From TTB (CT), page 61:
While I understand this added burden when the person has to make both jobs in a continuous or simultaneous basis (e.g. Pilot/Engineer on a Scout ship, Pilot/Gunner on a fighter), so deserving this -1 modifier to his/her skill, other positions combinations may be filled with less burden by the same person, mostly when at least one of the jobs is not required continuously, either because the jobs are fully compatible (e.g. Pilot/Navigator), used at distinct moments (e.g. Steward/Gunner) or some combination of both causes (e.g. Steward/Medic). In this last cases, I don't see this -1 modifier to the skills is justified.
Also, the way the salaries are rated may lead to some instances where the crewmember earns in fact less than with a single position: e.g. you have a ship that carries two fighters, while the main Pilot earns 6000 Cr a month, the fighter pilots, as they double as gunners in their fighters, earn only 5250 (75% of 6000+1000) Cr a month. Similarly, if you ask your stewards (who earn 3000 Cr a month) to double as gunners, their salaries will remain the same (75% of 3000 + 1000).
So I've always applied 2 changes to this rule:
-In some combinations (as told above) this -1 is not applied.
-The salary earned by a crewmember filling two positions is the highest salary plus half of the second one. So a fighter pilot, doubling as gunner in the fighter, would earn 6000 + 1000/2, so 6500 Cr a month, a Pilot/Navigator will earn 8500 (6000 + 5000/2) and a Steward/gunner will learn 3500 (3000 + 1000/2). Of course salaries are higher this way (for crewmembers doubling), but still lower than two crewmembers (and take less space and life support).
While I understand this added burden when the person has to make both jobs in a continuous or simultaneous basis (e.g. Pilot/Engineer on a Scout ship, Pilot/Gunner on a fighter), so deserving this -1 modifier to his/her skill, other positions combinations may be filled with less burden by the same person, mostly when at least one of the jobs is not required continuously, either because the jobs are fully compatible (e.g. Pilot/Navigator), used at distinct moments (e.g. Steward/Gunner) or some combination of both causes (e.g. Steward/Medic). In this last cases, I don't see this -1 modifier to the skills is justified.
Also, the way the salaries are rated may lead to some instances where the crewmember earns in fact less than with a single position: e.g. you have a ship that carries two fighters, while the main Pilot earns 6000 Cr a month, the fighter pilots, as they double as gunners in their fighters, earn only 5250 (75% of 6000+1000) Cr a month. Similarly, if you ask your stewards (who earn 3000 Cr a month) to double as gunners, their salaries will remain the same (75% of 3000 + 1000).
So I've always applied 2 changes to this rule:
-In some combinations (as told above) this -1 is not applied.
-The salary earned by a crewmember filling two positions is the highest salary plus half of the second one. So a fighter pilot, doubling as gunner in the fighter, would earn 6000 + 1000/2, so 6500 Cr a month, a Pilot/Navigator will earn 8500 (6000 + 5000/2) and a Steward/gunner will learn 3500 (3000 + 1000/2). Of course salaries are higher this way (for crewmembers doubling), but still lower than two crewmembers (and take less space and life support).
