FROM PAGE ONE

being paid to unemployed workers,
approved a demand for a supplemental
unemployment benefit plan which would be
funded by the forest industry and would
provide members on UIC additional
benefits up to 95 per cent of their regular
wage.

High on the delegates’ list of priorities
was the demand once again for a union-
controlled safety and health research fund
based on one cent per hour for all hours
worked, with the plan being funded by the
employers.

It is estimated that such a fund would
generate approximately eight hundred
thousand dollars a year which could be used
to pay independent medical research people
to check out all suspected job related work
hazards.

Another demand indicating the Union’s
interest in getting more time off called for
all overtime to be paid at double time rates,
with the employees having the option of
taking the overtime pay or having the
equivalent time off with regular pay and at
the employee’s discretion.

To compensate the members for shift
work, the delegates approved ademand that
a shift differential of five per cent be paid for
the afternoon shift and 10 per cent for the
graveyard shift.

The delegates also called for
improvements to the Union’s Health and
Welfare Plan, Dental Plan and Extended
Benefits Programme.

Other demands called for:

e A substantial general revision for all
Tradesmen and Apprentices.

e A substantial upward revision and
revamping of the Logging Wage Scale.

e An upward revision for all premium rates
including air tickets.

© Oilers’ rates to be revised and pegged in
line with Third-Year Apprentices.

e A substantial increase for daily power
saw rates.

e New construction rates to be paid for
work on mill expansion and technical
changes.

e Comprehensive changes to the hours of
work section in the Master Agreement.
© Removal of the qualifying conditions on

Statutory Holidays.

e Plywood Evaluation, Sawmill Rate
Determination and Sawmill Evaluation
to be completely reviewed and revised to
correct any disparities which exist, and
that upward revisions for both the
categories and wage curves be part of the
review.

e A clause to protect members during
permanent or partial plant and camp
closures.

e All grievance and union-management
meetings to be held during working hours
without loss in pay.

© Upgrading of the Apprenticeship
programme plus a proper ratio limiting
one apprentice for each four tradesmen.

e An industry-wide Troubled Employees
Programme, jointly administered and
funded by the employer on a cents per
hour for each hour worked.

eA comprehensive clause governing
Contractors, Sub-contractors and Owner-
Operators.

© One Master Agreement covering the
Coast, Northern and Southern Interior.

© Elimination of the $50.00 tool insurance
deduction.

e An amendment of the 1977 Memorandum
of Agreement covering Graders and

en.

An affirmative Action Plan similar to the
plan adopted by the B.C. Federation of
Labour to protect the rights of minorities.

© A ban on the use of new chemicals until

they have been proven safe by a reputable
government agency.

e Employers to pay the cost for fares of
employees working in remote areas after
each six-week shift.

© Safety equipment to be provided at no
cost to employees.

DAVE BARRETT

“WE GET
THE HOLE”

By DAVE BARRETT
NDP Leader of the Opposition

With world demand for natural resources
increasing at a tremendous annual rate, a
seller’s market has developed as never
before seen in economic history.

That’s what has given rise to the eco-
nomic power of OPEC oil-producing coun-
tries and other commodity associations. In
British Columbia with its wealth of resour-
ces this development has brought us the key
for unlocking our century-old hope of creat-
ing an industrial base to our province’s
economy.

California achieved this years ago with
far fewer resources than B.C.

Saskatchewan has managed to use the
seller’s market in potash to give a major
boost to its entire economy by exploiting
spin-off benefits.

Here in B.C. coal is the current resource in
the limelight. There is a world-wide demand
for our coal, not just in Japan. That demand
is our opportunity to develop our economy
beyond the continuing boom-bust cycle.

For a considerable period now, I have
argued that the only way to achieve that is
to link spin-off developments to our resource
contracts. For instance, the coal we sell to
Japan should have a contractual condition
that a substantial portion will go in ships
built and manned by British Columbians.

In other words, instead of Japan building
new ships to service the contracts, it should
be required to buy some ships in B.C. to
carry our coal. What a boost that would be
for our shipbuilding industry.

Similarly, some part of the railway rolling
stock for the unit trains should be reserved
for construction in B.C. That was why the
NDP administration started up the Rail-
West plant. The present coalition govern-
ment destroyed RailWest out of spite to-
wards our accomplishments. And it didn’t

insist on any spin-off benefits for B.C. in the
current coal sales to Japan. f

The result, at the very best, will be that
Japan will get our coal and we will be left
with the hole, as Stu Leggatt has pointed
out. Worse, there’s evidence as the Socreds’
own Jack Davis has acknowledged, that
Premier Bennett’s latest deal will mean a
public subsidy by British Columbia taxpay-
ers of $10 to $20 a tonne to send the coal to
Japan’s steel-making furnaces.

While our government was patting itself
on the back for a deal which could see as
much as a billion dollars of public money
being spent during the next 15 years,
Calgary-based Manalta Coal Ltd. con-
firmed it also had signed a 30-million-tonne
export contract of Alberta coal from that
province’s northwest. In that case, however,
the Japanese have agreed to share 40 per
cent of the expected development costs. In
our case, not a cent of their money is being
put up front.

Does that sound like a good business deal
that will help transform B.C.’s future eco-
nomic base or does it sound like the same
tired story of a quick fire-sale of another
non-renewable treasure for the sake of a
short-term political gain? Didn’t the Colum-
bia River Treaty fiasco teach us anything?

Finally, if our citizens have to subsidize
coal to Japan to help build cars and such,
can we expect the Japanese public to subsid-
ize Toyotas to B.C. in return?

COURT UPHOLDS
WEB CLAIMANT

In a landmark decision a B.C. Supreme
Court Justice ruled that the Workers’ Com-
pensation Board must open its confidential
medical files to claimants wishing to chal-
lenge the Board’s ruling on their medical
history.

Until now the Board refused claimants
this right by arguing that it was confiden-
tial information.

Supreme Court Justice John Bouck
agreed with Craig Paterson, a Vancouver
lawyer representing Vincenzo Napoli of
Smithers, that the claimant is denied justice
when the evidence is taken in secret and the
right to challenge it by cross-examination
and rebuttal is not available.

Napoli, a Canadian National Railway
employee, injured his back in 1974 while
pulling two dead horses off the CNR track
near Smithers. He filed an injury claim and
was awarded a permanent disability pen-
sion of $41.04 a month.

Prior to appealing the low amount of the
assessment to a board of review, Napoli
applied for permission to see what his
medical report said. The Board refused his
request on the grounds that it was confiden-
tial information.

Napoli, with the aid of legal assistance in
Smithers and Craig Paterson, applied for
permission to sue the Board. The request
was granted and at the hearing in Van-
couver Mr. Justice Bouck not only found in
favour of Napoli but also ordered the Board
to pay his court costs.

The Board has indicated it may appeal the
decision. However, if the decision stands it
will mean that all WCB claimants in B.C.
who challenge a ruling of the Board will
havethe automaticright to see their medical
files.

The Workers’ Compensation Board
served notice February 19 that it will appeal
the Court decision.

The Board’s chairman, Dr. Adam Little.
in announcing the decision, stated that
the Court decision creates an adversary

system which pits a worker against t)
Board. e ns

Lumber Worker/February/March, 1981/7