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