I have an answer for you Pool.
First off, let us assume that every person with a clear and open mind agrees that the DEC policy is not only unnecessary but a failure. Debatable is the issue that it is cost effective.
The company has dug a hole for itself and now is compelled to continue if not accentuate this policy. It is impossible for some of our management types to admit they made a huge miscalculation 4 years ago. Secondly the bean counters can show charts and graphs that seemingly support the myth that DEC's are more cost effective. It does not take into account the loss of qualified pilots, the loss of potential qualified pilots and the goodwill of the pilot group...... something that no one can put a price on.
DEC's cost more to recruit. They have had a much higher failure rate than F/O's. They have in the past been given preferential treatment wrt to accomodation and even schedules (not so anymore). They have a much higher rate of book-offs (told to me by buddy who is intimately involved in personnel matters......... I cannot verify that ) They also induce a higher rate of book-offs by F/O's. They are hired on a payscale higher than some present Captains. They will stay at EK for a shorter period of time than the average pilot. They sometimes do not have as much relevant experience as many of the F/O's waiting for command. The DEC policy has had a dramatic effect on recruitment. When taking into account all factors and not simply the BS put forth by the company through their minions, the DEC policy costs more in the long run !!!
There is NOT a general sentiment that all DEC's are scabbs and worthless pieces of crap. Unfortunately there are some that fit that category to a tee. Take Capt America or 767Jock for example. These types of individuals become lightening rods for a policy that disadvantages some for their own advantage.
I will relate a story of my earlier sim with a DEC. He actually lectured me on the first day when in reality he completely messed up the sim. The following day, he was chastised by the TRE regarding his performance. Anyone familiar with sims at EK must know that Captains are given the benefit of the doubt and F/O's are held to task for any errors. In this particular instance, this DEC was held to task and rightfully so. His attitude was shocking and his performance was dismal and thankfully the TRE was smart enough to give him a few good body shots.
Therein lies the problem. Some DEC's come to EK actually believing that they are somehow better than the F/O's waiting for command. This is misguided arrogance and not an indication of someone with good CRM or command skills. It is a messed up and totally insane policy for an airline with tons of competent F/O's waiting for command.
One other story, if you can bear with me. I also flew with a DEC who was clearly behind the power curve when it came to the A332. The big difference with this man was that he knew it, openly admitted it and we operated the flight as a team. He was not some arrogant primadonna, he was simply a pilot who took advantage of a misguided policy of an airline.
If ALL DEC's showed some compassion and understanding of the true situation at EK, I doubt that anyone would ever hold anything against them.
I for one have never held anything against DEC's. I do not believe any DEC is to blame for the policy. But I certainly understand why so many feel anger and animosity towards DEC's. A percentage of these pilots are idiots. They have no concept of what the policy has done to others and no inclination to ever try to understand. These are the same individuals who are appalling to fly with and get on this forum and try to justify their existence.
Points of fact; DEC's were never a requirement at EK
The DEC policy was instituted as a cost saving measure (albeit misguided)
A small percentage of DEC's truly deserve the reputation they have.
Why not just admit...... yeah its a fooked up policy but I had to take advantage of it. I am not better or worse than you, I just got lucky in my timing. Clearly this is beyond the capacity of some individuals.