MacBlo operations

Continued from page one

counters with the position that the
company is attempting to crank up
production at each operation even
though its I.W.A. employees are
amongst the most productive in the
world. MB also intends to pressure
and isolate crews that don’t accept its
attempts to unilaterally change work-
ing conditions.

Although MB says it does not want
to rock industry-wide negotiations, if
its move is successful, then other for-
est companies are likely to follow
suit.

At a press conference held in LW.A.
CANADA’s national office boardroom
on the day of the LRB application, Na-
tional President Gerry Stoney laid out
the L.W.A.’s strategy and explained the
union’s plan to the media.

He said that once bargaining starts
with FIR on May 5, 1996, MB will be
on the outside looking in and whatev-
er pattern agreement the union reach-
es, MB will be facing down the road.

Two days after the press confer-
ence, FIR accepted the terms of a
“protocol agreement” (see story page
three) which says that all accredited
FIR member companies and coast lo-
cal unions will be at the table for the
duration of bargaining. There will be
no job action taken against any indi-
vidual company or lockouts imposed
by any individual FIR employer. If the
union takes job action it would take
all of the companies on and if there is
a lockout situation, then all of the
LW.A. will be locked out.

Tn addition the protocol agreement
allows the union and the FIR accredit-
ed companies to seek solutions to lo-
cal issues that are to be solved out-
side of master agreement bargaining
sessions.

“MB is not covered by that (proto-
col) agreement,” Brother Stoney in-
formed the media. “They have chosen
to be on their own.”

In reaction to the I.W.A.’s LRB ap-
plication and the signing of the proto-
col agreement, on August 30 FIR an-
nounced that MB would now become
an “associate member” and be entitled
to benefit from the protocol agree-
ment.

However the union’s position is that
MB can not have its cake and eat it
too. They have decided to deaccredit
and have done so with the very intent
of taking the I.W.A. on ina fight.

The L.W.A. tried to keep MB inside
FIR as an accredited member but the
company’s decision makers ignored

° The union will require the support of all of its members to gauge an effective fight-back campaign against MB in 1997.
Photo taken at Canadian White Pine division, Vancouver.

the union, even though there was a
protocol agreement in the works prior
to MB's getting out of the employers’
association.

“We think the LRB application will
be successful,” said Stoney. “The
trend of governments (action) in this
area is to consolidate bargaining...”

He then gave examples where the
governments have imposed bargain-
ing councils in such sectors as health
care, education, construction and rail
unions.

“Their (government labour board
decisons) trends have been towards
the consolidation of bargaining units
rather that the diversification or
break-up of bargaining units,” said
Stoney.

Then he questioned MB’s entire
strategy to deaccredit from FIR and
destabilize the forest industry in 1997.

“If I were a shareholder in MacMil-
lan Bloedel, which I am not, I would
be concerned about MacMillan
Bloedel heading down the path to
confrontation with their forest indus-
try employees - whether they be
I.W.A. employees or they be (with
the) pulp unions, as a result of this ac-
tion.”

Stoney reminded the media that
both the Communication, Energy and
Paperworkers of Canada (C.E.P.) and
the Pulp, Paper and Woodworkers of

Canada (P.P.W.C.) have thrown their
support behind the I.W.A. In June, Bri-
an Payne, Regional Vice President of
the C.E.P. and Gary Worth, President.
of the P.P.W.C., joined the I.W.A. in
announcing that they would keep MB
pulp and paper operations isolated
during 1997 contract talks in order to
ensure that the company does not get
a cheaper deal in that sector. All three
unions have agreed to sit down and
coordinate their bargaining strategies
in 1997 and not to allow MB to pick
off any individual operations.

In 1993, MacMillan Bloedel was the
leading company in breaking up asso-
ciation bargaining in the pulp and pa-
per sector. However, both the C.E.P.
and the P.P.W.C. stuck to their guns
and forced the company to sign an in-

dustry pattern agreement in which no
cheaper deals were made.

Stoney reminded MB shareholders
that the company could be in a situa-
tion where it will battling all of its for-
est industry employers in 1997.

“MB has to take a good look at this.
The company is being microscoped
these days by their shareholders and
the financial world out there as to
whether or not they aren’t just un-
neccesarily provoking a confrontation
with their employees,” commented
the union president. “The employees
are not looking for a fight in 1997 but

they are not going to take this lying
down.”

Stoney said that if MacMillan
Bloedel even steps on one I.W.A.
member then it will have all 4,100 to
contend with.

“At the end of the day, MB is wor-
ried about their bottom line,” said
Stoney. “They are not doing this to
give more money to their employees.
If they wanted to do that they could
just write cheques.”

