CRISIS MANAGEMENT (BY THE SEAT OF THE PANTS)

What had happened was this. The Japanese staff in our Tokyo branch, from the rank of section chief on down, had formed a union, which had taken a hostile stance and presented branch management with a long list of demands. V., gloating over the continued absence of a union at the Osaka branch, had blamed T.B.'s incompetence for what had happened. The Amsterdam head office, taking his side, had ordered T.B. to follow V.'s instructions on all union and personnel matters. TB. refused to accept this order and, when the head office did not budge, offered his head on a platter. On V.'s recommendation I was appointed to succeed him.

I was filled with a mixture of surprise, gratitude and apprehension at this turn of events. I was buoyed by V.'s unqualified support, but uncertain if at age twenty-nine and with no experience in union matters I was up to the task. But this was no time for vacillation, and we hurried back home on the last day of 1961 to prepare for the move. We packed over the New Year's holidays — unheard of in Japan — and flew to Tokyo on 4 January. T.B., ever the gentleman, was at the airport to welcome us. He and his wife had already vacated the manager's residence and taken a room at a hotel so we could move straight into the house.

The next morning, he gave me a briefing. He described the situation as dire. The union representatives, tense and flushed with the importance of their act of defiance, had proved unyielding. They had threatened to strike if their demands were not met. T.B. had taken the advice of a well-known labour lawyer, who knew all about the dispute at the French bank and was prepared to handle our case. In his opinion the Communist-inspired Gaiginren, the same outfit that had been behind the strike at the French bank, was directing the action at our bank from the outside.

Somehow though I felt intuitively that I should not turn over the negotiations to a lawyer. Negotiating parties always preferred to reach their own agreements, mutual ‘understanding’ being valued higher than the fine print of a contract.