IluvPX,
sorry to introduce more rational debate onto this forum;-)
I have been thinking about what you have said. I have seen/known the starting positions of both the AOA and CX in several negotiations since 1999. If our starting position was 100 and CX's was 0, we have invariably ended up at position 5-10. So yes I could make an argument for not wasting your 1.25% - but then again, was the CX starting position affected by knowing they had to come up against the AOA? Would the CX position without the AOA be -10? Given the weak position the AOA has been in for the last 5 years it seems that maybe that is true as the company has only seen fit to endow some of us with a single 3% payrise to cover 7 years of inflation/exchange rate deterioration.
So is the end result of 5 to 10 worth being in the union? I think so. What I do know is that the AOA has stamped out many small injustices over time - they are not headline wins but they help!
I liken the AOA role to that of Hawkeye Pearce in the TV show MASH (Korean war/medical comedy). The generals keep sending troops off needlessly to their death - all Hawkeye can do is to try and save as many lives and limbs as possible. It seens a pointless task as more men will be sent to their death, but is one life saved not still worth it?
So no there are no Headline Wins from the AOA - but I do honestly believe things would be much worse were it not for our support and involvement in the AOA. After all we are in a business utopia - corporate profits are more important than all other considerations - and managers here have heard of HRM but think it has something to do with monitoring your pulse during exercise, not dealing with your staff!