2 B.C. LUMBER WORKER FINAL STRIKE ISSUE. From Page 1— Col. 1 “Board Report” The Conciliation Board ignored the fact that there had been no wage increase in 1958, and pro- posed a wage increase of seven cents an hour during the first year, and five cents an hour the second year of a two-year agreement. An additional six cents an hour for tradesmen was recommended by the Conciliation Board, indi- cating that no attempt was made to bring journey- men tradesmen close to parity with the prevailing rates in the area. Plywood “Stall” The Conciliation Board merely proposed the selection of a job evaluation expert to re-commence the work already done by men trained for the task under the 1955 agreement. The recommendations of this expert, one supposed to be acceptable to both parties, was to be binding on both parties. Only one conclusion could be reached with re- gard to this recommendation. The Board’s majority was trying to “stall’”’ any settlement, and then when action became necessary, to make sure of results favorable only to the employers. This would deny plywood workers a decent wage structure for another period of years. The fact that the plywood issue, by decision of the District convention was placed in general nego- tiations this year, made it imperative that the prob- lems of the plywood workers should be resolved this year. In this sense, the recommendation of the Board, became an important strike issue. The Conciliation Board made a recommenda- tion regarding category rate revision that was in effect agreement with the employers who wished to remove all provisions for rate revision from the con- tract. This recommendation proposed that both parties attempt to agree upon a mutually acceptable procedure for a trial period. This concealed a threat to category rate revisions. If the contract had been revised to delete the existing provisions, and substi- tute the one proposed, all provisions for annual rate revisions would have totally disappeared. Bargaining Agency The question of seniority rights under blanket certifications was referred by the Board’s proposal to subsequent negotiations between the Union and management. In the light of experience, this would have left the matter unsettled for an indefinite period. Still worse, it would have taken the ground from under the practice established in some in- stances by Local Unions, which had served to pro- tect the workers concerned. The Conciliation Board refused to make any ef- fort to correct a situation that had been causing hardship to loggers ina number of operations. It pro- posed that there be no change in the travel time con- tract provisions, even though the evidence was so conclusive, that it could not be successfully denied by the operators. Here again the majority report was so worded that if the Union had attempted to draft new provisions based on the proposal, all travel time benefits might have been suspended un- less fought for by the Union. The fact that the Board recommended the Union and management should work out a satisfac- tory provision left the door open to deletion of the existing provision which had been challenged by the See “BOARD REPORT” P. 11—Col. 1 From Page 1 — Col. 2 “Deutsch Report” additional ten cents an hour the. second year of a year contract. : He made it explicit that the increased pay be retroactive to June 15th. His proposal gave the Union eight cents an hor more over the two-year contract period. a : The Deutsch report recommended an addition increase of ten cents an hour for journeymen trad men effective June 15th, 1959. This upped the Board’s offer by another cents an hour. | Plywood Accepted The Deutsch proposals regarding the finaliz; tion of job evaluation program in the plywood tion of the industry, laid the basis for an improv wage structure. The text of this proposal is as follows. The immediate implementation in the plywood industry of the Job Evaluation program worked o pursuant to the memorandum of understanding 4 June 22nd, 1955. All jobs in the 0 to 81 point range shall be paid at base rates and the groupings shall progress at 10 point intervals (i.e. 0 to 81, 82 to 91, — 92, to 101, etc.) with a 4 cent an hour increment be- tween each group. The pay rates of existing incum- ments (red circle jobs) are to be protected against decrease until such time as job openings become available at the same pay rates or higher. The mat- ter of the differential between men’s and women’s pay rates for group 4 and subsequent groups is to be negotiated by the parties in accordance with the cir- cumstances in each plant. The above formula was recommended by the © mediator after long hours of discussion dealing with — this complex problem. When fully implemented, it will reduce the number of plywood workers on the — base rate by more than fifty per cent. The value of the clause may be summarized in the statement that seventy-four per cent of the ply- wood workers in eleven plants will receive pay in- creases, in accordance with skills required for the © jobs which they are performing. Procedure for Rate Revision a Definite provision is made for the appointment of a joint examining committee on a trial basis. A number of situations are made that did not appear ~ in the Conciliation Board’s report. (1) A committee ~ must be formed under the contract terms, and (2) it _ must deal with new jobs and jobs with changed con- tent. It is also provided that the procedure is to be — reviewed every six months. The text of the report on this point is as fol- lows: “The establishment, on a trial basis, of a joint examining committee representing both the Union and Management to determine whe- ther wage adjustments are indicated where it is found that significant changes have been made in the nature of existing jobs. This pro- cedure is to be reviewed periodically as experi- ence is gained, say once every six months. This — procedure is not to interfere in any way with Section 4 Article VI of the Master Agreement. — The Deutsch proposal on travel time while no as definite as the Union desired, does, howe point the finger at abuses permitted by some en See “DEUTSCH REPORT” P. 11—Col. 2