Led by president Jack Nichol (with attache case), a 21-member lob-

by of members of the United Fishermen and Allied Workers Union
met for two hours Apr. 9 with federal fisheries minister Romeo
LeBlanc (centre) to press the union’s demands for changes in fish-

“We are entering into a difficult
set of negotiations. The employers
of this province have worked hard
at destroying a good labor relations
climate through unprecedented
and inexcusable actions, particu-
larly. with reference to the
TWU/B.C. Tel. dispute. IWA
members showed their support for.
the brothers and sisters of the
TWU. We can be proud of that.’

Those were the opening words of
a recent message from Jack Mun-
ro, chairman of the provincial ne-
gotiating committee of the Interna-
tional Woodworkers of America.
It was included in Bulletin #1, re-
porting on the current round of
contract negotiations with the for-
est companies.

In reference to the bargaining
climate the negotiators expect,
Munro said this: ‘‘On behalf of the
provincial negotiating committee I
seek your full cooperation and sup-
port. It’s going to be a tough set of
negotiations and knowing your
support is there will allow us to go
to the bargaining table with the full
IWA membership behind us.’’

Gerry Stoney, president of Local
1-357 of the IWA in New West-
minster, mailed the regional bulle-
tin to members of his local, along
with a letter from himself, on Apr.
a

Dealing with the possibility 6f a
strike in the industry, Stoney
wrote: “‘Every effort will be made
to negotiate a renewed contract
without a strike, but if it becomes
necessary we should be prepared.
Decisions to make major high-cost
purchases should be deferred until
after negotiations are completed.”

This is a clear warning to all
members to adjust their personal
spending in order to be better able
to weather a long strike.

As he has on other occasions, -
Stoney listed the priority demands
as he saw them: ‘‘A substantial
wage increase protected by COLA,
accumulated time off and protec-

tion for members caught in plant
closures or partial closures:’?

Then, Stoney warned again
about a possible strike: ‘‘These is-
sues must be met in this set of nego-
tiations if a major confrontation is
to be avoided.”’

That was followed by a call for
discipline and ‘self control on the
part of the membership: “Only a
disciplined membership which will
respond to the calls of the leader-
ship during the uncertain months
ahead will ensure that the com-
mittee has the opportunity to freely
negotiate the best possible settle-
ment we can achieve in the in-
dustry, with or without strike ac-
tion.” ;

Any experienced trade union

leader and negotiator would recog-
nize this as a call for no unauthor-
ized job action during the course of
negotiations. This is borne out by
an earlier section of the Stoney let-
ter which refers to the first negoti-
ating sessions held on Apr. 1 and 2.
“The first meeting was a very
short one. The employers came in-
to the room to meet with us. There
was a heated argument about a
number of tradesmen from the
Port Alberni local deciding to walk
off the job in a protest to bring at-
tention to their demands for a revi-
sion. It was an isolated incident
which involved at most 200 trades-
men.
“The employer’s reaction was to
refuse to meet the IWA negotiating
committee to exchange demands
and make the first steps of negoti-
ating a collective agreement until
such time as the work stoppage
ended. In my opinion, when you

Published weekly at Suite 101 — 1416 Commercial Drive,
Vancouver, B.C. V5L 3X9. Phone 251-1186

Read the paper that fights for labor

City or town
Postal Code

| am enclosing:
1 year $1210 2 years $220 6 months $7 (0

OidO New( Foreign 1 year $15 0
Bill me later CF Donation$..........

PACIFIC TRIBUNE—APRIL 17, 1981—Page 12

wees

eries regulations and to reiterate their opposition to the west coast
salmon interception treaty. The lobby also brought the issues be-
fore Tory and NDP MPs (see story opposite).

take. into consideration that there
were fewer than 200 members in-
volved in the dispute, this was an
over-reaction by the employer even
though they may have been trying
to show us that they are going to
take a hard line in negotiations. I
believe they committed a tactical
error.’”

Stoney then went on to report
that ‘‘a more congenial atmos-
phere’’ prevailed at the meeting
Apr. 2.

Although Stoney criticized the
employers for over-reacting to the
Port Alberni work stoppage by 200
tradesmen, he again expressed con-
cern about unauthorized work
stoppages: “I urge you to utilize all
of the lines of communications

Labor Comment
Jack Phillips

open to you during the negotiations
to ensure that we do not make mis-
takes which interrupt negotiations
or allow. our membership to be
‘burned out’ having had enough
strike action before any call comes
for collective action.’’
Unauthorized strikes during ne-
gotiations which have the aim of
bringing pressure to bear on the
employers and/or the union lead-
ership are not restricted to the
IWA. They usually result from the
frustration of specific groups who
have no confidence in the leader-
ship to represent them properly,
from the irritation caused by what
the participants believe to be unre-
solved grievances, or from the ac-
tivities of adventuristic elements
who seek confrontation whenever
possible, irrespective of the overall
situation. Sometimes there is a
combination of all of these factors.
Another element that sometimes
has a bearing on such situations is
the struggle for leadership. It is not
my intention to pass judgment on
what took place in Port Alberni.
However, the provincial negotiat-
ing committee knows full well there
is a severe shortage of qualified
tradesmen in B.c. and that unless
the IWA tradesmen are satisfied in
these negotiations, the union will
have many problems. It’s up to the
committee to take it from there.
A recent membership meeting of
Port Alberni Local 1-85 of the
IWA, after a bitter fight lasting
some two months, adopted ‘‘in
principle’ a policy statement on

publicity during the 1981 negotia-
tions. ,

It called for a publicity and in-
formation department in the local,
with a full,time person in charge
and with representatives from
every mill and camp.

