Whirlygig - this is the age-old conundrum - is flight safety cost effective? Why pass on costs to the customer to make things a little safer when they will probably be OK anyway? This is the sort of thinking (mainly by bean counters) which is suddenly reversed when your best customer is killed in an accident. Suddenly nothing can be too safe and bu88er the cost.
As most airlines will tell you, killing your passengers is really bad for business which is why they spend so much making everything double safe.
The flip side of this is that the military has an extensive flight safety empire with lots of mandatory training and briefing plus umpteen different feedback forums to get round chain of command problems - yet we still lose people/aircraft. The problem is we don't know how many we would lose if we didn't have the flight safety cover. We know some of the things we don't know but we don't know all of the things we don't know (to paraphrase Donald Rumsfeld)