KEY POINTS:
It sounded like an offer they were not going to be allowed to refuse - one which would have chilled Labour MPs to the very bone.
"We are looking for exits with dignity for long-serving people," declared the Prime Minister shortly after the last election in response to questions about how Labour, as a third-term Government, would revitalise itself.
Helen Clark's language was somewhat unfortunate. "Exits with dignity" sounded rather too close to the euthanasia lobby's catch-cry of "death with dignity" for comfort.
It was also an oxymoron.
Few exits in politics are dignified.
Having been back in Parliament for barely a month, some MPs were being told they were effectively surplus to requirements for the rest of the term.
Two years later, the Prime Minister is trumpeting that close to half the ministers in the current Cabinet were not in the line-up elected after the 2002 election, while around one-fifth of the caucus will not be seeking re-election next year.
The numbers will be further highlighted at Labour's annual conference in Takapuna this weekend as evidence of renewal.
However, the refusal of some MPs to take the hint and the piecemeal fashion of the sometimes grudging retirement announcements have at times somewhat undermined the exercise.
Then again, that was always likely to be the case. No matter how you dress up dead wood, it is still dead wood.
For all her powers of patronage, the Prime Minister's plea for sacrifices for the common good was always going to struggle to overcome the combination of ego, ambition, sense of self-importance, sense of self-worth, feeling of status, enjoyment of the perks and sheer bloody-mindedness which is your average MP.
The accompanying feelings of bitterness, resentment and betrayal mean any exercise in renewal is potentially destabilising - a major reason why this week's Cabinet reshuffle did not see much blood-letting.
Clark admitted as much when she talked of "shaking the tree" and then waiting to see who fell out by way of retirements.
Some of Clark's reluctance to put more pressure on some MPs to quit dates back to 1990 when she was Deputy Prime Minister under Sir Geoffrey Palmer.
He engaged in a clean-out of his ministry, dispatching a handful of very grumpy ministers to the backbenches.
While they generally behaved themselves, Palmer paid for the demotions later that year, with caucus support for his faltering prime ministership spontaneously evaporating in the face of Mike Moore's leadership challenge.
Describing the latest Cabinet reshuffle as a victory for sentiment over impact, the National Party cannot understand why a Prime Minister so committed to winning has not been more ruthless with her reshuffle, given Labour's 10-point deficit in the polls.
However, Clark probably feels she has trodden on enough toes regeneration-wise.
That explains why there was no clean-out of the Labour ministers outside Cabinet, while no one was sacked from inside the Cabinet.
With one or two exceptions, Clark has not fiddled with seniority and rankings.
She has instead buttressed stability through patronage - most of the 41 Labour MPs standing next time have ministerial or senior parliamentary roles.
National got it slightly wrong. The reshuffle was not driven so much by sentiment as old-fashioned loyalty.
That most critical of political commodities explains why Clark would not even contemplate asking Jim Anderton to move off the front bench.
It is why Michael Cullen will remain Minister of Finance until he decides it is time to leave.
Moreover, Clark does not like change for change's sake.
A huge reshuffle could slow the Government's momentum at a crucial time.
There is another factor. If Labour wins again next year, it will likely have to accommodate ministers from coalition partners such as NZ First in Cabinet.
That means some existing Labour ministers will have to stand down after the election.
Rather than force them out now - and then bring in new ministers only to have to toss them out again after a just a year - Clark has put the likes of Rick Barker and Damien O'Connor on notice that they will be gone after the election.
Clark may not wish to create unnecessary trouble for herself by adding to the already eight MPs waiting to leave Parliament over whom she will have less and less hold as the election draws nearer.
While there are no doubts about their loyalty, Clark is running a minority Government and has to constantly count the numbers.
However, there is another major reason why the reshuffle lacked impact - Clark's thwarting of a power shift to the right in the Cabinet following Maharey's exit and Mallard's demotion.
She has promoted those with whom she is comfortable - Carter and Cunliffe - while slowing the rise of those she is less sure about - Clayton Cosgrove.
Phil Goff has not been given a large domestic portfolio, such as health, with which to both flex his currently wasted talents as Labour's premier political salesman and further raise his profile as a future leader.
Instead, the right has been deployed to plug holes where Labour is vulnerable - law and order plus health - while the left retains control of most of the key social policy portfolios - education, social development and housing - along with the economic levers.
Pete Hodgson is now charged with rescuing Labour's stalled "economic transformation" agenda in time to compete with National's big push on economic vision, while Trevor Mallard will no doubt be used in the Labour portfolio to scare voters into believing National will bring back the Employment Contracts Act.
It all begs a hypothetical question, however. How would Clark have refreshed her Cabinet had Mallard not punched Tau Henare and had Steve Maharey not decided to quit politics?
It must be presumed the pair would still be on Labour's front bench. It must also be presumed Clark would not have turfed off other incumbents to make room for some new(ish) faces.
Fortunately for Clark, Mallard's misbehaviour provided an excuse to free up another slot on the front bench along with Maharey's.
With the latter going, David Benson-Pope having gone and Mark Burton walking voluntarily, Clark could bring three new MPs into the Cabinet.
The end result? Rejuvenation of sorts - but still a feeling this was a missed opportunity.
The reshuffle does not really take the fight to National. There is no sense of Labour in transition to a new era.
But then the Prime Minister never intended the reshuffle to foreshadow that. In her book, winning elections is all about leadership, track record and policies.
While the new Cabinet plumage will proudly be on parade at Labour's conference, the limitations of the reshuffle means the burden of renewal now falls on policy.
Conference delegates can be in no doubt.
Labour needs lots of fresh ideas - and quickly.