By GEORGE MORRIS

The Alliance for Labor Action
has not yet been formally con-
stituted beyond the initial state-
ment of the objectives its two
big founding unions issued last,
July. The mechanics of the move-
ment and the initial drives will
be determined May 27 at the first
conference of the ALA in Wash-
ington.

So far it is public knowledge
that two committes. have been
set up to study plans for submis-
sion to the conference on organ-
izing and community action.
Also, leaders of the United Auto
Workers and the International
Brotherhood of Teamsters have
been conferring with leaders of
a number of unions to win their
cooperation for the planned ob-

jectives.

Here we underscore again, be-
cause so many tend to forget it,
the fact that the ALA is not a
new labor federation. It is a cen-
ter for new action and for revita-
lization of the entire labor
movement. The program of ALA
calls on unions of any or no affi-
liation to join in the effort.

If George Meany and his exe-
cutive council are so fearful of
new action and new vitality that
they threaten expulsion of any
union that cooperates with the
new: movement, the fault is not
with the ALA. At this point it is
not yet apparent what unions
will be at the ALA conference
in addition to the two founding
organizations, But it is a safe
guess that probably more unions
will be watching the conference
with interest than will be there.
Most unions want to see “the
action” before they get into it.

I have heard many people
voice impatience because they
have not yet seen action from the

.ALA. I expressed some impa-
tience, too, in some recent col-
umns and warned that the lead-
ers of the new movement will
lose leverage for action if they

drag preparations long. As we
observed, the people at AFL-CIO
headquarters favoring inaction
aren’t idle either. Their 40,000-
word “white paper” against the
UAW was deliberately timed as
a torpedo aimed at the ALA con-
ference and by its content was
designed to foster division with-
in ALA.

What is becoming increasingly
more apparent is that the lineup
is shaping over differences in
the labor movement and the de-
marcation will sharpen as the
months roll on. The most unfor-
tunate in such a situation, as we
have learned from past history,
are those who stand on the side-
lines as critics or just preach
unity and profess to be “impar-
tial.”

Unity means nothing unless it,
unites more working people in
struggle. We have seen in our
labor history since its inception
that “unity” as defined by Sam-
uel Gompers or William Green
or George Meany means unity at
a bureaucratic level and a mini-
mum of united action in the
ranks

The big cry against the CIO
when it rose in the thirties was
the charge it split the labor
‘movement. But within several
years after the CIO was born 10
million workers were united in
U.S. unions—and in more effec-
tive unions—in place of the 3.5
million when the split occurred.

I have also been hearing much
criticism of the leaders who ini-
tiated ALA. You get it from peo-
ple on the left and from the
right. In letters and other ways
I am reminded of views and acts
of Walter Reuther, Emil Mazey,
Frank Fitzsimmons and James R.
Hoffa, all thrown in to support
arguments against ALA. If there
is anybody in these 50 United
States who has written more
criticism of Reuther and some of
the others in ALA’s leadership
than I have since the thirties,

LABOR SCENE

By Bruce Magnuson

I'd like to know who he is. But
to the displeasure of some of my
critics, I have not hesitated to
applaud them when they did
something good. :

Our concern is not the rela-
tionships or attitudes towards in-
dividual leaders. We are concern,
ed with the movement of mil-
lions of people. It is because we
think the ALA is a promise of
greater movement — and it is so
far only a promise — that we be-
lieve it deserves all the encour-
agement progressives can give it.

There are, of course, some
people who are waiting for the
all-perfect unions and the fault-
less leaders. The Socialist Labor
Party, the oldest socialist orga-
nization in the U.S., is still wait-
ing for them. They will never
come. History doesn’t follow a
blueprint.

The men who formally initiat-
ed the CIO John Lewis, Sid-
ney Hillman, David Dubinsky,
Charles Howard—had a conser-
vative record, much of it down-
right reactionary before the thir-
ties. But by a peculiar twist of
history it is they who opened
the Pandora’s Box that became
the biggest upsurge of labor in
U.S. history. Some of these peo-
ple were later sorry for what
they did, because the march of
labor brushed even them to the
side. :

I am not suggesting that we
have a parallel or that the same
will happen. But we should bear
in mind that changing times
bring changes in relations and
possibilities of united fronts or
coalitions that seemed inconceiv-
able in the past. Beneath it all is
‘that powerful current of millions
of people whom some labor
leaders can confuse, mislead and
even detour for a period, but in
the long run that current keeps
flowing along like “Old Man Riv-
er.”

Progressives can’t be an effec-
tive influence unless they are

—— AlA~—centre for action CANADIAN UAW

eas

CONDEMNS ABMs

The Canadian Council of the
United Automobile Workers
Union, “condemned Prime Min-
ister Trudeau for his negative
attitude regarding the implemen-
tation of the ABM (anti-ballistic
missle) program.”

Meeting in St. Catherines
April 26-27 the 127,000 member
organization threw its support
behind its International Execu-
tive Board which has protested
“to President Nixon and asked
him to respond to the protest
against the ABM with an order
to cancel the project.

“Canada and Canadians would
be in great danger from fall-out
or short firings” said the Can-
adian resolution “according to
a wide body of scientific opinion”
it would “constitute an unneces-
sarily dangerous proliferation of
the nuclear arms race, while ad-
ding nothing to the U.S.A.’s real
defensive capability.”

The Conference also called
for price parity for automobiles
and accused the automobile
manufacturers of “contempt for
their Canadian customers.”

They demanded “that the De-
partment of Industry, Trade and

within that current of millions.
Within that current you can
deepen class consciousness, in-
fluence its direction, combat
those who seek to pollute it,
even criticize leaders when ne-
cessary, and speed the march
forward.

