aptually showing a. reduction in (buying power over the year 1939 for all groups, with the single ‘man penalized even more than ‘any other group. Now let us look at the other ‘aide of the picture, in terms fo ability to pay, as far as indus- ‘try is concerned. I quote the f following statement of Presi- ‘dent Truman, published in the |tabour Gazette, November, "1045; _ “Phe President asserted that ‘the “twin objectives’—stability of prices and higher wages” Were not irreconciliable, and that there was room in exist- tng price structure for business “85 2 whole to grant “substan- tial” increases in wage rates.” ‘The reason he gave for this was the fact that labor costs had reduced by the elimination '®f overtime pay since the end “of the war. Increased output Per hour of work, as a result of “Rew machinery and new meth- of production. Elimina- tion of the excess profits tax— this has already taken “place in Canada, the reduction being from 100 per cent to 60 cent with 20 per cent re- turnable this year. Whitout the profits ‘of tha companies in the wood- industry, the total in- of 25c per hour across board for all workers in industry, could almost be out of the savings on ex- profits tax. 40-hour week is a condi- ef work which has pre- in many industries and ef work and which been recognized by legisla- on | normal and desirable condition, A shorter work week will create employ- ment for many of our people, for many thousands of war workers and returning veter- ans, by the elimination of all overtime and the institution of second and third shifts. At the same time, consumer goods must be produced in greater quantities, with a view to pre- venting increases in prices. , Our third major demand, union shop and check-off, which the employers have re- jected so bitterly, is not only a practical condition of work, but is a vital matter of prin- ciple, Union shop clauses in an agreement are nothing more than the logical outcome of the collective bargaining pro- cess, It is not something new or different in employer-em- ployee relations. It merely represents the ultimate stage in ocllective bargaining. In view of the apparent re- luctance on the part of the op- erators in the woodworking in- dustry, to place the question of union shop and check-off in the hands of an arbiter and continue to negotiate on the question of wages and hours of work, the union charges that the employers are more con- cerned with open shop and chaotic conditions, than to ne- gotiate a peaceful settlement of the dispute, The proposal of a three-year contract with- out consideration for our de- mand for union security and the-40-hour week, is merely an attempt on the part of the em- ployers, to turn back the wheels of progress and shelve these important matters. It is apparent that the operators de- sire to force a strike in the lumbering industry, utilizing the stoppage of work to elim- Here I am “anursing a lost week end” and Melsness holl- ering for some copy as he is getting out an extra edition. Reckin he wants me to deal with the present situation in my own quaint way. Some day, boys, we're going to find out a whole lot about the lumber industry in this province. Don’t get swelled heads, but according to latest reports, you're about the most important 37,000 workers in B.C. The whole danged prov- ince depends on you all being at work. How much you get for your work is a “hoss of a different color”; main thing in some people’s thinking is just the work, Take this $9,000,000 in- crease in wages that the ne- gotiating committee turned down. ‘Twas admitted by the opposition that the $9,000,000 covered 2,000 extra lumber workers the bosses expected to hire, No wonder Mark Twain said, we have lies, damn lies, and then we have statistics. One day day the Vancouver daily newspapers report the overwhelming majority of the rank and file “wish to settle on the terms offered.” Next day, “the strike is called there will be a complete walk out, making thousands more job- less,” and then the last straw, “the strike is illegal.” Speaking to an old crony the other day, I says “If you go on strike you will be illegal.” “Tilegal,” he fairly snorted, “by the snuff colored water of the Fraser River, our negotiating committee can negotiate and negotiate, yes, negotiate fer six years and if they didn’t accept what the bosses offer, we would still be called il- legal. It wasn’t illegal to ac- cept relief some 15 years ago, but it was a damned poor way of living. If the boys don’t hold out for the full increase in wages and keep price controls on the living costs, we will have a gunny sack relief dole standard of living like in 1932, And besides, many workers in Canada are depending on what the IWA settles for; so we will have to use our full economic strength to make the best pos- sible wage gains.” I figure the old lad was talk- ing hoss sense, especially about the IWA being a good, militant union. The IWA ain't going to be like the man standing on a high bridge telling his pardner how strong he was, “Why I could hang onto the railing of this bridge with you a’holding my feet and I could pull us both up.” So a bet was made on the spot and as soon as the men got in position. the strong man hollered, “Hang on tight down: below, while I spit on my hands. Reckin District No. 1 sort of spit on their hanks back in January District Convention. inate price ceilings on all wood products and force prices up- ward at the expense of the general public. If the employers are throw- ing down the gauntlet to labor, we can and will pick it up and earry it until victory is achiev- ed. \ Page Three What Are The Issues? The employers, through paid ads in the dailies, are trying to confuse the issues and befuddle the public. To