FEATURE

ccording to Labour Minister Lyall Hanson, the Industrial Relations Act will be pro- claimed into law next week. With proclamation comes a new era of labour relations in B.C., cer- tain to be recorded as a period of rag- ing class struggle.

That is so because the new Industrial Relations Act is a step most capitalist governments have been reluctant to take in the post-war years. It has elimi- nated all pretense of neutrality in labour relations and placed the state firmly in the employer camp, ready to intervene in any dispute. Any labour dispute can now become a political bat- tle with the government.

The new Act is there to be used. And with proclamation the govern- ment’s agenda moves from the policy stage to implementation. The premier and his ministers have been candid enough on what that agenda is: to weaken trade unions decisively and to enforce a “labour peace” while employ- ers de-unionize and drive down stand- ards for those remaining under collective agreements. Already, Building Trades unions expect demands from the Con- struction Labour Relations Association to re-open the collective agreement ty before the master contract expires next May 1. The aim is to secure new con- cessions, on the threat of using the pro- visions of the new Act to de-unionize.

Following the Industrial Relations Act, the government is ready to implement its next major initiative, already prepared. Across-the-board privatization of government services and Crown corporations is being care- fully planned and made ready for sweeping measures likely to be brought down this fall or winter. Privatization will be public-sector union busting, and a lucrative opportunity for private acquisition by the investors the Socreds are courting.

This process will be greatly facili- tated by a free trade deal with the U.S., which is the third main objective of the Vander Zalm government.

For the trade union movement, the proclamation of the Industrial Rela- tions Act means that the government and employers have loaded weapons that dramatically increase the risks involved for labour in the inevitable confrontations over the Socred agenda. Until now the labour movement has been engaged in political protest over Bill 19 with little or no consequences for unions or union members.

Under the terms of the Industrial Relations Act strikes will be broken, certifications will be lost by IRC rul- ings, unions will be sued for damages in the courts, and employers will fire workers for any failure to abide by the Act’s provisions. Brian Smith’s ill-fated attempt to silence all protest under the threat of seditious conspiracy charges show how far this government is pre- pared to go.

B.C.’s labour movement faces a new era more challenging than any pre- vious. Unions have fought without legal nghts before, and the labour movement was built in the struggle to secure a measure of union security.

But for almost 50 years trade union battles have taken place within the con- text of a legal framework — one that still gave the edge to the employer but recognized the existence of unions. The Industrial Relations Act has a different objective: to limit and eliminate unions in B.C. And that is why for the first time, the trade union movement is pre- paring to defy not just an aspect of the law, but the entire state mechanism for labour relations.

nce Ken Georgetti and Cliff Andstein declared to anti-Bill 19 rallies that labour would not accept the provisions of the Industrial Relations Act, trade union strategists have been pre- paring plans for a boycott of the appa- ratus to administer that law, the Industrial Relations Commission.

There are two general purposes behind the boycott tactic. The first is based on the assessment that unions will lose the vast majority of decisions taken by the commission. Many deci- sions will be unacceptable and will have to be defied in any event, but the ability of the union to do that may be com- promised by participating in the unfair process before the IRC.

So the boycott tactic makes it clear to the union membership that they will have to rely on their organized strength and not expect justice under the law, and it makes it clear to employers that the union will take direct action when necessary to defend its members..

The campaign’s second objective is intensely political. The boycott chal- lenges the legitimacy of the govern- ment’s labour legislation and leads to certain confrontation when the government seeks to enforce the Act’s laws. That confrontation may reach unprecedented proportions, and with close to 75 per cent of the public opposed to the Industrial Relations Act, the possible political crisis could force the government to restore trade union rights.

These objectives have underpinned the wide ranging discussion in the labour movement over the scope of the boycott. All sorts of options have been considered, from a total boycott to a partial boycott. Although the B.C. Fed’s executive council has not yet determined the scope of the boycott, there is a growing consensus that it makes little sense to draw artificial lines through the Act or the IRC-machinery. It is the whole Industrial Relations Act, from its statement of principles to its redefinition of unfair labour practices, to the sweeping powers of Commis- sioner Ed Peck, which labour c can’t accept.

here is also a strong consen- sus that the boycott must be implemented tactically. The B.C. Teachers’ Federation,

j for example, has to re- organize its membership and secure certification as of Jan. 1, 1988 before it can join the boycott. There will be other cases where decisions will have to be made by the trade union leadership concerning things like certifications, and “Section 7” applications, in which members charge a union or union offi- cial with failure to represent them.

But its in the field of collective bar- gaining that the more difficult tactical problems are faced. The Industrial Relations Act requires unions to notify the IRC upon commencing bargaining, and failure to do so makes the whole bargaining process illegal from that

point.

The expected flash sent will be when Ed Peck enters the scene, usually to appoint a mediator. In the event that a decision is made to boycott, the IRC will file its order in the court and it then has the force of a court order. Failure to comply puts the union in contempt of court. That presents labour the choice of compliance or a show-down with the government and the courts. The tactical question is whether that show-down comes on ground selected by the labour move- ment or by the government.

' |

6 e PACIFIC TRIBUNE, JULY 22, 1987