We have still seen no sign of RMT's re-ballot, but can only assume that the ballot papers will be coming soon and every effort is being made to get the notification legally watertight.
But when a union is balloting members in hundreds of workplaces, in a company where people move grade and location at the rate of dozens per day, it is practically impossible to deliver bang up-to-date and accurate membership information. So we can expect another legal challenge.
If and when such a challenge arrives, RMT should not decide to re-ballot again. To do so would drag the fight out for even more months, would demoralise staff, and would signal to management that all they need to do is find a semi-colon out of place and they can get the union to re-ballot over and over again and never actually strike. And while that goes on, the jobs get cut, the management bullying continues and the chances of a decent pay deal fade away.
Instead, when the union gets its new Yes vote and the legal letter comes in, it should name dates for action anyway and set about preparing for the most effective action possible. RMT should defend itself in court, not with any particular expectation of winning, but in order to voice the arguments and expose the anti-union laws for what they are. Then, if an injuction is granted against the strike, everyone will know that it is unjust, and everyone will know what dates the official action would have taken place on. And rank-and-file members may well draw their own conclusions about what to do next ...