THE B.C, LUMBER WORKER

Representing the Organized Loggers and Lumberworkers of British Columbia
Published Every Second Monday By
INTERNATIONAL WOODWORKERS OF AMERICA (CIO)
DISTRICT COUNCIL NO, 1
25,000 copies printed this week
Subscription Rate: $1.00 per year
Advertising Rates on Application
Editor: B. J. MELSNESS Advertising: MATT FEE
Room 504 Holden Building—Phone PAcific 4151—Vancouver, B.C.
Authorized as Second Class Mail, Postoffice Dept., Ottawa.

e
The deadline for the coming issue is 4 p-m.
Thursday, May 16

The Commission

al O bring about a settlement of the dispute, and in-an
attempt to prevent a strike in the woodworking in-
dustry, the Federal Minister of Labor, the Honorable
Humphrey Mitchell, has appointed Chief Justice Gordon
McGregor Sloan as a Commissioner to investigate. The
appointment is made under authority of Order-in-Council
PC 4020, as amended, which states: “When in any indus-
try to which the Industrial Disputes Investigation Act
f . applies, a strike or lockout has occurred, or seems
to the Minister of Labor to be imminent and whether or
not a Board of Conciliation or investigation has been ap-
plied for .. . the Minister of Labor may refer the dispute
to a tribunal to be designated as an Industrial Disputes
Inquiry Commission, which shall make a preliminary in-
vestigation into the dispute promptly, and if a mutually
satisfactory adjustment is not afrived at, shall advise the
Minister of the matters at issue. . . .”

In effect, Order-in-Council P.C. 4020 is a formal pro-
cess of by-passing the normal processes under Wartime
Labor Relations Regulations P.C. 1003 and the Wartime
Wages Control Order P.C. 9384. The order has been
used to good effect in a number of cases, notably in the
dispute between the United Packinghouse Workers and
the three big meat packing companies. The commissioner
appointed in this case was. Chief Justice Richards, who
granted voluntary check-off, maintenance of membership
provisions and other concessions.

Other cases in the past where the government has
used similar action in by-passing the normal procedure,
was the recent Ford dispute on union security, where
Chief Justice Rand handed down his formula for union
security, which provides compulsory payment of dues by
all employees, regardless of whether they are members of
the union concerned or not. Also, in the case of the Coal
Mines late in ’44, the government used the same pro-
- cedure, and in Vancouver, with the Street Railway Work-
ers early in 1945, the orders-in-council were by-passed
and a settlement effected.

The Canadian labor movement has consistently re-
quested the government to amend the Order-in-Council
PC 1003 to make it more workable and also to provide
for check-off and maintenance of membership: This
should be done by the government at the earliest possible
time.

In the meantime, the union maintains that it is pre-
pared to meet night and day, if necessary, to bring about
a peaceful settlement prior to May 15th. If the employ-
ers are sincere in their desire to settle it can be done
without picket lines, if they are not, it will be done the
other way.

Operators Responsible

N MAY 7th, the District Executive Board of the

IWA met and issued the following statement: “Your
District Negotiating Committee having exhausted every
peaceful means of bringing about a settlement, pursuant
to the union’s just demands, declares that unless the em-
ployers consider a satisfactory settlement to the Union’s
just demands, on or before 11 am,, May 15th, 1946, the
district excutive board declares a general strike in the
woodworking industry of British Columbia.”

The above statemnt was made as a result of the op-
erators’ flat refusal to agree to the Union’s fair proposal
to arbitrate the union security question.. In making the
proposal to arbitrate, the union maintains that if agree-
ment can be reached on this manner of disposing of this
difference, we would in fact be settling the matter by
mutual agreement in negotiations; it being. understood
that the results of such mutually-agreed upon arbitration,
would be binding upon both parties. If the operators
hhad agreed to dispose of this one point in this manner,
the union felt. that they would then be in a position to

make some counter-proposals to the operators offer of
124c per hour increase and the 44-hour week. The oper-
ators, in refusing, must accept the full responsibility for
any tie-up which may come in the industry.

The operators, on the other hand, asked that we
make joint application for the oppointment of a_concili-
ation officer and proceed under P.C. 1003, the Wartime
Labor Relations Regulations. The union disagreed to
this proposal; first of all in that it would necessarily
include the 14 points submitted by the operators to
which the union took exception because they were not
put forward, in the opinion of the union, in acocrdance
with the provisions of the 1945 agreement.

