After a bruising year of strikes, in-fighting, damaging publicity, court battles and even the odd barroom brawl, the ordinary members of ASTI have decided to call a halt to the current campaign, which has won the union more enemies than friends.
While the union will continue to pursue its 30 per cent claim, essentially it will be a new campaign, not reliant on strikes, nor on the threat of exam disruption or school closures.
The results of the union's survey illustrate that ordinary members believe huge mistakes were made during the campaign, and it is time to learn from them. As one ASTI source said at the weekend: "We are going to have to eat a lot of humble pie."
Members still want to put the Government under pressure (for example 71 per cent want to withdraw co-operation with new Department of Education curriculums and syllabuses), but most seem to believe that alienating two vital constituencies, parents and pupils, in the process is not good politics. There is no appetite for public demonstrations with 65 per cent voting against the idea.
While the move away from strikes and school closures will be a relief to many parents, the replies on benchmarking are probably the most crucial in the long term.
The benchmarking body, which is currently in session, has long been the bΩte noire of the ASTI, with former president of the union, Ms Bernadine O'Sullivan and others, describing it as an underhand way to keep public sector wages down. The philosophy behind benchmarking was compared to a Japanese car plant at one stage.
However, many ASTI members watched as INTO and TUI representatives eagerly put together their submissions for this body, oblivious to the moral qualms of the ASTI. This has prompted many ASTI members to voice the opinion that it is better for them to be in, than out.
"If it is the only show in town, then we might as well be in there," said one member yesterday. Up to now this was a minority view, but the survey shows that 74 per cent favour the ASTI making a submission to the body.
Although this is not necessarily a vote in favour of full participation, it still represents a sea change in the union. More alarming for the still significant chunk of members (about 22 per cent) who want all-out strike action, 53 per cent of members say the union should take no action until the benchmarking body reports.
The survey, because of internal opposition, does not include the question: Would members agree to ASTI negotiators taking part in the benchmarking process?
A few months ago, the result would have been a predictable and overwhelming No. If members were asked now, the result might not be so clear cut.
The results are a victory of sorts for general secretary Charlie Lennon. He has been against what some regard as the headlong rush into industrial action. He now has stronger than ever support on the standing committee of the union and the results will strengthen his hand against the hard core of activists who want to return to strike action.
But the victory is only one "of sorts". He continues to face internal pressures with several branches submitting motions of no confidence. Also if the union does not give him a mandate soon, he will never have the chance to use his highly regarded negotiating skills in the benchmarking body.
For the TUI and INTO unions and their members, the results of the ASTI survey confirm that benchmarking is not the dark conspiracy some teachers have claimed it to be. The TUI has managed, through at times painful acrobatics, to keep itself out of industrial relations trouble.
At times the leadership positions taken by its general secretary Mr Jim Dorney and president Mr John McGabhann, have angered some of those on the union's left-wing flank. Now, however, the leadership will be able to tell them that even ASTI, so long the most radical of the three unions, is moving towards benchmarking, albeit slowly.
For ordinary ASTI members there will be a certain resignation. What was it all for? But many believe the action, while deeply unpopular, has put pressure on the Government to improve teachers' pay and ensure that younger graduates enter the profession.
Ironically, many of them argue, that by spurning the benchmarking body for so long, it should make the chances of a decent settlement more likely.