I cannot imagine anything worse than being kept in a city where there is a risk to one's health just because a trade union refuses to allow a temporary change to the time off at an out station. Surely they should have some concern for the health of their members.
Any sensible person can see that BA are concerned for the welfare of their crews and would not use this as a precedent to implimant permanent changes for time off at out stations. The union in my opinion is irresponsible by dictating that their members must stay in a city that could be a threat to their health. It it unbelievale this is the case.
On the subject of the union fining their members , they cannot. Who would stay in a union after they had been fined? It would be an intersting topic if they did try to fine a member because collecting the fine would an impossible task if not illegal. How could they force a member to pay up, by taking them to the small claims court?