Organizing program
builds on our base

by Dave Haggard

S we move our national organizing
and growth strategy ahead in the
weeks and months ahead, it will do
us some good to take a look at what
is happening in the Canadian econ-
omy and what kind of jobs are being

generated.

Information released by Statistics Canada
this.month reveals that the top ten job cate-
gories for male employment are truck drivers,
retail sales clerks, janitors/caretakers, retail
managers, farmers, sales reps, vehicle mechan-
ics, material handlers, carpenters, and con-
struction labourers. ~

For women, it goes like this. Number one is
retail sales clerks, then office secretaries,
cashiers, registered nurses, accounting clerks,
elementary/kindergarten teachers, waitresses,
office clerks, babysitters, and receptionists.

Across Canada there are about 1 million peo-
ple directly and indirectly employed by the for-
est industry, which is the traditional base of the
Industrial, Wood and Allied Workers of Canada.
There are about 363,000 Canadians who are
employed directly by the forest sector, in log-
ging, milling, remanufacturing, etc. and in the

pulp and paper sec-
tor. We have about
36,000 of them in the
I.W.A. The rest of the
unionized forest sec-
tor is largely repre-
sented by the CEP,
the PPWC and the
United Paperwork-
ers International
Union.

There’s still a lot
of organizing work
to be done in all sec-
tors of the forest
industry. We realize
the fundamental
importance of union
building on our for-
est sector base.

For years we have
been hammering
away at non-union
forest industry em-
ployers and have had some recent successes.
For instance, last year Williams Lake, B.C.
Local 1-425 finally, after several attempts,
organized the Riverside sawmill (formerly
Jacobsen Brothers) and brought in 238 new
I.W.A. members.

In Manitoba last year, local and national
union organizers narrowly missed, by only one
vote, organizing over 140 workers at the
Louisiana Pacific oriented strand board plant
in Swan River.

Another Statistics Canada report say that in
the last ten years, ending in 1996, there was an
average annual growth of 1.7% per in the forest
industry. In the wood industry itself, that

growth averaged 2.6%
per year, adding over
12,000 jobs to the Cana-
dian eons

Much of that growth
is in emerging sectors
such as silviculture. We
are now negotiating a
collective agreement
with New Forest Oppor-
tunities, which will
bring into the I.W.A.,
over 1,000 members in
the silviculture sector
on the B.C. Coast. After
that we are going to
turn our attention to
the province’s Interior.

Our men and women
are out there doing the
job and we will keep up
the good work organiz-
ing in the forest indus-
try sector.

But we must also organize, as our very own
constitution says, in the other areas outside the
forest industry sector.

If you look at the top ten categories for jobs
for men and women, it’s easy to figure where
unions are not prominent and who needs repre-
sentation. Many of those jobs, and other job
categories not in the top ten, would not be
there if it wasn’t for the strong forest industry
base that underlines the Canadian economy.

As we progress in the months ahead, we
must continue with our policies of fighting to
keep that forest industry base strong, and orga-
nize in all other sectors, many of which depend
on forest industry dollars for survival.

It’s the ordinary folks

who need forest jobs

by Kim Pollock

ast summer, as our members picketed
two Greenpeace ships in Vancouver har-
, bour, Dave Haggard faced TV cameras
be and told Canadians why. His message
_ _. was clear. Greenpeace is just another
(3d multinational corporation: “We've been
fighting multinational corporations for 60
years,” Haggard reminded viewers.
And that’s really what it’s all about: whether
it’s a company trying to cut corners, an environ-
mental group trying to put people out of work
or governments that forget their role as stew-
ards of both forests and people, I.W.A. CANADA
is there to stand with the workers against pow-
erful, privileged interests.

It's about balance. To quote our national For-
est Policy: “Our forests must be managed for
long-term sustainability. That means we must
constantly work to find balance between our
environmental, social and economic concerns.”

For our members who work in the forest sec-
tor or in forest-based communities, forestry is
the future, still critically tied to timber har-
vesting and to forest sector jobs.

From timber harvesting flows hundreds of
thousands of indirect jobs as well as export
earnings for our national and regional economies
and public services.

We say harvesting should be sustainable;
governments should insist on reforestation,
good forest practices and job creation. But ulti-
mately we believe that “doing the work needed
to produce wood and paper products is an hon-
orable way for Canadians to earn a living.”

It’s also about fairness. Many of the current
schemes to reduce timber harvesting would do
little to solve the real environmental problems
humanity faces. But they would do much “to
eliminate job opportunities, disrupt communi-
ties and damage or destroy the economy of for-
est-based towns across Canada.”

