Debate
sharpens

issues

The debate between
CAIMAW vice-president Peter
Cameron and labor commen-
tator Jack Phillips drew a packed
house to the Swedish Hall in Van-
couver Monday and when the
smoke cleared after more than
two hours of argument from both
audience and speakers, it was evi-
dent that Canadian trade union
sovereignty will continue to be an
-Issue of critical debate among
unionists for some time to come.

That there was agreement on
the desirability of an independent
Canadian trade union movement
was clear. But it was on the
peas issue of how that is to be
achieved that the ways parted
sharply.

There were nuances, of course,
but finally the two approaches
came down to these:

Cameron, regional vice-
President of the independent

dian Association of In-
dustrial, Mechanical and Allied
Workers, told the meeting that
the Steelworkers union, as an in-
ternational union, was “‘basically
undemocratic and unreform-
able.”

“‘T am one of those who is im-
patient with the course of
history,” he said at the outset,
“and if there is a practical way to
achieve a new militant,
democratic organization, then
workers should seize it — and not
wait for hopeless reform in a
bureaucratic, international
union,”’

Phillips, who stated that he was
speaking for the Communist Par-
ty, emphasized that it ‘would be
a mistake for progressive
unionists to break away from the
Mass of reformist workers,’ since
Such a move would make it easier
for the right wing to dominate the
Main unions and would isolate
the workers in small groups.

“Communist trade unionists
will stick with their unions and
fight for change — for class strug-
gle policies, for unity and for
Peace,”’ he said.

And change is possible, he
argued, citing the recent example
Of the election in Steel of Dave
Patterson and the rank-and-file
election victory in Local 40 of the
Hotel, Restaurant and

ders Union.

Debate within the trade union
Movement itself has centred on
the two approaches to Canadian
SOvereignty and it was expressed
by members of the predominant-
ly partisan audience echoing one
Of the other positions.

- On the one side, the advocates

Primarily those in the Confedera-
tion of Canadian Unions, have
argued that international unions
are an extension of U.S. domina-
tion and progressive Canadian
Wionists must break away for
them to form the nucleus of what
Will ultimately become an in-
dependent and sovereign Cana-
union movement.

On the other side, Communist
unionists and others have
argued that the Canadian Labor
Congress encompasses the over-
Whelming majority of organized

autonomy |

independent Canadian unions,

TRIBUNE PHOTO—SEAN GRIFFIN

JACK PHILLIPS (r), PETER CAMERON. . . divergent approaches
to the key issues of Canadian trade union independence.

dian and -intrnational unions.
Progressive unionists, therefore,
should be'part of that movement,
working all the time to change
undemocratic structures, to win
autonomy for Canadian sections
of international unions and to
unite the trade union movement
around the most progressive
policies possible at any given
time.

Recent history has also seen the
movement for Canadian
autonomy gain some momentum
with formation of the CLC
affiliated Canadian Paper-
workers Union, the achievement
of full autonomy for the Cana-
dian Area of the Longshoremen
and the establishment of
minimum standards for Cana-
dian autonomy in the CLC. The
election of Patterson as director
of District 6, climaxing an effec-
tive rank and file campaign, has
also been seen as an impetus to
Canadian autonomy.

During the debate, however,
Cameron questioned the poten-
tial for autonomy within Steel,
contending that the constitution
of the union virtually precludes
any meaningful reform in the
long run.

He argued that the constitution
stipulates that all staff be ap-
pointed from the international
headquarters in Pittsburgh, and
even when the director is pro-
gressive, the international can
emasculate his authority by veto-
ing the director’s staff appoint-
ments, allowing only those who

“are loyal to the international to be

appointed.

“‘Patterson was not the first,’’
he added. ‘‘There was an earlier
progressive director in District 31
(in the U.S.) who was defeated
after years of having his pro-
posals sabotaged from Pitt-
sburgh.”’

Cameron also contended that
CAIMAW came to prominence
here. after the Steelworkers
“swallowed”? the Mine-Mill and
Smelter Workers, its progressive
policies with it. Following that, he
said, CAIMAW gained strength,
not through raids, but because of
“indigenous movements’’” within
Steel of people who were disgust-
ed with the Steel leadership.

“Now we find ourselves in-
vited back into Trail,” he said,
adding that the workers in Trail

“should get out of their
bureaucratic, unreformable
union.

‘“‘When workers can make a
break with a U.S. dominated
union and take part in a
democratic, sovereign union,
then that is an advance for
labor,’ he claimed.

Phillips, who had opposed the
CAIMAW raid in Trail in two
Tribune articles — the issue
which, in fact, precipitated Mon-
day’s debate — countered that
‘it?s not true that you can’t
change things.”’ He cited the Pat-
terson election and the successful
fight by local Carpenters’ leaders
against an international-imposed
trusteeship.

‘‘There’s a new generation of
labor leaders in Canada — people
like Jean-Claude Parrot and
Dave Patterson — who will not
stand for American control,”’ he
said. ‘“‘But they also know that if
they move too fast they will
isolate themselves from the mass
of workers.”’

