ManaAda ,each of the crew members should check any switches position, no matter in which area of resp the switch is.
The one who has it, should move the switch and give the response,but the other one should check if right.
So ,your example ,is an example of a crew not doing the check properly..it may happen no matter how the check is written,the new or old way.
For ex: the FO leave the switch to manual ,and the cpt ,who should answer the check (old version check ) , knowing 'by memory' the check ( as we all do,after some time ) ,says 'CHECK' ,or 'AUTO' ,without looking. The FO ,who was responsible for that switch, doesn't bother to look again and goes on with the check. It is possible ,right?
BelArgus - no question, 3 brains and 3 pairs of eyes are better than 2. But then again, on older plains we flew we had 4 or even 5 crew members...much better,right ?
Now,try to compare the level of automatization between such old planes and new ones. You are fortunate to have the third crew member,but I think it's a mistake to disregard the manufacturer's procedures.
Most of those procedures are made as a result of cooperation with client airlines..I've seen some of our suggestions incorporated in the QRH or the FCTM.
Most resistance to the new checks is met with the old, experienced pilots.Why?..cause we know better how to fly the plane..the way we've learned it was the right way..It's human nature.
I've seen funny situations like: hey, don't touch the lights ,those are mine ...or ..I would select the fuel pumps,those are important items,the cpt should do those....after a while they all learned the new way,and now feel familiar with that.The FO does most of the preflight switches now, while the cpt monitors and crosschecks. What's wrong with that?