They aren't "prepared" for it: they're hoping for it. They know if they require it then they're the bad guys. If the government requires it then they get to say "well gee shucks we'd love to let you fly but those mean government guys won't let us" and launder the policy they want through the government.
The airlines want to reduce their risk, so they want to have the most onerous policy they can to minimize their risk. However there are two problems with this. One is the PR problem in that if they make the decision they own the decision. The other is other airlines have signaled they aren't going to require vaccinations. This creates a problem, because now all the unvaccinated people will just fly with some other airline. But if they get the government to require vaccinations, now you've not only solved your "defector" problem you've pawned the decision onto someone else so you don't look like the bad guy; so you don't have the PR problem.
You are correct they are all "bad guys". And cowards, because they're afraid to make a decision and stand by it and hoping to just pawn the decision off onto someone else.
At one point a few of the airlines were signaling that they were uncomfortable requiring passengers take something that wasn't FDA approved. Of course one of the injections obtaining approval has mitigated that somewhat, but I don't remember seeing anything to indicate that the airlines had changed their views post-approval.
FWIW I'm assuming I'll never be able to fly again, if for no other reason than I'm not sitting on a plane wearing a mask.
Remember when Dr. Dao was beaten and dragged from a United flight? - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H4fhJbufjx4
Pepperidge Farm remembers
They aren't "prepared" for it: they're hoping for it. They know if they require it then they're the bad guys. If the government requires it then they get to say "well gee shucks we'd love to let you fly but those mean government guys won't let us" and launder the policy they want through the government.
Practically begging for it really
It's not really good guy vs bad buy. It's about splitting responsibility in whatever way makes it most difficult to fight.
The airlines want to reduce their risk, so they want to have the most onerous policy they can to minimize their risk. However there are two problems with this. One is the PR problem in that if they make the decision they own the decision. The other is other airlines have signaled they aren't going to require vaccinations. This creates a problem, because now all the unvaccinated people will just fly with some other airline. But if they get the government to require vaccinations, now you've not only solved your "defector" problem you've pawned the decision onto someone else so you don't look like the bad guy; so you don't have the PR problem.
You are correct they are all "bad guys". And cowards, because they're afraid to make a decision and stand by it and hoping to just pawn the decision off onto someone else.
Have they? (For passengers, employees - at the very least new, prospective ones - are obviously fucked for any of them unfortunately.)
I don't have any particularly favorite when it comes to airlines, but I'll avoid United forever moving forward if feasible.
At one point a few of the airlines were signaling that they were uncomfortable requiring passengers take something that wasn't FDA approved. Of course one of the injections obtaining approval has mitigated that somewhat, but I don't remember seeing anything to indicate that the airlines had changed their views post-approval.
FWIW I'm assuming I'll never be able to fly again, if for no other reason than I'm not sitting on a plane wearing a mask.
United CEO is a cocksucking piece of shit
This is about as stupid as United Airlines preparing to require Mohammad Atta