You are correct but, again, it can't happen under our current contract language. The Negotiating Committee needs to modify 23.N.26 and 23.O.22 to read "Pilots who have submitted GSWCs" rather than "Regular pilots who have submitted GSWCs..." in order for the unicorn to appear.

Oddly, it would be interesting to see if an out-of-base reserve pilot on golden days could get a carry-out trip that conflicts with a next month trip based on the language of 23.O.23. That is clearly an unintended consequence of poor contract drafting in that your in-base reserve pilot on an (*) day gets bypassed but an out-of-base reserve pilot on an (*) day appears to be eligible. The drafters should have kept the contract language parallel but they didn't and here we are.