The second point is the fact that the process of
negotiations on wages and hours has not been exhausted
and it would be foolish to submit to a government board,
questions.on which there was no deadlock. The oper-
ators have stated that the union had refused to move
from their demand of 25c per hour and the 40-hour week,
which is incorrect. The union offered to make counter-
proposals which would necessarily have to be something
different from the original, provided the operators would
agree to dispose of the union security question.

This is a fair proposal on the part of the union.
Decision to announce the deadline was made in accord-
ance with instructions of the last quarterly council meet-
ing that “with authority vested in it by a 93 percent
positive strike vote of the membership, the District Ne-
gotiating Committee reject any and all stalling on the
part of employers and government.”

If they desire to do so, the operators can prevent a
tie-up of the industry, and the responsibility for any such
tie-up must rest with them, for their untenable position
of not accepting the responsibility in negotiations.

Legal Aspects

A NY TIME after strike action starts, attempts to dis-

tract public attention and the attention of members
of the IWA from the main issues of the strike may be
expected from the police or boss loggers through arrests
and injunctions against picketting, etc. These are well-
known strike-breaking techniques, but if properly handled
by the various local defence committees and the legal
advisers of the Union, the effect can be largely nullified.

The first point to bear in mind is that legal proceéd-
ings must NEVER be allowed to become the main issue.
The isue now is, and will remain, better wages, hours
and union security. It is definitely NOT legal cases!

Bearing these considerations in mind, the tasks of de-
fence committees is twofold: Firstly, to make every effort
prior to strike to line up as many bondsmen as possible,
realizing that before the strike is over bail will be needed
and it is of the utmost importance that Union leaders and
pickets. who are arrested should be released and sent back
to their duties in the quickest possible time. Bondsmen
should fall into two classes; those who will put up cash
and those who have real estate registered in their own
name, taking into consideration unless real estate is so
registered it may not be put up for bail.

The second task of defence committees will be
counter-atcion against legal injunctions involving officials
of the Union or the pickets themselves.

In cases of arrest, immediate reaction of the Defence
Committee should be to send a representative to the
police to check the name of the party arrested and the
charge laid against him. Once having obtained this infor-
mation, phone or wire it to the District Office or to the
IWA’s legal attorney, John Stanton. It is essential that
the central committee be kept informed of all charges
laid, no matter how trivial they may appear to be or how
serious. Application should then be made by the De-
fence Committee concerned for‘ bail; for which there is
no set procedure. Should any doubt arise about granting
of bail, again immediate contact should be made with
the central committee. It is inconceivable that any of-
fence could arise during a strike of such a serious char-
acter as to warrant a Magistrate refusing bail, but this
may be attempted in an effort to intimidate the strikers,

In paying cash bail, simply hand the required amount
to the police officer, or court clerk, who will issue a re-
ceipt. The arrested man will then be released and will
be told when to appear in Court. Note carefully that the
party who hands the money in and gets the receipt IS
THE ONLY PARTY WHO CAN GET THE BAIL
MONEY BACK AGAIN.

If property bail is ordered, the owner of the prop-
erty should appear at the police station and sign a bond.

_ Once the bond has been typed out and signed by the

bondsman and the accused, the latter is released from
cutsody and told when to appear in court,

When a charge is laid against a person, he jg NOT

invariably arrested. In these cases, he is merely sum-
CONTINUED ON PAGE FOUR

INFLATION
Poe”

| PRESIDENES’

J..t2 COLUMN

In a democracy such as ours,
the right to a rising standard

of living cannot be challenged
If wages are chained to living
costs, thereby restricting the
living standards of the people,
future advance would be halt
ed. Tjoday, workers’ pay
cheques are only half the nee
essary amount to buy back the
products that industry cam
produce; at the same time
large surplus profits are being
accumulated at the expense of
the consumer, the majority of
which are the workers.
Statistics recently gathered
by our research bureau, shows
that according to figures from
the Labour Gazette for
1945, using 1939 as a basis for
the average wage index, just
after the war commenced, the
average wage index for 104
was 137.5, or an average
ly wage of $31.84. From
amount of course the
tax must be deducted: s
ment was then made for
cost of living in
with the figures as publi
tha Toronto Welfare
Budget. It was found,
1944, using the figure 19
cent as a base and allo
the income tax and cost
ing adjustment, the net,
wages for a married ma
two dependents was
cent, a married man
dependents 90.4 per ¢e
for a single man 80.6