RESIDENT'S MESSAGE

Reasons to organize
are many in Canada

by Dave Haggard

ice
\f
|

\ $F hen we held our national conven-
/ tion in Thunder Bay, Ontario in
/ late September and early Octo-

ber, the delegates passed a num-

ber of resolutions to put this
1 union’s organizing program into
motion. I.W.A. members from all over Canada
debated our National Organizing and Growth
strategy and passed a resolution to put a big
chunk of dues money into organizing the unor-
ganized. And I’m glad they did.

The facts are that we are approaching the
21st century and the struggle for workers’ rights
in Canada is continuing unabated. In fact in
some areas of our country the struggle is facing
more obstacles.

All you have to do is look at two cases where
our Ontario locals are trying to get collective
agreements to see the need for union represen-
tation.

In Hawkesbury Ontario Local 1000 members
have been on strike against a ruthless employer
at the Place Mont Roc retirement residence
since mid-August in a fight back against conces-
sions (see story page three). The employer is try-
ing to break the strike by herding scabs.

When I visited the picket line in October I
saw a very determined group of women and men
struggling to get some fairness and justice from

their employer. The
employer has Bot the

udacity to hold par-
ties for his group of
scabs to keep them
stealing the jobs of
our members.

The right wing
government of Mike
Harris is assisting
this disgusting em-
ployer and is mak-
ing a mockery of laws
that create justice
for workers. We will
not abandon this
strike and will see it
out until there is a
new collective agree-
ment in place.

We should all be
concerned when
labour laws in this
country allow em-
ployers to prolong strikes by allowing scabs
past picket lines and, in the case of Place Mont
Roc, for the quality of services to elderly people
drop as a result.

In Thunder Bay, Local 2693 has been involved
in a bitter scrap against an employer, Indus-
trial Hardwood Products, just to bring some
basic rights to workers who have been mis-
treated, harassed, and fired for trying to join
the I.W.A.

The case of Industrial Hardwoods (see pages
10-11) is a situation where the employer was so
belligerent and so disrespectful of workers, that
even the Ontario Labour Relations Board threw
the book at the company and granted our union
an automatic certification.

Just thinking about Place Mont Roc and
Industrial Hardwood makes my blood boil. But

rather than get mad, we |
as a union have to get
even with these rogue
employers. We have to |
stick it back to them |
until they respect work-
ers and give them the
pride and dignity that
they deserve.

We have to organize
and educate the unor-
ganized and let every
single worker in Canada
know that there is a
place for them in our
organization.

There is a place for
them ina union that will
fight hammer and tong
with any employer, of
any size, in any province
of Canada. There isa
place for any worker of
any size, shape, colour,
or creed in the most democratically run work-
ers’ organization in this country. __ :

We are going to get more organizers out in
the field to do just that.

In January of next year we will have com-
pleted our first phase of organizing seminars
(ORG ID) right across Canada, and will be gear-
ing up for advanced education for organizers as
well.

Despite the tough economic times that forest
industry workers are facing in B.C., in 1998 we
are going to forge ahead to organize and edu-
cate. It’s time to get the show on the road.

We’ve got the talent in our membership,
we've got the mandate, and we’ve got the pro-
grams developing. Let’s all make 1998 a big
year for the I.W.A. and build this union bigger
and stronger.

ANDS AND FORE

Time to move ahead on
certification standards

by Kim Pollock

t’s increasingly important that Canadian
forest companies gain international recog-
nition for the progress we’ve made toward
} sustainable forest management. That

became particularly clear in recent weeks.
(| First, portions of the Swedish forest indus-
try signed an agreement with the Forest Stew-
ardship Council, the international “green stamp”
wing of the powerful green movement.

Second, the British building products company
B&Q announced it would no longer purchase
Canadian hemlock from British Columbia. This
provided ample opportunity for green extremists
on both sides of the Atlantic to again dump on
Canada’s forest sector because we rely on “old-
growth” forests.

The two events are in fact related. Although
Greenpeace was quick to claim credit for for
B&Q’s announcement, in fact they can take no
credit at all. In reality, B&Q is a member of the
United Kingdom’s Group of 95-plus, a loosely-
knit group of mildly green-leaning retailers.
Alan Knight of B&Q is an old FSC fellow-trav-
eller. In 1992, B&Q announced that “timber
from clear-felled natural forests, regardless of
the reasons they were felled, will not be accept-
able.” But surprise: B&Q also stated in 1994
that it would only sell timber certified by FSC.
The problem was that FSC had not certified any
that was useful.

So about a year ago The Group of 95-plus
warned FSC that the green stampers would
have to stand and deliver or get lost.

