Thanks guys for your interesting inputs, some of which are more sensible and informative than others :D. One other issue I have with this free-ride extracrew lark is that no airport tax or security fee has been paid by the recipient (tax evasion :confused:) and the airline receives no revenue despite burning extra fuel carrying the individual). Adios amigos :=

You can always give 20€ to the captain and let your mind rest in peace...

The company gets no money for transporting an extracrew, right, but gets much more safety by doing so than by carrying a marshall with a weapon (who does not pay either and is NOT a crew member) at least we will not fire a gun!:D
Anyway, I think it's not worth to carry on trying to discuss about things you won't never understand (Nightstop) you match up to "the world is safer now" sort of forums where your contributions will be much more appreciated than in this one.
We got the idea mr perfect: we're doing illegal things (tax evasion) and we're putting the world at risk (despite the improvements in airpot security thanks to brilliant minds like yours), but once again, we'll keep doing it, it's a wonderfull benefit when you're away from home and a nice colleague takes you back home and (you're gonna love this!) 95% of times in biz class. I've flown in south america for a while and crossed the atlantic to go home every time I had a few days off in a row and I am very gratefull to the spanish colleagues that helped me!

Felices vuelos!!

Nightstop, oh yes , the aircraft burns a lot more fuel for carrying an extra
person onboard, and it might not climb to its optimun flight level, and you
forgot to mention the food. Give me a break.
One time had a non revenue ticket to fly with AA from SJU to MCO and the flight was full. I asked the gate agent for a jump seat: I was told by
her that it wasn't possible because of a weight problem, I then asked her
to ask the captain. She said the captain had no saying in this. This was
pre 9/11. I had to wait a few hours for an available flight. Is this
what you want, Nightstop?

Hi guys.
I undersand all of you, disappointed with nightstop and everybody with same ideas. Xcrew is more difficult day by day and we want to preserve it. But to defend the idea and to spread it, must be done with words not guns. If you don't have any valid idea don't shout.
Xcrew have been used since long time ago in many places. The big difference with Spain is that we have the Xcrew regulated in our OMs. I have found many persons at many countries, involved on the flight not understanding the xcrew, not pilots, but flight dispatcher, etc. The first time you as a captain tells them you want to transport a collegue as xcrew comes a extrange expression on their faces. Then as you explain what you want to do, always, always, they find a similar figure on their country perfectly matching the situation. The most of the times they get a free coupon to the xcrew because is what they are used to do with the national companies. That doesn't means to be treated as a pax. Even at the loadsheet an xcrew is added as part of the crew, 75 kg instead of the 84 of a pax. For that reason the xcrew do not pay taxes. Because it is perfectly legal being part of the crew or the plane, same as acting as an onboard marshall.
The reason why somebody gets ungry when talking about xcrew is because everyday it is more difficult to access to the plane and security it is harder. But that has nothing to see with companies. Companies are comfortable with the xcrew because it has a double function. First is to help, just in case, for free. Help to the cabin crew or to the technical crew if need it. This is the main reason to the xcrew "because he or she could do something more technical than a regular pax" And second is a facility to their staff to live outside the company base, therefore expanding their available workers sources. It is common to all the spanish airlines, representing then an special non talk agreement between companies