FRBC silviculture

Continued from page sixteen

the same study indicates that over 60% of silvi-
cultural workers work less than 5 months/year.

Another WSCA * study breaks employment
down into regions and functions as follows:

Average Days Worked Per Year
On Coast of British Columbia
Entry-level Tree Planters 44
Ee Experienced Tree Planters 56
Brushing & Weeding 66
Entry-level Juvenile Spacing 67
Experienced Juvenile Spacing 112
Pruning 51
Crew Boss 88
Project Manager 82

One of the clear goals of the forest worker
agency is to provide greater continuity of employ-
ment from the expenditure of FRBC dollars.
This continuity will more readily flow from the
forest worker agency model than the status quo,
eumply because workers will have a common
employer for all FRBC funded silvicultural pro-
jee - New Forest Opportunities Limited. Thus,

lewFO will provide workers some measure of
employment stability, regardless of the duration
of the work being done by any one silvicultural
contractor.

Proponents of the status quo have attempted
to argue that workers do not want employment,
stability, making claims such as the one made by
silvicultural contractor and WSCA spokesperson,
Dirk Brinkman: °“... only about 20% of existing
silvicultural workers want the big year-round
local jobs.” However, the worker survey portion
of the WSCA commissioned Coopers and Lybrand
study found just the opposite - 72% of surveyed
silvicultural workers say they are not getting the
amount and type of work they want and 52%
attribute this to the fact there is “not enough
available.” Further, 54% of surveyed silvicultural
workers stated they held other jobs during the
year.”

(2) Displaced Forest Workers:

Just as critical as the nature of employment, is
who is employed on FRBC funded silvicultural
work. With, the public and government focus on.
Cananoamaniall al sustainability issues in
recent years has come massive displacement of
forest workers. A critical part of the mandate of
Forest Renewal BC was to mitigate the impact of
changes in forest policy on these workers and the
communities they live in. Unfortunately, no
mechanism was put in place to ensure that the
expenditure of FRBC funds was directed toward
displaced workers and forest dependent commu-
nities.

Tn terms of land based work funded by FRBC,
the forest worker agency will make this connec-
tion. The Jobs and Timber Accord clearly pro-
vides that priority for FRBC funded silvicultural
work will go to displaced workers, also recogniz-
ing the need to provide employment to First
Nations and qualified workers in the local com-
munities.

And contrary to some claims by opponents of
the agency, this work will be available to all dis-
placed forest workers, regardless of previous
union affiliation.

(3) Forest Dependent Communities:

Clearly forest dependent communities will
benefit directly from any new entrants into the
industry under the provisions for local hiring.
This is particularly important in that it may
Batentially give young people access to, as well as
experience in the forest industry. In addition to
this, communities will also benefit from the fact
that existing forest workers who are displaced
will be able to find work and continue to live and
raise their families in forest dependent towns.

Regardless, the spin-off benefits to forest
dependent communities of local, stable employ-
ment will be much greater than from the existing
migratory, short-term work that is currently pro-
vided by the silvicultural industry.

(4) Contractors: : ‘

Contrary to the rhetoric, the experience of the
VIHP suggests that contractors have also bene-
fited from the HCL setup. On reflection though,
it is easy to understand the benefits of an HCL
model to contractors in a situation where there is
competitive bidding for a large number of con-
tracts for similar work. z 3

Given that most spending will still be ten-
dered, the knowledge that there is a level playing
field in terms of labour costs under the NewFO-
LW.A. collective agreement will allow for a more
competitive bidding process. Further, economies

of scale are gained in areas such as payroll,
administration and labour relations because
these functions are handled by the employer,
NewFO, not the individual contractor. This will
allow smaller contractors to bid on a level play-
ing field with larger contractors, because they
will theoretically be faced with the same per
employee cost paid to NewF 0 to perform these
administrative functions.

There is anecdotal evidence to support the idea
that there will be a more competitive and even
bidding process from the VIHP. Between 1994-
1997 approximately 63 prime contractors and
365 sub-contractors had worked on the project.
More significantly, HCL has received an average
of 6 bids per contract, compared to a provincial
average of 3.7 per contract.

(5) Worker Safety:

The current silvicultural industry is highly
dangerous to workers. Tree planters, for instance,
have the province’s highest rate of accident
claims per hour worked. Statistics compiled by
the Workers’ Compensation Board’s Statistical
Services Branch show that between 1992 and
1996, silvicultural workers averaged 23 short-
term disability, long-term disability or fatal
claims per 100 estimated person years of employ-
ment. By comparison, loggers averaged only 13
claims over the same period, even though logging
is generally acknowledged to be more danger-
ous.

This is at least partly due to the higher level of
unionization among loggers, particularly in the
highly dangerous coastal industry. Union mem-
bers have developed a culture of collective respon-
sibility that helps ensure that every member of a
crew is expected to think about their own safety
as well as that of their workmates. This attitude
is backed up by the “muscle” of the national and
local union, which continue to push for better
enforcement, prevention, education and fair
treatment for injured workers and their families.
Crucially important is the unionized workers’
ability to collectively enforce the “right to refuse”
sections of the WCB Act that allow workers to
refuse to do work in conditions that are unsafe.
In fact, unionized loggers enjoy a ten times
greater chance of going home from work alive
than do their non-union counterparts.

