Now we may be talking about something else. Is the company really "against" changing the current system for assigning trips? Perhaps their attitude is that what was negotiated (which resulted in the current system) is what they will have to live with until the next negotiations. They may be just as happy with a different system, as long as it doesn't result in additional costs.
That is different from saying it is actually cost effective for them to pay a reserve 73 hours for only working 43 or 53 hours.
I have mentioned this before here, although it has been awhile: If it is really true that all reserves are sitting around for significant numbers of hours below their guarantee each month, be careful what you wish for. If I were management, to me that means I have TOO MANY F/As, which means I would be looking at furloughing a bunch of you.
If you really want to push the envelope, make sure this is one outcome you are prepared for.
It runs in cycles, too many FAs in PHL in the winter and not enough on the Holiday's and summer. I think CLT is reversed, too many in the summer and not enough on the Holiday's and winter.
The company has zero reason to change the system that FAs don't like when they can and will use that information during the combined contract negociations.