This Hawaii story was everywhere by the time most Hawaii travelers saw it, which is usually a reason for Beat of Hawaii (BOH) to leave it alone. But the part that made it spread so quickly is also the part most coverage barely stopped to examine: Alaska did not just decide where former Hawaiian flight attendants could not wear a lei, flowers in their hair, or Aloha Shirts. It also decided where Alaska flight attendants could.
That turned what seemingly was a niche airline-uniform story into something much larger and viral-worthy. The headlines focused on former Hawaiian flight attendants assigned to Alaska-branded international routes who can no longer wear Hawaii elements. Meanwhile, Alaska flight attendants remain free to wear them on flights serving the islands.
Put succinctly, a former Hawaiian Airlines flight attendant working an Alaska-branded flight from Seattle to Rome cannot wear a lei. An Alaska Airlines flight attendant working a flight from Seattle to Honolulu can.
That sounded backward enough that it spread far beyond the usual airline, travel and Hawaii circles. Most coverage stopped at the outrage. The part it skipped is simpler and stranger: the answer is not about who the employee works for. It is about where the airplane is flying to. The flower no longer belongs to the people who carried it. It belongs to the route.
How the rule works.
The policy affects roughly 250 Hawaiian flight attendants assigned to a Seattle base supporting Alaska-branded long-haul routes to Europe and Asia. On those widebody flights, flowers, leis, and aloha shirts are no longer permitted. At the same time, those same elements are allowed on flights serving Hawaii, including Alaska-branded flights and the 737s worked by Alaska crews.
The distinction is not based on who the employee is. It is based simply on where the aircraft is going. That is how a former Hawaiian flight attendant assigned to an Alaska-Europe route can be restricted from wearing the flower, while an Alaska flight attendant flying a 737 to Honolulu can wear one.
On any flight to or from Hawaii, flowers and lei remain permitted, even when the flight is Alaska-branded, and Alaska’s own crews are working it. Whether travelers agree with that boundary or not, it is the line the company has chosen. The flower is permitted on Hawaii service and restricted on certain non-Hawaii routes, regardless of which airline the employee originally worked for.
Readers split before we even weighed in.
BOH readers landed on opposite sides of that almost immediately. Debbie saw the restriction as sensible because it applies to flights that are not going to Hawaii. “A flower in your hair and a lei doesn’t make sense in Rome,” she wrote.
Another reader went further, arguing that if Delta or United had bought Hawaiian, little of the branding might have survived at all, and that Alaska deserves some credit for trying to preserve pieces of it while carrying the cost and complexity of running two brands.
Others saw the same rule as a sign of where the acquisition is headed. One wrote that Hawaii is being erased by Alaska, with no synergy and no Aloha, while another said the airline no longer really exists and is only keeping the Hawaiian name for now. Those are very different reactions to the same policy, which is exactly why the story traveled so widely before we ever touched it ourselves.
Both points of view are easy to understand. The rule produces a result people can argue about without either side being entirely right or wrong: Alaska is preserving branding, including the lei on Hawaii flights, while also deciding that former Hawaiian flight attendants cannot always wear them.
Why the reaction spread so quickly.
Most airline stories stay inside airline circles. This one got away because almost anyone could seemingly understand the contradiction without knowing anything about fleet plans, labor contracts, or airline acquisitions.
The version people saw in headlines, social posts, and online discussions seemed inappropriate, and it explains why the story spread as widely as it did. The explanation is much more nuanced, but the first impression is powerful because it sounds like the exact opposite of what most people would expect.
Alaska now has to decide where one brand ends and the other begins. In this case, it is deciding which parts of Hawaiian travel apply across the company and which apply only to its Hawaii service.
What travelers see.
For most passengers, this is not really a uniform story. It is one more visible sign that the old Alaska and Hawaiian labels no longer explain the onboard experience as cleanly as they once did.
Travelers booking Hawaii flights now encounter both Alaska and Hawaiian branding, Hawaiian and Alaska aircraft, Alaska crews and Hawaiian crews, and sometimes confusing combinations of these that can make the experience feel different from one route to another. The Seattle long-haul flying to Europe and Asia is still staffed by Hawaiian flight attendants, not Alaska crews, because the two workforces have not yet been integrated. The flight attendants’ union has documented that the new Dreamliner routes to Rome, Seoul, and London still fall under the Hawaiian contract.
That is why the flower, the lei, and the Aloha Shirt carried so much weight in this discussion. They are easy for passengers to recognize, and they still represent something larger than the uniform elements themselves. Even Alaska acknowledges that the two-brand strategy they are trying to execute is unique and has not been done by a U.S. airline. That reality is now showing up in places like that, where passengers can actually see it.
The boundary now visible.
