How refreshing to see Mr Eddington put the welfare of Sabena's employees before his own company's bottom line. (not)
I am not generally in favour of state bale outs but there are a number of occasions where it may be justified. The test for this is where the social cost is greater than the financial cost AND where the company can be made profitable AND/OR when the national interest is involved. Rolls Royce/Air France spring to mind.
Is it not also the case that BA was privatised after having all their debts written off by the government? How does one define "substantial financial aid from its government"?
I don't think Sabena is a threat to BA so why should he be so keen to see thousands of people made unemployed. Cast in the same mould as his predecesor perhaps? Lets hope that mould is destroyed before it can be used again.
