B.C. LUMBER WORKER Ist Issue, March, EDITORIAL SSBB 43 °° Every trade unionist must realize that the new Trade Union Act (Bill 43) is intended to make it easy for the employers to “hold the line” on wages and contract conditions. - In no single respect does it offer any advantage to trade unions acting for workers seeking better wages. In many respects, it is designed to stop the cus- tomary trade union activities necessary to gain better wages and working conditions. This is the reason that employers’ organizations are delighted with the Act. They intend to use it to intimidate militant trade union action. In the months to come, trade union members should remember that this was why this Act was passed at the insistence of the employers’ organizations. If he is disappointed, because his wages are not increasd as they should be, he should place the blame where it belongs—with the Social Credit Government. Every trade union member should know how this Act affects his living standards, that at the next session of the Legislature he may be ready to demand its repeal. The employers have tried to convince the public that the Act (Bill 43) will apply only to those unions which commit unlawful acts. This is not the truth. The truth is that activities of trade unions which have been neces- sary and lawful, have now been made unlawful, and unjustly so. By the repeal of the former Trade Union Act and by the introduction of new restrictions many important rights of the trade unions have been taken away. The Trade Union Act (1959) (Bill 43) takes away the right to make strike action effective against the employer who will not grant reasonable contract terms. It does this by: (a) Prohibiting picketing except at the employer’s pies of business and by members of the striking union only. (b) Prohibiting support from the members of other unions. Refusal to handle “hot” goods is now illegal. (c) Prohibiting the publication of information else- where about the unfair labour practices of the struck employer. (d) By making every infraction of the Act and the Labour Relations Act not only illegal, and subject to the penalties of the Labour Relations Act, but also actionable. One illegal act by one member in regard to picketing, makes all picketing illegal, and makes the union liable to court action for damages. Delays Explained Owing to circumstances beyond the control of the Editorial Board, the publication of recent issues of the B.C. Lumber Worker has been unavoidably delayed. This has been due to a jurisdictional dispute involving members of the printing trades in Vancouver shops. And You (e) If the employer successfully sues for damages, the union’s funds can be attached. If these funds do not satisfy the judgment, no protection is given the welfare funds of the union and the personal assets of its members. (d) As any infraction of the Labour Relations Act can be the pretext for action for damages, the new Act can easily provide the employers with the opportunity to so delay negotiations as to make them ineffective. (£ The presumption related in the Act that a Union is guilty of any illegal act by any of its members until the contrary is proven is open to wide abuse. Innocent men can be made to suffer for the acts of mischief- makers. The Trade Union Act (Bill 43) has one major pur- pose. It is designed to prevent successful strike action, by restricting the picketing and similar activities whch make strike action successful. It is intended to expose any striking trade union to the danger of complete bank- ruptcy by damage suits on the part of the employers. When trade unions are deprived of the right to take effective strike action, they are completely at the mercy of the employers when bargaining for their contract demands. The spokesmen for the employers who now say that the Act will not harm the trade union which refrains from any illegal act, simply do not understand that the right to strike, and strike effectively must stand behind any union at the bargaining table to get results. U.K. Trade Unions Now Protected In response to numerous enquiries regarding the Taff Vale decision in Great Britain, which has been frequently referred to in the recent controversy over Bill 43, a brief summary of the circumstances surrounding that famous incident is given below. Publication date of the next issue of the B.C, LUMBER WORKER is Morch 19th. Deadline for ad copy is March 12th and for news copy March 13th. CC LoncenWorver PUBLISHED TWICE MONTHLY ON THE FIRST AND THIRD THURSDAYS BY International Woodworkers of America (C1O-CCL) Distriet Couneil No. 1 eS = DISTRICT OFFICER: President Joe Morris ist Vice-President . Joe Madden 2nd Vice-President Stuart M. Hodgson Fred Fieber ard Vice-President Seeretary-Treasurer International Board Mei Address all communications to GEORGE H. MITCHELL, Secretary-Treasurer 45 Kingsway - Dickens 6261-2 Vancouver, B.C. Subscription Rates.............82.00 per annum Advertising Representative... G, A. Spencer Authorized as Second Class Mail, Post Office Dept., Ottawa 27,600 COPIWS PRINTED IN THIS ISSUT George H. Mitchell ‘Walter F. Allen The Taff Vale case which cost the Amalgamated Railway. Servants 50,000 pounds and “made” the British Labour Par- ty arose out of a strike on the Taff Vale Railway in South ‘Wales in 1900. Former railway strikes had been defeated, which encour- aged the Taff Vale Railway Co. to fight the strike with every weapon at its disposal. Strike breakers were import- ed, but were persuaded not to work as scabs. It was never al- leged that any acts of violence were committed. After the Company had pro: secuted some of the individual strikers it decided to proceed against the Amalgamated Soci- ety itself. Two actions were launched. An injunction was sought to restrain the Society and its officers from commit- ting acts calculated to damage the company in the operation of business—i.e. the hiring of strike bearers during the strike. Secondly, the Society itself was sued for damages caused by the actions of its officers and members in that they had caused the railway to cease its operations: The injunction was granted and in the second action the Company was awarded 23,000 pounds in damages with costs. The decision was upheld after appeals to the higher courts and eventually to the Privy Council of the House of Lords. It must be emphasized that the question before the courts was one of civil and not crimin- al liability. It was well under- stood that trade unionists were liable for prosecution for acts of violence or threatened viol- ence in connection with their picketing. ers and unions that the trade union acts barred any such ac- tion as brought by the Company against the railway union. The Taff Vale judgment it- self was based, not on any acts of violence, but’ on the civil damage caused the railway company by the strike itself, and by the attempts of the strikers to deter the scabs peacefully from accepting strike-breaking employment. It was soon realized by the whole British trade union move- ment that the judgment struck at the roots of all effective strike action. The British trade unions were galvanized to take yigorous, action, as the judg- ment set a precedent which would enable the employers to bankrupt any union taking strike action. In the next general election, a large group of labour mem- bers were elected. Soon after, the British Trades Union Con- gress decided to foster the foun- dation of the British Labour Party. Upon the election of La- bour members in a sufficient number to the British Hoy of Commons, the decision reversed in Parliament by am- endments to the Trades Dis- putes Act. "Slap In the Face” ‘The Clark report on the U.S. old age security system is a “slap in the face to Canada’s senior citizens,” CCF House Leader Hazen Argue said an exclusive interview. “The great weakness of this report is that it makes no_rec- ommendations whatsoever,” Mr. Argue said. The lengthy report, just tab- led in the House of Commons by Health and Welfare Minister Monteith, claims in effect that the U.S. pensions system is pro- bably too expensive for Canada now. “Tt just wanders around both sides of the subject. It's about as indecisive as the Prime Min- ister,’ Mr. Argue commented. ‘A very poor report, and badly done” was the CCF House Lead- er’s answer to this reporter's question as to whether Dr. Clark’s work was valuable at all. If you re-fuel a power lawn- mower when the motor is hot, remember that one gallon of gas- oline blows up like 83 pounds of dynamite. nee ee A TV picture tube “explosion” has the effect of a hand grenade. If there’s a fire in the room, coy- er the set with a rug for protec- tion. Up to that time, it had been generally accepted by employ-Convention, Vancouver, GEORGE DRONECK, B.C. Staff Representative of the Amalgamated Clothing Workers, prevails on Joyee Stewart, Con- vention delegate from Local 1-217, IWA, to draw the lucky tickets during the Union Label draw at the 22nd Annual IWA District PRIZE E DRA ERIDRY. i |