i (au \ \aae Official Publication of the International Weeduorhers of America 8. District Council No. 1. Vol. XIX, No. 29 SS” November 22, 1948 =S* Vancouver, B. C. “WA Battles ‘Rate’ Change ‘WIUC’ LAWYER GOT $8500 RETAINER JUST BEFORE SPLIT John Stanton, well-known LPP lawyer and legal adviser to Pritchett’s “WIUC”, received a total of $8,500 as retaining fees from IWA funds within two days of the breakaway move. A sum of $1,305.78 due on a personal promissory note by Karl E. Dalskog to the Canadian Bank of Commerce, Victory Square Branch, Vancouver, was charged to the account of Local 1-71, IWA, on October 4. si Personal Loan Paid»by ‘IWA’ To deal with the Dalskog situation first: On June 18, 1948, the personal promissory note for $1,500 was given the Canadian Bank of Commerce, Victory Square, by Karl E. Dalskog (“Ernie”). ‘ Certain repayments were made and the amount of the note was reduced to $1,305.78, including interest, as at October A, one day after the decision of the Communist-led majority of the District Council to disaffiliate.- Payment of the outstanding $1,305.78 was guaranteed by “D. M. Barbour and N. C. Madsen”, formerly officials of Loeal 1-71, IWA, and the total amount was charged to the account of the IWA, Local 1-71. District Officials Demand Repayment Now for the Stanton situation: On October 1, a cheque for $3,000, signed by “Vern Carlyle and G. Hilland”, was made out in the name of John Stanton. Carlyle and Hilland were then officials of Local 1-217. The cheque was drawn on the Bank of Montreal, Hastings and Carrall, Vancouver. Again, on October 1, a cheque for $2,500, signed by D. M. Barbour, and N. C. Madsen, was made out to John Stanton. The cheque was drawn on the Canadian Bank of Com- merce, Victory Square. Similarly, Barbour and Madsen were at that time IWA officials, but of Local 1-71. October 2 was the date of the third cheque, issued by “, Dalskog and J. Forbes” and made out to Stanton, from the funds of B.C. District Council, IWA. The cheque was on the Bank of Montreal, Carrall and Hastings. All three cheques were cashed. District officials are demanding the repayment of the monies paid to Stanton. @ ARKIN ADMITS $134,000 IWA Al Parkin, rebel “WIUC” official, has declared openly that $134,000 of the IWA strike fund is being held “intact and in trust” by the so-called “WIUC” for strike protetcion pur- poses.” At the same time, he brazenly stated that the basic pur- of the breakaway from the IWA was because of a “world problem”—obviously the world program of the Com- munist movement. Z ‘These two damning admissions _ were made by 2 nervous Parkin, formerly Education director of the TWA, ‘and now a leg-man for Prit- chett, when he was allowed to at a meeting of B.C. Fir juct’s men at Sechelt. ‘A speakers at the meeting ed ‘Adolph Germer, National CIO -yepresentative, and Claud Ballard, ‘assistant director of organization. Parkin, who had 30 minutes’ talking time, evaded all of the de- tailed financial issues on the grounds that that had not been his job. He didn’t know, etc. _Glaud Ballard had’ spoken before him and given a strong, accurate recount of the attempted split, and the reasons for it, “WORLD PROBLEM” Board Rates Move Toward Negotiation Labor Relations Board ruled this week that Board Rates in logging camps are a proper matter for collective bargaining, for future con- tracts. But nevertheless, IWA District president J. S. Als- bury said that negotiations will start on November 30 with Stuart Research for im- mediate adjustment of the 1948 arbitrary board raises. Another session of IWA argu- ments has been heard before the Board since last week, when the IWA speakers made no bones about héw ‘their membership feel they have been treated. The operators maintained that the board rates question was not a matter for negotiation, but the Labor Relations Board ruling -has shown them how wrong they are. DEFINITE RULING President Alsbury told the B.C. Lumber Worker: “At least we got a definite ruling for the 1949 con- tract, and we will push ahead with negotiations to alter what has hap- pened since the 1948 contract was signed. “This ruling goes to show how lax and uninterested the former District leaders were on this vi- tal matter. Hogg’s letter to Dals- kog on June 11, 1948, should have been enough to ensure that the board rates question was pressed in negotiation, and the same ruling would probably have been obtained—that rates are for collective bargaining.” Majority of 8,000 loggers saw their hard-won pay increases va- nish from the pay packets a few days after the 1948 agreement was signed when the operators, with- out any notification even, upped the rates from $2.00 to $2.50 a day—and that came on top of the overall 50-cent increase slapped on in April. had to find a reason other than fear of the LPP-Communist gang losing their grip on the leadership, and the finances of the IWA. So he told what is a basic truth, He came out and brazenly al- leged that there was no real quar- rel between the International