What has changed?
Been away a while and the discussion seems to be the same ... having got it horribly wrong last time, I'll punt my incorrect thoughts out again:
1) If BA were going to sue Unite and sack strikers they would have allowed the last strike to go ahead. The timing was great as it would have had minimal impact on peak seasons and the strike was clearly "unprotected" so I think if this approach was going to happen then BA would have done it by now. Contrary to Litebulbs thoughts - I believe strikers could be sacked on day 1 without any referemce to internal process. Anyone can be sacked at any time for any reason. The recourse is through an ET but if the strike is ruled as "unprotected" then an ET is unlikely to rule in the strikers favour.
2) SOSR - 90 days - nope. Not happening. That would have to apply (I think) to all cabin crew equally. And I can't see BA penalising those that have come into work. Although from previous discussions I seem to remember some crew (e.g. LGW) saying a SOSR that applied to all crew might actually improve their T&Cs.
3) I am coming to the opinion that BA really are just going to sit this one out. They hold all the cards. They know that the number of strikers is falling. They know they can run a near full operation. So they will take the hit financially on potential lost bookings and just wait until the unions and strikers give up. My only concern with this approach is that it leaves the issues largely unresolved and potentially just puts them off for a future date.
I think one thing has been consistent throughout this dispute. BA have stated what they will do and they have carried through that promise. So I don't think we'll see any sudden sackings or SOSR. They'll announce the options facing cabin crew and let cabin crew make their own choice and decide their own fate.