And there are some distinct differences between the US maritime industry and the US aviation industry. The legacies are businesses first and foremost. They will change and adapt as they always have. They will not disappear. Make no mistake, this turn of events is bad for the profession, but it is by no means the end.

It's not just this one company, it's that they have paved a path to a new business model. No one knows how deep the rabbit hole will get.
How much would your favorite legacy shrink if they dropped their international flying, and the domestic flying that feeds that international flying? The industry will still be there, but the premium jobs that you desire will be fewer.
Don't think that any Union wouldn't cave on JV scope if it were costing the company millions and risking the rest of their contract in BK, or that the company couldn't renege through force majeure.

What differences are you referring to? What specific differences do you think will insulate the aviation industry? All businesses are businesses first and foremost, including cruise lines. What are you talking about? You are just telling yourself that because you don't want to hear otherwise.

Both industries are subject to basic economic forces. NAI will not be the only foreign flag carrier; more will come now that the precedent is set. And the public will love it. Soon, the 3 us flag carriers will not be able to compete with the multiple foreign flag carriers. If this is allowed to permenantly continue, (which it will be) over a long enough period of time the US flag international carriers will not be able to survive without their international revenue.

Exactly. I submit they will not be able to survive without it. I hope I am wrong.

I think they'll survive, it will just be with fewer jobs. The point to point transition into the secondary international markets is a larger threat to the status quo than saving $200 bucks and hour on the crew, IMO.
The change over will now happen on and increased timeline, and hopefully the legacys can keep up.
BA has already started it with service to SJC, AUS, and MSY

Agreed. Thomas Cook had plans to fly nonstop into RNO form London Gatwick last winter for the ski season which attracts a lot of Europeans to the lake Tahoe area. This plan was scrapped after the local podunk Customs office told them it was looking at 3 hrs. to process the A330 passengers. (although no problema with the Guadalajara flights?)
The big three can continue connecting pax for the time being but you can see were this is going.

This ruling doesn't change anything. This would still be a horrible choice for a profession if you had 30 years left. The NAI is just one threat of many. Retiring in the next decade from a legacy is one thing but just entering this profession now in your 20's? I'd have a plan B and C and be ready to move to China at some point if I wanted to continue flying airplanes. There will no pot of gold at the end of the rainbow for anyone just starting this career.

In exchange for $7M a year in tax breaks. BTW, 1300 Carrier jobs are still going to Mexico. Faux News "forgot" to report that so you might have missed that little fact.

So the pilot shortage is gone bc of this? No, this is definitely a step in the wrong direction but it's not the end all be all. Things will change down the road and certain types of fleets might shrink but everyone needs to take a chill pill.

That reminds me of the time a traveling circus planned to give a performance in Baton Rouge. Gov. Huey Long sent word that they could not do so on the night of an LSU football game, but they replied that the show must go on. He then informed them that his Department of Agriculture would not allow any circus animals to enter Louisiana until they had been sheep-dipped. The performance was rescheduled. :D