Staff Travel and discliplinary action
As an alternate view I see it as a matter of timing
BA warned cabin crew what would happen to ST if they went on strike, and carried out it's warning.
CC had a choice (catch 22 perhaps) go on strike and lose ST or stay at work and keep it.
If staff chose to be on strike the loss of ST could be seen as their choice
If, however, BA had removed ST without warning after the strike it would be a totally different matter and could be seen as discriminatory.
As regards other staff groups they threatened to go on strike, but didn't, so why should BA remove a consession?
So BA is taking discliplinary action against CC who, in some cases, were perceived as making threats to other staff.
If these actions were stopped it could be seen as BA and the union condoning such action.
If in the future a member of staff was perceived to issue threats against another the accused could use the fact of that "condoning of action" as a defence
So, Miss M, that could mean that if someone threatened you at work BA could take no action, nor could the union do anything about it. Is that what union members want?