-IWA Officials Claim Tha
Effort Not Mere Lip Service

Signed editorial appearing

in the February issue of the

B.C. Lumberman, organ of the BCLM.A, and alleging lack
of sincerity in professed support of the safety program has
caused IWA safety men to wonder if management is pre-
paring to abandon the friendly cooperation which has fea-

tured the prograth to date.

In his statemént, Editor Van
Perry reports situations, encount-
ered by him, where violations of
the accident prevention regulations
were flagrant. From these ex-
periences, he apparently. makes the
deduction that the root cause of all
such violations of safe procedures
stems from the innate perversity
of the workers in the industry.

Union Spanked
The editorial is more than criti-
cal of IWA participation in the!
safety program, and says “it is|
hard to appreciate why a union
button should be permitted to}
‘double’ as a license to threaten
life, limb, and working ahility of |
others wearing the same button.
‘The implication is that the Union
is an obstacle in the way of an

effective safety program.

after serious accidents, but had
focussed attention on the steps re-
quired to prevent any recurrence
of similar accidents. This con-
structive attitude, he claimed, had
made full cooperation on the job
possible.

“Get Tough’

Concern was expressed that a
spokesman for the employers, who
is well and favorably known for
his great personal interest in
safety, should now advocate a “get
tough” policy toward the Union's
members, on the ground that it is
their laxity alone which is respon-
sible for the defects discavered in
the prograin.

It is freely admitted, said the
District Secretary, by both labor
and management representatives,
that the safety program is far from

— 1955

COAST LOCCING AUCIDENTS.

——————

This point of view, as stated in
an employers’ publication was
dealt with by District Secretary-
Treasurer George Mitchell on the
Green Gold radio program, March
V7.

Union Defended
He pointed to the fact that since
1948, the Union has given con-
sistent and conscientious support
to a safety program, based upon
an agreed-upon plan of coopera-
tion between management, labor
and the Workmen's Compensation
Board.
He described how the Union had
ercised care to ensure that con-
flict in any other phase of labor-
management relations should not
be projected into safety matters.
The Union had not persisted, he
said, in attempts to “fix blame”

Complaints regarding its exist-
ing imperfections should not ob-
scure that fact \that progress has
been made, with very important
results. Any perfectionist may
ly spot defects he said, but the
only claims made have been in
respect of progress, and not per-
fection.

Division of Responsibilities

‘The present program is based
on the underrstanding gained of
the proper division of responsi-
bilities in accident prevention.
Management is responsible for
safety in the maintenance of the
premises and equipment, the
training of the workers in safe
working procedures, and the
necessary continued. supervision
of working procedures.

The Editor of the B.C. Lumber-

man in describing acts of careles:

Dead...

OCCUPATION: Chokerman
EXPERIENCE: 5 or 6 years
AGE: 60 Years

The workman, who was normally employed marking logs, wa:

the woods helping: the Cot operator

bring out a tree length log. After

hooking the choker to the log he stook beside the Cat. As the log was

- winched the front end hung up on a tree, Th
down a small sapling which struck the workman injuring him fatally. He

was not wearing a Safety Hat.

rear end swung and brought

‘ployer cuts his production costs.

ness or neglect, does not mention
to what extent management in
these instances had been neligent
in supervision or in giving leader-
ship ‘to the crews with regard to
safety considerations.

Management has always insisted
upon the unrestricted right to
direct the working force engaged
in production. Management must
therefore accept full responsibility
for the direction of production in
such’a manner as to ensure safety.
Safe working conditions spell ef-
ficient production.

The enforcement of the regula-
tions, under-the law, rests with the
Workmen's Compensation Board.
Labor benefits by such enforce-
ment in protection, and the em-

Union’s Responsibility

The Union has recognized that
it must uphold safe working pro-
cedures. The lives and the work-
ing ability of its members are at
stake.

It is the proper function of the
Union, in respect of accident
prevention, to encourage its
members to cultivate safe work-
ing habits, leading to instinctive
compliance with the job require-
ments, That IWA members of
the safety committees are sincere
about this work, would soon be
realized by anyone who attends
the Union’s safety conferences.
The Union is determined that
the entire membership shall be
enlisted in the effort, and has
succeeded in breaking down

aT

t Union

ca

much of the former apathy.

The Editor of the employers’
magazine is on dangerous ground,
when he suggests arbitrary action
in dealing with an offender.

In the first place, many of the
imperfections now to be seen in
the safety program stem from long
years of neglect. It is not so many
years ago that men were regarded
as heing expendable, and manage-
ment upheld the tradition that it
was unmanly to place safety be-
fore production demands.

Justice: Vital 7

In the second place, the safety
program must rest on considera-
tions of justice and fair-play. Be-
fore any worker is made to suffer,
for any offence under the condi-
tions of his employment, proper
cause must he proven for any such
disciplinary action.

The Union must make its stand
for even-handed justice in this re-
spect. It is for this reason that
protective provisions are written
into the contract. These provisions
in no way make safety unwork-
able, but on the contrary place
safety on the only satisfactory
basis to gain effective results, The
contract stabilizes these results
they would not be stabilized by
breaching the contract.

‘Threats of drastic penalties will
not satisfactorily inculcate the
spirit of whole-hearted observance
of the safety rul Safety educa-
tion, conducted to date, has
done far more to inspire men to

work with a deep-rooted regard
for the safety code, than any puni- |
tive measure proposed or adopted. |

Survey Suggested
IWA safety men suggest, that |
if the Editor of the employers’ |
magazine would make a more}
thorough survey of conditions ani
all operations, he would in all fair-
ss he compelled to reach the

following conclusions

1. Where members of the
supervisory staff have under- |
stood safety engineering prin-
ciples ,and have taken pains to
organize cooperation on the job,
the accident frequency rates have
tumbled.

2. Where members of the
supervisory staff have evaded
their responsibilities by attempts
to shift the blame to the crew

WAVE YOU EVER SEEW'

4 SCMER WORKER,
< QRESSED CHKE THIS f

dea caw oawcee PS
ORESSED LIKE THE £ —>

members, safety gets shelved.

3. Where the safety program
is getting genuine results, care
is taken to promote good will
and enthusiasm in cooperative
relations between labor and
management.

4. The program works where
both labor and management
agree on a proper division of
responsibility, and live up to it.

An unsafe habit may be start-
ing the very first time you are
guilty of an unsafe practice. That
first time may not get you into
accident trouble, but you're bait-
ing the habit trap to catch your-
self later.

why tel om

A Word to the Wise; Use

Both Your Eyes.

Undesirable
By-Products.

of
Industry

OTTO KWOWGETTER ..:;

SOME PEOPLE IT SEEMS
STILL HAVE TO BE TAUGHT. |

NOT TO LIFT
WITH A STOOP-*

\

f

Perm
Cost to lg
Days wa

Work
follows;

Lumber
Const:
Trade
General
Operatio
Provinjs
Metal miji
and
Navigati
Operati
Railroad
Light, pq
Fishing
Coal mii

An accidy
interrup|
progres

might ré
damage (
output.

4
Compensiji

Accident,’

The pra
duty, a mr
sity and
attainmey.

BRI

WORKMEVS COMA

~ | BUT, INSTEAD. |

~ WITH A

souat/