This raises future expectations. From now on, they will be expecting a handout when there’s a crisis, and be more likely to take risky actions!
That ship sailed a long time ago. Or should I say, that Plane took off a long time ago.
There is one caveat to what you say.
This crisis is not of their making, and much of the effects on them come from actions governments have mandated the airlines and their customers make. So part of their situation comes not by a natural, normal course of economic activity, but from demands of governments. So, government should not be part of the solution getting the airlines back to normal?
So the government declares “you must do this, in spite of what the costs may be”, and then the government says, when its over, “now you are on your own”.??? That’s in affect your position it seems.
I am not for “bailouts”, and do hope any aid that the airlines get is in the forms of loans. BUT, I do understand the legal logic of government making costly extraordinary demands on businesses “in a crisis”, that will be very costly to those businesses, and then government being part of the financial solutions to those businesses as they too recover from the crisis. This is totally different than the “Chrysler” bailout which was precipitated only by Chrysler’s own actions, not the governments.