[Donunder]

Far be it from me to admit that I fully understand the following course of action but how would the union overlords at Holden have coped with this attitude from their rank and file?

Some years ago a motor magazine journalist was being shown through one of the Toyota assembly plants in Japan when he noticed that a large number of workers were wearing red armbands. He asked why this was so and his guide explained that they were on "strike".

The journo said how come if they're still working? The guide replied that all the workers considered themselves part of a close-knit family within the plant, and solidarity among the workers on the shop floor was paramount. They would never do anything to compromise the smooth running and safety of their workplace, nor disrupt the flow of cars along the line causing them to fail to reach their production target.

They therefore continued to work, but as a protest to management they would not be accepting wages for the period of their strike. This apparently allowed them to retain faith with the other workers by maintaining the plant's throughput, but was seen as a massive insult and affront to management. And no, the journo was assured, management staff were not giggling up their sleeves behind the workers' backs, thinking they were getting a good deal -- all work and no pay. It really was a major embarassment for the managers, in a nation where keeping face is everything.

Meanwhile -- go back three posts and have another read.

The answer, I would suggest, would have lain somewhere between these two extremes -- a little common sense and give and take from both sides. But now it's all too late...