Page Four

B.C. LUMBER WORKER

IWA REFUTE BOSS ARGUMENT
WITH FACTS & FIGURES

FAUNAL session of the Conciliation Board produced a forth-
right rebuttal by the TWA representatives of the argu-

ments presented by Forest
boss,

One of the few brighter moments came when W. Hef-
fernan, FIR lawyer, informed the board that they no
longer acted for Super Service Garage and Sawmill.

Bert Gargrave cracked, “

with your presentation, Mr. Heffernan.” “No,” replied R.
V. Stuart, “Their mill burned down.”

Following are extracts from the official transcript of

the proceedings:

At the outset they (the Em-
ployees) remind us that last year
they told the Conciliation Board
that they were in keen competi-
tion. They said, “Lumber mar-
kets are no longer a sellers’ pre-
rogative.” In spite.of this ery of
wolf, howver, lumber profits in
1948 were the highest on record.

Again they are crying wolf

but going further to offer a

preposterous suggestion that

that workers in the industry
accept a 13c-an-hour wage cut.

The fact is that the honeymoon
is over, no longer can lumber op-
erators expect to pawn their low
grade items off at exorbitant
prices.

It is worth noting that Mr.
Ross (President, Canadian Con-
struction Ass’n.), does not look
for a great reduction in costs but
a “levelling off” at prices com-
parable to the end of 1948. Yet
Forest Industrial Relations Ltd.
ask us to work for 1947 wages
and pay 1949 prices, ia

The employer says, “The Jap-
anese and Chinese markets, to all
intents and purposes, are closed
to this province indefinitely as an
outlet for lumber.”

This statement is offered with-
out supporting evidence and we
do not concur that the markets to.
these countries are closed indefi-
nitely. Japan is getting back into
the world market. China at, the
present time is in a state of up-
heaval but stability of govern-
ment is now-fast being realized.

Preamble

The company’ brief suggests
“the union further agrees that it
will at no time take any action to
instruct the local and/or its mem-
bers to act contrary to the terms
contained in this agreement.”

The language is ambiguous.
How could the union agree not
to consult with itself? The op-
erators imply that the union is
‘something different from the lo-
eal union and its members which
hold the contract. There is no
need of such an amendment as
the agreement would not be sign
ed unless both parties had the in-
tention of carrying it out.

Bargaining Agency

The union merely asks the em-
ployer to give it the same infor-
mation it must give the Labour
Relations Board under the law as
a matter of information, It is not
the union’s intention to go fur-
ther than the law. We will go
along with the wording of the
LC.A. Act.

Employers’ Rights

We reiterate at this time the
position we took in negotiations
prior to the conciliation pro-
ceedings in which we stated
that we would consider writ-
ing in an employers’ rights
clause and incorporating it into
a Union Shop clause.

Accident Prevention
Committee

The employers’ brief states
that the Union has not requested
a new section be added to the
preesnt Article. This is requested
because every day a person goes
to work in this most hazardous
industry he is subjecting himself
to injury and perhaps death.

We are sincere when we ask
for this additional clause which
gives the employee the right to
cease work when he has been
working in the immediate vicinity
of a fatality.

The employers disagree saying
that this cannot be regulated by

igid rule. They say that each
ease must be governed by indi-
. vidual circumstances yet they of-
fer no alternative clause which'|
would allow the local union, party
to this contract, and the employ-
er, party to this contract, to

Industrial Relations for the

‘I hope they’re not dissatisfied

They insist that the employer
|has the right to work the people
lirrespective of their feelings.

They give no consideration to the
mental anguish that may be im-
posed on a man who is forced to
stay on the job, but are thinking
of penalties to the company.

It does not disturb, the employ-
ers that in forcing a «worker -to
remain on a job in a state of
emotion he may injure himself or
injure some ,fellow worker. The
only penalty we can see to the
Company is that of losing profits
through the loss of a few hours’
production.

If this is a serious contention
and the fatality rate is so high
in operations as‘to materially ef-
fect production over a period of
time, then by all means an in-
vestigation should be held of
these companies’ practices.

The union has pointed out in
cross-examination that in a very
few instances would it be neces-
sary to shut down more than a
small department in which the
accident occurred.

