It’s not an inverse assignment. The company just blasts category and whomever gets ahold of scheduling first gets trips. This was never a step in the contract and definitely isn’t IA step. They are just coding it that way and saying it was covered using 23.M.7. IA has been an obsolete step since Arcos.

Really IA has been obsolete since they switched to the robocall. At that point it went from Inverse Assignment to Inverse Proffer, again to whoever could get a hold of scheduling the fastest. I don't know when IA's went away from live schedulers calling people and forcing them to work if they answered the phone, but it was before I was hired. Proffers coupled with the arrival of ARCOS has blown up the IA process, hence why there needs to be a new type of coverage step for close-in (2 hours to report or less?) rotations. 1 single callout batch in ACROS, no auto accept/acknoweldge. Done in seniority order like all the rest of our premium pay. The senior most pilot who raises their hand gets the rotation - you cannot decline an award. Declining an award is the same as no-showing any other rotation (PBS awarded, WS, SWP, etc) which would bring in CPO involvment. If scheduling had to skip coverage to get to this step then a 23M7 payment is still due.

I disagree, this would give scheduling the power to hold trips and assign them late in hopes of getting off cheap. I have no confidence they will get the 23M7 correct or do it at all. We need a lot of other fixes before we go to a short notice non-proffer type of coverage. This would also aborgate seniority because short notice doesn't allow everyone to participate unless they are going to be phone available 24/7.

My idea is just one to fix the process. There also needs to be more automation/contractual langauge that would prevent trips from sitting uncovered for so long before trip coverage starts. And more automation in the ARCOS process of running through the award/decline process within a callout. The company sitting on trips doesn't do them any favors either when they have to triple pay to cover it. And sitting and skipping WS to go to IA costs the company more money even if they "forget" to mark that 23M7 was used. I don't think scheduling is nefarious in letting trips go uncovered (or sitting on people's schedule after declining an award) for long periods of time. I think it is simply a combination of incompetence and understaffing.

Like I said the company needs to clean up their act first, but even if/when they do there inevitably will still be flying that gets uncovered at the last minute that needs some sort of mechanism for rapid covering, with premium pay and with 23M7 due.

We already have this in the coverage ladder, they just need to use it properly. They have untouched tools that are more than appropriate. Reroute was so regular that we negotiated extra pay. That's in the ladder well before IAs and why are we not seeing it to the level we did in 2019? Because they are cheap. It worked fine for years when we weren't getting paid. This is about enforcing the current agreement, not rewriting them into compliance for their ineptitude.

I lime your idea, but I think everyone called should get 2 hours. Forget 23.M.7. Spread the wealth. This is the step for violating GS coverage so penalty should be severe. 2 hours to everyone inconvenienced. That was batch size penalty so we know they can afford it.

Yes every time CS do this shenanigans the senior pilot who get paid due to 23M7 is mostly the same pilots every month. Who probably even don5 want to fly those trips still getting paid. Yes it’s now whoever answers first or get hold of cs gets the trip

yes this is the way it should be done..get rid of IA totally, it serves basically no purpose now.

I think anyone who turns down the GS should not get paid. Only call and pay the pilots that didn’t get a shot at the GS.

Sometime they don’t even run GS they go straight for IA