Narrative:

The dispatch [efficiency reward program] rewards all dispatchers when a system-wide average arrival fuel target is met. Consideration should be given to the use of our famous paper alternate program. Where it is legal; but there is no operational desire by [company] to have an airplane at the planned / fueled alternate. ZZZ is an example with 1240 pounds of fuel to get from ZZZ1 to ZZZ. Do you really think that if the ZZZ1 airport is flow restricted; slowed by weather; slowed by traffic or actual weather requires a missed approach that an [airline] pilot is going to get our 40 million dollar airplane on the ground at ZZZ with an alternate fuel burn of 1240 pounds? In fact the jet is going to be on a missed approach that takes it to zzzzz intersection; closer to ZZZ2 than ZZZ. This aircraft would not be in the top five for an approach to ZZZ; or even have ramp space to park the jet in these conditions.I cannot get the dispatch committee to decide what they want to use as an actual alternate before I initiate an approach. The answer is always give me a call on the missed. No; I have a jet to fly and already an agreement of where the jet is going. After the missed approach is not the time to call the committee to session. When a left or right turn after the missed approach procedure determines where the jet is actually going due to fuel. There is not enough fuel to change the flight path direction. It is time to eliminate the mind set and the paper alternate policy followed by [company] for many years.I operate our airplanes with using reserve fuel scratch pad message displayed far too much. I land with low fuel pressure lights illuminating on the runway. I initiate an approach then I have to refuse 1 turn in hold to clear the special VFR airspace because I do not have the fuel to get to the alternate. Whether it be a paper or a usable alternate. (I am aware [company] has done studies and garnered support from boeing and others to justify the behavior. This policy forces the attitude that I can land at most airports if it gets ugly and [company] can figure it out after that.) which is a terrible attitude to impose upon your captains.[company] has mouthed the verbiage that the captain of the flight has always been and will continue to be the final authority on how much fuel is required to safely complete the flight. However when I ask dispatch for 500 pounds the answer is no. Or; sure and the fuel is added in the captain add column and tracked specifically to the captain for disciplinary action. Which effectively negates any authority to make any final fuel load decision. It is time to eliminate the captain add and tracking policy. It is this [company] that in practice eliminates compliance with flight operations manual - departure fuel coordination; and far's that require the captain and the dispatcher agree. Now is the time to eliminate the captain add tracking policy that was put in place during labor negotiations to hardline fuel loads; the unintended consequences are damaging to a safety first approach. Given current policy and reality of the line experiences perhaps the five year look back at arrival fuel should be considered hind sight; and that averages still leave fifty percent of the flights short on fuel. I know our leadership has taken the push; watch for reaction; and measure the push back approach to management. Please consider this a push back and a request to evaluate your stated and inferred policies; along with the compliance expectations. These types of policies and labor contracts along with our hurray; hurray letters and pep rallies to meet the quota is where a safe efficient operation falls apart. This is not supporting a culture of safety. More importantly it is my life and your 40 million dollar jet you are placing at risk. You are promoting a culture of risk and reward. Reward for those that create the risk.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: B737 Captain reported concerns with the company's new fuel policy of decreasing fuel loads under the average for the last few years.

Narrative: The Dispatch [Efficiency Reward Program] rewards all dispatchers when a system-wide average arrival fuel target is met. Consideration should be given to the use of our famous PAPER ALTERNATE PROGRAM. Where it is legal; but there is no operational desire by [Company] to have an airplane at the planned / fueled alternate. ZZZ is an example with 1240 pounds of fuel to get from ZZZ1 to ZZZ. Do you really think that if the ZZZ1 airport is flow restricted; slowed by weather; slowed by traffic or actual weather requires a missed approach that an [airline] pilot is going to get our 40 million dollar airplane on the ground at ZZZ with an alternate fuel burn of 1240 pounds? In fact the jet is going to be on a missed approach that takes it to ZZZZZ intersection; closer to ZZZ2 than ZZZ. This aircraft would not be in the top five for an approach to ZZZ; or even have ramp space to park the jet in these conditions.I cannot get the dispatch committee to decide what they want to use as an actual alternate before I initiate an approach. The answer is always give me a call on the missed. No; I have a jet to fly and already an agreement of where the jet is going. After the missed approach is not the time to call the committee to session. When a left or right turn after the missed approach procedure determines where the jet is actually going due to fuel. There is not enough fuel to change the flight path direction. It is time to eliminate the mind set and the paper alternate policy followed by [company] for many years.I operate our airplanes with USING RESERVE FUEL scratch pad message displayed far too much. I land with low fuel pressure lights illuminating on the runway. I initiate an approach then I have to refuse 1 turn in hold to clear the Special VFR airspace because I do not have the fuel to get to the alternate. Whether it be a paper or a usable alternate. (I am aware [company] has done studies and garnered support from Boeing and others to justify the behavior. This policy forces the attitude that I can land at most airports if it gets ugly and [Company] can figure it out after that.) Which is a terrible attitude to impose upon your captains.[Company] has mouthed the verbiage that the captain of the flight has always been and will continue to be the final authority on how much fuel is required to safely complete the flight. However when I ask dispatch for 500 pounds the answer is NO. Or; sure and the fuel is added in the Captain add column and tracked specifically to the captain for disciplinary action. Which effectively negates any authority to make any final fuel load decision. It is time to eliminate the Captain add and tracking policy. It is this [Company] that in practice eliminates compliance with Flight Operations Manual - Departure Fuel Coordination; and FAR's that require the captain and the dispatcher agree. Now is the time to eliminate the Captain add Tracking Policy that was put in place during labor negotiations to hardline fuel loads; the unintended consequences are damaging to a safety first approach. Given current policy and reality of the line experiences perhaps the five year look back at arrival fuel should be considered hind sight; and that averages still leave fifty percent of the flights short on fuel. I know our leadership has taken the Push; Watch for Reaction; and Measure the Push Back approach to management. Please consider this a Push Back and a request to evaluate your stated and inferred policies; along with the compliance expectations. These types of policies and labor contracts along with our Hurray; Hurray letters and pep rallies to meet the quota is where a Safe Efficient Operation falls apart. This is not supporting a culture of safety. More importantly it is my life and your 40 million dollar jet you are placing at risk. You are promoting a culture of risk and reward. Reward for those that create the Risk.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.