REGINA — Saskatchewan’s
Tory government has embarked
on ‘“‘a campaign to undercut the
Saskatchewan Government Em-
eae Union (SGEU) and
sabotage the union at every op-
portunity’’, charged SGEU Pres-
ident Jim Hayes, Feb. 9. His
comments follow the govern-
ment’s refusal to make payroll
deductions to implement the
union’s member-financed long-
term disability plan (LTD), ap-
proved by the union’s members
last September.

The province’s Public Service
Commission (PSC), has seized on
complaints by a tiny minority of
union members about details of
the plan. Bureaucratic roadblocks
have stalled the LTD, leaving sick
and injured members without
adequate benefits. After finally
agreeing to begin deductions on
Jan. 1, 1983, the PSC reneged on
its word on the day following the
completion of SGEU’s contract
vote. This action led the SGEU to
charge that the commission is
“attempting to create havoc
_ within our union’’, by catering to
so-called union dissidents who
threaten to go to court to recover
their deducted contributions.

The battle is only the latest
round in a vendetta waged by the
Conservatives against the pro-
vince’s employees. Since the De-
vine government took office, a
number of higher ranking civil
servants known to hold pro-
fae views have been fired.
= ‘temporary”’” employees,
left ‘‘out-of-scope’’ of union con-
tracts under the previous New
Democratic Party government,
were also given the axe. In the
most publicized case, the
government tried to transfer Re-
gina alderman Harry Van Mulli-

————————————————

From
Regina

Kimball
Cariou

gen, an employee of Sask-
atchewan Housing, and an SGEU
member, to ajob in Prince Albert.
Van Mulligen, an NDPer, had en-
raged the cabinet by voting
against formal wage restrictions
on city employees, but won his
job back after widespread pro-
tests.

On the strike front, several
groups of SGEU members were
forced to hit the bricks last sum-
mer; 80 cancer clinic workers
struck for parity with their
counterparts in other provinces,
only to be hit with a legislated
back-to-work order; 80 em-
ployees of the Alliance of the
Youth and Elderly in Saskatoon,
and 200 Workers’ Compensation
Board employees, were also on
the picket lines; and 400 Wascana
Hospital workers conducted a
lengthy work-to-rule.

Then in August, Premier De-
vine announced his guidelines for
‘**1% below inflation’’ wage set-
tlements. The ‘*1%”’ solution was
aimed squarely at the bulk of
SGEU members whose contract
expired Sept. 30, 1982.

During the ensuing negotia-
tions, the Tories used the wage
control legislation and the big
stick of job cuts to intimidate
union members. SGEU figures
show that hundreds of job posi-
tions have been left unfilled since
the Conservative administration

nefits.

Ee ES GORe

———

sk Tories attack public sector unions

instituted a hiring freeze last
spring, measureably reducing the
number of provincial employees.
Finance Minister Bob Andrew
warned workers of further staff
cuts if the government’s wage
guidelines were rejected.
Fearing for their job security,
and well aware that the cabinet
might impose back-to-work legis-
lation to break a strike, 50.8% of
SGEU members reluctantly
voted in late January to accept a
contract offering 7% and 6% over
two years. While most sections of
the union rejected the offer, the
large ‘‘yes’’ vote among Regina
clerical workers provided the
razor-thin margin for acceptance.
The new contract fails to
guarantee job security, and in-
cludes some “‘take-aways’”’ in the
areas of classifications and be-

As though this virtual war on

MacEachen

ade Lalonde ee

workin
liberally

provincial workers were insuf-
ficient, many Tories at their
November convention called for
further attacks on the political
rights and living standards of the
province’s employees. Related to
this anti-SGEU campaign is the
effort by the Saskatchewan
Chamber of Commerce and other
business groups to force changes
in.the Trade Union Act. The
changes would introduce a var-
iant of ‘‘right-to-work”’ in Sask-
atchewan. (The ‘‘right-to-work’’,
as workers know, does not mean

the right to a job, but rather the
right to smash unions, to build a
scab movement,
worker against worker in the
monopoly-made crisis.)

Faced with the many-sided at-
tack, labor is moving into action
to resist the Tories. The SGEU is
conducting a campaign among its
members to counter the govern-
ment’s failure to act on the long-
term disability plan. And they re-
cently sponsored a job fightback

conference with other labor aX
unemployed groups.

