The government may not want too much capacity in the hands of too few carriers, but there are very few domestic markets left where there aren't at least three carriers competing. So I wouldn't look for a government backed bailout. The last one (ATSB) had some pretty high hurdles in terms of presenting a viable business case, and not everyone was rubber-stamp approved (e.g. UA). Several of those who were approved did pay back their bonds in whole, just to start failing all over again (e.g. TZ and US). So I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for another ATSB style bailout.
If there are speculators willing to put DIP financing into Frontier, whose obituary was pretty much written the day WN moved back into DEN, then there are most likely speculators willing to put money into resurrecting UA and US. Airbus has done that time and time again, as has GE. Both have a lot to lose if UA or US collapses.
I think most carriers acknowledge the morale issue. They're just not going to throw money at the problem (which would be only have short term gain if at all). If history is any indicator, morale is never going to improve as long as the company is losing money, laying people off, and not investing in new equipment.
Everyone loves to point at WN, but morale even there is questionable these days. They're not growing at the same pace they were even five years ago, which means it's taking longer to get to the left seat. Stock has under-performed for several years, which means there aren't as many paper millionaires as there were ten years ago. Whatever halo effect there was from Herb and Colleen's presence is also gone.
Likewise at B6 -- their Obama was banished to starting up a new airline in Brazil, they're selling airplanes and pulling out of markets. It wouldn't surprise me to see a renewed effort to unionize there.
In a rare moment of agreement with Bob, lowering wages isn't going to solve anyone's problems. AA's downsized a lot, yet is carrying a lot of excess capacity in terms of real estate, and is still overstaffed in some areas (management and front line alike).
I'll take the line AMT's word for the fact that they're leaner than they were in 2003. I'm not as convinced that the overhaul hangars and shops have been trimmed back as much as the line has. Closing one or two of the smaller bases does make sense, just as it made sense to trim back on the number of active military bases we had ten and twenty years ago.
Sure, it sucks to be one of the people affected, but there's just no need to have the capacity for a 900 aircraft fleet when have 650 aircraft and plan to reduce that even further.