Compulsory arbitration

Thatcher moves

}

against labor

Premier Ross Thatcher, mono-
poly’s kamakazi pilot in Sas-
Katchewan, has called a special
Session of the provincial legisla-
ture to enact compulsory arbit-
ration for the bulk of the pro-
vince’s’ government employed
workers,

The legislation is aimed at
this time against 1,300 office
and gas workers employed by
the government - owned _ Sas-
katchewan Power Corporation
who went on strike last Friday.
But the legislation will also set
out arbitration procedures for
hospital workers in the province,

_The main feature of the le-
gislation will be the establish-
ment of a board with one repre-
sentative of both the company
and union involved, under the
chairmanship of a judge appoint-
ed by the government. The find-
ngs of the board will be binding.

According: to press reports,
hatcher is quoted as saying
that the
of teeth. “We don’t intend to

Pass a bill that they can ignore,”
he said. ¥ :

The province’s gas workers
are striking to back up demands
for an eight percent raise in
wages. The final offer of the
Power commission was for a
four percent increase. The nego-
lations have dragged on since
early March and it was not until
August that the. government ad-
vanced a proposal for a two to
three percent increase which
was later adjusted to four per-
cent, Neither the general man-
®ger of the power corporation
nor the cabinet minister respon-
sible participated in negotiations
Prior to the end of August.

In a statement issued by the
Saskatchewan Federation of
Labor the government was ac-
Cused of playing “cat and
mouse” with the union.

“The whole conduct of the
80vernment in negotiations”, the
Statement continued, “indicated
Provocation rather than.a genu-

UCT THIN -TodeTHER OUR INCOMES
WILL AVERME OVER 59.00 Ths YeaR!*

bill will have plenty ©

“the International

PREMIER ROSS THATCHER

ine and serious effort to get a
fair settlement of this dispute.”

Noting that the government,

during the course of negotia-
tions, did not attempt to use
either conciliation or mediation
processes, the SFL_ indicated
that the government set the dis-
pute up as an excuse to embark
upon a program of more res-
trictive labor legislation in the
province,

The provocative anti-union
element in the proposed legisla-
tion is underlined by a state-

“ment of Premier Thatcher to the

press in which he charged that
the union had planned to strike
two years ago but had backed
down at that time. ‘Now they
wish to test the government’s
determination . . . and we are

pleased to give them the
chance,” he said.
J. C, Brockelbank, deputy

leader of the CCF opposition,
charged that the Thatcher goy-
ernment created, “by its own
Opportunity” the means to intro-
duce compulsory arbitration,
“by instructing the power cor-
poration not to make a reason-
able offer.”

“The real cause -of the dis-

- pute,” he said, “is the same as

in other disputes: the rapidly in-
creasing cost of living which in
effect is a reduction in real
wages.”

Thatcher is aided in his move
to impose compulsory arbitra-
tion because the workers in the
Saskatchewan Power Corpora-
tion are split due to a raid by
Brotherhood
of Electrical Workers which has
torn a section of the corpora-

‘tion’s employees away from the
_ original

bargaining agent, the
Oil, Chemical and Atomic Work-
ers. The workers involved in the
strike are members of the Oil
and Chemical workers’ while
members of the JBEW are not
striking. Fishing in these waters,

Thatcher said, “I think the se-
cond union (IBEW) is a much
more sensible one .. . they saw
the bill and backed off.”

The members of the IBEW
have respected the picket lines
of their fellow employees and
have refused to do any work
which is normally handled by
the striking workers.

Attacking the proposed legis-
lation, Bill Beeching, leader of
the Communist Party in Sas-
katchewan, accused Premier
Thathcer of “using the plight of
the Saskatchewan Power Cor-
poration employees as a pretext
to introduce compulsory arbitra-
tion as part of his process of
creating a hospitable climate for
big business at the expense of
the workers.”

_ “This underlying fact” he con-
tinued, “transforms the strike
from the economic to the poli-
tical sphere.

