Labour contracts will take us to the bottom THIS ARTICLE IS NOT meant to question the beliefs, integrity or ability of any faller. In recent years more and more fallers, many whom are good, solid union men and productive work- ers, have been forced by major forest companies to take labour contracts on the Coast. Some have been severed from their company or have been laid- off until their seniority runs out. Weyerhaeuser is trying to eliminate all of its company fallers' positions in ere eenomanl OPINION BY KEN COTTINI favour of contractors and I have no doubt that they eventually wantlabour contractors to step in for less money. This trend has big implications for all IWA members as other major employers would be forced to follow to compete. If they ever succeed in eliminating bargaining unit fallers, other phases will be next on the list. Labour contractors are forced to bid against each other in a race to the bot- tom. They are paid a lump sum of money and often have to pay the costs of their own WCB premiums, insur- ance, saws, pickups, gas and oil, etc. | FOREST COMPANIES ARE INCREASINGLY FORCING THEIR EMPLOYEES INTO LABOUR CONTRACTS and most likely don't get paid travel time. To make ends meet, the normal six and one-half hour work day can go © out the window and production is — speeded-up, causing further safety risks. Many have to bid so low that they can't keep their pension or other benefit plans paid-up. Some day they are going to need that pension plan when they retire. It's a race to the bottom that is tak- ing place and we all need to face it. With Liberal forest policies coming, things are going to get more uncer- tain. The question is what can we do as workers and union members? In my opinion, company fallers and labour contractors have to unite and support each other, We are all in the same barrel and face the same pit- falls and genuine dangers — whether they be the eventual meltdown of wages and working conditions the IWA has fought over 65 years to — obtain, proper safety and supervisory conditions, and/or basic job security issues. We can look to the WCB's new — faller certification program and safe | work practices to get employers to back off on the cost savings they get by forcing unsafe production speed- ups which can kill and maim more workers. We also have to reach out to yo 1 workers who may not know — the IWA's history and where good standards for wages and benefits e from. Most of all, I think that all fallers | should work with their union to address these issues. Ken Cottini, a former executive board member of IWA Local 363, is a faller at TimberWest’s Oyster River division PRESIDENT’S MESSAGE It’s time for us to pull together like we always have IWA members from coast-to-coast must understand the importance of this year’s B.C. forest industry negotiations BY DAVE HAGGARD IN BRITISH COLUMBIA your union’s provincial negoti- ating committee has already begun negotiations for master collective bargaining agreements in the forest industry. In late March we exchanged demands with the Interior Forest Labour Relations Association in the southern Interior in our sincere desire to set a pattern agreement which we hope to take to other parts of the industry. At our provincial wage and contract conference in January, the IWA put together a set of very reasonable demands which recognize the tough times that this industry is in. Even in those tough times, companies like Canfor, West Fraser, Weldwood and Interfor are making good profits. A lot of that profit-making capacity has arisen from the fact that IWA members have bitten the bullet and have bent over backwards to make their operations run more efficiently. Our members are doing their part to pull through these tough times. Unfortunately many have suffered permanent closures while others have suffered indefinite shutdowns and other forms of job insecurity. The effects of U.S. tariffs have been felt in various parts of Canada but most heavily on the Coast — which has been hit with other issues in the global marketplace. Now, as we head deeper into negotiations, the B.C. government has intro- duced legislation to change the province's forest policy by radically dismantling the “social contract” between the public resource and private industry. We anticipate that Coast nego- tiations could be affected as a result. Your union has stepped forward to offer the government our union’s ideas in the form of a “social accountability clause” to any changes in policy. We are the only ones putting forward positive suggestions to a Liberal government that only claims it cares about forest workers and communities. Just as we deal with government, so too are we attempting to deal with the industry in a straight forward and honest manner. This industry needs stablility — not uncertainty. And our members need stability and security, as does our union. We need to seek constructive, joint solutions at the bar- gaining table to get back on track and deal with the trade and competitive challenges the forest industry faces. At the bargaining table we will soon be able to detect if the industry in both the Interior and Coast will bargain in good faith. I’m cautiously optimistic that we can with most com- panies. But we already have some major problems with Weyerhaeuser on the Coast which is aggressively trying to bust up bargaining units and has a continuous agenda of contracting out jobs, phase-by-phase, to labour and non- union contractors. We have successfully kept bargaining units together in some areas, but Weyco continues to cut the IWA no quarter as far as getting rid of company fallers and beating up other workers. Weyerhaeuser has been put on notice by our union that their actions strike at the very heart of our union and what it has fought for over its more than 65 years. Weyerhaeuser is trying to destroy the bargaining authority of the IWA on the Coast and we cannot let them succeed because every other company would try to do the same. The struggle of B.C. woodworkers in these times is monu- mental and the struggles on the Coast are key to the future of - our organization. We fought a four and one-half month strike over these issues in 1986 and it may be necessary to get into a battle on contracting out in 2003. That is why all IWA Canada members, from coast-to-coast must be aware of what is taking place in B.C. We have a tradition of helping each other in every province and region where we have members — and this may prove the year when B.C. workers call on the rest of the union for that solidarity. EDITORIAL Hey, what about Canadian sovereignty? In their attempts to seek a ‘negotiated settlement’ with Canada over softwood lumber the Americans are pushing for control over our industry THEY WANT TO SEND IN AN OCCUPATION FORCE of U.S. Department of Commerce auditors. We're not talking about Baghdad here — we're talking about Victoria B.C. That's right. In early January, as part of its proposal to solve the softwood lumber war between the U.S. and Canada, U.S. Department of Commerce undersecretary Grant Aldonis tabled a series of measures calling for Canadian compliance to American trade and commerce demands. In January Mr. Aldonas release a policy paper (see article by Kim Pollock on pages ten and eleven) calling for, among other things, the permanent inclusion of American monitors into the B.C. Forest Ministry’s office to oversee the implementa- tion and maintenance of “free-market” reforms dictated and approved by the Americans themselves. Then and only then, says the U.S., could there be a reduction in countervailing | duties. There is nothing said about antidumping duties. This judge and jury mechanism would monitor the follow- ing aspects of forest policy by a Canadian province: timber harvest volume, employment levels, investment levels in Canada, lumber output, and stumpage rates. Critical of our system of publicly-held Crown lands, the DOC is against firms that want to process B.C. timber actually having to be located in the province. That means they want open log mar- kets where B.C. logs would flow to American mills. The U.S. proposal also demands timber auctions, although the Americans might consider the privati- zation of Crown land as an alternative. Nowhere does it mention that the U.S. itself prohibits the export of American logs from federal or state lands. IWA Canada national president Dave Haggard has repeatedly warned the B.C. government and the public about the outright loss of sovereignty i T WANT YOUR LOGS FOR US. SAWMILLS: ‘1HAVE A CONCERN that would occur under such a sce- THAT PROVINCES, 22tio and about the instability and unpredictability that would occur for IN PARTICULAR companies, workers and communities B.C., WILL BITEON under a move to open timber auctions. , “I have a concern that provinces, in Ut alee particular B.C., will bite on the U.S. = DAVE HAGGARD proposal,” he said, adding that it would divide Canada and forever link our for- est policy to U.S. whims. He warned that if the Liberals, who are on a path of gutting the “social con- tract” parts of the Forest Act, sell-out rural B.C. workers, and communities “they will pay a high political price.” IWA PRESIDENT APRIL 2003 THE ALLIED WORKER | 5