To say that the previous strike is unlawful is simply not true.
The injunction has been granted on account of the 20 day strike.
AI: it hasn't been PROVEN yet (in a full court case) that the previous strike was illegal.
Sure, there is a strong case for it and as a Union I sure as hell wouldn't want to fight that battle but as for now, the previous strike is deemed 'legal'.
Now what I think will happen and this is being aluded to with statements from Walsh in the papers is that there is a slow wedge driven in between the UNITE union and BASSA shop stewards who have been crying for guerilla tactics.
With the huge potential case overhead UNITE will cut BASSA loose to sink or swim (Sink in this case) as part of an A$$ saving deal with BA.
So I repeat, if they sack 2500 crew from the march strikes atm that would still be unlawful dismissal until proven that strike was illegal. Judge hasn't made a judgement on that!
I think it's game/set and match BA if the appeal gets turned down today.
Woodley already stated they had an agreement in principal and it will be ratified as soon as the Union clears up their BASSA branch.
Unfortunate though, I'd rather see those berks leave the company and have a fresh 'One Team' approach.