ALAA TTT THE PEQ@PLE MArine. 6929 I DATION Telephone Published every Saturday by the People Publishing Company, Room 104, Shelly Suildina, 119 West Pender Street, Vancouver, British Columbia, and printed at Broadway Printers Limited, 151 East 8th Avenue, Vancouver, British Columbia. EDITOR: HAL GRIFFIN ASSOCIATE EDITOR: AL PARKIN ADOT TTT W hat Is CCF Stand? - ie READERS of the CCF News, official organ of the CCF in British Columbia, have been watching the editorial columns of that paper for comment on the Teheran Declaration, they have been disappointed. The editors, and the provincial ©CF leaders, appar- ently regard the declaration as merely another general statement of purpose without any profound Significance for the future and therefore scarcely worthy of their comment. But it is hardly eredible, however logical the conclusion would be, that their silence on one of the great documents of all time is to be construed as agree- ment with the warped and defeatist viewpoint expressed by Mrs. Dorothy Steeves, MLA. Only she among CCE provincial spokesmen has commented on the declaration and her comments are typical of the poisonous ideas she has long spread through her column in the CCE News. On the eve of the Gairo and Teheran econfernces, Mrs. Steeves opened her column with these words: “We are gratified to learn that the chiefs of the principal Allies are once more bestirring themselves and coming from the ends of the earth for a meeting, but, we could be more satisfied if we knew that they came with a mandate from the people whom they are supposed to represent in the vital matters to be considered. The actual fact is that the future organization of world affairs will depend on decisions taken by four individuals and that it is highly doubtful Whether these persons reflect the views held- by the Majority of people in the nations of which they are the mouthpieces.” And when the Teheran Declaration was issued she wrote: “The Cairo and Teheran conferences have come and Sone, the pictures of the Big Four have been flashed around the world and have shown them seatly in friendly conclave, and yet another pro- nouncement adorns the press headlines. It is interesting to specu- Jate what these leaders would proceed to do if they were intent on carrying out the full implications of the Teheran Declaration. Mr. Stalin might announce plans for the abolition of the dictatorship of the Communist hierarchy, Mr. Churchill might call a conference to formulate ways and means for the democratization of the colonial area _ and Mr. Roosevelt might give his attention to the solution of the Negro problem. It is safe to Say that these statesmen will do nothing of the sort and will not do so until a public demand has been created for these and similar measures to form the basis of a democratic peace.” It would be too much, of course, to suppose that Mrs. Steeves, her vision so blinded by her own venom, would grasp the tremendous Significance of the declaration and of this sentence in particular: “We express our determination that our nations shall worl together in the war and in the peace that will follow.” Busy with her own Tittle plans for reorganizing the world, it would’ never occur to her that the declaration embodies the hopes and aspirations of all the people of the United Nations who, like Churchill and Stalin, Roosevelt and Chiang Kai-shek, “look with confidence to the day when all the peoples of the world may live free lives untouched by tyranny and according to their varying desires and their own consciences.” Me: STEEVES finds the Teheran Declaration “vague and dis- appointing” because it does not fit her own preconceived ideas of hew the post-war world should be organized. What those ideas are she makes clear in the current issue of the CCF News in pro- posing for Europe a pattern of federations, which to Mrs. Steeves’ way of thinking would be anti-Soviet blocs. While conceding that “there is much evidence that the Baltic people are willing to become part of the Soviet Union,” and that “there is much to be said for Russia’s claim” to western Byelorussia and western Ukraine, Mrs. Steeves injects her poison by observing that “the armies of the United Nations are supposed to be coming to Europe as ‘liberators’, not as conquerors”—a comment reminscent of the reactionary Polish government-in-exile — and pleads that “the democratic wishes of the people should prevail,” as indeed they will by the Teheran Declaration. Then she states: “Misunderstanding between