PRESIDENT’S MESSAG

Freedom of press
only a pipedream

by Jack Munro

” )HIS fall we will be reading and hearing

| more and more about a future trade deal

_ with Mexico. As, in the free trade elec-

| tion days of 1988, we will be told by

1 media pundits and editorialists across

Canada, that we need a trade deal with
Mexico.

And as in those pre-election times, we will
be told again and again, through the media,
that if we don’t get into a trade deal with the
U.S. and Mexico we will suffer economically.

Those who will be campaigning and pro-
testing against such a trade deal will receive
little coverage by the media if any. In all
likelihood there will be no in-depth reports
investigating the oppressive working condi-
tions in Mexico or the massive loss of jobs in
Canada that would result from such a deal.

When we look at television, listen to the
radio, and read a newspaper we must keep in
mind that the media should be trying to cover
all sides of an issue.

The fine democratic values that make Can-
ada the unique nation that it is are based on
things like “informed consent.” People respect
existing laws and debate the enactment of
new laws through a political process in which,

it is assumed, everyone has a pretty good
understanding of the facts.

The media facilitates the political process

by reporting the facts
in a serious and un-
biased fashion. But if
corporate values take
the upper hand in that
scheme of things, no-
tions like informal
consent suffer a seri-
ous setback.

The media distrib-
utes a very powerful
product — informa-
tion. And in all sorts
of direct and indirect
ways, that informa-
tion shapes and pro-
motes the democratic
values that are the
basic fabric of our
society.

ae |

may be very uncom-
fortable with that
trend, large media cor-
porations see it as
enormously profit-
able.

The problem from a
public perspective is
that significant news
stories are either ig-
nored or trivialized.

Hopefully when the
free trade deal with
Mexico is reported,
Canadians will be able
to discern for them-
selves what is unbi-
ased and balanced re-
porting and what is

Examining the
newspaper business in
Canada, it is pretty obvious that the concen-
tration of media ownership does not serve the
public, does not enhance the quality and
reporting of information and, most of all, does
not lead to a greater diversity of opinion.

It’s that diversity of opinion that lies at the
root of our notion of a free press. However,
freedom of the press is today what it always
has been — freedom for publishers to peddle
their views and promote their agenda.

It is extremely frustrating to hear media
companies rattle on about the importance of a
free press when the product they turn out
doesn’t substantially address things associ-
ated with a free press. A free press should be
the public eyes and ears on what the system
isn’t doing right.

One of the major disturbing trends in the
media is that news is being treated as enter-
tainment. Whereas journalists themselves

being peddled for
them as a message
from the corporate media bosses.

We should be aware that our democratic
values are being threatened by the unchecked
imbalances that exist in the corporate media.

Governments are unwilling to step in and
regulate. And God help us if they ever did. In
terms of balance I don’t see a Brian Mulroney
or a Bill Vander Zalm as having the ability or
the motivation to restore the balance. Once
governments begin to alter the media the
amount of “free press” that we are prepared to
live with is implicitly altered.

By themselves media corporations have to
show a lot more editorial accountability anda
lot more balance, both in terms of presenta-
tion and reporting. There is some distance to
go before there is again enough competition in
the media industry which could pressure the
media giants into doing a better job.

NE UNION IN WO

Merger of unions
still in future

By Gerry Stoney

experiment was short-
lived as the pressures
of negotiations start-
ed to build and old
personality conflicts
resurfaced. This re-
sulted in the Pulp
Unions going on strike
and the IWA continu-
ing to work. The re-
sults were disastrous

ITHIN the IWA in Canada seri-

ous discussion about working

towards “One Union in Wood”

didn’t begin until 1967. Inter-

estingly, from the International
Pulp Unions and the formation of the Pulp
and Paper Workers of Canada.

If one sits and examines all of the pros and
cons of forming one union to represent all
woodworkers in Canada there can be no other
conclusion than that it is a good idea. The
main compelling reason is that the Forest
companies have one employers’ union in wood
now. Although they may play cutthroat with
each other as far as market control is con-
cerned, when they are facing negotiations
with the unions representing their employees,
they have no problem in forming a common
front to ensure that they achieve the best for
all of them.

Recognizing that the idea of all workers in
the Forest Industry belonging to one union is
a good idea is one thing. Bringing about the
necessary mergers to put it in place is some-
thing else.

Since serious discussions commenced
within the IWA about this issue a number of
attempts have been made to move towards
this goal.

In 1975 an agreement was reached between
the IWA, C.P.U. and the P.P.WC. to form a joint
bargaining front in negotiations for a collec-
tive agreement. It was agreed that common
strategies would be adopted, that there would
be regular consultation and that there would
be observers from the IWA sitting in on pulp

negotiating meetings and vice versa. This

as far as any chance of
a merger in the near future was concerned.
Under the existing laws, the Pulp Unions
took full advantage of their right to picket a
common employer and almost 20,000 IWA
members were picketed off the job for almost
three months. The strike finally concluded
when the Pulp Unions were legislated back to
work. The IWA had reached a settlement a
couple of days before, but the Pulp Unions did
not settle for some time as Federal Wage and
Price Controls were brought in by Trudeau's
government in the in-

two Regional Councils in Canada,” made a
merger at that time impossible.

The most positive move towards a more
unified unionized workforce in the Forest
Industry came about in the Spring of 1988
when agreement was finally reached between
two large locals of the Lumber and Sawmill
Workers Union in Northern Ontario and
IWA-CANADA to merge. Although this was a
positive move and provides IWA-CANADA
with a much larger presence in Ontario it is
probably not the pattern for One Union in
Wood in Canada.

It will undoubtedly take a major common
problem or goal for all unions in the Forest
Industry to force the players to come to a
table and talk seriously about merger. When
this does happen and there is no doubt that it
eventually will, there will be many hurdles to
overcome.

Two of the major unions, C.P.U. and the
Energy and Chemical Workers Union elect
their officers at convention, while the other
two, IWA-CANADA

terim. This incident
once again polarized
the unions for a long
time as far as any
thought of merger
was concerned. Even
though there was ex-
treme bitterness be-
tween the IWA and the

It will undoubtedly take
a major common problem
or goal for all forest
sector unions to talk
seriously about merger

and the P.P.WC. elect
by referendum ballot
of the entire member-
ship.

The structure of all
four unions is differ-
ent, resulting in dif-
ferent staffing ar-
rangements, wide var-

Pulp Unions, Brother
Munro joined with the Forest Industry
employers and travelled to Ottawa and was
successful in convincing the A.I.B. that the
Pulp Unions should be allowed to receive the
same settlement, including Pension Improve-
ments that the IWA received.

They had been told earlier in no uncertain
terms that the settlement far exceeded the
A.I.B. guidelines.

The next serious attempt at a merger took
place in the early 1980’s when discussions
commenced at a National level with C.P.U. and
a number of meetings were held which at first
appeared to have some chance of success.
However, it soon became apparent that the
differences in structure, “The IWA was still
part of an International Union and there were

iances in per capita
assessments, as well as strike fund assess-
ments and payments.

These issues combined with the history of
conflicts both personality and issue-oriented
will provide a mammoth challenge to those
who are at the table.

The other compelling force which may ulti-
mately force the process is the Rank and File
membership of the unions affected. The aver-
age worker in the industry would far rather
stand side by side with a fellow worker in the
industry and face the employer than be at
odds with his Brother or Sister and fighting
the employers at the same time.

Gerry Stoney is the Ist vice-president of IWA -
CANADA.

a

4/LUMBERWORKER/SEPTEMBER, 1990