But the employers go from the
sublime to the ridiculous in say-
ing that this “is similar to the em-
ployees demanding to be allowed
to go home because of an acci-
dent in a plant next door.”

The employers referred to
one Mr. Will D. Jenkins. They
say’ that he is recognized as
one of the foremost accident
prevention authorities on the
continent. We pose the ques-
tion: “Who recognizes Mr. Will
D. Jenkins as one of the fore-
most authorities on the con-
tinent?”

Exhibit No, 5 shows that he is
an employee of the British Co-
lumbia Manufacturers’ Associa-
tion!

Seniority

In closing their argument on
Seniority the employers say
that the present article on sen-
jority .. . over a period of six
years, has proved satisfactory
to both parties. Had that as-
sumption been correct, the
union in this year’s contract
would certainly have not asked
for a change.

We believe that every Union
member should have equal rights
and not have a sword hanging
over his head if he accepts a
Union position, In the employers’
proposal the individual. must
either give up his seniority rights
or confine himself to holding of-
fice for. one-year periods.

_. We believe that the employer
in this case is injecting himself
into the matter of running our
business and I am certain if we
told the employers that they
must change the personnel of
their supervisory force every
year they would seriously ob-
ject, and rightly so.

For example, three men may
be working a machine, each takes
his turn in having a lunch period.
‘The machine never stops and the
two men left on the mathine are
required to do three mens’ work.

The company is getting the
benefit of this production and we
demand that we be compensated
for the’extra heavy labor that is
thrown upon the remaining work-
ers. In other cases departments
are staggered the same as indi-
viduals and the work from one
department piles up on the other
department, so that the continual
flow of amterial is not inter-
rupted.

We feel that it is only fair that
when the company gets 24 hours
of production the workers get 24
24 hours pay.

The employers say they .are
opposing any change in the hours
of work clause the same as they
were last year and claim it is
impossible to work the production
shift from Monday through Fri-
day so that the mills “would be
operating on Monday morning.”
The Sawmill operators and the
Union went through this same
phase in the West Coast of the
United States, namely, Oregon
and Washington, in the late 30's.

The work week in those saw-

‘The employers’ present
show that the average loss
companies was 5le per day on
meals and an average loss on
lodging of 17c, or a total loss of
68c per day.

While we do not question the
honesty or integrity of the em-
ployers presentation*we have no
break-down to show what costs
are included. Again we say that
these logging companies are not
in a competitive market where
demand establishes prices. They
are not in the restaurant business
but are in the logging business.

‘They make the point that al-
though there are some 12,000
workers employed in B.C. log-
ging operations only some 7,600
are affected by the board rates
and state that “employees board-
ed and lodged in these establish-
ments have the benefit of living
on the highest material standard
prevailing in the country with no
increase in prices over pi ewar |
charges, while all other citizens
took the full weight of the cost
of living increases.”

Yet they state that a substan-
tial number of, these 7,600 men
Teave camp for weekends. It is
true that some leave camp for
weekends, such as married men
who are forced, because of the
isolated location of the operation
to stay in camp while maintain-
ing a home and a family in some
adjacent town where schools are
available. Anyone can see that

mill and logging camps are all
defined Monday through Friday,
and in no instance has there been
a closing of operations on Mon-
day in order to do necessary
maintenance work. The mainten-
ance work in most of those mills
is done by night shift workers
who work while the mill is idle,
instead of trying to do all of the
maintenance work on Saturday
and Sunday.

It has been found that the
equipment is in much better
shape when a planned program
of maintenance is established.

cent,

these men did feel the full weight
of the cost of living increases,

It should be noted at this point
that the board rate in the fishing
industry up to last year was $30
a month and through negotiations |
was raised to $40 a month. This
was a raise of one-third percent
while board charges in logging
operations was raised unilater-
ally sixty-five and two-thirds per

At least to keep in line with
this other major industry in
British Columbia board rates

Statutory Holidays

should be rolled back to at least
$2.00 which would still allow
operators thirty-three and one-

Just recently it has come to
our attention that the oil work-
ers in British Columbia have
gained nine paid holidays in their
new agreement. The UPWA have
just gained nine paid holidays in

third per cent increase.
General Provisions

Again the company declined
any change in the General Pro-

their agreement with Ballards
Ltd.

visions Clause, based upon the
argument that it was approved
unanimously by the 1948 Con-

The agreement signed by the
B.C, Woodworkers, (CCL), gives
graduated statutory paid holi-
days up to nine.

