Labour

No easy road to unity for CUPW ©

By EVERT HOOGERS
Recent issues of the Pacific Tribune have
addressed the question of unity in the new,

expanded Canadian Union of Postal

Workers, as it wrestles with a raid initiated
by some leaders of the Letter Carriers
Union of Canada, formerly certified to bar-
gain for outside workers in Canada Post
Corporation.

This discussion scarcely could be more
timely. The labour movement as a whole
has a huge stake in the current negotiations
between Canada Post and CUPW. It
embodies virtually all the elements threaten-
ing Canadian workers within the miserable
Tory agenda, and a union loss due to inter-
nal disunity would be intolerable.

Marion Pollack’s article (Tribune, Feb. 5,
1990) succinctly outlined what is at
stake — cutbacks, job security, protections
against unfair discipline, contracting-out
(franchising — the corporate ‘cheap
labour” strategy), postal service reduction,
new technology at the expense of workers,
privatization, just to name a few items.

Given that the Conservative government
has dictated the corporation’s position in
this fight, it’s clear these forces view a defeat

| Labour Forum

of CUPW as pivotal in the advance of the
corporate program for Canada. In recent
weeks, for example, the Tories have swept
aside not only the recommendations of its
own creation (the Postal Services Review
Committee), but also the committee itself
because it advocated increased postal ser-
vice and a brake on deregulation.

With an unobstructed run at the one
organization standing in the way of Tory
plans for Canada Post now in the offing, it’s
no wonder other unions facing similar
attacks are anxious for CUPW to solve its
in-house problems as quickly as possible.

But events since CUPW won the certifi-
cation vote in January, 1989, culminating in
the current raid by LCUC, have not ren-
dered this project a particularly easy one, as
attested to by Pollack’s article and the
response by Nikki Golinowski (Tribune
Feb. 19, 1990), an outside worker who has
lived through much of the turmoil.

Differences once resolved in the Novem-
ber, 1988 merger agreement (summarily
scuttled by LCUC business agents) have
been blown into remarkable proportions by
an LCUC “power base” leadership deter-
mined to convince former LCUC members

. that “a letter carrier is a letter carrier no
matter where he/she works and a mail ser-
vice courier is a mail service courier no
matter where he/she works.” (Gerry Lowe,
“power base” leader in a Jan. 31 bulletin).
And that there is little commonality
between these outside workers and other
inside workers, and that consequently “the
Canadian Labour Relations Board will
have no choice but to return us (outside
workers) to the Letter Carriers’ Union and
the representation they have given for so
many years.”

That such assertions are hopelessly
flawed and even false is outweighed only by
the jeopardy in which they lace the project
of solidarity between outside and inside
workers as we face the Tory-Canada Post
storm. And lest there by any lack of clarity
on the import of the “power base”’ message,
Lowe has set the record straight by declar-
ing LCUC intentions “to fight this national
office of CUPW first and the boss second.”

Although the LCUC “power base”
claims it has convinced over 16,000 out of
22,000 former members to sign LCUC
cards in the raid, it seems certain that not
many of the signers would agree the struggle
against the boss is secondary to the fight
against CUPW. Similarly, it is surely note-

12 e Pacific Tribune, March 5, 1990

worthy that some outside workers such as
Nikki Golinowski have concluded that “‘it is
foolish for letter carriers to expect they will
get their old LCUC back as it was” and “‘the
only way that all postal workers can survive
such an evil employer as Canada Post is an
all united front ....”

I heartily concur. Nonetheless, this sen-
timent has not reached as far as her analysis
of how the actions of CUPW allegedly
embittered and alienated sincere, dedicated
activists from the ranks of LCUC. In fact, it
is precisely her failure to identify the role of
the employer in her assessment of CUP W’s
errors that most weakens her unity propos-
als.

Take, for example, her claim that “grie-
vances are being declared abandoned
because CUPW has neglected proper time
limits,” and her subsequent first suggestions
for unity that ““CUPW respect and act
within proper grievance time limits.”

So who says CUPW has neglected proper
‘time’ limits?” An arbitrator? A union fact-
finding commission?

Not quite. In fact, the idea that grievances
have been “abandoned” over time limits
was dreamed up by none other than Can-
ada Post itself. The corporation’s motiva-
tion is hardly in doubt. First, it wishes to
divert attention from its own constant viola-
tion of collective agreements by not replying
to grievances within time limits. Second, it
wishes to create dissension within CUPW
by providing ammunition for a slander
campaign against the union leadership.

The baited hook was swallowed quickly
by the “power base” which prompted its
supporters to generate hundreds of unfair
representation charges. against CUPW in
front of the CLRB. In so doing, they
adopted as their own Canada Post’s curious
interpretation of the collective agreement.

