e IWA Local 1-424 member Ward Giant (second from left) was fired for wearing IWA hard hat stickers. Eight of

his fellow workers were suspended for the same. L. to R. are Mark Finkle, John Tanchun, Trevor Marshall, Ted Alexander, Gerald Miller, Brother Grant and Ed Henderson. Missing are Bill Taylor and Dennis Vreeling. All were reinstated by labour board (see story bottom page).

Millworkers join WA at Louisiana Pacific on union’s third organizing drive

DAWSON CREEK, B.C. - Even though workers at Louisiana Pacific‘s waferboard plant here were certified to IWA-CANADA Local 1-424 on March 8, the prob- Jems of getting the company to respect the workers‘ affiliation and negotiate a collective agreement are continuing.

The successful organizing cam- paign conducted by National Organizing Director Lyle Pona and National Organizer Rick McRae and many union supporters in the plant was a special victory. On three previous occasions starting in 1988, the Union due to employer interference, was unable to certify the mill. fi

“The major difference during this organizing drive was the commit- ment of the crew to be successful,” said Brother McRae. “They really went to bat this time.”

He also says that the company had made every commitment and promise psible in the past few years and had eventually broken them all. .

L-P promised grievance commit-

tees and to open up communication but in the end did nothing.

McRae says that the company’s many threats of closure were even- tually seen by the workers as a smokescreen and working condi- tions had become so abysmal for some that they felt a plant closure might be a better alternative any- way.

Since the certification in March, the company has been harassing employees - both supporters and non-supporters of the union.

In April L-P fired one worker and suspended 8 others for wearing IWA-CANADA stickers on their hard hats.

The union fought the company for their jobs in front of the Industrial Relations Council and won. (See article this page). On April 28, all 9 workers were reinstated with back wages and benefits and had their disciplinary records lifted for the incidents.

The company was obviously pick- ing on union supporters and has eventually alienated the majority of

the workers in the plant. It even fired a worker for walking too slow.

According to Ward Grant, the worker fired for wearing hard hat stickers, money and benefits were not necessarily the issues why the workers decided to join the IWA this time around.

Safety is a major issue in the plant. By and large L-P has ignored the recommendations of its safety committee which is largely non- functional.

“Nothing seriously gets done about the safety recommendations,” says Brother Grant. He says that since the union entered the plant, however, inspectors from the WCB have been in on a more regular basis and some things have improved.

Another major problem is sick days and production bonuses. Currently a worker has to put in 3 months for one free sick day and another 6 months to get their sec- ond. Currently a worker will lose higher production bonuses even if they are only sick one day.

Base rate in the plant is $11.00

per hour.

In June there is a scheduled shut- down of the plant for maintenance purpose. There’s some concern that L-P may extend the shutdown to try and weaken the union.

In some of their other operations in the United States where they have had to negotiate agreements they've dragged things out for long periods of three years and more.

Currently as the IWA waits to negotiate with the company, the local union has its first vice-presi- dent Jack Higgins in Dawson Creek. He is keeping a close eye on L-P’s activities and is showing the IWA support for the workers who are in an isolated part of the province, about a 240 mile drive northeast of Prince George in the Peace River country and about 22 miles from the Alberta border.

Brother Higgins says the workers are being intimidated by L-P and that they have to hang tough.

In the community of Dawson Creek the Union, over the last 4 organizing attempts, has built up considerable support.

“Just about everyone seems to know someone who has been screwed around by them (L-P)” says Brother Higgins “so I think the community accepts us more now.”

In the past, such as during the IWA organizing campaign held between February - April, 1989, the company threatened to shut the mill down if it went union. Even before the mill started production in August of 1987, its threats to leave the community were well known.

Organizing Director Lyle Pona says that during the early organiz- ing campaigns, L-P “used absolute fear tactics to keep the union out.”

Those tactics eventually changed and the employer tried to promise everything under the sun. The workers saw through the promises in time.

As production levels rose L-P refused to improve conditions for the workforce, and paid nominal bonuses along the way.

For the IWA and the B.C. Labour Movement, the unionization of L-P is a major victory. L-P has never been bashful in boasting that it is predominately a non-union employ- er in the United States.

Its ties to the anti-labour Socred Government of Bill Bennett helped it get a foothold in Dawson Creek. In the 1980’s the Socreds made loan guarantees and gave L-P its infra- structure and created Bill 19 - the infamous labour legislation.

“I think L-P is in shock right now,” says Pona. “They are finding out that there are some protections and rights that workers have in this province, which they don’t have to deal with in their other operations.”

Workers have right to show open support for union

After one worker was fired and eight others were suspended in April at L-P for wearing IWA- CANADA hard had stickers, the Union went to court to get them

reinstated. The IWA hired Vancouver labour lawyer Shona Moore to take the e on and after the Industrial Poletane Council heard the Union’s case, all workers were reinstated with full back pay, benefits and

that an employer would

r for showing paDpare union is hard to believe, - after the Union has been

the: IW.

L-P was intending to punish sup- porters of the IWA and simultane- ously communicate a powerful threat to the employees watching that they shouldn’t support the IWA, said Ms. Moore in an inter- view with the Lumberworker. She also said the company was trying to epee them from promoting the Union because their job would be in eee for doing so.

f you can imagine having 100 odd suplayees see 9 or 10 fired or suspended indefinitely for some- thing as sensible as wearing a stick- er - that was a very powerful threat to the rest of the employees,” said

are unable to scare off the

Moore. “That’s what I believe the intent of L-P was.”

L-P’s explanation to the IRC was that it always had a policy against defacing company, property. Moore, however, called evidence to show that this policy has never been applied to stickers on hard hats.

Even if there are rules governing the marking of hard hats, there are laws to protec Trade Union mem- bers rights to display support for their Union. Union members have freedom of speech and the right to display support for the Union and encourage others to do the same.

It was only after the Union was certified on March 3 that the com- pany issued a bulletin which warned against the display of IWA stickers and buttons on hard hats and other surfaces.

The lawyer argued on behalf of the IWA that, under labour law, no employer can interfere with the for- mation or adminstration of a trade union. She argued that an impor-

tant role of the trade union is orga- nizing and that the union, by encouraging its members to wear stickers, is part of the process in the organizing of employees.

Ms. Moore also argued that the company was interfering with Union rights by discharging and suspending the workers because they were members of the Union and were seeking to include others to become a member of the IWA.

“They wanted to wear these stick- ers to be used as a vehicle for encouraging (some of) their co- workers to get off the fence, and start to support the IWA.”

Ms. Moore says “an employer's strong resistance to trade unions is rather typical.”

She says there are lots of nasty _ employers around the province but it’s the first time she has encoun- tered an employer who has fired or suspended workers for demonstrat- ing Union support.

LUMBERWORKER/JUNE, 1992/9