Ph LL EID TORREAI ot ATTA AG AAT

LABOR

Labor mobilization urgent

mM

as gov’t-employer actions signal full assault on rights

Continued from page 1

over possible changes was the result ofa struggle between ‘“‘the far right wing who are anti-union and don’t see unions as useful and those, like myself, who figure that organized labor is a very significant element in society and therefore we should have a framework in which we can work things out.”’

There seem to be only two possible

explanations for that shift. The Hamilton may only have been pro- viding a cover for a behind-the-scenes campaign for labor code alterations (an unlikely possibility) — or the council, which represents the major corporate employers in the province, has now become convinced that the time is op- portune to take on the trade union movement in the way that the far right wing has been demanding. _ The substantive changes to the code sought by the Employers Council in its brief are an indication that the latter is the case. It called for:

e Removal of the Labor Relations Board’s authority to use discretion in decertification applications and provi- sion for automatic votes;

e A broadened definition of strikes to restrict workers’ rights to work stop- pages or slowdowns;

e Restriction of secondary picketing (already prescribed by previous code amendments) to only those companies where employers are in a lockout posi- tion;

¢ Legislation to prevent strike votes in advance of any ‘‘meaningful’’ bargaining;

Another provision sought by the council would force all construction employers into the boses’ bargaining association, Construction Labor Rela- tions Association (That demand, which is intended to prevent smaller employers from making their own collective agreements with construction unions, is a measure of the employers’ hypocrisy since they want the union for themselves but want it eliminated or at least restricted for their employees.)

The amendments sought by the council echo those demanded by employers although the B.C. Construc- tion Association which met with Mc- Clelland early in February, added a few demands of its own, some of which are even more far-reaching. Among provi- sions it sought:

© Legislation to prohibit closed shop agreements and ‘‘non-affiliation clauses (which give construction unions the right to refuse to work with non- union or non-affiliated workers);

e The institution of an appeal pro- cedure on LRB rulings;

e Extension of current exemptions from the Employment Standards Act to include shop workers in addition to on- site construction workers.

The charges hinted at by Mc- Clelland have in his speech Mar. 14 to the Canadian Manufacturers’ Associa- tion indicated that the employers demands have largely been met — in- cluding one of the BCCA demands pro- viding for possible appeal of LRB deci- sions to the government or cabinet.

Roy Gautier, president of the B.C. and Yukon Building Trades Council added Friday that some of McCielland’s proposals ‘‘are directly in line with demands of right-to-work employers such as the Independent Canadian Businessmen’s Association.””

If the” Socreds proceed with the legislative changes this province would be saddled with some of the most reac-

tionary labor legislation in the country.

The proposed amendments are a political echo of former Socred premier W.A.C. Bennett’s infamous Bills 42 and 43 — with current mass unemploy- ment and the threat of layoffs giving a razor’s edge to the knife cutting away at trade union rights.

Several recent incidents have also demonstrated that there is an increasing vehemence in the Socreds attack against long established labor rights.

e The Mining Association of B.C., representing the major mining corpora- tions in the province, announced Tues- day that it was filing a complaint under. the Combines Investigation Act against the 17 Building Trades unions and has called on the federal consumer and cor- porate affairs department, which ad- ministers the Act, to investigate the unions’ collective agreements.

The association has charged that the non-affiliation clauses contained in the agreements ‘‘adversely affect the future of the mining industry.”

The action by the association has par- ticular significance in that Tex Enemark, association president, is both a former special advisor to Rob Basford when he was federal Liberal minister for consumer and corporate affairs, and the former deputy minister for the Social Credit government’s ministry of consumer and corporate affairs.

e Last year, Janbar Enterprises, one of several cedar shingle mills in the Fraser Valley, shut down because of slumping markets. But early in 1983, a former mill supervisor gathered together a non-union crew and — in consultation with right wing Socred backbencher Bill Ritchie — went back to work at the newly-reopened plant at less than union rates. At the same time, they applied for decertification of the IWA at the mill.

Another. [WA-certified mill in Revelstoke was recently decertified when the employer claimed he would re-open if employees accepted substan- tial concessions. Both incidents have come amidst an increasingly tempo of demands for concessions from the main forest employer, Forest Industrial Rela- tions.

e In what even the industry’s bible, the Journal of Commerce acknowledg- ed was a precedent-setting decision, the B.C. Building Corporation granted the $12.7 million contract for the Kamloops courthouse construction to anon-union Chilliwack firm, J. C. Kerkhoff and Sons Construction Ltd.

Kerkhoff, in turn, gave much of the work to sub-contractors but when the Building Trades Council applied for certification for one of them, Erco Con- struction, Kerkhoof promptly fired that sub-contractor.

The Building Trades Council has fil- ed an unfair labor practice charge against Kerkhoff, charging a violation of the labor code. Hearings are continu- ing at the LRB.

But company president Bill Kerkhoff’s comments were significant. “Tf we can get away with this project,”’ he told the Journal of Commerce Mar.

14, ‘‘it will open the floodgate for more non-union work.”

® Acopy of a draft bill obtained by trade unionists has revealed that Pat McGeer, socred minister for science and technology, has proposed legislation that would allow employers seeking to locate high technology industries in the government’s Discovery Park research

PACIFIC TRIBUNE—MARCH 25, 1983—Page 12

facilities to be exempted from the provi- sions of the labor code.

