Pressured to carry a fuel figure that manages risk in a resonsable manner
That is how I would put it.
The airlines I have worked for have been trying to make Flight Crews do this for at least 30 years - they don't like crews adding another 'x' kilos for 'mum'; on account of 'mum' costs 3 to 4 % per hour of any extra fuel loaded. i.e. a 10 hour flight with another 10 tonnes over min flight plan fuel will cost between 3 - 4 tonnes of extra fuel all gone (paid for and added into the global warming thingy)
I have always loaded the fuel I think will cater for the conditions that I may 'reasonably' expect to arise at the destination and alternate airfields. (The word 'reasonably' means I make my own assesment of 'risk management' which would be something I hope along the lines that aircraft designers build into the aircraft when they consider the strength of the main spars versus the likelyhood of an idiot pilot driving their aircraft into the mother of all CB's)
I never carry fuel for 'Mum', although over the decades before the LH seat I flew with many who did. I do carry extra fuel when I believe that safety or an unnaceptable commercial risk requires it. I have never felt 'uncomfortably' short of fuel.
We are paid as Captains to manage risk in every aspect of our working day (take the loading of the aircraft for instance - do we check every aspect of that? Or look at performance - I could go on and on)
Any airline I have worked for will allow me to carry the fuel that is appropriate to the risk - in 34 years in this business I've never had one complaint from management about extra fuel - and I doubt that will change. For those who persist in carrying 'a bit for mum', well you deserve some critisism because you are not resolving those 'risk management' decisisions appropriately in my opinion.
Regards
Exeng