offi- cers and the District officers at that time. He said the breakaway move was part of a world program. _ Then Parkin got to the strike fund. He said that the “WIUC” are holding the strike fund (ap- proximately $134,000) intact and in trust for strike protection purposes, Parkin was followed by Adolph Germer who surprised him imme- diately by agreeing that the WIUC Parkin was out on a limb, He breakaway undoubtedly was part OPERATORS ACCUSED OF HIGH HANDED ACTION; AIDED BY PRITCHET’S ‘OKAY’ ARBITRATION action of many coast shingle operators in converting the 2714-cent hourly guarantee for piece work- ers to an 814-cents-a-square basis is now being fought by loyal District IWA officials. Immediate action was taken by provisional president J. S. Alsbury. An Arbitration Board sat in Victoria on Saturday, November 18, when it was learned: j. Dalskog and Pritchett agreed to drop the clause de- tailing the 15-cent 1946 increase and 12¥,-cent 1947 increase for fallers, buckers, and other contract workers, from the 1948 master agreement. 2. Institution of such a practise would mean a cut in wages in the great majority of operations. These dangerous actions, by Stuart Research and by the discredited Dalskog-Pritchett gang, are now out in the open. District officials have been considerably hampered up till now by lack of records, appropriated by the splitters. ‘Acceptance of the operatérs’ ac- tions would mean that hourly in- crease guarantees obtained by fallers and buckers in 1946 and 1947 would also be subject-to. arbi- trary alteration to piece work rat President Alsbury said after the hearing, “The negligence of Dals- kkog and Pritchett in agreeing to the elimination of article 4, section 4, 1947 contract is scandalous.” It was stated on oath before Gordon Sloan, chairman, T. Mac- Kenzie, IWA ‘representative, and H. Hurndall, employers’ nominee, that on September 27, 1948, Dalskog and Pritchett both agreed to the deletion from the new contract of the detailed clause giving the 1946 and 1947 raises to contract workers. IWA CASE IWA case presented to the board, summarized, was: Practise during the past two years calls for the continuation of the hourly guarantee. The operat- ors have no right arbitrarily to change the set-up, as the master contract just negotiated left that clause untouched (apart from the 5-cent raise for sawyers, and 4- cent for packers). No question of elimination or conversion of the hourly guarantee STRIKE FUND IN REBELS HANDS ofa world problem — a problem created by the social and economic disruption planned as part of the Moscow-directed drive to further world Communism. He flayed Parkin with the facts of the international situation. The questions in the minds of the staunch IWA community at Sechelt were obvious. By what right did the splitters take away IWA money with them out of the organization? Who are the trustees? How much can we trust them? If the $134,000 is being held for strike protection—whose pro- tection is involved? What strikes are being con- templated by the weak leader- ship of the weak rebel union? was raised during bargaining. It can’t be done now. Present guarantee means $2.20 a day to each shingle mill piece worker. Conversion means that if. 26 squares a day were produced’, the gross return to the ‘piece worker would be $2.21. But the snag is that in all large operations, 80 percent of the saw- yers have a smaller cut than 26 squares per eight-hour shift. THEY LOSE MONEY Twenty percent of the sawyers might benefit by the conversion, but it must be remembered that their timber is picked, because they are usually cutting premium grades. Article 5, Section 2, of the new contract is clear. It says, “Contract workers will receive the following increases: Fallers and Buckers, 13 cents per 1000 feet; Shingle Saw- yers, 5 cents per square; Shingle Packers, 4 cents per square. * It is obvious that there was no intention on the part of the con- ciliation board to alter the then ex- isting rates of pay for piece work- - ers, which rates included the 2734 cent hourly guarantee from 1946 and 1947. This arbitration, now in capable and honest hands, is the result of the negligence of the former Dist- rict leaders. The last thought in the minds of these men, during September, 1948, was the new con- tract. Their minds were full of their adolescent plans to get their ” new toy, the “W1UC” into action. MORE NEGLIGENCE F _ It is worth noting, too, that. Dist- rict officials have discovered the following: ‘Article 1, Section 4, 1947 con- tract, states that the minimum rate for common labor shall be 95 cents an hour. Article 5 of the new contract dodges laying down the basis rate of $1.08 an hour. It states merely, “Present scale of wages of employees, except con- tract workers, shall be increased by 18 cents an hour, or 11 percent.” This is further evidence of the dangerous negligence of Pritchett and Co. in allowing this clause to go through, without stating in black and white that the basie com- mon labor wage is now $1.08.