LABOR There will be a decidedly different edge put on the keynote reports to the annual B.C. Federation of Labor convention which opens next Nov. 25 in the PNE Forum in Vancouver. That different edge has been carefully honed by Art Kube from his Boundary Round offices and it is intended to cut off a demonstrative display of militancy at the convention, and to instead focus attention of delegates on a critique of Socred and Tory policies and a set of alternative poli- cies. Kube insists that he is getting the labor movement read for the provincial election battle expected within the next year. The left sees it as a blunting of the federation’s poli- cies of industrial and political action, and the substitution of deeds with a pile of social democratic words. However it is cut, it would be a different kind of B.C. Federation convention that didn’t send a warning to the employers and the government that the labor movement is ready to defend itself, and at the same time to secure a commitment for a fightback program from the affiliates. The apparent absence of such a warning and a call to mobilization is all the more remarkable given the current challenges looming before the province’s labor move- ment. @ The demand for concessions and increasing moves towards union busting are brought into focus by the series of union- busting conferences organized on recent weekends by the construction industry. The industry has already indicated that it expects a minimum 25 per cent cut in wages in the master agreement, and it has publicly warned that it may repeat the strategy of the Alberta contractors in cancelling the cur- rent agreement on its May | expiry date and imposing the cut rates May 2. The message from CLRA is clear: give us massive con- cessions or we will go open shop May 2, 1986. The Building Trades aren’t the only unions facing concessionary demands. The major hotels are already interviewing scabs in anticipation of a strike in that industry, and Jack Munro has conceded to his union’s convention in September that it would take all of the [WA’s resolve to hold the line on concessions from the forest industry. @In the public sector, over 100,000 workers are at the bargaining table before May | of next year and the determination of the provincial government is that all of them will be denied any significant. wage increase. Most of these workers have already lost 10 per cent or more of their relative purchasing power over the past three years. ® On the political front, the Socreds have launched a massive and typically dema- gogic propaganda campaign around Expo and promised new mega-projects to cover up the main issue in B.C. — poverty and unemployment. Native Indians and envir- onmentalists will be made scapegoats and construction jobs at any cost promoted. Particularly dangerous about the Socred program is its commitment to a continental B.C. FED DELEGATES Dinner-meeting with BEN SWANKEY labor educator, journalist “There is no alternative to fundamental change.”’ Nov. 27, 5 p.m. —_——! Community 3096 E. Hastkes St Spons. by Labor Committee, Communist Party of Canada KUBE IN 1984 CONVENTION. . energy policy — including construction of the Site C Dam for export of power — and a free trade deal with the U.S. These challenges are given scant refer- ence in the 45-page report of the federa- tion’s executive council which will be presented to delegates on Monday, Nov. 25. In fact, of those 45 pages, barely 14 are concerned with trade union activities and they are mostly a bland account of past conferences. The dominant part of the report is an extensive critique of the Mac- donald Royal Commission Report, a con- trasting review of the Solidarity People’s Commission Report and a summary eco- nomic policy statement. Implicit in this emphasis is the decision of the executive council at its last meeting, inspired by the delegation to Australia to examine the “accord” between the trade union movement and the labor govern- ment, to “accept the invitation from the New Democratic Party to join in exploring the feasibility of developing a strategy for a Wilson joint B.C. Committee on Economic Devel- opment.” The idea is that the federation and the NDP (the party, not the caucus) will appoint members to a committee to discuss acommon “legislative agenda” that would answer some of labor’s concerns and fit into the NDP economic program. There are different explanations for this proposal as well. Federation officers insist that they are responding to pressure to cease the practice of giving a political blank cheque to the NDP and are working to secure commitments on key issues. Accord- ing to some officers, that is needed in order to avoid inflated expectations of what an NDP government will provide. But the executive council gave its unanimous sup- port for the process on the outright assu- rance that it would not lead to wage restraint as it has in Australia. Bob Skelly understands the process in very different terms. Every statement he has