A Seattle-to-Rome flight marketed as Alaska service is not the same product as a Honolulu-bound flight, even though it uses what was once a Hawaiian-branded Dreamliner. And many travelers already expect different branding between the two. Alaska’s rule reflects exactly that.
But the policy also answers a question Hawaii travelers have been asking since the acquisition closed. What exactly is Hawaiian now, and what will it become? For now, more is being made clear about who gets to carry that identity.
Under this rule, Hawaiian is not limited to employees who have worked for Hawaiian Airlines. It is not something that automatically follows those people, regardless of where they fly. Instead, it is something the company has chosen to switch on for Hawaii service and switch off everywhere else.
For travelers to Hawaii, is that a reasonable boundary, or does it further change what the Hawaiian brand means?
Lead Photo Credit: © Beat of Hawaii. Pictured is BOH Editor Rob Kvidt with Hawaiian Airlines to celebrate its inaugural New York flight.
Get Breaking Hawaii Travel News
A flight attendant on an Alaska Airlines flight from Seattle to Rome wearing a lei would just be silly. To the majority of passengers who have no clue about the Alaska-Hawaiian link, it would look undisciplined and chaotic.
I recently moved back to Seattle from Kauai due to health issues. I am not Hawaiian, I was never even a local, yet I was privileged to live on Kauai for 9 years. Always used Alaska for the ease of direct flights and while there was never as much Aloha as on a Hawaiian flight, you could feel the warmth. Recently while at SeaTac headed to Austin on Alaska the agent calling the OKC Alaska flight next store opened the announcement with “Aloha” and ended it with “Mahalo”. No sweeter sound for me. After a few rounds of this I approached him to thank him and he said he forgets and it just comes out. I hoped he could continue to “forget” and that it might spread across the company. Apparently not with the recent revelation that many expressions of Aloha are reserved for a small segment of flights. Being on the continent I have more choices of airlines and less reason to feel loyalty to Alaska. Especially if they are blind to the crews greatest strengths!
If Alaska is going to maintain the Hawaiian Airlines brand, this policy makes sense. On flights from Seattle to places that don’t touch Hawaii, it should be an Alaska branded presentation to the guests.
The flip side however is that Alaska should consider repainting part of their fleet to Hawaiian colors for all flights to/from Hawaii. If Alaska Airlines flight attendants want to work those routes, they should adopt Hawaiian Airlines uniform and dress standards.
Alaska Air Group has said from the beginning that once all the dust settles and the fleets and crews get sorted out, all service to Hawaii will be Hawaiian branded.
Sorry but any outrage over this is ridiculous. It’s simple and it makes sense. Why on earth would flight attendants on a flight to Europe, wear a lei!!??
And it’s wrong to try to paint this as an act against Ex-Hawaiian airlines flight attendants but not Alaska FA’s. It’s not that at all. Why are people trying to paint it that way? Again, it’s simple. If a route is Hawaii-bound they wear a lei. If the route is to somewhere else other Hawaiian then they don’t. It doesn’t matter if they were Hawaiian Airlines FA’s or Alaska FA’s.
This whole thing regarding the demise of Hawaiian and anger at Alaska Air has reached the point of being ridiculous. Is BOH feeding this frenzy? I think maybe so.
This is an issue of inclusion, not branding.
Alaska flight attendants can be tatted up, pierced, and colored hair, but the Hawaiians wearing flowers in their hair is where they draw the line?
What are your thoughts on headscarves, kippahs, or box braids? And while we’re at it, who’s determining gender non conforming crew members and uniform selection?
Many Polynesians have become a diaspora from their own homeland, even many call Seattle home. Flowers worn in their hair are deeply symbolic, serving as expressions of cultural pride and hospitality. Wearing them connects the individual to nature, ancestors, and to mana wherever they are.
Is that really the fight Alaska wants to choose
I believe Alaska has missed an incredible marketing opportunity with this decision. Hawaiian Airlines has a huge brand identity in Asia having flown there for two decades myself. Alaska Airlines has a brand is associated with snow, ice, and coldness, and there is absolutely no brand awareness in Asia.
Europe is a different story as Alaska has an opportunity to build a brand in Europe. Although the brand has the same connotations of ice, snow and cold, perhaps it would be more understood by Europeans. Hawaiian on the other hand, stands for Aloha, generosity and service, which could then be marketed to Europe and increase traffic into Honolulu and Hawaii. Big marketing mistake.
I am very grateful that flight attendant on Hawaiian or Alaskan flights flying to in front of the Hawaiian islands can still wear flowers in their hair. It is part of our heritage and that is being honored. Would it be great if our flight attendant could wear them anywhere in the world… Absolutely but we have lost that privilege. I do find respect for the Alaskan Airlines people that they have honored the culture and that it is still OK to wear flowers on the Hawaiian routes and I will look forward to taking those planes and seeing flowers in the Hair of all of our beautiful flight attendants! If you’re in Alaskan person reading this… Special request to coach them that it’s OK to still have all of our beautiful aloha spirit!
