What is it with Weyerhaeuser’s substance program? WHEN I WAS CLEARING snowwith a 966 loader this winter, I didn’t see where a fellow worker parked a pick-up. Accidently the machine I was on tapped the grill and did minor damage. My employer, Weyerhaeuser, took me off for a breathylzer test which tested nega- s and then a urine test, which tested legative about five days later. So there I was, in our small town of Slave Lake, Alberta population of about 6,000 and word spread like wildfire. OPINION BY PAUL SOARS While completely innocent of any drug and alcohol abuse on the job, I feel that I have been stigmatized by the whole experience: a minor accident, mandato- ty drug testing and then having my eo bounced all over the community. My wife, who worked in a grocery store, felt very uncomfortable when the local customers would pass by her till. In my opinion, a company like Weyerhaeuser should treat their employees with the dignity and respect that we all deserve. The company should adhere to its own “People Principles.” WE ALL HAVE ACCIDENTS AND WE'RE ALL HUMAN - BUT THAT DOESN’T MEAN WE’RE ON DRUGS Instead I’ve seen the company use its new substance impairment program in a discriminatory way. They test some people when accidents occur and over- look others. We all have accidents and we're all human — but that doesn’t mean we're on drugs. If the bosses were tested every time they have made a mis- PRESIDENT’S MESSAGE Push has turned to shove on the coast of B.C. Strike had to be called to prevent FIR from imposing terms and conditions of work BY DAVE HAGGARD COASTAL FOREST INDUSTRY EMPLOYERS turned down the IWA’s final vote offer in early November and then pulled a fast one by trying to dictate and impose a conces- sionary agreement on our membership. On November 21, our coast membership, hit the bricks when the B.C. Labour Relations Board made the unfortunate ruling that gave FIR the right to impose terms and conditions of work. FIR took the provocative and, for the forest industry, unprecedented step of trying to impose their terms of employ- ment in our mills and logging operations — a move that, in our opinion, threatens the collective bargaining process. The IWA is serious about negotiating a collective agreement which is in step with the pattern agreements that we have set in the Interior. In fact, in our final offer that was rejected, we said that, until June 15, 2004, the industry could try out some standard shifts in the operations, and negotiate, on a local union basis, joint measures to reduce costs of logging and milling. We offered FIR the basic 6-year pattern agreement with 11 per cent in wage increases, a bonus pay scheme, and some joint funding improvements to fix up the IWA-Forest Industry pension plan, long term disability plan and reduce costs of other benefits. We have even offered to consider a separate agreement for lumber remanufacturing. The final offer was made on October 9 and Forest Industrial Relations, which is mainly controlled by Weyerhaeuser, International Forest Products and TimberWest, was stunned. Ordered by the Labour Relations Board, FIR was forced to take the vote to its affiliate companies’ operations. FIR and these major outfits did everything in their power get our final offer rejected — they still want a pound of flesh out of our membership. Now they want to impose a three-year deal with virtually no wage increases and only 25 cents per hour into our pension plan for the last two years. And they want a pile of concessions to chisel away our collective agreement. We intend to keep our coastal FIR agreement in step with Interior agreements to keep a level playing field — a playing field that has existed since the late 70’s. We also insist that the industry treat their senior employees with the dignity and respect that they deserve. It has been our membership’s hard work that has made the profits that major forest companies have bilked out of B.C. without reinvesting on the Coast. We expect the industry to reveal their investment plans for the Coast in real terms and not give us airy-fairy platitudes about future investment somewhere down the road. And they can’t simply pay for that reinvestment off the backs and out of the pockets of our membership. If they don’t want to work with the IWA or invest, those companies should put their tree farm licenses up for sale — then we would see a line-up of bidders a mile long to take them over. Our union is willing to work with this industry through these tough times in the forest industry’s history or fight with it. The choice is their’s. We are willing to continue to sit down and talk about real solutions that will reduce