What was won

at Chrysler's

By DAN HAMMOND

IX thousands Chrysler work-
ers streamed into the Wind-
sor Arena through pouring

rain, February 1, to hear the
results of many long hours of
negotiations by their leaders
with Chrysler Canada. Their 95
percent vote in favor of the new
contract was a’ vote of confi-
dence in their leaders ability to
get wage parity with American
workers without sacrificing any
of the hard-won benefits of past
contracts.

Local 444 President Charlie
Brooks told the Tribune:

“Chrysler thought they had us
in a defensive position, but we
were able to turn the tables and
put them on the bottom. They
knew we wouldn’t give up the
benefits we had.‘We told Chrys-
ler if they wanted to go on, we

were ready to give them a.

spanking.”

Main features won from
Chrysler were Canadian parity,
retroactive wage increases, big-

alf dewhurst

VER the past few years the
trade union movement has
been subjected to a whole

taft of anti-labor laws and
measures—not to speak of court
injunctions, police harassament,
trials and jail sentences.

The purpose of all these anti-
union governmental and court
actions across the country is to
undermine the bargaining
strength of the unions.

The federal government and
provincial governments have a
number of new measures in mind

to continue the assault with.’

They have put Bill C-186 before
Parliament to amend the Labor
Relations Act which, regardless
of its merits or demerits, has
served so far to divide the trade
union movement. It has put into
motion the Woods Task Force
which, at great expense to the

public treasury, travels around: .

the country studying the state
of labor-employer relations.

In reacting favorably to big
business pressures for compul-
sory arbitration and strike res-
trictions, Mr. Nicholson brought
down a storm of protest around
his ears. The trade unions show-
ed no intention of standing idle

FEBRUARY 16, 1968—PACIFIC TRIBUNE—Page 4

ger pensions, guaranteed annual
income, more holidays, improved
insurance, improved working
conditions, improved health care
protection, improved survivor
benefits and retained rest per-
iods.

The provision of wage parity
for Canadian Chrysler workers
was an historic breakthrough. It
will provide equality for UAW
members working for Chrysler

Corporation in Canada who, as.

a result of the Automotive Trade
Agreement with the U.S. now
produce for the same market as
U.S. Chrysler workers. By June
1, 1970, 100 percent of the origi-
nal difference between U.S. and

‘Canadian workers will be wiped

out.

Production workers will re-
ceive a 20-cent hourly pay raise
the first year of the agreement.
Skilled tradesmen will receive an
increase of 50 cents an hour the
first year.

The annual improvement fac-
tor will provide additional wage
increases for all workers (three

percent each year),

on November 15, 1968 and Nov-
ember 15, 1969.

Both the 20-cent wage in-
crease for production workers
and the 50 cents for skilled
workers is retroactive to Nov-
ember 15, 1967—a first in UAW
negotiations with Chrysler.

The union turned down the
attempt by Chrysler to replace
their two 10 minute shutdown
rest periods per shift. This has
to be one of thé major wins of
the strike. Doug Fraser, Direc-
tor of UAW’s Chrysler depart-
ment said, “We refused to sell
these benefits for a few lousy
pieces of silver.”

Chrysler's approach that
“what’s good in the U.S. is good
for Canadians” was rejected and
the union maintains the practice
of shutting down the plant twice
a shift for 10 minutes.

The current system of in-
plant representation is. conti-
nued. But the time stewards and
committeemen will have to
handle grievances has been
about doubled. This should re-
Sult in a great many grievances
being settled on the floor of the
shop instead of before an arbi-
trator. President Brooks said,
“This will help the stewards
greatly. Before, they were
nothing but secretaries, having
time to write up and file griev-
ances but never having time to
fight them. Now we'll see some
change. Previously we had over
7,000 grievances outstanding .in
our local of 9,000, where our
brothers across the river (Det-
roit) had only 6,000 for about

- 100,000 members.”

The teach-ins held by the
union during the strike were
called off on Thurstday for the

ranging ei
from nine to 16 cents an hour ”

* protecting the public

general membership meeting, to
ratify the contract. One young
guy told me, “It’s too bad, I was
just getting to like them. It’s
surprising when you learn about
what our union has done.”

When Charlie Brooks asked
the members for a show of
hands to tell how they liked the
contract, they shot up so fast
that this reporter was unable to
pick up his camera to record the
vote.

I missed the second time
when they voted unanimously to
give financial aid in the way of
weekly donations to support the
General Motors and Ford work-
ers who are planting their feet
firm to take on the other two
of the big three. The defeat of
Chrysler will, sure be an incen-
tive to UAW brothers in
their battles, as well as being a
huge benefit to the struggles of
all Canadian workers.