Much ado about nothing! Years ago, Western Airlines/Delta had 2 complete different uniforms for flight attendants. If they were flying to Hawaii, they had a Hawaii uniform that they would wear. That was the rule. But they were not allowed to wear them on any other routes. That made total sense to me as it still does. It’s just part of an airlines uniform code.
So did United.
They are flying for Alaska Airlines and they are wearing the uniform for that airline. It’s OK to alter their uniform for the Hawaiian flights, but why would a lei become part of the uniform for flights elsewhere? Does a Mexican flight attendant wear a sombrero when flying to Seattle, Honolulu, Europe? Does a Dutch flight attendant wear wooden shoes? Why would a flight attendant flying into Rome be dressed in Hawaiian garb?
You think Mexican carrier FA’s were sombrero’s? My Goodness, are you for real? Leave your opinion to yourself next time.
NPS you should take your own advice since my innocuous remark went right over your head lol 🤦🏽♀️
NPS……… Your comment to Janet was uncalled for. There appears to be a reading comprehension issue. Janet was not saying FA’s to Mexico wear sombreros. She was making an analogy – the analogy being we do NOT see Latina or Latino flight attendants wear sombreros when they’re working flights to Europe or Seattle, etc. Just as we do not expect German heritage FA’s to wear dirndle skirts on flights to Asia, etc. In other words, where would airlines draw the line? We can think numerous examples of FA’s ethnic heritage costumes but they don’t wear them while working as flight attendants to places that have nothing in common with that ethnic background. Airlines have uniforms and they always have. Are they supposed to do away with their required uniforms and let FA’s wear whatever they want?
That is not at all what I said 🤦🏽♀️🙄
Sorry Deborah, my last comment could appear as though it was directed to you and it was not. It was for NPS because I thought my first comment was not approved and then suddenly it was. Obviously I agree with you Deborah. Thank you for getting it!
I’m really surprised BOH allowed your comment. But since they did, my comment to you NPS is learn how to read. That’s not at all what she said.
If l were Hawaiian and wanted to wear a flower in my hair, unless acceptable hair accessories are dictated by my employer and flowers are not included—which would be weird—I’d want to do that.
“A Seattle-to-Rome flight marketed as Alaska service is not the same product as a Honolulu-bound flight, even though it uses what was once a Hawaiian-branded Dreamliner.” Good grief. They are now AS 787s. They’re never going back. Time to get over it.
This whole Lei / uniform ordeal is the biggest nothing burger about bankrupt HA being acquired by AS yet.
I think this is an absurd decision. If a woman of Hawaiian ancestry chooses to wear a flower in her hair in a nod to her culture, why would Alaska have a problem with that, regardless of where the plane is flying? They aren’t dictating the type of earrings she wears, if any; right? Or whether or not she wears a watch. This doesn’t seem to be a question of compliance with uniform standards. It’s just ridiculous overreach.
John V,
I agree with you 100 percent!
This rule shows disrespect for the Hawaiian ancestry of employees, and is designed to erase the Hawaiian dna that is expressed in many ways such as flowers and aloha.
Hawaiians should be outraged at Alaska Air cancelling cultural traditions.
I agree completely with Jon!
Because they are wearing a uniform…
And yes, they do have standards for watches and earrings.
When in Rome……
Hilarious!
My opinion, for what it’s worth- this is a non issue. When I flew to Rome the last two times, the only thing I noticed was multi-lingual flight attendants. Since I flew SFO-FCO, should I have expected Boudin sourdough boules with cioppino?
When I fly to Hawaii, it’s a lovely touch that the flight attendants have on an Aloha shirt, wear a lei, have flowers in their hair, and arrange beautiful tropical flowers in the restrooms. I am also excited about the new menu featuring Hawaiian style foods. I appreciate that Alaska is keeping a bit of aloha on the flights to and from Hawaii. Going to Rome? Not really something I would ever expect.
The senior management of Alaska Air obviously does not appreciate the marketing appeal of a leí, Hawaiian style shirt or Moomoo. Although an airline called Alaska based in Seattle has lost its way from the 49th State and now the 50th as well.
Pride in Alaska would mean an Alaska State flag pin, scarf or tie or Hawaiian style shirt with a totem pole, North Star, moose, bad eagle or Salmon motif or pattern.
Why not incorporate a nice nonperishable leí with either style of clothing? Braniff Air. took the unique crew apparel to extreme and everyone noticed. But in the case of Alaska-Hawaiian, crew apparel similar to any other Mainland US airline in the lower is just all the same; boring and commonplace.
Aloha!
A totem pole?
Really?
Totems are artifacts of Alaska natives in Southeast Alaska.
Which Alaska are you talking about.