costs. Since the fall of 2001, when we brought together FIR, the Truck Loggers’ Association and the IWA to look for creative ways to reduce costs while respecting the integrity of our col- lective agreement, the industry has dragged its feet. Now it’s time for FIR to drop the rhetoric that workers are to blame for the predicament the industry is in. Our local unions and members are willing to play constructive roles to get this industry back on its feet again, but we will not destroy what we have struggled for decades for to achieve. take, there would be a lot of testing — going on. But that would be unfair too. Workers including myself are ed and intimidated by having the slightest accident or being involved in any form of mishap. Itis something that inhibits job performance and can cause an unsafe work environment. We don’t want to be humiliated, labeled, degraded by the testing or wrongly accused. We have to live in our communities. I am trying to start a small business, outside of mill hours, running a Bobcat for odd jobs in town. Since the drug test- ing episode I have seen about a 50 per cent drop in client calls. My suspicion is that it’s related to the drug testing. In my opinion, Weyerhaeuser should straight up with its workforce and t them in a caring fashion. If they think someone needs help, then help should be offered. An Employee and Family Assistance Program in the com- munity is a good resource to start with. 1 think it’s good that our union is fighting back and is working on a strate- gy to deal with Weyerhaeuser on these issues. It’s important for us workers to keep the issue on the front burner too! paul Soares is a member of IWA Canada Local 1-207. He works at Weyco's OSB plant in Slave Lake, AB. ' EDITORIAL Crying crocodile tears for workers’ rights CEOs from major forest corporations are tied into a national campaign to promote the deunionization of Canada WHAT DO PRESIDENTS AND CEOS of some major forest companies have in common? If you say forestry issues and mar- ket issues you're right. But if you peel the onion back a little fur- ther you'll find out that they, through their participation on the Board of Governors of the Business Council of B.C., are backers of a national anti-union campaign recently trumpeted by the CanWest Global network. Starting this past Labour Day weekend the National Post and Global News publicized the results ofa poll commissioned for LabourWatch.Com which says it is a “federal non-profit corporation headquartered in British Columbia.” LabourWatch.Com, supported by some of the province’s and the countries larger business associations and legal firms repre- senting those companies, paid for a poll of which some selective results tumed up in a week-long series of articles in the right- wing National Post and Global News broadcasts, along with anti- union interpretations and articles on those results. In the National Post series entitled “State of the Unions,” according to columist Terence Corcoran, there is a “broad and deep union-free sentiment revealed in the poll.” Mr. Corcoran didn’t say it is LabourWatch.Com’s very purpose to provide work- ers information on how to decertify unions, even though it hides behind the rhetoric of providing workers “easy access to infor- mation about their rights and responsibilities when they want a union in their workplace as well as when they want to be union free.” LabourWatch.Com, as the Canadian Labour Congress president Ken Georgetti points out, is a “virtual ‘Who’s Who’ of vehemently anti-union organizations — the National Citizens Coalition, provincial contractors associa- tions, small business coalitions and dozens of management-side law firms.” But even with its patently anti-labour slant the poll revealed that more than 80 per cent of union members responded labourwaten.com Infotravail.ca (Canadian LabourWatch Associaton {Labour Day Poll What Are Conada's “Labourers” Really “Thinking This Labour Day" Research Report acute to Ratna Post na ial Mews ‘Si September 62503 artes THROUGH THE B.C. that they were satisfied with their union BUSINESS COUNCIL, and some 79 per cent of members claim they-receive satisfactory commu- FORESTINDUSTRY nication from their leaders. CEOS AND OTHER We agree with Brother Georgetti on the truism that “any poll can get the COUNCILMEMBERS = ncwers it wants if you cook the ques- ARE SUPPORTING THE tions.” The union busters at ANTF-UNION WoRK OF LabourWatch.Com and their support- ers, including forest industry leaders, should come clean and release their questioning to reveal how their poll was concocted and what biases were inherent. LABOURWATCH.COM NOVEMBER 2003 THE ALLIED WORKER | 5