CC89 cannot go it alone, they have to act in concert with BASSA or they are history.
I don't think this statement is technically speaking, accurate. To my knowledge, Amicus(CC89) retain their independent constitution rules, and could, if they wanted, break away and once again be independent.
BASSA, on the other hand, are a branch of Unite, and remain under the Unite umbrella (and ultimately control?). They cannot break away.
It is clear now that Unite have had enough of the shenanigans, and are not prepared to fund or support BASSA/Amicus any further. I believe that the clause in the offer for not supporting disciplinaries is more for Unite's benefit than BA's. After all, BA could not stop anyone going to an independent lawyer or tribunal, so the clause appears to serve little purpose for BA. It does however have huge financial implications for Unite, so could it be that Unite wanted it in there as they simply do not want to defend the defenceless?
The next few weeks could be very interesting.
I am BA cabin crew - This is my own viewpoint and not that of BA.