Ona wider scale, pressure from
affiliates has led the SFL to call’
second conference, on Feb. 221
‘Moose Jaw, to discuss the fight
back. The following day, reP
resentatives of the labor mové
ment are to meet with the pro
vincial cabinet to present thei
opposition to changes in labo
legislation as demanded by
Chamber of Commerce.

and to set

Quebec strike should spur fighthack —

Although the teachers in Quebec are still out on strike,

bricks and bouquets are already being thrown at the
Common Front for its militant response to the Quebec
Government’s wage rollback Bill 105.

The bricks are being thrown by those forces in the
labor movement who dub the strike a failure and setback
for labor in Quebec and across Canada. The bouquets by
those who regard it as an important and positive contri-
bution to the overall fightback against the monopoly-in-
spired economic crisis.

It may be expected that this appraisal and inner strug-
gle will go on for some time in a labor movement which is
itself agonizing over how to protect and extend its gains
in the face of a combined government-monopoly offen-
sive against it on all fronts.

Perhaps a more revealing question than whether or not
the Common Front strike in Quebec was a success,
might be: did the working people of Quebec fare worse or
better for their struggle than the working class in
English-speaking Canada which (with some exceptions
such as the Chrysler workers) simply sat back and al-
lowed the government to take similar actions against it
without any real fightback?

In English-speaking Canada a serious demoralization
has opyions) Set in among the public service sector of -

headers ad thee
| record ene has. Seale ae

ability to face the combined assault of the state and
monopoly. It has brought into question the competence of
the trade union leadership in the public sector and the

spn may well pay: for its ieaohery.3 is its political
skin t

eR oavols, 18
ely sc mepes ni wage cutting and Nee i dhe failure’of the Common Front general strike has yet tobe”

“fully detionstrated. It will show up in'the future political munity control 6

: This has workers’ confidence in their own

Labor in action
William Stewart

CLC. It has, in large measure given the initiative in the
economic and class battles to state monopoly capitalism.

In Quebec, one may question the wisdom of the lead-
ers of the Common Front in calling ‘‘an unlimited general
strike”’, rather than more limited one-day, or two-day, or
specified strikes which would have given them more
freedom of action and placed less intense pressure on
their members. Leaving that matter aside for the time
being, however, the preparedness of the leadership to
lead, and the Prepaiadaess. of the workers to struggle
was proven.

The usefulness of the Common Front strike lies in the
fact that it took place. It is a warning to any government
in Quebec that you cannot roll over the working class
except at a heavy price. The price the Levesque

Rag ater ae na

bacon say ‘there

“shape of events in Quebec. -

If the working class is able to deepen its consciousness
and perception of the present crisis and strengthen its
economic and political unity in common struggle against.
monopoly and its governments, then the strike will have

-

been successful. There is much evidence that this may
well be the case.

One might note that general strikes, usually of a short-
er and specified duration, in Europe are sometimes ig-
nored by a majority of the workers involved. Those labor
leaders who look for a certified guarantee that all the
workers in all the factories, mines and offices will re-
spond to their calls to action, before they are prepared to
issue such calls, are not leading the working class but
hiding behind its most backward elements.

The Common Front general strike in Quebec was a
significant contribution to the fightback of all Canadian
workers against the attack by governments and corp-
orations on their hard won gains. It provided courage
and inspiration to all the forces across Canada prepared
to take part in the struggle. This was shown by the
spontaneous messages of support that poured into the
Common Front from across Canada.

It focuses on the sad record of the Canadian Labor
Congress which caved in when faced with similar deci-
sions and the Quebec strike can therefore be expected to
stimulate the fightback movements at a union, local and
provincial level.

Under the slogans of no give-backs, fightback; and, no
2 wage controls; the working clas must prepare itself to

Together with labor’ s economic altertiative these
should be at the heart of the struggle for a turn-around in
Canada for new poliicies of full employment, prosperity:
and new governments to bring them into place.

PACIFIC TRIBUNE—FEBRUARY 25, 1983—Page 6

ty contin in Sh

NAC A oA ONAL
Fn a Ae Be Oak aA NOTA Ta