the Scandinavian countries, which in the past have all had such a fine record of social progress and internationalism, is most regrettable. A close alliance between these countries would do much in the future towards solving their economic difficulties and enabling them to take the lead in 4 cooperative Federation of European states.” It is hardly a coincidence that in the same issue there appears an article, “Pan Europa for the Common People.” by S. G. Cameron of Ottawa. Is this why the CCF leaders are silent on the Teheran Declaration, ~ because it does not coincide with their own ideas for the future organization of Europe in forms of impracticable federations opposed to the principles enunciated in the Teheran Declaration? There is no doubt that Mrs. Steeves speaks, not for the majority of CCF members and supporters but only for herself and a dwindling number of followers. But in view of the silence of other CCF leaders on the paramount question of the declaration her defeatist discord is deafening. The labor movement can judge for itself where Mrs. Steeves stands on the declaration. Other CCF leaders should make their position clear or they too will be judged—on their Silence, ages Marked low ar Jugoslavia Pre- By HERMAN SANDERS This is the second in a series of Allied Labor News article on the Yugoslav labor movement. AGES and working conditions in Yugoslavia, following formation of that state in 1918, were among the worst in all Europe. This fact, coupled with the heroic efforts of union organizers in the face of brutal opposition by successive dictatorships, led the majority of Yugoslavia’s 1,000,000 work- ers to join one or the other of the nationwide trade union fed- erations—the General Labor Union and the United Federation of Labor Unions (URSS). At the height of its influence the _Northumberland former, led by the Yugoslav So- cial Democratic leader Topalo- vich, totalled 250,000, while the URSS, particularly strong in the mining and coastal areas, had between 350,000 and 400,000 mem- bers. There were also national trade unions in Croatia and Slo- venia. Official laws prescribed an eight hour day. But in most eases the working day was never less than 10 hours and more of- ten between 12 and 16. Only the typographical workers, who were among the best organized, usually worked the official eight hour day. Cement workers aver- aged 10 hours a day, farm work- ers 12 and carpenters 16. The best artisans never re- ceived more than a maximum o£ $1.25 (U.S.) a day and a mini- mum of 80 cents. Farm workers received less than 50 cents a day, tenant farmers between 10 and 15 cents and cement workers 742 cents an hour for a 10 hour day. The average Bosnian miner, who generally worked foreign-con- trelled mines, earned less than 50 cents a day. In 3932 the average wage ; amounted to 26 cents a-day. One réport declares that in Decem- ber, 1940, 257,189 workers earned 24 dinars (56 cents) a day and 148,177 between 24 and 34 dinars. In general it may be said that average wages throughout the country ranged from about 25 cents to 50 cents daily. Working conditions were worst in industries dominated by foreign capital — particularly British, French, American and Italian and in the German-con- trolled bauxite monopoly. One newspaper reported in November, 1940, that in Belerade 80,000 factory workers, 10,000 office employes and 10,000 rail- waymen received earnings below the standard of minimum sub- sistence. This meant that, to- gether with their families, 320,000 out of Belgrade’s 400.000 people received less than they needed to keep going. One December 20, 1940, the newpaper Radnicke Novine set the minimum monthly income requirement at 2300 din- ars (about $54). A report on unemployment issued in the same year pointed out, however, that the 25 per- cent of industrial workers then “mployed received an average or only 34 dinars (80 cents) a day for a six-day week, or 884 Ginars a month, Giving the effects of unemploy- ment, brought on to some ex- tent by the war, Politika report- ed en November 7, 1940: “According to official data there were in Yugoslavia last year 3,455 factories and indus- trial plants. This year there are only 3254, that is, a reduction of 201. The biggest decline has taken place in Croatia.” While no exact figures on un- employment are available, Politi- ka reported cenditions particu- larly grave on the Dalmatian coastal area. The tourist trade and the shipbuilding industry in Croatia and Montenegro were most affected, it said. HE