Forgotten in the flurry of anti-CUPW pro-
paganda accompanying these activities was

‘In the end it is the ominous
shadow of the Tory-Canada
Post program to gut our
contracts which highlights
for CUPW the best way to
build unity — on the
common interests of all
postal workers.’

the fact that the LCUC leaders upholding
Canada Post’s “technical” interpretation
were the very union officers who had nego-
tiated the agreement, and who, when
LCUC was certified, would have soundly
lambasted the corporation for such sleazy
attempts at a technical dodge to real grie-
vances.

Happily, the issue is rapidly being
revealed for what it is. Canada Post last
week was forced to belatedly drop its objec-
tions to thousands of grievances it claimed
had been referred to arbitration in an
“untimely” fashion. Its position simply was
unsustainable, having been so ruled by a
number of arbitrators, since it would have
eliminated the corporation’s obligation to
reply to grievances for all practical pur-
poses.

Identical “time limit” objections by the
corporation with respect to other grievance
stages will shortly bite the same discredited
dust. Lamentably, the unity which could
have been built had.LCUC leaders sup-
ported CUPW’s insistence that the post
office deal honestly with the merits of grie-

_vances was transformed into hostility from

some outside workers who were influenced
by the power base campaign to vilify

HOOGERS AT 1984 CUPW RALLY ...

CUPW — a campaign involving cynical
support of Canada Post’s stance in order to
achieve the desired goal.

This incident, as well as many others,
underscores the rather desperate strategy
adopted by the power base to decertify
CUPW and regain power. In short, the
thrust is to be able to convince the Canadian
Labour Relations Board that the merged
bargaining unit is unworkable, that outside
and inside workers are so utterly different
and opposed that it will be necessary to
rectify the “mistake” the board made and
return to separate units. It’s an unbelievably
long shot, but it’s the only powder in the
power base musket.

The result of all this is that when we set
out to build unity among postal workers for
the battle we’re now in, we first must recog-
nize that the LCUC power base has deliber-
ately set itself on a collision course with
CUPW. There simply is no possibility that
some sort of “dialogue”’ will convince these
LCUC leaders to change course.

From the moment the LCUC business
agents and national executive decided to
scuttle the merger agreements and its equal
sharing of responsibility and authority with
CUPW, they also rejected the prospect that
discussion and negotiations were possible in
the project of building a new union.

Like it or not, CUPW will continue to
undergo the attacks laid down in the
“power base” script until the curtain comes
down on the LCUC power play. It may be
rapid, if the CLRB squashes an application
for review of the bargaining unit in the near
future. It may be prolonged (a more likely
scenario) in the form of an LCUC attempt
to force a new certification vote for the
entire unit, rather than limit themselves to
forcing a CLRB review with further and
extended attacks and criticism of all
attempts at integration by CUPW.

The good news is that despite this diffi-
culty real unity can and will be built any-

then, as now, unity of postal:_workers vital.

way. This prospect is reflected in a number
of ways:

@ The issues in our current negotiations
struggle affect all postal classifications pro-
foundly, and the message that CUPW 1s
fighting for all classifications is coming
through loudly and clearly.

@ The decision of LCUC leaders to
recruit their supporters to raid ironically has
assisted in integrating local union structure,
because “power base” supporters have been
forced to reveal their true agenda, and out-
side workers committed to real unity have |
increasingly been stepping in to replace
them as stewards, committee members ang
local executive officers.

© Solidarity is far from dead betwee
inside and outside workers. Recently in
Vancouver. (a major centre of ‘ ‘power
base” activists) we have witnessed the total
support of inside workers when mail service
couriers erected picket lines to protest the
corporation’s stealing of their work. Many
other examples abound.

@ The June 1990 national convention in
Toronto will serve as a key forum at which
major decisions will be made to amend the
CUPW constitution for purposes of further
integrating our new members at all levels of
the union.

In the end, it is the ominous shadow of
the Tory/Canada Post program to gut the

protections of our contract, slash postal ser
vices and jobs and impose “labour saving”

new technology which highlights for
CUPW the best way to build unity — on-
the common interests of all postal workers.

No one should doubt, despite the current
internal restiveness, that our union will
accomplish this goal. And from there, with
the assistance of the entire labour move-
ment and progressive organizations in our
communities, we will together fight to break
the plans of the Tories.

Evert Hoogers isa technical advisor at the
CUPW national office in Ottawa.

TRIBUNE

Published weekly at 2681 East Hastings Street
Vancouver, B.C. V5K 1Z5. Phone 251-1186

lam Sales 1yr.$2000 2yrs. $350) 3yrs. $500 Foreign 1 yr. $32 o
Bill me later 0 Donation $ a an

i

i

i.

LY

i

i

i

i Name ....... ee
ee Phi: Sat FS es
Boccccccrttttressseeeess Postal Code
i

L

Se ee |

ee