A recently-reported Simon-Fraser University
report for silviculture employers notes that silvi-

cultural workers use on average 60 percent of
their cardiovascular capacity, twice the level rec-

ommended by occupational health experts. * This
situation is likely Rereely the result of the com-
petitive bidding system that forces employers to
emphasize production at the expense of working

conditions, wages and health and safety stan-
dards.

(6) The Province:

There are clear benefits to the provincial econ-
omy and the provincial treasury in having a
unionized workforce. As a recent study by
researchers from Simon Fraser University indi-
cates, unionized forest workers “capture” a steady
share of between two-thirds and three-quarters
of all the wealth generated by the forest sector in
B.C. “ This is circulated through communities in
the form of workers’ savings, purchases of goods
and services and payment of taxes. In 1996, Price
Waterhouse reports, “income taxes and other
payments to government on behalf of direct for-
est industry employees remained constant at
$1.9 billion.” Obviously, the higher workers’
wages, the more they can buy, save or pay in
taxes. This results in job creation, particularly in
the forest-based communities where the multi-
plier effect of unionized workers’ spending cre-
ates huge numbers of “spin-off” jobs in retail, ser-
vice and government sectors. The same Price
Waterhouse report notes that “this multiplier
effect is estimated to result in the creation of two
additional jobs in British Columbia for each
direct job. Thus the 99,100 direct (forest sector)
jobs support a further 198,000 jobs in other sec-
tors of the provincial economy.” *

The Collective Agreement

There are then, clear opportunities and bene-
fits that can result from a collective agreement
covering silvicultural workers. As the example of
the VIHP and HCL shows, under such an agree-
ment workers can benefit due to:

° better pay, benefits, living conditions, work-
ing conditions and safety performance;

© increased opportunities for training and
career-track employment;

° a longer work year.

Communities and the provincial government
will benefit from:

© opportunities for local employment;

° greater “spin-off” benefits of employment-cre-
ation and tax revenue.

Finally, even contractors will benefit from:
economies of scale in areas such as payroll,
administration and labour relations;

© more productive and secure workforce;
¢ local costs for health and safety claims.

Conclusion

The clear conclusion is that unionization of the
silvicultural workforce in British Columbia could
well represent a “win-win” situation for silvicul-
tural workers, contractors, communities and the
provincial government.

Why then the strong resistance to it from silvi-
cultural employers? Over the years, contractors
and other forest companies have made healthy
profits from B.C.’s forests, forest communities
and workers including silvicultural workers.
Recently both citizens and the provincial govern-
ment have demanded from the industry that it
put something back into forest communities in
the form of new, good-paying, family-supporting
jobs. Contractors understandably resist a concept
that appears to strike at both their profit mar-
gins and their control over their workforce.

I.W.A. CANADA believes that it’s only fair
that silvicultural workers should have a chance
to enjoy the same wages, benefits and working
conditions that others in the forest sector take for
granted. Our years of facing down employers
large and small tell us that employer resistance
is no reason to stop in our struggle for a better
deal for working men and women.

In this case, as we have demonstrated, there
are tangible potential benefits, not just.to work-
ers, but to contractors, the community and the
provincial economy. We have nothing to fear but
fear itself: only a failure of will or our own pos-
sible lack of effort stands between British
Columbians and the realization of these benefits.
We say it’s time to make the effort.

FOOTNOTES

(1) Estimates at the time the Jobs and Timber
Accord was announced are that Forest
Renewal BC will spend at least $300 mil-
lion to:create 5,000 jobs over term of the
Accord.

(2) Information obtained from the BC Trans-

portation Financing Authority and High-

way Constructors Limited.

This compares to estimates of equity rep-
resentation in the broader construction
industry of four per cent (4%) - See
Women, Native Indians, Visible Minori-
ties, and People with Disabilities Working
for Employers, The Amalgamated Con-
struction Association of Canada and
Employment and Immigration Canada.
Vancouver: January 1990.

1996/1997 Reports: Vancouver Island
Highway Project: Planning and Design.
Auditor General of British Columbia. Vic-
toria: November 1996.

Lee Doney, CEO of Forest Renewal BC.
Vancouver Sun: October 9, 1997.

Profile of Core Silvicultural Contracting
Activities in British Columbia. Western
Silviculture Contractors Association, Final
Report. Coopers & Lybrand Consulting:
August 1997.

Thid.
Western Silvicultural Contractors Associa-

tion. Wage and Benefit Survey, Price
Waterhouse.

Brinkman, Dirk. Championing small jobs.
Canadian Silviculture Magazine: Spring
97, p.35.

(10) Profile of Core Silvicultural Contracting
Activities in British Columbia, Western
Silviculture Contractors Association Final
Report. Coopers & Lybrand Consulting:
August 1997.

(11) WCB Statistical Services, “Basic Industry
Statistics, mimeo.

(12) See D.A. Salisbury, R. Brubaker, C. Hertz-
man, G.R. Loeb, Fatalities Among British
Columbia Fallers and Buckers, 1981-87,
Department of Health Care and Epidemi-
ology, University of B.C., p.6

(13) “Study shows tree planting tough work,
planters argue” AV Times, June 4, 1997.

(14) Richard Schwindt and Terry Heaps, Chop-
ping Up the Money Tree, David Suzuki
Foundation, 1996, pp. 58 and 95.

(15) Price Waterhouse, The Forest Industry in
British Columbia, Vancouver, May 1997
pii.

(16) Ibid. p. 16.

(8)

(4)

(6)

(6)

(1)
(8)

(9)

Henne eee ee

LUMBERWORKER/MARCH, 1998/17