iorsoenestiposinabiodions

NE ee TOE ee
a lia ll =

Unity key to building trades question

On July 14-15 the Canadian
Building Trades Unions will be
meeting in conference in Calgary.
Main item of business before the
conference will be differences be-
tween the BT’s and the Canadian
Labor Congress. Moves stretch-

ing from continuing warfare with

the CLC to outright withdrawal
will be discussed.

We are turning the column this
Week over to an article which ap-
peared in the B.C. Carpenters’
newspaper, On the Level, June
1980 edition, because we think it
hits the nail on the head (no pun
intended).

* ~*

In a letter to William Konyha,
General President of the Carpen-
ters International Union, Bill
Zander, President of the B.C.

Provincial Council of Carpenters

protested a reported move by the
Carpenters and other Building
Trade Unions to withhold per
capita tax payments to the Cana-
dian Labor Congress.

Zander sent the letter following
the recent CLC Convention held
in Winnipeg, where the Inter-
national attempted to boycott the
biennial convention of the Cana-
dian labor movement.

Zander stated in his letter to
Konyha that the reasons given by
International Representatives for
the withholding of per capita from
the CLC were —

“1. Industrial, union encroach-
ment into the building trades un-
ions’ jurisdiction. :
=o The problem of the Quebec
Federation of Labor and the
building trades in that province.

3. The voting structure at CLC
Conventions. BS

Dealing with the three points,
Zander said on the issue of juris-
diction, “In British Columbia,
along with other building trades
the Carpenters have been in the
forefront of a prolonged confron-
tation causing considerable strife,
over the construction of sawmills
and so on with the International

- labor councils,

Woodworkers of America. Aris-
ing out of this very unhealthy
situation and after a number of
meetings with the B.C. Federa-
tion of Labor as well as the CLC,
a committee was appointed by
the president of the CLC, Dennis
McBHermott, to attempt to reach
an agreement.

On April 25 of this year a Letter

of Understanding was agreed
upon; it was approved unanim-
ously by the CLC executive
council.
- We believe that this document
does a great deal to resolve what
has become an ever-increasing
problem of industrial unions
doing new construction work
which properly belongs to the
building trades unions.

Further, I would like to point
out that the fight for our survival
against the attacks of the
non-union sector and the ‘‘right to
work’”’ is an issue which has been
taken up by the entire trade union
movement in this province. We

have found in this struggle that in -

most cases the industrial unions,
particularly the IWA, through
the B.C. Federation of Labor
and the local labor councils,
have played a leading role in sup-
porting the building trades
unions.

Finally, because we are being
confronted at an ever-increasing
rate with anti-labor legislation,
“right to work,”’ and a general
attack on labor through the media
by big business and their govern-
ments, it would be absurd to pull
out of the CLC. This can only
deprive us of the overall
of the federations of labor and the
not
only our position but the position
of all of labor and playing into the
hands of our enemies. We would
be flying in the face of an histori-
cally proven fact, which labor has
‘always subscribed to, that ‘‘Un-
ited we stand, divided we fall!”

On the second point, Zander
went on to say, ““The Quebec

wl
\ »
NAG)
NR Lh
3 Re
Prey ((qy ‘ —
ss eet
' J — F
S ? ie
fe)
KZ) ~
(}
4
yy dlp

problem, we believe that because
of the ‘‘special conditions”’
recognized. by the trade union
movement in Canada regarding
the right to self-determination,
and because of a fractured trade

union movement in Quebec, spe-
cial consideration must be given.
We do not pretend to know the
answers but do sincerely feel that
if respect and consideration is
given to their problems and. aspi-
rations a solution can and will be
found .in Quebec. If not, the
memberships of the building
trades unions will go elsewhere,
creating even greater problems
and more fractionalization.”’
. Onthe issue of the voting struc-
ture of the CLC Zander stated,
‘*The third area of contention is

the question of the voting struc-
ture at CLC conventions. We
have not seen, nor have we dis-
cussed, a concrete proposal from
the wise men on the National
Building Trades executives, if in-
deed they have one. Our position
in British Columbia is one of stay-
ing with the present structure
which, until proven otherwise,
appears to be the most acceptable
democratic forum for achieving a
consensus and providing for rank
and file participation.

Again, however, those who are
not satisfied, those who advocate
change, should at least be pre-
pared to discuss the issue and/or
address it on the convention floor
— not use it as an excuse to ‘‘take
their marbles and go home.”’

In closing his letter, Zander cal-
led on Konyha to address this
issue promptly and clarify the
position of the International office
and its affiliation to the CLC.

Autonomy

On the broader issue of Cana-
dian autonomy within the United
Brotherhood of Carpenters and
Joiners, the. B.C. Provincial
Council have also submitted a

comprehensive 25-page brief to
the General Executive Board en-
titled, ‘‘The Continuing Case for
Canadian Autonomy.”

The submission which outlines
the history of attempts by the
Canadian members to obtain
‘‘Basic Rights’’ within the Inter-
national also spells out the serious
drain to the U.S. of Canadian
financial resources and the in-
adequate servicing by the Inter-
national in the province of B.C.

The brief points out that the

United Brotherhood of Carpen- .

ters & Joiners of America have
not met the CLC’s minimum
standards for self government
which were approved by the CLC
in 1974.

