出新聞實例 ，傳達出他對航空業及時事的關心。A 並使用了 “understand（了解）” 這個字眼，更能傳達給聽眾，說者本身對於事件的深入程度， 而非只是 “know（知道）”

B 以逆勢操作（adverse）地表達對 A 的不認同，這不見得不妥，但強而有力的例子就顯得非常重要 ，才能支持他的反對意見。以我過去參與團討的經驗，小組中有人持相反意見時，會快速將焦點 集中在他身上，其他應徵者會好奇 想知道這個反對意見。B 置入他的醫學背景（置入性行銷），有效提供給考官他的直接有貢獻的個人背景印象，並提到人命關天（vital），飛安不僅是只有機械或人為問題，乘客的健康，也是空服員的一大顧慮。（註記：雖然空服員沒辦法對乘客進行醫療行為，但至少能掌握黃金時間，提供急救，迅速通知機長，安排就近機場降落。）