Oppose phone hike

The following letter was today
sent by the Leader of the Com-
munist Party to the Railway

- Transport Committee:

Sir:

Having received your commit-
tee’s conclusions, issued at Ot-
tawa on January 23, 1968, to the
effect that said committee will
not order: Bell Telephone to re-
duce its rates to customers
despite the fact that present
rate structure produces earnings
above the permissive level on the
company’s total capitalization
established by Judgment issued
in May, 1966, we hereby strong-
ly protest against this high-hand-
ed, unwarranted and improper
decision by a public body charg-
ed with the responsibility of
interest
against this monopolistic corpo-
ration.

In actual fact, Bell Telephone

has made excessive illegal profits
continuously .every year at the
expense of its subscribers. By
these means, as well as through
special tax concessions at the

municipal level, Bell has extract-

ed millions, perhaps well over
100 million dollars during the
last decade from subscribers and
municipal taxpayers.

In view of the above, and for
other reasons, argued in. our pre-
sentation on this matter to.the

. Board of Transport Commission-

ers in 1966, we repeat our de-
mand that the time is long
overdue when this private com-
munications empire, which now
seeks an extention of its charter,
must be taken over by public
authority, nationalized and oper-
ated as a public utility under the
direction of a Board, on which
labor as well as other public
bodies are given adequate repre-
sentation.

Labor Department to the rescue

while being divested of their
bargaining strength. The pro-
tests had to be taken into ac-
count for this government must
soon face the voters. But big
business pressure for punitive
measures against the unions is
still on, for with growing un-
employment the big employers
consider the situation more ap-
propriate for their purposes.

In an attempt to come to the
rescue of the government, the
labor department has jumped in-
to the muddied-up water with
both feet. It has done so through

‘the person of Bernard Wilson,

Federal Assistant Deputy Minis-
ter of Labor, who projects a
Proposition which ‘if it ever be-
came law would mean compul-
sory arbitration and the end of
Collective bargaining as now
practised.

Last _September, .Mr. Wilson
addressed a panel discussion of
the Canadian Association of Ad-
minstrators of Labor Legislation
in Ottawa. This address, con-
taining the above-mentioned pro-
position, was published in full
in the January, 1968 issue of
Labour Gazette, Official journal
of the Canada Department of

Labor. A publisher’s note to the
article states that publication of
addresses in full is not normal-
ly practised by this journal.
Here is Mr. Wilson’s proposi-

‘tion written out as an amend-

ment to the Industrial Relations
and Disputes Investigation Act
by the author and included in
the article:

“Notwithstanding the provi-.

sions of Sections 21 and 22 of
this Act (the Industrial Relations
and Disputes Investigation Act),
where a strike or lockout has
taken place and has been in ef-
fect for 14 days from the date
of its inception, the Governor

‘in Council may, if the strike or -

lockout imperils the safety or
security of Canada or the econo:
mic welfare of its citizsens, other
than those participating direct-
ly in the strike or lockout, pro-
mulgate Regulations for the re-

sumption of operation by the’

employer and by the employees,
and for the final settlement of
the dispute without further
strike or lockout.” ;

Mr. Wilson is no newcomer to
the field of labor-management
relations. He has been: head of
the conciliation and arbitration

branch of the labor department
and secretary of the Canada La-
bor Relations ‘Board for many
years.

Mr. Wilson does not argue
against free- collective bargain-
ing and strikes. His article is
liberally sprinkled with plati-
tudes upholding these rights. He
argues that “breakthrough im-
provements _in working condi-
tions are not made without bar-
gaining power.” He states “‘it is
feasible, tactical or otherwise
desirable to lay down in legisla-
tion the certainty of strike pro-
hibition, or provide for a period
of time for the duration of strike
action.” To do so, he says,

“would inhibit bargaining.”.

The assistant deputy minister
is against clearly defined restric-
tions in legislation. The power
to restrict must be transfered by
legislation to the Cabinet, leav-
ing to legislation the farcial re-
cognition of “rights that a large
part of labor consider funda:
mental.” i

He is also against legislating
strike prohibition. Rather he
favors the idea. that strikes
should be allowed to start and
continue for 14 days before the

Cabinet intervenes with a back-
to-work order. A two week
strike, he reasons, would be an
ideal safety-valve to let off

‘steam. Timing, he argues, is

vital in choosing the right mo-
ment for settlement of strikes.

But what. employer would
settle when he knows in advance
that the Cabinet will at the
“right moment” order the strike
off? Mr. Wilson has been around
long enough to know that they
wouldn’t, as does the depart-

* ment of labor.

The labor department's res-
cue bid must be drowned in a

sea of protest. The bargaining . ;

Strength of orgdnized labor
must be strengthened not weak-
ened. The heavy and sustained
attacks fo undermine the
Strength of the trade unions
serves to emphasize the pres-
sing need of the unions right
across the country to close
ranks in unity. The CLC con-
vention this coming May can
play an important role in forg-
ing unity of all unions in Can-
ada. A unity that is based on
the. firm principle of working
class solidarity and mutual re-
spect for national aspirations. -

|