He said that the union hopes it is
sending a clear message that MB’s ac-
tions are unacceptable and that the
1.W.A. would take the same action
against other companies that tried to
get out of FIR.

He reminded the media that the
union fought a similiar battle against
Pacific Forest Products which deac-
credited from FIR in 1993. Before the
end of 1994 negotiations, which
wound up in a three year contract for
the industry, the company agreed to
get back into the employers’ associa-
tion and sign the master agreement.

“We have a good collective agree-
ment,” said Stoney. “We have the high-
est paid forest workers in the world
and we like it that way.”

“When you narrow it down, there
are not a lot of problems areas out
there,” he added. “But they (MB) want
to bust it (association bargaining) up.”

ey

Manitoba labour laws

Continued from page one

“This is one of the most draconian
pieces of legislation that has been
seen in years,” says Brother Ander-
son. “This is right-wing government to
the extreme and there is no place for
it in Manitoba.”

Jack Alexander, President of I.W.A.
CANADA Local 1-830 says the Tory
government is trying to shackle the
union movement at a time when there
is no demand for changes to labour
laws. He says that there is no demand,
even from employer organizations, for
large-scale labour law reform.

He points out to an example that
Premier Filmon is getting back at
unions for their campaigning against
his government in 1995. In April of
last year, the Manitoba’s Teacher So-
ciety ran print ads questioning the
policies of the Filmon government.

“The teachers pointed out some se-
rious problems in the education sys-
tem which were directly attributable
to the budget cuts and attacks on edu-
cation by the Conservatives,” says
Brother Alexander. “Filmon has had a
thing for them since then and the at-
tempt by his government to shut
unions up is part of his government's
response.”

But Alexander says that the unions

will not be quiet on matters of a politi-
cal nature and gives the reminder that
the Supreme Court of Canada has al-
ready ruled that unions have a right
and a responsibility to act and speak
out on political issues which affect
their members.

Brother Anderson says that the
I.W.A. takes political action on behalf
of the majority of its members and de-

The Manitoba
government is trying
to disrupt internal
union affairs and
weaken union
democracy

cides to support the NDP, a party
which is opposed to most Conserva-
tive policies.

The major objective of the legisla-
tion is to weaken unions and make
Manitoba into a low wage province
which will compete for investment on
that basis.

Filmon does not appear that he is
prepared to move at all, despite bi-
partite committee recommendations

that say that government should not
interfere in internal union affairs.

The conservative Winnipeg Free
Press wrote an editorial on July 13
which directly criticized the govern-
ment for allowing dismissal of work-
ers for picket line incidents.

It wrote: “This proposal lies in the
midst of a thick bundle of amend-
ments all aimed at weakening unions
and worker in their efforts to certify
bargaining units and bargain collec-
tive agreements.”

Lyle Pona, Director of Organizing
at the I.W.A. CANADA national of-
fice in Vancouver, says the sweeping
changes to the Manitoba Labour
Code proposed in Bill 26 exceed the
brutal attacks on working people
previously seen in Alberta and On-
tario.

“Some provisions, particularly
those that interfere with the unions’
internal matters would even make the
most reactionary legislators in the
southern United States blush with
envy,” says Brother Pona.

Bill 26 will do even more than “turn
back the clock,” says Pona. “It will vir-
tually end the right of workers in that
province to organize freely without
employer interference.”

He points out that employers such
as Louisiana Pacific, which recently
began operating an oriented strand-
board plant in Swan River, must be
preparing to “uncork the champagne

bottle” if the proposed changes be-
come law.

“In British Columbia our union
should continue to breathe a sigh of
relief for ‘dodging the bullet’ as we
surely would have been facing the
same destiny had the Gordon Camp-
bell Liberal formed the government in
the election,” adds Pona.

Rob Hilliard, President of the Mani-
toba Federation of Labour, says there
are several other government bills
pending, which will negatively affect
unions. They include giving the gov-
ernment sole discretion of determin-
ing what is an essential service during
public sector work stoppages; allow-
ing the government to hire a special
Commissioner to determine what
union is the bargaining agent for em-
ployees, the size of bargaining units,
and the legality of existing collective
agreement clauses when new employ-
ers (i.e. Regional Health Boards) are
created.

Hilliard also says the government
plans to eliminate minimum standards
on construction sites at the discretion
of the Labour Minister and effectively
eliminate collective bargaining rights
for the province's teachers. 35

The MFL plans to continue a public
relations campaign as part of its strat-
egy to counteract the proposed
cheanees Bill 26 will 20.908 for public

earings prior to the reading in
the legislature.

2/LUMBERWORKER/SEPTEMBER, 1996