As a frequent fully-flex J long haul SLF flyer with BA and others I've an obvious interest in this matter and have been reading this thread daily since the strike announcement. I have avoided the debate thus far as I'm not directly involved.
However, I now feel obliged to comment.
It appears to me as an interested but neutral* observer that the majority of posters on here are anti-strike. However, those pro-strike cannot be dissuaded despite the fact that they are not clear on the reasons for the strike (other than a deep mistrust of BA management) and further, have no clear idea what they hope to achieve by taking this action. (If that is an incorrect assessment I look forward to a reasoned post explaining why it is not so)
I can certainly understand unhappiness, bitterness even, over any reduction in staff numbers or T&C's. I wouldn't like either to be imposed upon me. But if that "imposition" had arisen after several months of negotiation during a period when my company was under clear financial pressure, and as a consequence restructuring across multiple departments, I'm sure a dose of realism would set in. Especially if I thought that IA (or even the threat of IA) could very likely collapse the company.
It seems to me that those voting yes are aware of the risks to themselves (disciplinary action etc) and to the company (bankruptcy) but are determined to proceed nonetheless. Turkeys voting for Christmas is not a fair analagy. Cows voting for wholesale slaughter on the basis of 1 case of foot & mouth disease is more apt.
*Neutral in company vs crew dispute, not choice of airline as I fly BA when I can but am quite prepared (and frequently do) take my business elsewhere.