I have difficulty arguing with the fact that we can only get 620 hours a year out of our crews when we need 900 [...] I am a realist and know that it is just so vital for us to make easyJet more economical than the opposition. That does NOT mean sacrificing our lives to make a few top managers rich - it does mean being flexible over rostering when the need arises.
If the last straw breaks the donkey's back, wouldn't it be fair to say that the donkey was pretty much overloaded in the first place?
If the difference between make or break is 280 hours across 3 aircraft worth of crew, then the problem isn't the crew economies. It's more fundamental and points to an unsustainable business model. That's the realistic view.
Given the choice between flogging your donkey to within an inch of its life or breaking its back in order to turn a profit suggests you'd be better off loading it with something more worthwhile. To argue the closure of EMA with reference to crew costs would be disingenuous and dishonest.