Originally Posted by
Jetscream 32
.
So do you save the people or save the company - I’d rather save the people - even if they are unemployed if the govt is contributing say £1500 per month for 12 months - they will not be homeless.... It’s not like they are going to be snapped up by other airlines currently!
I can understand the "saving the people" very well. BUT and it is a very big BUT, if you all all the airlines to fail with the assumption that new ones MAY start then pretty much single supplier to that airline will be going bust as well.
This will be the dilemma as if Airline know they are on their own then why bother paying suppliers is you are going bust and trying to hold onto cash. Each of these supplier will be struggling anyway as work will have dried up but add in a customer who will never pay and there will be lots more jobs lost.
Restarting and thinking new airlines will pop up is a no chance for a bank who has just got burned by a major airline for £300 million, lessors will be the same demanding huge deposits because they are in the same position and the old suppliers will be no longer in business because they lost their house / business etc.
The least worst option is to say to Airlines, hold onto you staff at a reduced pay rate, Govt will fund this for 6 months to prevent thousands being shoved on the dole, lots of people seeking mega assistance from council for housing / mortgage and food banks.
At least a reboot will be quicker because the majority of people should still be around, if at Gatwick you said to a big Airline, tough then lots of people living and renting in local area would give up and try to head for home. This is not just airline but the thousands who work in retail / airport services . Aside from devastating local economy in short term in the long term where are all those people who currently work in airport going to come from in an area with pretty much negative unemployment.