As a result, FSC cut a deal with the Swedes.
Whereas FSC propaganda is long on opposition
to clearcutting, for example, the Swedes were
required to do little other than comply with
existing Swedish law and refrain from harvest-
ing “old growth” — after some six centuries of
timber harvesting, they have nearly none.

The Scandinavians clearcut very extensively,
however, as anyone who has ever flown over can
confirm. Indeed, many Canadians who have vis-
ited Sweden, including I.W.A. president Dave
Haggard, note that Swedish forest practices are
no better, likely not as good, as those required

under the British Columbia Forest Practices
Code and in some other Canadian jurisdictions.

.

Still, there was green
joy. “The fact that Swe-
den was the first large
forest industry nation to
agree on criteria for eco-

labeling will be of great
importance around the

world and inspire many
other countries to follow
suit,” gushes Per Rosen-
berg of the World Wildlife
Fund.

Suddenly, the FSC had
some product to offer
British retailers, the
Scandinavians had a secure, certified market in
the U.K. and Europeans could tut-tut about how
we Canadians cut.down “old-growth” to make the
same forest products according to the same prac-
tices that they use. We’re always in danger when

our competitors’ self-interest lines up with green

the country. It’s interesting to speculate, for
instance, whether the FSC would willingly take
into account the huge reliance of Canada’s forest
sector on “old-growth” forests compared to Scan-
dinavia. Would FSC cut British Columbia forest
companies a “Swedeheart deal?” I think not.

That’s a key reason for the CSA to move for-
ward on both the certification and ISO fronts. So
far, according to CSA, 15 major companies and
some 12,000 private woodlot owners in coopera-
tion with their associations are working to imple-
ment the standard. These companies and orga-
nizations reportedly cover alba 20 million
hectares — an area that already approximates
the total Swedish forest area. They collectively
harvest between 25 and 30 million cubic metres
of wood.

But we still haven’t actually certified any
forests. Meanwhile, FSC is out helping our com-
petitors to penetrate our markets and gain mar-
ket share by trumpeting their adherence to

self-righteousness!

That’s why it’s crucially
important that we get
our own certification
process up and running.
I.W.A. CANADA sup-
ports the Canadian Stan-
dards _Association’s
National Sustainable
Forest Management Sys-
tem, approved as a Cana-
dian national standard
in September, 1996.

These standards, the

The FSC is out helping our
competitors to penetrate our
markets and gain market
share by trumpeting their
opposition to harvesting
“old growth.”

“green standards.”
Some Canadian firms
have indicated impa-
tience with the
CSA/ISO and have
started talking to the
FSC.

For our part, the
I.W.A. categorically
rules out FSC involve-
ment. Based on the FSC
involvement of organi-
zations like Greenpeace
and other anti-logging

outcome of a cross-coun-
try process of consultation, help forest operators
move forward toward sustainable management.
On-the-ground performance objectives will be set
for both national criteria and local values.
Progress toward the objectives will be monitored
through third party audits, leading to the issuance
of a certificate: the certificate informs customers,
consumers and the public that the company has
met the requirements and is moving toward sus-
tainable forest management.

At the same time, Canada is also moving to
link its sustainable forest management stan-
dards to the International Standards Organiza-
tion’s ISO 14001 and 14004 Environmental Man-
agement System standards, which are applicable
world-wide. The ISO is internationally recog-
nized as the leading world-wide federation of|
national standards bodies, with participants from
about 100 countries.

Compared to the green FSC, the CSA\ISO
process offers a flexible approach that will accom-
modate the diversity of Canada’s forests, the
range of ownership and tenures and and the fed-
eral-provincial division of powers that creates a
mosaic of different legislation and policy across

extreme groups, it
would be much like letting a bunch of arsonists
become fire inspectors. You know that their real
interest is not in ensuring that timber harvest-
ing and forest management are conducted prop-
erly, but rather that the industry is destroyed,
devastated and ultimately shut down.

Could loggers in B.C.’s central coast or Ont-
ario's Temagami region really trust the the same
people who blockaded them out of work turn
Geet and regulate their industry? Again, not

ely.

No, we're still better to work within our own
national process and within an international for-
mat that allows room for international differ-
ences and diversity.

I simply urge the CSA to keep pushing ahead
and not get bogged down in technical details or
“interpretation.” Those details will be sorted out
as we “learn by doing.” Let’s keep our eye on the

Pee and keep the process moving forward,
folks!

Kim Pollock is the Director of I.W.A. CANADA’s
Environment and Land-Use Department.

a

4/LUMBERWORKER/DECEMBER, 1997