only step taken by the government to protect labor was the creation of the Yugoslav General Insurance Organization or Suzor, which provided social insurance for between 80,000 and 900.000 workers. With the estab- lishment of the Alexandrian dic- tatership on January 6, 1929, how- ever, Suzor became a corrupt and almost unworkable organi- zation. Along with the abolition of the original 33 provinces and ihe establishment of nine banats (provinees) in 1930, social insur- ance became in large measure a leeal affair. All Suzor officials were govern- ment appointed, the previous clectoral system having heen ~ abolished, From 1930 on Yugo- slay democratie parties, even when offered posts, refused to participate in Suzor. Besides the General Labor Union, the URSS and the na- tional unions a clerical labor org- anization existed in Slovenia. Dr. Viadke Matchek’s Croation Peas- ant Party sponsored the Croation Workers Union, an independent group which often cooperated with the URSS. One part of the Peasant Party —Jled by Ante Pavelich, today the leading Cro- atian Quisling—split off and the unions under his control often attacked the URSS as “commun- :St-dominated.” In addition, the government attempted to establish trade unions of its own—notably the Wational Workers Union of form- er Prime Minister Tsvetkoyvich— but they failed because of la- bor’s vigorous opposition to the successive dictatorial govern- ments. Through the Oryuna (National- ist Youth Organization), headed by Yevjevich, the government tried to organize corporate trade unions like these of Mussolini. The Oryuna, although officially Suppressed im 1925, cooperated with the Tsvetkovich and Stoya- dinovich governments and tried unsuccessfully to provoke striles in order to discredit the labor movement. Similar attempts by the Stoyadinovich-Tsyetkovich Yereza, or Radical Party, tike- wise met with failure. The strongest independent unions were among the building trades, railway. typographical, metal and mine workers and the seamen. In 1937 the pro-fascist govern- ment launched an attack on al} trade unions, culminating in the suppression of the URSS in 1941. it is still in the talking Short Jabs by OV Bill= VWienetneg GOPY of a paper I picke A a few days ago had a item about the youth of Bi who were being registerea! vrork in the coal mines. Ac’| ing to the story, of the hun of young men who register¢ | Neweastle, the center of coalfields, most 100 percent chose the yather than the mines. An who has ever lived in a camp ard used their five ‘SE even without working in mines, will understand why The cynical treatment of © mminers by the coal barons” taken all the dignity out of | in the mines, if there ever | any. Self-seeking politicans used mining issues as pol footballs for two or three g) ations. It is twenty years — since the Sankey Commi, recommended to the British ernment that the solution is coal mining question lay ii nationalization of the mines” Whether nationalization 1. make any improvement rei to be seen. But it is a matt j record that in the Crow’s eoalfield during the last strikes were an almost dail currence under the rule of ‘ ate enterprize,” about whie & hear so much today. b This was corrected by the } minion government taking the mines and granting the f ers’ demands—and there we 1 more strikes while the war 1. | Mining companies may pi : figures of the wages earne coal miners—under ideal : tions. But these ideal cong rarely obtain and at mos very short periods of time | men’s wages actually are s over 5 percent of what the panies allege, what with b time and deductiens. To keep mines workin produce coal for the war ~ Which the miners are always ing to do, is easy; make the ing conditions at least as : able as in other occupé particularly in B.C. mines, are the most dangerous i world. : Alphabet MOUNTIE told an ad | eommittee to the cusi of enemy property in Tc last week, that he found a in a Ukrainian Labor T . eontaining an alphabet f Such terms as “C” for cap and “L” for Lenin. It is probably true. But én alphabet could not be I for children as all Ukr |! children learn English i a public schools. If such an F bet was used for adult ‘ 2rants where’s the harm. Pe l that mountie would ~ & Ukrainian immisrants dir {5 learn the English langua; ft they would be prey for Prec § t Kirkeonnell and the er Ukrainian nationalists. FE Anyhow, if that cop rez $f alphabet through he would ( more than the mountie { he trial of Allan Campbell wk} there were 36 letters in the j bet, :