Daysleeper. If obstacle clearance requirements dictate a certain third segment level altitude then this should normally also take into account the 5 or 10 minute engine power limitation. See Mutt's reply to my post.
To climb to a higher third segment merely because someone in management decides that Recalls should be completed before third segment, defeats the certification purpose of the engine limitations. Thus obstacle clearance is compromised. The performance engineers responsible for designing the runway analysis chart with its various caveats on third segment level altitudes where dictated by obstacle clearance rules - are entitled to assume that the pilots are competent to handle Recalls as well as play by the rules.
If clawing your way to a higher third segment than laid down by the performance engineers simply because it seems a good idea at the time, then you may as well say throw the engine limitations out of the window and gain an unfair weight advantage on your competitors who play fair.
Empty Cruise. Bleeding back to V2+15 after an engine failure which has happened in excess of V2+15, does not comply with one Boeing type which requires that the speed at the time of engine failure should be held unless it happened above V2+20 - in which case speed should be reduced back to V2+20.
See FCT 737 (TM) Page 2.44 date October 31, 2002.