Lenin stressed this a thousand
times. It’s been the ABC of pro-
gressive action in the labor
movement for many years. And
for many years those who ignor-
ed this reality landed on the
scrap pile of failures.

Daily World

Commerce of the Government,
Canada call, not only Ford ,
Canada to terms on its price j
equity towards all Canadian cy
tomers but the whole auto ;
dustry in Canada, and that
thorough investigation of tt
pricing of cars in Canada ung
the Canada-U.S. Automotiy
Trade Agreement be conductg
with a full disclosure of the x
sults of the investigation mad
to Parliament.” <

Also demanded by the Cow
cil was assurance by the Ontarj
Government that supplement,
tion of benefits in negotiate
health plans be allowed wha
medicare is instituted in th
province. Many union negotigt
ed plans now provide for covey
age beyond the scope of medi
care and the UAW is determine
that the establishment of unj
versal medicare, which the unior
fully supports, will not reduc
the coverage now in effect jr
many of its agreements.

The parley also criticized the
unilateral hoist in fees by th
Ontario Medical Association
without reference to the Ont.
ario Standing Committee m
Health, as promised by the gor-
ernment in 1967.

A comprehensive report on
the State of the Union wai
given to the delegates. It shows
that the UAW has gone up
the fourth largest to the d
largest union in Canada in the
past year. :

The UAW is now involved in
organizing campaigns a
Canada embracing over 10,
workers. According to
figures they organized 1,20
workers since the last Coun
meeting and have applied f
certification in plants repre
ing another 500.

Disregard workers’ rights —

“Arrogant disregard of its
workers’ rights” is the charge
levelled against the Ontario gov-
ernment by Stanley Little, pre-
sident of the Canadian Union of
Public Employees, (CUPE). To
adequately meet this challenge,
government workers will, in Mr.
Little’s words, “have to speak
the language of crisis, conflict
and confrontation.”

Next year, when the govern-
ment takes over all property as-
sessment in Ontario, some 2,500
municipal assessment employees
will have to join the Civil Ser-
vice Association of Ontario.
These workers are now mem-
bers of CUPE by voluntary
choice, which is their right. But

‘while this right to free associa-

tion is solemnly proclaimed by
law, it is denied to employees of
the government. The Civil Ser-
vice Association of Ontario is
no substitute for a union, and
there is growing discontent with
worker - management relations
and the autocratic way they are
handled now in the provincial
civil service.

In the autumn of 1967, when >
© PACIFIC TRIBUNEMAY 2, 1969-—Page 4

the province took over the ad-
ministration of justice at the
local government level, some
employees fought hard against
transfer from CUPE, the union
of their choice, to the CSA. At
that time the employees lost, at
least temporarily. Now the issue
comes up again with municipal
workers in another area, or de-
partment.

Of all employees in public ser-
vices, the most disgusting con-
ditions are to be found amongst
hospital workers across this
country. Their wages are among
the lowest. Because official gov-
ernment policy deliberately re-
strict budgets in areas of the
greatest social needs, hospital
budgets have been severely cut.
In Ontario, immigrants who
came here less than a year ago
from as far away as the Philip-
pines, and employed as hospital
workers, have been laid off. On
the one hand we need more hos-
pitals and workers to service
them. On the other hand, as al-
ways in areas where no private
profits are to be made, there is
a shortage of funds.

This’ inhuman approach’ is

characteristic of our capitalist
society, based upon human ex-
ploitation. The working people
are the ones to suffer the great-
est hardships as a result of this
system. .

The government of Ontario
has outlawed strikes of hospi-
tal workers while at the same
time imposing a ceiling on wage
increases that can be negotiat-
ed. In the case of registered and
graduate nurses, negotiations
are with the Civil Service Com-
mission. But in the case of
unions representing non-profes-
sionals, negotiations are with
local hospital boards. Since col-
lective bargaining has become
meaningless because of the ceil-
ing on wage increases, must
cases move quickly to arbitra-
tion, supposedly binding on both
parties.

A recent arbitration award,
concerning the Building Service
Employees International Union
and the Peel Memorial Hospital
in Brampton, Ontario, has ig-
nored the wage ceiling set by
the Ontario Hospital Services
Commission. The award says the
workers should have a 25 per-

_ against

cent raise in an 18-month con-
tract.

An earlier memorandum of
agreement between the union
and the hospital in question had
been withdrawn when the OHSC
refused to provide funds to meet
wage payments in excess of its
arbitrarily imposed wage ceil-
ing. Dealing with this aspect of
the situation, the arbitration
board in this case had the fol-

‘ lowing to say: . . . “Unions are

forced to deal with. the facade
of a hospital board and prevent-
ed from collective confrontation
with the central. body which
makes the real decisions uni-
laterally.”

With governments at all levels
moving in to prevent workers in
the public sector from improv-
ing their economic conditions
the stage is set for a combined
government-employer offensive
labor in the private
sector.

With productivity increasing
faster in Canada than in the
U.S. last year, and with mono-
poly-rigged prices, rents and

taxes going sky-high, the bene-

fits of increased output as 4
sult of speed-ups, rationaliza
and technical efficiency goes
swell private profits. 4
guidelines in this situation W?
not only preserve a status qt
in the buying power of wages
even if we allow for limited i!
creases here and there, but Wh
reduce workers living standart
at a time when substantial im?
provements are called for.
All this calls for mobilization
of the great reservoirs
strength which are latent in th
trade union movement. It ca”
for new methods of struggle "
both economic and _ politi
confrontation with the &)
ployers and their stooges in80|
ernment. The time is also ! |
overdue for a coordinated calf
paign to organize the millions
of unorganized from one end 0
the country to the other.
in this way will the workin
class of our country assume "
position history has assigned #
it as. the leading force in”
struggle for social progr