He also challenged the idea
that the independent Canadian
unions are the leaders in the fight

for a sovereign trade union move- |

ment and for progressive policies.

“T submit to you that there are
more members in the CLC who
believe in socialism, however they
define it, than the total member-
ship of the CCU,” he said, referr-
ing to a recent article which had
compared the CCU with the
‘“‘small dedicated groups’? who
had initiated the Russian and
Chinese revolutions.

The central issue, he said, is the
“unity of the working class
around its own needs — better
wages, conditions, security of
employment and a world of

”

We need to break the U.S.
domination, he said, but that is _,
part of the larger fight for unity,
democracy and progressive
policies.

He also told the meeting that
there would be no future for
CAIMAW ‘“‘unless they stop
raiding.

“They should be organizing
the unorganized,”’ he said, and
‘fighting with other unionists for
an independent trade union
movement — free not only of
U.S. control, but free of the mon-
opolies and the governments
which represent them.”’

_BRITISH COLUMBIA

Letter bares WCB

anti-worker bias

Continued from page t
criticized because of the prejudicial
affect it would have on WCB

claims.

The WCB has also come under
increasing fire for its decisions,
several of which have. blatantly
favored corporate employers.

Last month, the WCB announc-
ed that it was removing the penalty

— assessment against Cominco: in

Trail, originally imposed in 1973
for excessively high levels of lead
contamination in work areas.

The original penalty was subject
to three-year review based on Com-
inco’s performance in decreasing
contamination with provision for
80 percent rebate of fines — if
Cominco carried out its promised
schedule for clean-up.

The latest study, completed last
year, found no improvement in
Cominco’s performance. But last
week, the WCB rebated $703,496
in fines and lifted any further fines
— on the groundless assumption
that Cominco. would carry out its
modernization and clean-up pro-
gram.

The Vancouver and District
Labor Council Tuesday protested
the WCB decision, adding its voice
to that of the B.C. Federation of
Labor.

Also this week, on Monday,
B.C. Provincial Council of
Carpenters president Bill Zander
blasted the WCB for ignoring safe-
ty violations and for decreasing the
number of inspections on construc-
tion sites.

Zander, who presented a
62-page brief on behalf of the
Carpenters, was appearing before
the Victoria hearings of the con-
struction industry safety inquiry,
set up by the labor ministry follow-
ing the deaths of four carpenters in
a construction accident Jan. 6.

He charged that the Board is
‘under political pressure’ to go
easy on construction employers
who violate safety regulations.

The labor federation and several
unions earlier made the demand
for a royal commission following
the disclosure that the WCB faced
an enormous deficit, created large-
ly by the too-low assessments on in-
dustrial employers.

Continued from page. 1

called by the broadly-based
B.C. Organization to Fight
Racism to sound a warning over
the growing number of racist in-
cidents and to demand a
legislative ban on the resurgent
Ku Klux Klan.

The park was the scene of a
murder earlier this year when
Khushpal Gill was brutally kick-
ed and left to die on the park
grounds.

Just last month, another man
Ajit Singh Phunal, was shot
with a long needle fired from a
passing car by someone using an
air gun. On the needle was a
label with the words: ‘‘Com-
pliments of the KKK.”’

While the rally had drawn
some 200 people, including
young children to protest the
racist incidents, the members of
the People’s Front and the
Defence Committee had come
with the intention of disrupting
the meeting.

Canadian Farmworkers’
Union president Raj Chouhan,

guest speaker at the rally on
behalf of the CFU, related the
events leading up to the attack:

“Just as Charan Gill was
finishing his speech in Punjabi,
a group of about 30 or 40 people
came towards the platform with
their placards, shouting slogans
and demanding the right to

~ speak,’’ he said.
“We told them this rally had

Attack unprovoked

a member of the BCOFR anda -

Ambulance attendants take Juri Oja to hospital after his skull
was fractured during the attack.. Sas

been called by the BCOFR and
that they should hold their own
rally somewhere else — and
then they attacked us.

“Charles Boylan came at me
and hit me on the head; I tried to
protect myself with my right
arm before I fell down.”’

Chouhan was later treated
for an injured arm. Another
BCOFR member, Michael
Robinson, had his arm broken.

Juri Oja had to undergo
emergency surgery to relieve
pressure on his brain after ‘his
skull was fractured in the attack,
possibly with a blow from a
microphone stand.

The attack by the East Indian
Defence Committee is not the
first such provocation. In May,
1979, several members of the
Defence Committee attacked a
public meeting of 500 people
organized by the East Indian
Workers’ Association.

Pairi Basi, secretary of the
Workers’ Association said at
the time that the attackers, who
were ‘‘known to be members of
the Defence Committee’’ rush-
ed the stage with iron bars and
baseball bats.

Delegates to the Vancouver
and District Labor Council
Tuesday also criticized press
coverage of the incident Sun-
day, noting that it had been
presented as a clash between
rival groups, rather than a
deliberate attack against the
BCOFR rally.

PHOTO — SEAN GRIFFIN

| Workers comprising both Cana-

a

g< 1y PACIFIC TRIBUNE—OCT. 9, 1981—Page 3