it may be able to justifiably report on additional fuel carriage with some credibility. I think the data all too nebulous to be of any value, especially as the reasons for additional fuel carriage is unknown.
If the intent is less innocent and derived from the same warped logic as Ryanair or the CX 'fuel ladder' then they will cherry pick the fuel ordering to suit a 'performance management agenda'.
An honest system, driven by a heartfelt desire to reduce CO2 pollution would ALSO include any financial inducement to management pilots (DFO or deputy) to drive an agenda.
Further any assessment would balance fuel ordered versus needed, including those times when instinct, experience or a vibe means pilots added fuel not strictly necessary but that decision saved a diversion and unscheduled overnight of crew, aircraft and passengers.
One suspect that in the absence of an inclusive real cost benefit model and transparent disclosures of any financial benefit, a more nefarious motive may be in operation.
Of course establishing a benchmark Ryanair offers insight into how this operates...
Ryanair set up a system to benchmark pilots against each other on their use of fuel. A twenty page table was produced with the pilots’ names, base, fuel burn, fuel target and percentage of use above or below the target.
Maybe ask your DFO or his 'deputy' whether or not he makes money from you carrying less fuel whilst you carry strict liability before dismissing what other airlines have done to their pilots and they may yet do to you.