I don't think that's what he was saying. Getting inversely assigned was a bad thing, and they were meant as a last ditch ability for the company to put anybody in a seat, even someone who is not at a crew base. In fact, IA isn't one, but several steps scattered throughout the coverage ladders. Look at the very last step...it says "in position", not in category. That means anyone qualified that they get ahold of, and is legal, is going flying.

If you read how inverse assignment works, there is a presumption that you ARE going flying if contacted. You aren't proffered. In fact, if you look at 23 R.8, you aren't called and asked, you are called and informed of the assignment. That's not asking, that's telling. The ALV rule and the leveling mechanism for inverse assignment is there to protect pilots from multiple bad deals before the pain was spread around, and a basic limit for the month (23 R.1 & R.10).

The problem is multiple iterations of global changes have occurred since C2k when all this stuff got to be in the current form. FAR 117, for one. FRB rules for another. There's always the "in position" and related off day answers. This whole system was designed with the idea that people don't want to be forced to fly when they don't want to, and it was one at a time phone contact.

So, with that bit of history, if people are no longer being told to go fly when they don't want to, instead now being asked to fly if they want to, then the entire premise has changed.