The department would be re-
sponsible for the preparation and
distribution of information as
follows: ~

@ Contract talks and how they
are progressing;

@ Details of wages and fringe
benefits in other union contracts;

@ Details and information on
the cost of living;

@ Details and information on
taxation and interest rates, as they
affect woodworkers;

@ Analysis of the employers’
propaganda as it is published anda
response with facts and figures
from the union’s point of view;

@ Statistics and analyses on
productivity, profits and related
facts re the lumber industry;

@ Special bulletins where neces-
Sary;

@ Provisions to ensure regular
distribution of these materials to
outlying camps and mills.

The intention is obvious: to keep
the membership better informed
on negotiations than in the past.

Negotiations will recommence
on May 5 and as Stoney put it:
“This may seem like a long time,
but the provincial committee felt
that with pulp negotiations not
even commencing until May 14, we
would just be spinning our wheels
if we met on aregular basis between
now and May 5.”’ In other words,
the IWA negotiators and their
counterparts do not see any sensein
carrying on negotiations until the
Pulp, Paper and Woodworkers of
Canada and the Canadian Paper-
workers’ Union file their demands.

These two unions between them
have more than 16,000 members,
as compared with the IWA’s 51,-
000 members. In most cases, a big
forestry company has collective
agreements with both the IWA and
one or both of the other unions. As
past experience has proven, the
unity, or lack of unity, between
these three unions can be decisive in
deciding the outcome of negotia-
tions.

If anything was missing in Ston-
ey’s letter, it was a call for unity.and
co-ordination between these three
unions.

FISHERMAN PHOTO— GEOFF MEGGS

UFAWU
lobby wins |
concession |

United Fishermen and Allied |)
Workers Union president Jack |’
Nichol termed the union’s 21
member lobby to Parliament}
Hill last week ‘‘a resounding
Success” in achieving the majot |)
objective of the union — raising })
awareness among federal politi |)
cians about the crisis that exists |
in the west coast fishing in-})
dustry.

There was less achieved in ac-
tual commitments from the})
government, but Nichol expect}
ed that. ‘“We’re veteran lobby- |
‘ists and used to the fact that}
politicians never give you a firm ||
answer,”’ he told the Tribune}
this week. ‘“You have to meas-}|
ure your success by the impact)
you make ‘on people. And we]:
made a real impact on a lot of
people there.’’

The lobbyists met with over |
100.MPs, with the New Demo-}
cratic Party and Conservative
Party western caucuses, with the |
standing committee on fisheries |’
and forests and had a two hour |’
session with minister of fisheries |)
Romeo LeBlanc. |

The three major issues press-}_
ed by the union drew mixed re- |)
sponses. LeBlanc did bend on}
union demands that new restric-}

The concessions from Le-
Blanc on the Fraser River gillnet
fishery came after Tory MPS}
Tom Siddon and Benno Friesen
and NDP MP Pauline Jewett
put heavy pressure on the min-f ’
ister during question period,| —
pointing out that U.S. fisher-| —
men will be allowed to fish Fra-} »
ser River stocks for 63 days! }
while Canadian fishermen will |) ~
be limited to nine days. iE

However on the union’s.sec- | :
ond demand that a new two li- | be
cence system for trollers be re- | R
considered, LeBlanc categoric-| *
ally refused to make any} s

b

-changes. The union views the} *

t

overall attack on small boat} ©
fishermen and a first step}

two licence system as part of an} a

.towards an area licencing}

scheme. |
Neither was there any com- |
mitment from LeBlanc to re-| =

} consider the government’s sup-}

port for the proposed west coast 7
salmon interception treaty with}
the U.S., the major political] ,
issue pressed by the lobby. tl
The union did explain its op- | ir
position to the treaty to ‘many || re
MPs who knew little or nothing
about it, Nichol said, and they} F
received positive responses to} |
the union’s position from both} }
the NDP and Tory west coast
caucuses. uP
It is doubtful that the Tories | |
will oppose the treaty, Nichol | ;
said, “‘but that will be an aca-| |
demic question unless the treaty | S
is given the full parliamentary | | -
debate it deserves.” 4 %s
In the past treaties have been i
ratified by Parliament, but the q
union was told that the govern-} |
ment is not required to put the | |,
treaty to Parliament. {
A key problem the lobby fac- |,
ed was the lack of any west coast | J)
government members to ap-
proach. ‘There is a real isola-
tion of the Liberal government
from the problems of western | |
Canada, and that was appar- | ||
ent,”’ he said. K&