Letters accompanying the bill have indicated that the legislation may be in- troduced into a spring session of the legislature — if in fact a session is called before an election.

Following recent visits to various Pacific Rim countries, McGeer and other Socred ministers hope to attract some of the major multinational high technology corporations to British Col- umbia to establish industry here based on the Discovery Park research facilities set up by the Socreds. But the price, evidently, is a guarantee of virtual im- munity from union organization.

With unemployment creating desperation among many workers, the employer and government offensive against the trade union movement has intensified in the past few weeks. And restriction of union rights could well be the focus of an impending provincial election — under the guise of “‘giving those who want to work for lower wages the right to do so.” :

If the Social Credit government were to be re-elected with a mandate to change the code along the lines in- dicated, it would have catastrophic con- sequences, opening the way for wage- cutting on a major scale with workers faced with the threat of plant closures and possible decertification.

Repudiation of the polls of any at- tempt by the Socreds to make the labor movement a target would be the most welcome outcome ofan election call.

But even the defeat of the Socreds — if an election is indeed called — will not alone defend the trade union movement since the employers’ front will not be dismantled the day after the voteis held. And thousands of union members in the mining and forest industries will still face demands for concessions at the

- bargaining table.

The labor movement clearly needs to

mobilize its ranks against the attack, not ~

only on its long established rights — buat also on its continued existence. But since January there has been too little from the B.C. Federation of Labor to indicate the ferocity of the assault on the labor movement. In that, there is an echo of the stand taken last year,

following the announcement of Ben-,

nett’s Compensation Stablization Pro- gram, when the B.C. Fed and the New Democratic Party argued that controls should not be fought so as not to give the Socreds the pretext for a snap elec- tion.

The provincial council of the NDP did vote last month to favor “‘the restoration, enhancement and preserva- tion of the labor code’’ and to “‘con- demn any Socred attempt to create con-

flict amongst British Columbians for -

political gain.”” But the condemnation of the Socreds’ proposed labor code amendment has not been voiced by the NDP caucus.

Just three weeks before his death, former B.C. Fed president Jim Kin- naird warned that with the changes to the labor code sought by the Socreds, “Jabor faces the most serious threat to its existence since the so-called ‘right-to- work’ campaign of the mid and late 70's.”

Kinnaird declared that the Federa- tion was prepared to fight the govern- ment over the changes and called on the 500 affiliates ‘‘to begin to mobilize their members to fight the amendments.”’

Two months later, that mobilization is more urgent than ever.

VDT case han on board rulin

Members of the Hospital Employees Union at Surrey — Memorial Hospital stuck to their words this week and turned off suspect video display terminals (VDTs), precipitating a Labor Rela- — tions Board case that could effect thousands of VDT operators throughout the province.

The action was promp- ted by hospital manage- 4 2 ment’s refusal to imple- DR. HARI SHARMA. ment the recommendations ‘ecommendations ne for improved VDT safety Plemented. contained in the report issued last. week by Dr. Sharma.

Only the VDTs in the accounting office are 40 however, and operators there are continuing to carry other work.

No date has been set for a:LRB hearing at press 0© although one could still be scheduled before the end 0 the week. : “3

Dr. Sharma, a nuclear chemist, had been commissl0 ed by the union to test the hospital VDTs for poss! radiation following the appearance of several abno’ pregnancies among operators. ;

His report, issued Mar. 14, indicated that the vpTs ov the accounting office did emit high levels of puslaUle electric field radiation. #

Although he estalished no definite link between the emissions and the abnormal pregnancies, he noted that the accounting office operators whom he intervieweos reported various adverse effects whereas those oper ator in the medical records office, using terminals made by different manufacturer, reported no illeffects. |

Asaresult, Dr. Sharma outlined six recommendatio”” | for improved operator safety including shielding of o VDTs and eventual replacement of the terminals 12 the accounting office. a

HEU secretary-business manager Jack Gerow h@ | given the hospital until this week to implement 0" recommendation or operators would shut down tho” machines which were considered unsafe.

In turning the machines off, he said, operators We exercising their rights under Section 83(3) of the lab code which states: ‘‘An act of mission by a trade union

by the employees shall not constitute a strike where its dé

required for the safety or health of those employees- That section was recently upheld by the LRBina lan® = mark decision Feb. 15. a Surrey Memorial management and Health Labo! Relations have charged, however, that the HEU members are taking illegal job action. The hospital has also called in technicians from the Workers’ Compensation Board and the radiation pro” tection branch of the provincial governement to condu® further tests on the VDTs. But both department hav already tested the terminals and because of inadequalt” equipment, were unable to detect the emissions which Dr. Sharma found. . The LRB decision on the case could have broadr a cussions in the province since there are an estimate 50,000 VDT operators in B.C. — most of them wome?

JOIN THE GREAT

GE ANY

wit

For any of your trav" needs, big or ane Let Globe Tours fi the best way for y°U

Hawaii @ Mexico @ F'! Las Vegas @ Reno @ Calg@"’ Montreal @ Paris @ Lond°’

GLOBE TOURS

2679 East Hastings Stree’ Vancouver, B.C. V5K12-

253-1221

| rae