The CLC standards call for the
election of Canadian officers by
Canadians and those elected
would have the right to speak for
the union in Canada. The brief
states ‘‘we do insist that Canadian
carpenters have at least the
minimum standards of self
government, within the Inter-
national, as have been enunciated
by the CLC.

Hamilton labor on regional gov't

HAMILTON — In a unanim-
ous vote, June 12, the Hamilton
and District Labor Council
adopted a new municipal pro-
gram, to which candidates seek-
ing council’s backing in the Nov.
9 elections will have to commit
themselves.

Terry Fraser, secretary of the
Political Action Committee and a
delegate for the Intemational
Brotherhood of Electrical Work-
ers, (IBEW), introduced the 14-
point program to the council
Meeting and an accompanying
five-point action program to raise
$10,000 for a campaign to pub-
licize the municipal program.

Debate on the program centred
on the section dealing with reg-
ional government in which the
council’s position favoring one-
tier government was reversed to a
stand against all forms of regional
government.

The new proposal calls for “‘a-

return to a municipal form of
government ... with future
regionalization based on dem-

ocratic amalgamation... based.

on the right of the citizens to make
such decisions.” .

Brian Rushton, a staff repre-
sentative of the United Steel-
workers and one of only three
who opposed the change, said the
new position ‘‘comes into conflict
With the first section (preamble)
when we're talking about NDP
candidates. One-tier is the posi-
tion we’ ve had for many years —
it’s also the position of the NDP.”

Rushton was backed by John —

McCullogh who said that, ‘“NDP
policy is made at convention.
This council would be super-
ceding the convention ... (and
should) refer it back (to com-
mittee), until a meeting of the
NDP Area Council gives its
thoughts.”’

But labor council president
Harry Greenwood -thought dif-
ferently. ‘‘Regional government
is not working’’, Greenwood
said. ‘The NDP position of one-
tier government has now been re-
duced to rhetoric ... This
(PAC) committee is expressing
the desires of the people of this
council.”

Council vice-president Tom
Davidson supported the program
saying: ‘‘We went down the road
of peace with regional govern-
ment because of the attempts: in
democratic fashion to merge the
sharing of certain services ... but
we can’t do that anymore ... not
at the price of the democratic right
of the people to make decisions.””

Davidson pointed out, ‘‘a polit-
ical party can have its policies and
make its decisions but it’s not
going to make decisions for this
labor movement.

“The CLC (Canadian Labor
Congress) made decisions that
are quite different from this politi-
cal party’’, Davidson said. **We
have to make decisions that are in
the best interests of the labor
movement not of a political party.
This party — the one that we’ ve
previously endorsed — has the
best clout at this moment. But it’s
our job to fight for the best in-
terests of working people.

“This is our program”’, he said,
‘tone that’s developed by the
labor movement.” :

Also endorsing the program,
IBEW delegate Don Stewart told
the meeting that reverting to
municipal government ‘‘doesn’t
close the door to municipalities
working together for common
purposes or for common ser-
vices... One-tier regional
government is not one whit more
democratic or one whit more

open to municipal democracy
than two-tier — just ask the
people of Thunder Bay.”

.Stewart charged, ‘regional
government actually erodes
democracy. A city manager is a
part and component of regional
government. Conditional grants
and patronage are a part of reg-
ional government. :
_ “Regional government’’, he
said, ‘‘increases taxation — the
percentage of taxes that working
people have paid is up and the
percentage that corporations
have paid is down.”’

Stewart. .accused the Tory
government in Queen’s Park of
‘leaning on the municipalities’,
and said labor doesn’t “‘want to
see small municipalities get
hosed.”’

Labor council secretary Bill
Thompson pointed out that “‘the
appointment of (regional chair-
person) Anne Jones exemplifies
(the fact that) the best of our ideas
have been turned on their head,
destroyed or perverted. The de-
sire for democracy has been con-
tinually stifled.”’

Thompson added that if labor
didn’t oppose regional govcin-
ment ‘‘every nickle and dime
reactionary will be pushing for
Proposition 13 (type laws) on the
basis of proper and justified anger
of the municipalities against reg-
ional government.

Carpenters on strike

. TORONTO — Some 12,000
members of the Brotherhood of
Carpenters and Joiners through-
out Ontario hit the bricks June 16
to back contract demands for a
decent wage hike and to protest
take-away proposals put on the
table by the Carpenters Employ-
ers Bargaining Agency. —

. With the expiry of the current
agreement April 30, they have
been without a province-wide
agreement for more than a month.
In walking off the job, the Carpen-
ters rejected the contractors’
offer of a two-year pact and an
increase of $1.98 an hour.

The workers are demanding
$2.50 which is in line with other.
trades which have already settled
in this year’s round of construc-
tion industry negotiations. Build-
ing trades workers, have to main-
tain most of their own benefits
such as sickness and accident and
pensions. With massive unem-
ployment wracking the industry
right now, the wage rates which
the big-business media try to paint
as too rich don’t go much further
than industrial wages.

Also at issue are the union’s
demands for increased travel and

PACIFIC TRIBUNE—JUNE 27, 1980—Page 5