Too close for comfort-easyjet lands with 18m fuel
Trouble is that many 'bean-counters' in Flt Ops were Ex Mill failures who needed to make a point to higher-ups. No point in claiming to be the "Captain"; your "Command" decision making would come under review.
I regularly rounded up the fuel to nearest zero in order to make the manual loadsheet easier. Yes, Bean counters kept costs down by not paying for down-route or even Base departure computer loadsheets. "Captain" was phoned by CP and asked to calculate how much extra the annual fuel bills would be if everyone did that. It was quite a lot, actually.
Because ETOPS was an ERA operation, final reserve contingency could be, by definition, reduced to 5% of the last hour. Compliant 'Yes-Men' were flying the North Atlantic with 125kg contingency.
Clever 'beancounters' also applied language definition to the enhanced fuel requirement for ETOPS and convinced most that it was not necessary.
Try telling the beancounters that flying the N atlantic with 125 kgs contingency and no ETOPS enhanced diversion fuel because, say, the En-route Diversion airfield was, in fact, closed and, in any case, was a Glider club field . Claiming to be "Captain" would not endear.
Only one Cowboy outfit employer in my experience and I said "Khimo Sabi" pretty quick. Still look good in me Tonto outfit that I kept for dressing up room parties though.
Thankfully, there are very professional airlines out there who would not argue with fuel decisions. I stayed with one for 17 years and regularly came top of the list of the most fuel efficient Captains. I was told that it was because I was one of the few who took Company minimum fuel, all the time. It was a generous figure compared to what the Cowboy outfit was trying to pursuade me to do.
In recent history, wasn't it one lot who were so often declaring fuel emergencies at arrival airfield that it became, almost, SOP ???
I take full round-trip in the Beamer just going to Ayanappa for lunch ! - Much easier on the digestion -.