The New Westminster Cordage
union agreement provides for .8|
paid holidays. The New Method
Laundry of Victoria employees
enjoy nine paid holidays.

Those above cited cases further
show that the trend is becoming
more and more toward paid sta-
tutory holidays.

Board and Lodging

We believe that it is absolutely
necessary that a clause be writ-
ten into the 1949 agreement set-
ting out board and lodging
charges.

| tisfactorily in the opinion of the

ciliation Board as “a fair and
practical clause”. They maintain
that it has operated successfully.

But again had it operated sa-

union the union would not have
requested any change.

The union has in no instance
offered changes in the contract
as a matter of “bargaining-
strategy” even though we have
been continually accused of
such tactics.

Health and Welfare Plan

The employers again decline to!
consider this matter because it
“can only be regarded as a re-
quest for an additional wage in-
crease put forward for a bargain-

serious.

The Feo ane
Hospital plan

a aoe ah
eed for
this industry. Now the

uming that the .

Fe ee ag Monpieiantie
will be broadened to extend this
service to some degree of medical —
ak

No evidence supports this as-
sumption, ?

Union Shop :

‘The attitude of the employers,
to union security proposals seems|
to be entirely foreign to the now
generally accepted approach to
this question. The union’s case is
fully stated in their original brief
but we are forced to deal with
some of the matters contained in
the employers’ brief.

The employers quote” excerpts
from the decision of Chief Jus-
tice Sloan in 1946, which in’ part
reads as follows:

“I am unable to reach the
conclusion that the union
during the life of the 1946
contract, will stand in any
need of any form of addition-
al ‘security’ or union shop’
organization in order to per-
mit it effectively to ‘police
the contract’.”

We would ask the Board to
particularly note the fact that
the Chief Justice refers speeifi-
cally to the life of the 1946 con.
tract which would imply that he
recognized the possibility of
changing conditions,

‘The situation today is altogeth-
er different from. either 1946,
1947, or 1948. As mentioned in
the employers brief there is a
rival union in the field, a splinter
organization from the IWA and
a great deal of trouble can be
caused to employer and union
alike by jurisdictional fights.

The granting of union shop
provisions to the union will obvi-
ate this possibility. The union is
a responsible body and feels that
now after several years under
contract it is entitled to a major
degree of union security,

The various examples present-
ed by the employers as proof of
their contention that union secur-
ity is not desirable seem to us to
be of little value -in-aiding “the
Board to arrive at a decision in
this matter,

With this wide variety of
agreement and length of time in
effect the employers find it neces-
sary to go back to 1945 to find
one example worth quoting and
as we will show, there were other
factors involved in this dispute.

Another case referred to is the
Arbitration. Award made by Mr.
Justice C, P. McTague, between
UPWA and Canada Packers et
al. The Company quotes one
paragraph from Mr. McTague’s
award, thereby suggesting that
no form of Union Security was
established.

This is, in our opinion, a de-
liberate attempt to deceive the
Board, and we wish to quote the
actual recommendation made in

=

aS

Vacations with Pay

We find thatthe only serious
objection the Companies have to
the proposal for additional bene-
fits is that “they are simply
another form of wage increase,”
and that “the industries are not
in a position to assume the pres-
ent rates for the ensuing year.

In other words their only seri-
ous objection is that they claim
their inability to pay. We ask
that vacations be kept in line
with the trend of the times.

Hours of Work

The Union would like to point
out to the Board that a serious
practice has sprung up in the
past few months and it is abso-
lutely essential that in continuous
production plants the union’s pro-
posed clause be given serious
consideration. d '

There are bvperators at the
present maintaining 24-hour
production yet deducting lunch
time from those employees on

govern these cases.

a continuous shift.

A Wer

LUG

dof One Syllable +