us, the real issues are, a rising standard of living for all the people with full em- ployment and security. Employers Oppose Security In direct opposition to those aims are arrayed the forces of reaction, the antilabor employers who seek a return to “open season” on the purchasing of labor-power. Men like Victor M. Drury of the Canadian Car and Foundry Company, who told his shareholders last fall, “The party is over. Not only will there mot be enough jobs, but wages will have to be brought down to former peacetime levels. If employees won’t take a cut in wages, tha plant will have to close down. We cannét afford to have our Profits cut into by paying high wartime levels-” But such a perspective promises nothing but an economy, of searcity, a shrinking home market, a mounting national debt, wi- employment and inestimable social loss. The question is not whether we can afford to support a policy of increasing but actually whether we can afford not to increase them. Huge Profits Justify Wage Hoist ! What are the facts? The Bank of Canada annual report on the financial condition of 678 Canadian companies shows that the average net income to stockholders between 1936 and 1939 was about $263,000,000; the average between 1940 and 1943 had in- creased to about $301,000,000, or just a little more than 13 per cent. A substantial portion of these dividends ($345,000,000) was re- tained by the companies as undistributed profits. At the same time the average amount put aside for depreciation charges in- creased from an average of $11,000,000 during 1936-39 to an average of $175,000,000 during 1940-43, an increase of over 57 per cent. The total current assets of these companies (this includes cash on hand, marketable securities, accounts receivable and in- ventories) increased steadily from $1,160 million in 1944. Last year the H. R. MacMillan Export Company alone paid $1,349,322 in excess profits tax. The company’s “take-home pay,” after deducting all taxes, was more than 100 per cent of capital stock investment in the company. Fabulous profits were also earned by other companies in British Columbia’s major industries. These figures hardly suggest that Big Business has been suf- fering from financial malnutrition during the last few years. On the contrary, it is perfectly clear that a very nice killing has been made out of the war, and that industry moves into the reconstruction period in a stronger position to expand than ever before. Why Increased Wages Are Necessary ? What is the minimum wage requirement? The Toronto Wel- fare Council recently conducted a study by trained socialworkers, nutritioners, doctors, etc. on the minimum requirement for a de- cent standard of life. The 1944 report states: “The conclusions from this study would indicate that in 1944 2 minimum of $36.85 a week would be required to cover the bare essentials for health and self- respect for 2 family of five with two adults . . - The Committee feels that if this budget is studied it will be generally agreed that no un- reasonable expenditures are included and many limitations are assumed.” This budget provides only the barest minimum for maintenanco of health and self-respect. It is not’ enough. It doesn’t provide for a rising standard of life; it takes a minimum yearly income of $1,864.20 to just get by. How does this compare with the average take-home pay of families in Canada and B.C.? How does this figure measure up to this “barest minimum?” Statistics on Canadian incomes show the following facts for the year ending February, 1943: Aver Income Aver. Per Year Per Week 485,526 heads of families averaged «$908.00 $17.46 536,013 unmarried males averaged « 450.00 8.66 337,811 unmarried females averaged » 374.00 7.19 That meant that 1,357,000 workers or 44 per cent of all wage and salary earners in the country during the year ending February, 1943 (a war year), received anywhere from $18.39 to $6.53 less per week than was required to provide 2 minimum standard of “health” and self-respect.” And the figures for British Columbia are very little better. According to the Dominion Bureau of Statistics, in 1941 ,the lower third wage-earner group received an average of $574.00 per year or approximately $16.00 per week. The above figures provide ample proof of the imperative need for wage increases. How much is 81 cents per hour in 1945 worth in terms of 1939 purchasing power? Workers today must be concerned with more than their money ‘wages—they must think in terms of real wages. ‘As an example, let us consider a married man with no children, who has gained a 16c per hour increase from 65c to 8ic during thé war period. 1945 Money Less Inome Less Dom. Bureau ‘Real Wage Today Wages Tax of 9%% of Statls. Increase In Terms of 1939 in Cost of Living since Purchasing Power 1939—18.49% 81e ie 14.9¢ 58.4e Thus 81c today, in terms of 1939 purchasing power, is only the equivalent of 584c, actually less “real wages” than this worker was receiving in 1939. : How About Price Increases ? Do Wage Increases Necessitate Price Increases? According to “Canada 1945,” the official handbook of the Federal Ministry of Trade and Commrece, the net wage increase between 1939 and 1943 (that is, wages above increased living costs), was 15.6 per cent. In the same period, according to the “Advanced Report on Manufacturing Industries of Canada, 1943,” issued by the Dominion Bureau of Statistics, it is shown that production per employee rose 85 per cent between 1939 and 1943. Thus, if the labor costs per unit of production were the atcual yardstick in determining the selling price of such a unit then the prices should have dropped by 19.4 per cent, the margin between the increased production and the increased wages- “ CONTINUED ON PAGE FOUR