The following is a couple of paragraphs taken from the 06 Jan AOA update, and specifically addresses the AOA funding of the UK appeal:
The GC has always recognised the extreme divisiveness of the issues surrounding an increase to the Normal Retirement Age. Our position has been a consistent one, that we want a fair deal on RA65 for everyone. By necessity, there must be compensation for those disadvantaged by a change to our CoS; no-one is suggesting otherwise. Equally, no-one is suggesting that we are preventing a move to RA65.
Remember, the Company has exactly what it wants at the moment; all the extendees it wants, for as long as it wants – and no longer – and at the (reduced) price it wants. Why would they want a RA65 deal?
For those who are members, take the time to read the rest of the update that is residing in your inbox.
I personally think the GC has succinctly put in two paragraphs, what has taken 5 pages of emotive, devisive tripe on here. It has been said before, and I'll say it again: This is of management's doing, not the AOA's.
disclaimer: I am not on the GC!