that have to pay health insurance and retirement costs for their employees far above what a European airline would have to pay because of the Nanny state.
I think you'll find my employer pays an awful lot of pension and National Insurance contributions for me, not to mention private healthcare. Wouldn't want to live on the $100 per week state pension now.
Diesel8s quotations on EU subsidies are rather disingenuous. AF had susbsisdies
ending in 1997. Iberia got the cash in 1996. Alitalia are banging the begging bowl but the Italian government has repeatedly said no. Olympic haven't had any cash for a long while. The quote about 40% of EU states paying subsidies is undated.
What is clear is that since 2001 the US carriers have received
billions of dollars in direct subsidy from the ATSB, plus free security enhancements (flight deck doors for example), Chapter 11 protection and still they appeal for assistance because of the high price of oil. Since 2001
AFAIK no European airline has received any state subsidy. Somebody mentioned that more Europeans visit the USA than vice versa and they prefer their own national carriers. Well if thats the case then why are US government permitting the subsidies to be spent on international routes? By all means take the cash if thats what it takes to maintain an essential domestic air network, but using it to compete with unsubsidised airlines on your loss making international routes is nothing other than pure protectionism.