I trust that as many members as possible will be attending the forum night. I believe it would be most worthwhile to place many facets of this argument into perspective.
As has been said before (many times), CX would love to see the pilots pay for the pleasure of having a job.
As for the S/O aspect - I, as a full paying passenger, would be a little nervous knowing that if my aircraft was being crewed by 2 Second Officers, that in fact only 2 out of the 4 pilots were fully qualified on the aircraft type! I don't think many of the travelling public are aware of this fact (that Second Officers are only partially trained on the aircraft type - i.e. do not receive a full type rating).
The company is saving alot of money by having S/O's in the first place. To try it on with crewing an aircraft with 2 of them on a regular basis is simply a lead in to making this situation the NORM - rather than the exception.
Many airlines (notably One World partner British Airways) operate with 2 FULLY QUALIFIED crews generally - no S/O's as I understand (correct me if I'm wrong please).
This is merely one aspect of the CX management attempting to totally screw with the pilots' job, and more alarmingly, with the overall flight safety and reputation of the airline.
I am neither a company man nor staunch unionist. However, I DO believe that a very undesirable situation exists. The amangement have a duty to their shareholders - yes - absolutely and totally granted. BUT, not at the expense of the employees (not just pilots - cabin crew are having, and have had, a hell of a time!) and more importantly not at the expense of safety.
Just face the fact that they will continue to bully EVERYONE as long as any group is willing to rollover and take it.
Call me an idealist, but why can't everyone just get on with each other. To the CX management:
You are being WAY too greedy. To have your two main frontline groups onside would save you hundreds of millions of dollars a year in good will (working on days off, less sickness, happy passengers etc).