I don't think they could do that.

Their options are:

#1: Take the grants, use the money to keep employees mostly intact (minus voluntary cutbacks, VLOA's, etc).
Advantage: Free money to preserve capacity in case they need it later this year. Good PR.
Disadvantage: What if the grant $ is not enough to cover payroll costs for idle employees? That get's to #2...



#2: Pass on the grants, and manage their own way out it. If the grants don't cover payroll, they would be financially better off in the short-term taking no grants, and immediately taking a weed-whacker to rank-and-file labor. It still might be worth it to take the grants and pay the delta out of pocket to preserve capacity IF they think they're going to need it soon...

But if they're concerned about near-term cash bleed-out and BK, they may not be able to afford to pay ANYTHING above the grants to preserve capacity that might or might not be needed soon.

Also it's possible that the answer could be different for AA vs. the WO's... I think they are sufficiently arms-length that each operating company could make their own decision without affecting the others.

For AA, I'm sure they'll take the grant... if they're still bleeding from the arteries and about to bleed out in a few months, they'll just ask for more aid, AA is too big to liquidate. WO's don't qualify in that regard.