GMDS
What crap are you talking about, TC would have been behind the layout of the aircraft and the savings of one million US on the front crew compartment.
I don't get your point ....
What I meant is that it was TCs decision to scrap the nice front bunk, which would allow a skipper to rest in either a seat or bunk and be able to rejoin the cockpit in a matter of seconds. Undoubtedly he will fail to even show up there in case of a rapid deco or smoke in the cabin, when resting in the torpedo tube having 300+ panicking pax inbetween.
As now it becomes more and more apparent that a too high number of FOs need a lot more time, training and experience to upgrade, it shows that having two of them in the driver seat and the skipper trapped in the rear coffin might not be what the company wanted the public to know. And everything, every little incident eventually comes out and such a safety sensitive issue is very detrimental to a company's reputation, especially among frequent and upper class flyers.
We might end up with either two skippers on a 3 men flight, or a seat behind the cockpit, to calm some customers or regulators. But both solutions will evaporate the initial saving of 1mio$ for the rear bunk quite rapidly.
As I always said: Greed inevitably ends up in higher cost, if the decision makers are biased either by incompetence, ignorance, arrogance, corruption or pure and simple greed.
With such issues it makes a lot of sense to take advice from the professionals who will work with the system. EK has a lot of such pros with experience from former operations. But like a silly wise-a** teenager, arrogance prevails to the result that the pros involved lose motivation and just sing along the looney tune and everything ends up costing heaploads more.
"WTF" the mismanagers might think, our bonus stays the same, we just cut the one for the employees .....