made on the matter reduces to an assurance that an “accord” is needed as a public statement that wage demands would be res- trained under an NDP government. “There has to be a cap on wage increases. . .it has to be done voluntarily,” Skelly said in an interview with the Sun’s Vaughn Palmer Oct. 17, “We want to indicate to the public that we’re not going to give away the store to organized labor simply because labor has a strong bargaining position.” Skelly’s desire for such an accord is basic to NDP strategy. The NDP leadership sin- 12 e PACIFIC TRIBUNE, NOVEMBER 20, 1985 cerely believes that they lost the 1983 elec- tion because Dave Barrett made a speech in the Kootenays and stated that the Compen- sation Stabilization Program would be phased out. It was seized on by the Socreds and media and touted as the “blunder” of the campaign. Barrett attempted to recover and later said, “It will be tougher to get wage increases with us than it was with Peck 2 = But the real reason the NDP lost was its failure to present a real alternative that eco- nomically desperate people could relate to, and many New Democrats made that point. However, Skelly and chief strategist Gerry Scott have orientated on avoiding the situa- tion Barrett found himself in by pre- empting the Socreds with an accord that would be seen as a voluntary wage control program. There are nevertheless important reasons for proceeding with meetings with the NDP. To say the least, NDP policy on a number of critical issues is quite fuzzy at present. For example, Skelly has been neu- tral on free trade. Two other items on the federation’s short list would be an unquali- fied commitment to end the Compensation Stabilization Program and the repeal of the anti-labor legislation enacted by the Socreds, Obviously the NDP will enter the discus- sions with other objectives. Skelly’s approach to an accord is based on the notions that wage increases are inflationary and that labor should participate in tripartite man- agement of the economy. It should be noted that while defenders of the Australian accord argue it is bipartite between the unions and the Labor government, in fact it includes not less than five tripartite commis- sions and the labor government has also established tripartite industrial councils in 11 separate industries. Given these different views of what an “accord” or “legislative framework” would be based on, it is difficult to imagine much coming of the process unless either the fed- eration or the NDP fundamentally shift their approach. The disturbing lack of a fightback pro- gram projected to the federation convention may indicate that some in the B.C, Fed leadership are already prepared to make a : | | [ | I | | | I I | | / I | ! | I / | i NAME a eR ER ek ces ae a er ee Tn ret ee oe THREE MONTHS FOR $2 RRO EE RR EO BE ORR ee ROR OS eee ae ee ee ee ne eae SAR ARR CEN e ee 80 ee) OR a, ee N ee ok eee Ve eT Reem POSTAL CODE Clip and mail to: Pacific Tribune, 2681 East Hastings St. Vancouver, B.C. V5K 125 — LS LS ST NS Man Somme. ume sit chante meson .a different message to delegates this time around. shift towards the Skelly strategy of winning centre votes by “taming” the labor move ment: =, It contrasts sharply with a tradition firmly based in B.C.’s labor movement. If 1982, when the Telecommunication Workers faced an intransigent B.C. Telephone Company, then president Jim Kinnaird told the employers of the province that thé “gloves are off’ and organized regional industrial actions to back up the warning. It 1983, the Solidarity movement forced the | Socreds to back off their intention to break | the public sector unions, and in 1984, the B.C. Fed convention gave the leaderhsip 4 mandate to mobilize the unemployed and ensure that poverty and unemployment até | the central issues in the next election. At | Kube was re-elected with a program headed | by a commitment to co-ordinate bargaif | ing. The message from Art Kube this yeal does have a different edge. It is to assure thé province that no one, especially the members of the Terminal City club, has | anything to fear from an NDP government: To serve that end there will be no militant rhetoric from the federation, even while thé right-to-work gang are gathering their for ces for a spring offensive. The message that the B.C. Fed leadership are likely to hear from a lot of delegates is that Skelly’s “new beginnings” is the old strategy that has lost three consecutive elec tions, and each time it was followed by a8 even greater attack on the working peoplé and the labor movement. That attack is already looming and thé message that Construction Labor Relations and the Socreds ought to hear from this | convention is that the labor movement §§ mobilizing behind a program of politi action, and it is prepared to take off the | gloves and engage in co-ordinated indus trial ation to defeat concessions and stoP | union-busting in the construction industty | or elsewhere, and to beat restraint in thé public sector. ee ee