in the years following the mission the mistakes and disagreements received added scrutiny. Several writers embellished the more dramatic aspects that led to the radio conference, introducing both “strike” and “mutiny” to the interpretation of events. These and other controversial terms continue to be used, even if inaccurately, to describe the hours leading up to the conference between astronauts and mission control.
What they called their actions is not important. The important thing is the lesson that the ones doing work should have a say in the organisation of their work, both for their sake and the sake of the quality of their efforts.
OTOH, it could have been the commander's sole decision, which means it wasn't a strike. He may have decided that as the commander he needed a fit crew and this was the only way to attain that.
Hence the phrase 'burden of command'
Commanders shouls consider all forms of feedback on a decision
edit: I work in commercial construction management.
A military NCO or junior officer are leaders, but not management, but is more of an agent of management. If you look at paramilitary uniformed services with unionization like the police or fire service, usually the civil service ranks, up to Captain, are union members who collectively bargain. Once you leave that Captain level (a Police or Fire Captain is usually aligned with an organization similar in scope to an Army Company), you are management.
The reality is that the people in space didn't do exactly what the people on the ground wanted, and suffered for it on the ground as a result. Whatever it is, it walks and quacks like a strike-like incident that was handled by the management as one would expect.
http://this-space-available.blogspot.com/2016/01/space-myths...