We have to remind Canadians that it’s not
fair to make small groups of workers, their fam-
ilies and their communities pay the full cost of
measures supposedly designed to benefit all
Canadians.

And we have to get them, as well, to wonder
whether any proposal is worth the cost — partic-
ularly when the result is often use of less envi-
. ronmentally friendly products or timber har-
vesting in other countries, where the rules are

less stringent and the
environmental impacts
as great or greater. Few
would sacrifice Medicare
to please Greenpeace!

These arguments can
be persuasive with the
majority of Canadians.
But there are others who
either make their living
| through forestry cam-
paigning or who support
the green groups’ agenda
— and those people will
be back.

There are hotspots and areas of concern. In
British Columbia, for instance, where there has
already been so much turmoil and trouble, we
can expect more.

Greenpeace and its extremist allies have
made it clear that they are keenly interested in
the Central coast region, which they have pro-
claimed the “Great Bear Rainforest.” This year
they will likely aim to hit international audi-
ences and will spend little or no time cultivat-

Bill C-65, introduced in October, 1996, would
have allowed the federal government to develop
plans for endangered or threatened species
without any consideration of social or economic
impacts; without an obligation to include those
affected in developing the plan; and without
any responsibility to protect or compensate
anyone.

Concerted action by labour, farmers, indus-
try, fishermen, trappers and communities
defeated C-65, but the government is again
“consulting” us on a new endangered species
law. Although there has been much reference to
“cooperative” approaches involving “steward-
ship” and “prevention, we haven’t seen a bill.

Ultimately there is little substitute for the
kind of decisive action that led to last summer’s
capture of Greenpeace’s ships in Vancouver
harbour or the community blockade of WCOWC
in Squamish; municipal resolutions to keep
Greenpeace out of coastal ports; sharp rejection
of blockaders by First Nations and disruption of
news conferences, events and demonstrations.

It is critical to remember that we seem to be
most successful when we choose the issue and

ing support in B.C. or Canada.
On the Prairies, we are

when workers are seen as speaking up for them-
selves, their families

concerned about a num-
ber of recent develop-
ments, including in Al-
berta, where there was a
bomb attack last Nov-
ember on Spray Lake
Logging, west of Dids-
bury. Logging equipment.
was destroyed only
shortly after the work-

Many of the current
schemes to reduce timber
harvesting would do little to
solve the real environmental
problems humanity faces.

and their communi-
ties. And it’s equally
important that we be
seen to be standing uj

for principals and val-
ues, not simply resist-
ing change. We are not,
for instance, opposed
to protecting endan-
gered species or water

ers left the site. Police
continue to investigate; no charges have yet
been laid.

In Saskatchewan, plans are afoot for reviews
of 20-year forest management agreements by a
panel of government-appointed experts. This
follows years of frustrating consultation with
stakeholders and industry, with no end in sight.

In Ontario, green groups recently were success-
ful in gaining an Ontario Divisional Court judge-
ment ruling that current timber harvest plans in
Northern Ontario are unlawful. The Crown is
appealing, but logging plans in Algonquin Park,
the Algoma Highlands, Temagami and other
regions of Ontario could be placed on hold.

In Ontario today there is a danger of both
government inaction and green reaction. Mean-
while, the government is also pressing ahead
with its Lands for Life program, which it pro-
poses as a means to enact some degree of land-
use planning for Ontario’s various ecoregions.

Finally, we face federal legislation to protect
endangered species. Again, this goal needs to be
put in perspective and balanced against economic
values such as employment or social concerns,
such as worker safety or community stability.

quality: we support
those measures, but we also support jobs in the
forests, stable communities, worker safety and
a sound Canadian economy. Once more, it’s
about fairness and balance.

As well, it’s important to remember that we
can get the public on side when we frame the
argument in terms of jobs, job creation and
communities. The more we can remind and per-
suade people that there is a cost behind envi-
ronmental initiatives, the more successful we
are likely to be in defending ourselves against
unreasonable preservationist demands. It’s
important to put a human face to the costs.

Returning then to Dave Haggard’s comments,
the greens like to polarize issues in terms of
“people versus corporations.” We need to con-
stantly deflate that language, by showing that
there are people — ordinary, hard-working
Canadian people who make their living throu;
forestry and are proud of it — on our side of He
issue, too.

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

4/LUMBERWORKER/MARCH, 1998

Pe ee