Funny thing, this business of law. Interesting that their point of contention mentions as statement of fact that potential employees have withdrawn their interest in the company or have quit calling all together as a DIRECT RESULT of reading that website.

I'm pretty sure that they would have a very hard time convincing any judge or jury that a single person, let alone multiple people, were directly dissuaded from seeking employment 100% due to the fact that this website existed. In addition to that, there is no requirement by anybody related to either party to force anyone to go to and / or read the contents.

At worst, change a bit of the wording. Instead of, "If the pilots should strike while you are on probation, you will face a very difficult choice: strike with us and be fired by the company, or cross a picket line and earn the black mark of a scab."

..make sure you use words such as, "...could be...", or even, "..likely be", if precedent has been set.

If statements of fact are indeed fact, you will be fine.