In principle I don't disagree but who decides what is right and what is wrong?
Well that would be a court, when a case is brought before it.
we live in a society where you are innocent until proven guilty
no-one has acted illegally until they have been proven to have done so by a court, stating that BA have punished CC illegally is pre-judging the issue. Until a judge says otherwise, to say BA have acted illegally is just an opinion and changes nothing.
punishment, which has not been administered correctly
is sadly just your opinion and has not yet been established in law. There are many views on this but until a court has ruled they are just that - opinions and not facts.
I have stated that there are many arguments about this issue, not least of which is that the only thing hindering the return of ST is the union's stance - they have rejected ST return under the conditions offered. So any "damage" done to the strikers by the removal of ST has been increased and enhanced by their own union. This is a complex case and not in any way, shape or form as black and white as some on this forum wish it to be.
Let it go to court, let the judge decide who has acted within the law or otherwise. In the meantime perhaps BASSA could refocus on dealing with the meat of the issue, rather than this side dish.