I admire your tenacity. It is hard to stick to one's principles of supporting the democratic will of the union when it is obvious that the union leadership cannot deliver anything by striking. To know that and to continue with "my union right or wrong" takes real courage.
There is no doubt that the strike would be legal - unless BASSA and UNITE have once again screwed up the ballot, which I very much doubt they have done. The strike may well be unprotected, and that opens up the union to damages, there is some debate as to whether these are limited to £250,000 or not. I suspect that BA will go after UNITE for costs and not sack strikers, apart from anything else it will open a can of worms. At the moment BA seem to have been successful at retaining public sympathy, BASSA has failed in this - comments about Kristalnacht being a prime example of how to lose sympathy - sacking people for striking would be likely to change this positive
PR overnight. Going after union funds would seem much more productive, would keep public sympathy and recoup some of the losses incurred.
I do have a genuine question. My views on this are probably completely contrary to your own views, but could you explain to me what outcome from striking you expect and why the outcome would be different from last summer's strikes. I have an honest interest here and wish to try to understand why you think striking will achieve anything this time around.
Thanks
JT