- CAIMAW — catalyst for change:

Recently, | had a lengthy discus-
sion with Jess Succamore, national
secretary-treasurer of the Canadian
Association of Industrial
Mechanical and Allied Workers. He
spoke freely about his union and his
personal trade union philosophy.
Also, he gave me sample copies of
their newspaper (CAIMAW
- Review), some fact sheets and a
copy of their constitution.

The first article in the constitu-
tion describes CAIMAW as a pure-
ly Canadian union. This is best
understood by reference to Clause
(i) of Article two:

“To promote the right and
freedom of Canadian workers to
belong to labor organizations that
are effective, democratic and not
dominated by any element foreign
to, or not in the best interests of the
people of Canada.”’

The full meaning of that clause
was demonstrated by a one-page
feature in the (CAIMAW Review)
~ for September/October 1978: The
heading reads as follows: CLC: Jr.
Partner of the AFL-CIO. A smaller
headline reads this way: CCU —
Alternative Labor Central.

Thus, the CLC exemplifies what
is bad in our trade union a
ment. In contrast, the CCU,
which CAIMAW is affiliated is of.
fered as the alternative. If only were

that simple!
The short piece on the CCU
referred to above informed all

readers that the CCU had 30,000
members. in Canada, of whom
16,000 were in B.C. The member-
ship of the Canadian Labor Con-
gress (Canada’s largest trade union
_ central) was listed on the same page
as being 2.2 million strong.
~ Labor Organization In Canada,
1978, published by the Labor Data
Branch in Ottawa, credits the CLC
with 2,203,812 members and the
CCU with 26,007 members. Accor-
-dingly, the CLC represented 67.2
percent of the organized workers as
against 0.8 percent for the CCU.

‘right’ to raid internationals

It is against this background that
we must evaluate the following
statements from the CAIMAW
Review (Sept./Oct. 1978).

“Although the membership of
the CCU is small compared to that
of the CLC, there is no doubt that
the presence of an alternative labor
central has served as a catalyst to
promote Canadian unionism within
the larger body.

“The 14 unions affiliated to the
CCU are all independent Canadian

LABOR
COMMENT

BY JACK PHILLIPS

unions, all dedicated to the struggle
for a sovereign Canadian labor
movement.”’

If the catalyst theory is to be con-
sidered, then we must examine a
few more facts. The Confederation
of National Trade Unions, a purely
Canadian trade union center based
in Quebec, had 188,000 members in
1978. Further, the Congress of
Democratic Unions in Quebec
(founded in 1972 after a break-
away from the CNTU) had 38,000
members. Thus, if we accept the
catalyst theory, then we must say
that these two Quebec centrals also
serve as catalysts to promote Cana-
dian unionism within the larger
body, namely the CLC. Carrying
this argument to its logical conclu-
sion, we could then point to a
number of other independent
unions and describe them in turn as
catalysts, thus presenting separa-
tion from the CLC as a virtue in
itself.

There are those within the leader-
ship of the CCU and among their

‘Profits before safety’
behind CPR derailment

Continued from page 1
ears, despite the denials of the ex-
ecutive vice-president of the CPR,
is contrary to the regulations of the
Canadian Transport Commission.
Propane, according to the regula-
tions, when transported by rail,
must be placarded ‘*Dangerous,”’
_ while phosgene, the gas which was
used in gas warfare in World War I,
must be placarded ‘‘Poison Gas”’

tor shipment by rail tank car.

The ignoring of the law by CPR
management does not stop with the
overlooking of a specific section or

subsection of the regulations. Pro-
— minently displayed on the wall of
the foyer in the offices of the Cana-
dian Transport Commission in
downtown Toronto is a chart which
graphically outlines the positioning
of cars with dangerous commod-
ities. The chart, which carries the
logo CPR, shows, in two places,
that tank cars carrying placards
reading *‘Dangerous’’ must not be
placed next to cars with placards
reading *‘Poison Gas.’’ A worker at
the CTC offices told the Tribune
that it was his understanding that
the charts “are posted in every CPR
~ marshalling yard office.”’
In an interview, a railway trade
union official, who asked that his
name not be used because of the an-
ticipated investigations into the ac-
cident, told the Tribune, ‘‘They
{the CPR) are not going to be able

to stick some poor yard marshal for

_this. The decision for the position-
ing of that many chemical tank cars
is not made by a yard marshal but
by railway management. They
“(CPR management) obviously posi-
tioned the cars not by the regula-
tions but for convenience in off-
loading.”

Another trade union official,
who also asked not to be named,
told the Tribune that he wasn’t
‘“‘surprised that the regulations had
been. ignored.’” When asked how
the accident and the evacuation
could have been prevented he said,
‘*It could have been prevented from
the start if the CPR didn’t put pro-
tits before safety. The railways have
had the technology for the electron-
ic sensors to detect hot boxes since
the 1960s.’” It was a hot box or
broken axle that is the suspected
cause of the initial derailment.
‘“*But,’’ he continued, ‘‘the CPR
hadn’t put them on one of the most
heavily used lines for the transport
of dangerous chemicals because the
placement of the sensors would ob-
viously have cut into their precious
profits. And perhaps the position-
ing of the cars could have been
straightened out by a yard marshal
it the CPR wasn’t constantly put-
ting pressure on the yard marshal:
to couple the trains and get them
out of the yards as soon as possible.
Again it’s profit before safety.