“Top brass fuctionaries of the .

government. and employers like
compulsary arbitration because
it doesn’t decide ther own wages
and working conditions. It is a
means of controlling and re-
stricting the rate of wages and
level of working conditions of
the working people. It exercises
control over the trade union
movement through punitive
measures. Compulsory. arbitra-
tion removes the necessity of
the bosses to negotiate with
unions and therefore gives con-
trol of any situation to the em-
ployer by restricting or prohibit-
ing the use of the only weapons
the worker has.

“The Thatcher government

not only sells ownership of our.

natural resources for a _ song,
often underwriting the financing
of the operation with public
funds, but also threatens the
democratic rights of the work-
ing people as part of the process.
Premier Thatcher likes to refer
ta himself as a “middle of the
roader”’, no doubt a relic from
his past, but it is obvious he is
riding on the extreme right
shoulder.

“This special session of the
legislature could do something
to benefit the people. First of
all it should uphold democracy.
There is a need for laws giving
the right to workers to share in
prosperity, to make certain his
economic gains are not constant-
ly wiped out by inflation, to de-
mand a national board to com-
pel corporations to show cause
before price rises are permitted.
If the owners have a right to
profits, then the workers have
a right to strike for a share of
the increased wealth they pro-
duce. The need for such Jaws is
a political challenge to the trade
union movement.” '

cr

The hangar interior is reflected on the polished surface of
a U.S. satellite, Pageos, as. it undergeos inflation tests. The
satellite is inflated to a diameter of 100 feet and goes into orbit
2,600 miles above the earth. Photographed against the stars,
it can be used to calculate distances between different parts of

the earth.

Why the flurry ©

over a grant
to a Marxis??

A question about a Centennial
award made to Marxist scholar
Stanley B. Ryerson recently pro-
voked a question in the House of
Commons, and a reply by State
Secretary Judy LaMarsh. Miss
LaMarsh said she was “not very
happy” about the award.

The following letter: was sent
to the press by Mr. Ryerson.

ONCERN has been expressed
in the House of Commons
by Mr. Marcel Lambert

(PC, Edmonton East) and by the
secretary of state, Miss LaMarsh,
in connection with an award
made by the Centennial Com-
mission to assist in the prepara-
tion of a study of British North.
America in the period 1815-1873:
the recipient being known as the
vauthor of a number of books
which essay a Marxian interpre-
tation of Canadian historical
development, and as editor of
The Marxist Quarterly.

In view of the prejudices and
misconceptions that abound, it
is not altogether surprising that:
some people should have difficul-
ty in entertaining the idea that
a Marxist interpretation of Can-
adian history could perhaps con-
tribute to an understanding of
Confederation, and of the prob-
lems of contemporary Canada:
to say nothing of its finding a
legitimate place in publications
relating to the Centennial.

When the late Professor Har~
old Innis, the founder of econo-
mic history-writing in this coun-
try, wrote some 30 years ago
that “There is much to be said
for the Marxian approach to
Canadian history, but not suffi-
cient to support absolute cer-
iainty’? — he expressed a degree
of open-mindedness that is rare
even today.

But the situation, as regards
attitudes to Marxism, is changing
—_ even in North America. The
intellectual climate now allows
of serious academic discussion
and studies of Marxism on a
scale that would have been un-
thinkable a decade: or so ago.
There are even small beginnings
in the direction of discussion, in
college courses, of the writings
of Canadian: Marxists as well as
those of the founders, the clas-
sics of Marxism.

As regards my own work —
since I am obliged to make re-
ference to it — I would only
point out that a study of French
Canada, published in 1943, raised
some questions regarding the

bi-national character of this

country, which in the last few
years have become central to
the whole public debate.

In this regard, the guess might
be hazarded that some of the
disquiet being expressed about
my forthcoming book may not
be unrelated to the nature of the
Marxist position on French Ca-
nada, on the two national com-
munities or nations in Canada,
on the right of national self-de-
termination—a position that is
in direct conflict witht the “Bi-
Bi” conception, which seeks to
perpetuate the status quo by ob-
scuring the crucial, central
question of the right of the
French Canadians to their own
State. :

I hope that my study of the ‘

forces that shaped Confederation
may justify its place among the
large body of Centennial publi-
cations, by making a modest
contribution to understanding of
the “national question” as well
as of the “social question” in
Canada today.

September 16, 1966—PACIFIC TRIBUNE—Page 3.

a a

A) a