Congress and President Bush have taken swift and correct action to pass a $15 billion package of loan guarantees and cash grants for the beleaguered aviation industry. Yet politicians on both sides of the aisle rightly proclaimed that a bailout should not be a means of bailing out highly-paid CEOs from the workings of the market. Labor leaders criticized the bailout for not offering extra funds to help the tens of thousands of workers who may lose jobs and benefits. And the notion of millionaire CEOs keeping their own massive compensation packages intact while slashing thousands of jobs is unseemly.

But the CEOs of Continental, UAL Corp., and AMR Corp. are just a few among the millions who stand to be bailed out by government assistance. And many people have a lot more to lose than they do. The airline bailout, in fact, will protect the pocketbooks of millions of Americans -- even those who don't know it.

For the airlines, already pressured by slowing business travel, rising fuel costs, and high fixed costs, the gruesome events of last week were particularly lethal.

To say that the industry has been decimated -- which literally means being reduced by 10 percent -- is too weak by half. Some 20% of the massive industry is slated for downsizing. United Airlines, the nation's second largest airline, plans to lay off 20,000 employees. Continental, Delta, and USAir will all likely reduce their payrolls by 10,000 apiece. At Boeing, 30,000 employees stand to lose their jobs.

NOT YOUR TYPICAL FAT CATS

Consider United Airlines. There, 17 directors and top officers own 1.22 million shares between them, or about 2.3 percent of the total. James Goodwin, the CEO, owns about 390,000 shares. But those figures pale in comparison to the 55 percent stake held by the company's employees. Back in 1994, in exchange for wage concessions, the airline's employees received majority ownership. So as parent company UAL's stock fell from 31 to 19 in the past week, the company's workers lost more than $400 million in equity.

In this age of democratized capital, in fact, it is increasingly difficult to make the traditional distinctions between labor and management, between workers and capital. At AMR Corp. the parent company of American Airlines, the board and top executives own about 5.1 percent of the company, or 7.87 million shares. But according to recent filings, one mutual fund favored by individual investors, the Vanguard Primecap Fund, alone holds nearly percent, about 13.5 million shares. The New York State Common Retirement Fund, which invests on behalf of New York's middle-class public employees, held 1.343 million shares of AMR at the end of last year.

Troll through the filings on the SEC's EDGAR system, or on Yahoo! Finance, and you'll find a similar state of affairs at other airlines. Delta CEO Leo Mullin had 914,000 shares of company stock as of March 2001. The California Public Employees Retirement System, which invests on behalf of the largest state's civil servants, bureaucrats, and other officials, owns 555,700 shares, according to its 2000 report. And while Delta's directors and top executive officers collectively owned 1.644 million shares, mutual fund giant Fidelity holds 2.226 million shares on behalf of its legions of investors.

At USAir, the fourth largest mutual fund investor is the College Retirement Equities Fund, which invests on behalf of college professors and employees of non-profits -- not your typical fat cats. It has some 381,800 shares in the company.

By taking action to help the airlines, and to stop their stocks from plummeting further, the government certainly helped out the CEOs. But it also protected millions of holders of pensions, mutual funds and investment accounts.

TYRANNY OF THE LOWEST BIDDER

What's more, this package of government assistance will also provide a sort of psychological bailout for a beleaguered investor nation.

The events of September 11 rightly set off a great deal of soul-searching, especially among investors. Like other similarly situated companies, the airlines are subjected to the sometimes pernicious rigors and mandates of the stock market. To survive and thrive as publicly held entities, airlines have had to pursue constant growth through acquisition and consolidation, compete in vicious price wars, and cut costs wherever possible. A popular cost-reduction strategy for publicly held firms -- in all sectors -- is to outsource functions like cleaning, catering, or security, frequently to the lowest bidder.

In the wake of the hijackings, the poorly compensated, poorly trained, and poorly incentivized workers who man the security checkpoints at our airports have received their share of blame.

Of course, publicly held airlines for years have demanded a low-cost means of funneling passengers quickly into their terminals. Let's say airlines a few years ago insisted on hiring highly skilled former military officers to screen passengers, and to subject frequent fliers the sort of intense questioning and scrutiny received by passengers traveling to and from Israel. Business travelers would have screamed, and airlines would have instantly become less profitable and efficient. Shareholders, including some of the activist shareholders mentioned above, would have pressured management to improve performance.

Are we investors responsible for the hijackings? Of course not. But did the logic of shareholder value, which frequently elevates cost management and financial performance above prudence and safety, help create a climate in which vicious terrorists could succeed? I can't help but think that the answer is yes.

By bailing out the manifold public shareholders of our listing airline companies, Washington might be doing us all a favor.