My beef is that QF are getting an enormous competitive advantage out of this. Whilst everybody else is carrying around alternates and diverting, they're just rolling up and autolanding illegally. In the second instance mentioned above Qantas landed and BA had to divert. So BA get penalised in a commercial sense for following the law yet Qantas are able to just land.
It must be a giant pain in the backside for airlines like Delta/United/Air Canada who would not have much in the way of spare crews lying around. So the delays after rescuing the aircraft and crew from the alternate and the subsequent schedule delays must cost a fortune.
Begs the question what would Qantas have to do for CASA to take action?
Some lightweight commentary here from the ABC on Sydney airport and the fog. No mention of the fact that a major international airport which has a significant number of Long haul flights inbound at dawn should have a CAT III approach regardless of the number of times a year the fog hits.
The World Today - Fog causes air delays for second day in a row 29/05/2013