Over six months after the conclusion of the ASTI's industrial action in pursuit of a 30 per cent rise, the union continues to be the most controversial body or group in Irish education.

While the other two teacher unions prepare their strategy for the benchmarking body, the ASTI - at least its central executive - is still very isolated.

While all three teacher unions are balloting their members on the side issue of supervision/substitution, the ASTI is still the only union not prepared to put its case for a rise before the benchmarking body. While this position seems to be generally agreed on in the union, it is about the only thing which is.

On every other matter of strategy the union seems to be fractured. There are splits over whether the union was right not to put the £27 per hour supervision offer to a ballot, divisions on how to advance the more mainstream claim for a 30 per cent rise and divisions over who was to blame for the poor campaign earlier this year, which largely hinged on a threat to exams.

With such sharp differences it is hard to see the union going into another round of school closures, certainly if it wants to retain any sense of unity.

Last week the ASTI's head office received many calls, emails and letters from members angry that the £27 an hour was not put to a ballot. Many of them said they were against the £27 an hour offer, but wanted the chance to record this view nevertheless.

Crudely, like earlier this year, there are still two groups driving ASTI. The full-time officials based in head office and the second more radical group, made up of full-time teachers, particularly from Dublin branches, who are more prepared for confrontation with the Government.

Both sides like to stereotype the other. The full-time officials tend to see the radical group as unrealistic and out of touch with the realities of negotiating agreements with the Government and other teacher unions. They blame the more radical group for what they often described as the "cul-de-sac" the union found itself in earlier this year.

The other side tend to see the head office group as the problem and suggest that if these officials were really committed on the pay issue, the Government would have caved in by now.

Ordinary members have to decide on the truth of these perceptions. Many teachers who have contacted this newspaper still yearn for their pay and conditions to be improved, but think the tactics used so far have been a dismal failure. Others think ordinary members have not been listened to or consulted enough. Others think any strategy which rests on closing schools is bound to damage the ASTI's case.

After April's elections, the union's standing committee is now less radical. Former president Bernadine O'Sullivan is gone, along with other prominent members who strongly supported the 30 per cent campaign.

Many of the new members are closer to general secretary Charlie Lennon, but there is still a determined group which opposes his more moderate stance.

While the supervision issue is still in the air, one wonders where the union is going long term?

The 30 per cent claim is no nearer to being conceded, and even with a general election in the offing, the union's lobbying campaign is proving to be of limited value. The union remains outside the benchmarking body, and will have to watch from the sidelines and see how the other teacher unions get on.