givemewings
Trying to answer your questions.
Concerning the quality our CRCs provide in terms of rest quality - the company couldn't give a damn. They are not a bit concerned about our rest quality and subsequently safety. It's all about gaining space for either headroom for F passengers, or toilets. Nothing more or less.
The other safety aspect is basically virulent in the case where the commander rests and two FOs are on the flight deck. I don't doubt the ability of most FOs, but strictly legally it is only the commander who is responsible for the operation. If he can rest close to the cockpity, the issue is none, because he can be called up in due time, even in emergencies. At EK though, the distance of the location and the fact that panicking passengers can obstruct his way back to the cockpit hinders his capability of coming back on deck. He rest the sole responsible though.
(I guess this was the reference to the QF72 flight, although I am not sure, and potentially also to the AF447 accident).
This is a safety issue with some constellations on the flight deck. EK had an incident over the Himalayas that might have turned ugly with two FOs on the deck making a potentially fatal mistake. EK was lucky that day that the aircraft had no CRC and therefore the captain had to rest in F and had the possibility to access the cockpit very rapidly as he sensed the danger. On todays aircraft, with the CRC in the very remotest place on the aircraft, this incident would have been potentially fatal.
No lessons were drawn from this incident.
The other issue i dealt with above is distraction , a consequence of the location of the CRC and the lack of seating capabiliy of the supernumeraries outside the busy flight deck.