Don't you understand that even if only 10% of flights were cancelled the strike would be extremely effective. Airlines cannot afford to sit any aircraft on the ground for any unscheduled length of time. A typical aircraft costs 700,000 dollars a month to lease or finance and airports charge by the hour to sit aircraft on the ground and its not cheap, passengers have to be accommodated and compensated, or flights paid for on other airlines. If BA really are as close to bankruptcy as is suggested, they have either to give in or allow the company to go out of business, which of course they will not do.
No, you're wrong.
If only 10% of flights were cancelled then the strike would be totally ineffective. Cabin crew cant afford to stay on strike for any length of time either, either financially or in consideration of not wanting to be among the last left on strike when the crew start going back to work during the first hours of a strike.
I hear that BASSA have rented a football pitch near to the airport to use as "Strike HQ". Well at least they will all have a good view of the constant stream of BA aircraft taking off and landing from there.
You should realise that BA have no choice other than to make sure they get the necessary savings from cabin crew. The current financial situation makes it so and other staff groups that have signed up to savings will want their money back if the CC fail to meet their savings target.
Willie Walsh cannot afford to lose this and moreover, he will not lose - I guarantee it.