__ PACIFIC TRIBUNE— NOVEMBER 23, 1979—Page 12

supporters who use the catalyst
theory to justify signing up
members in a unit covered by any
Canadian branch of an _ interna-
tional union (union with head-

‘quarters in the U.S.) and then ap-

plying for certification during the
‘‘open season.’’ The major part of
the CCU membership in British

Columbia has resulted from such_

practices. It must also be said that
some unions within the CLC have
raided each other from time to
time. However, the practice of
raiding is generally frowned upon in
the trade union movement, because
it places union against union and
worker against worker and causes
division and disruption. Also, it is
very costly, in terms of union funds
that could be put to a better use.

When I visited Succamore, he
was kind enough to give me a full
morning of his time. He came
across as a sincere, devoted trade
union leader, but I cannot say that I
agree with all of his trade union
philosophy. For that matter, he ex-
pected me to disagree on some ques-
tions.

According to Succamore, about
70 per cent of CAIMAW’s member-

ship previously belonged to interna-

tional unions and the remainder
were first organized by CAIMAW.
About half the existing certifica-
tions are made up of members gain-
ed through signing up unorganized
workers.

He told me that the breakdown ~

of the CAIMAW membership is as
follows: B.C. 4,500; -Manitoba
2,220; Saskatchewan 80 and Alber-
ta 175.

Approximately =o 000 B.C.
members are in mining locals, in
five open pit mines and in one
underground mine in the Gold
River area on Vancouver Island.
According to CAIMAW statistics,
it is the largest union in open pit
mining in B.C., a jurisdiction which

| an

|

has been claimed by a number of
unions, including the Steelworkers,
the Operating Engineers and the
Laborers. Steel represents only
1,400 members in this field.
However, it is the dominant union
‘in underground mining.

CAIMAW has become the major
union in truck manufacturing and
assembly in Western Canada,
representing workers at Kenworth,
Freightliner and International
Harvester.

It is also the certified bargaining
agency for the mechanical and
maintenance staff of Fogg Motors,
Northridge Chrysler, Surrey
Dodge, Arrow Transfer and Inland

Kenworth.
In addition, CAIMAW is the

largest: union in the foundries, with
some 350 members.

This membership in truck, auto
and foundries was gained by replac-
ing other unions as_ bargaining
agencies.

An obvious question is whether
ten years of fighting the established

unions affiliated to the CLC has’

really paid off. For example, all
CAIMAW has to show in B.C. for
its tremendous efforts in this
‘decade, a decade marked by
jurisdictional squabbling, raiding
and bitter. quarrels, is 4,500
members. However, this is more
than a statistical question.

CAIMAW first came into ex-
istence in 1966 as a union for elec-
trical workers after the Lenkurt
strike in Burnaby. When it failed to
make any serious inroads against
the International Brotherhood of
Electrical Workers, it transformed
itself into a general union, in 1969.

In my interview with Succamore,
he defined CAIMAW’s philosophy
as follows:

“I see our union as one that ex-
poses foreign domination of our
economy by U.S. interests and U.S.
business unionism. We are trying to

put the labor movement back
focus.”’
When I raised the. question’
raiding other unions, Succa'
said it is the policy of his unio
to raid another Canadian u
This implies, of course,
CAIMAW reserves the right to
any branch of an_internatiol
union. ]
When I advanced the -idea t
there should be one independeé
sovereign nd united trade uni
movement in Canada, embr
all unions, he agreed, in
words: ‘‘The labor movement
more important than any
union.”
However, when a general u
such as CAIMAW is prepare
sign up members belonging to al
international union in Canada;
argues that its mission is to prov!
a sovereign trade union movemt
by ‘‘liberating”’ a very large secll
of the organized workers If
established unions. Frankly, I
believe that this is the metho
which the Canadian trade ul
movement will be transformed f
damentally, irrespective of ©
many legitimate grievances that
ist within the international uni
Saying that is not to deny”
sincerity, dedication and deepl
desire for democratic and eff
trade unionism of men like
camore and those who follow #
leadership. However, it is my |
nion that being honest, sincere
dedicated is no guarantee
making wrong estimations.
I intend to elaborate on U
matters, among others, in myg
Labor Comment.
Also, I will try to show
CAIMAW stands in relation t
jor policy questions affectin
labor movement as a whole, om
basis of its own policy statemen!
published in their offi
newspaper. ‘

=

The power that
newspaper is
bragging about
is its readers.

_TWO-FSTED,

oe raat wg wal
nse

struggle need
_win.
-Every wee
more and mot

About 75% of
them are busi-
ness executives,
managers and

professionals.
Their average

are turning »
the Tribune 0
cause they see
as their nev

their interests.

personal income
is $32,000 per year.
As they say, ‘‘Our
readers are power-
ful.’? And the Post
exists to help keep
them that way.

Our readers are not
rich or _ influential
But they want and
need power too.

That is why they
read this newspaper
every week. To get

the information, an-
alysis and solidarity
which people in

PACIFi

RIiBUNE
Read the paper that fights for

Name....... oe See Se

Address

eR NG CNN NG ON Ant

GIGDYAOWD:. «3 Sask oas teak Province. .

Postal Codec. =~ es

| am enclosing:

1 year $10 2 years $180 +6 months $6 0
OldO New cen 1 ie $12 0

Donation $. .

SS ks Se eo

And with every neé
reader our pow
grows. Get your SI
today.

jell

ot
ae Sie Soa ce 8a Ree

nwa Oe

ee : af Sieg <7