History has shown us time and time again that this matters very little when nationalistic feelings go South. I am not claiming that this is going to happen in this particar case of Brussels Airways but it would in no way surprise me if it did.
Are you familiar with Dutch nationalistic feelings, including the name calling in the BPost vs PostNL takeover saga? If not, I guess the British being tossed around by the almighty EU and going against all economic common sense, yet persisting in doing surely does.
I'm aware of European nationalistic feelings in general, and I've no doubt that that is one reason the Lufthansa group has sought to preserve the identities of other airlines in the group - SWISS, Austrian, etc. But of course, SWISS and Austrian are full-service carriers, which Brussels Airlines is not. The hybrid model presents a challenge in terms of integration, primarily because Lufthansa customers expect a consistent level of service outside of the Eurowings platform. Brussels Airlines is better suited to integration into Eurowings. Since Brussels is the capital of the European Union, I might even go so far as to suggest that that change would be welcomed in some quarters.
No one can control such nationalistic sentiments, as you well know, but I am simply stating that, when economic reality is taken into account, the actions of a relatively small workforce at Brussels Airlines will be little use against the giant that is the Lufthansa Group. Lufthansa owns the planes - if the worst really does happen, they can always get someone else to fly them.
Well run companies can be susceptible to takeover, in this case Lufthansa simply bought the shares. Apart from the size difference, as it is no merger, how could it be a merger of equals?
So if LH was not interested in the assets and the market of that airline, why should they have bought it? Up to now Brussels Airlines did better than Eurowings. I think you greatly underestimate the fuss unions can make.
Of course well-run companies can be susceptible to takeover, precisely because they are well-run. However, they often have the luxury of multiple suitors and a great deal of influence over the final deal. A well-run company is not often provided with a "take it or leave it" offer.
My 'Merger of Equals' comment is aimed at the suggestion that every airline purchased by another has the right to retain their name and identity. That assumption, even when applied to the European Market, is false. Lufthansa calls the shots, as well they should.
You're confusing the value of assets with how they are utilized by a company. Air Berlin, for example, had a great deal of very valuable assets (Aircraft, Market Share, etc.), but they were unable to properly organize the company to make best use of those assets. It's no secret that they were valuable, because both Lufthansa and Easyjet attempted to get their hands on different chunks of the company following its collapse, but Air Berlin as an entity was a shoddily-run basket case.
Brussels Airlines has a number of valuable assets, which can be better exploited if integrated into a bigger company (Eurowings) with stronger backing (Lufthansa Group).