The question posed above is wor-
rying many trade unionists in B.C.
Recently the Western District Presi-
_dent of Mine-Mill wrote an im
‘portant article which was published
in the current issue of “The Com-
mentator.” The PT here reprints
that articlein slightly abridged
form.

-By HARVEY MURPHY

For many years the trade union
movement was growing and this
was reflected in the wage rates,
hours or work, and other condi-
tions which were classified as the
best in Canada,

The British Columbia Federa-
tion of Labor convention recently
concluded, had before it two very
startling figures—‘‘Whereas the

number of
workers in
British Col-
,umbia_ in-
~ creased by
1 45,000, the

‘ number of
trade union-
ists declined
by 17,000.”’

_ And further
—‘‘Union membership as a per-
centage of the work force drop-
ped from 53.9% in 1958 to 45.2%
in 1962,’’

The leadership of the B.C, Fed-
eration of Labor has sought to
blame the effects of Bill 43
and other legislative actions
taken’ by the government of Bri-
tish Columbia for this develop-
ment but this is hardly an ex-
planation; nor is automation and
its effects on industry an explan-
ation because with these figures
in front of us, it is clear that
the B.C., trade union movement
is declining in face of a growing
work force.

The explanation that more fits
the situation in B.C., is to be
looked at from what is going on
inside the trade union movement,
Those of us who participated in
the great organizational drives
that brought thousands of work-
ers into the trade union movement
and established trade unions in
spite of themost vicious employer
opposition, know that trade union
organization in the basic indus-
tries of B.C., was brought about,
in spite of the blacklist, in spite
of the suppression inthe company
towns and camps of this province
with company police watching
over ‘‘strangers’’ coming into the
mining and. lumbering towns.

The fact that we could organize
in face of these conditions and
bring workers into the trade union
movement to win the fight for
union recognition, is something
that workers should be remind-
ed of.

Who can forget the sit-down
strikes? Who can forget the de-
portation threat against foreign-
born workers who sought to join
a trade union? Who can forget

“the Fraser Mills strike? The —

Anyox strike? The strike in Pio-

WHY AREN'T B.C.
UNIONS GROWING?

Policies of raiding and inner
union attacks are tearing the
guts out of the trade union move-
ment, Highly paid union bosses
employing so-called organizers
who don’t organize unorganized
workers but who go into organized
camps to make false promises,
and spread divisive propaganda
but who above all, split one
worker from another.

How can the trade union move-
ment grow? What say have the
membership of unions today in
deciding policies? This has been
going on for almost 20 years.
Ever since the war ended we have

seen growth of trade unionism.

and the powerful position occu-
—pied by the trade unions as a
united force. It was reflected
in the victories won by labor
not only in wages and agreements
but also in improved labor legis-
lation.

We, in B.C., canremember the
great labor lobbies in Victoria
and the respect that the govern-
ments had for labor at that time
because labor was united and was
attracting to itself the support
of unorganized workers and the
community, Strikes of workers
for wages and working conditions
were supported by unions and
trade unionists regardless of
craft or industrial affiliation.

Here we see the B.C. Federa-
tion of Labor in convention and
a strike of the miners at Reeves

MacDonald then in its seventh ©

month which was not even men-
tioned. New mines came into op-
eration and before they could
become established with func-
tioning local unions, raids were
launched and people imported into
B.C., who had never participated
in the organization of workers,
going house to house poisoning
workers against their trade
union, disrupting the Locals, and
with hundreds of thousands of
dollars of trade unionists’ dues
dissipated; and where raids suc-
ceed, unions cease to function
and the bosses can sit back and
take their toll.

British Columbia is the most
industrialized province in Can-
ada, The vast majority of voters
are workers in industry but th,
convention of the NDP couldn’t
look those figures in the face be-
cause among the leadership of
that NDP convention, as in the
leadership of the B.C. Federation
of Labour, are the men who are
dividing and splitting labor and
totally accountable for the weak-
ening of the trade union move-
ment,

For all these years the Mine
Mill & Smelter Workers’ Union

has been a target for raids by the
Steelworkers’ Union leadership,
Raiding has now reached a high
point in the mining industry of
British Columbia, Raiding is a
dirty business and the people that
it attracts to this role, characters

See UNIONS peg. 10

neer?

HE'S PRACTICING HIS BANKRUPT EXPRESSION

FOR THE GNTRACT NEGOTIATIONS TO MORROW’,

WHO'S BEHIND _IT?

Liberal - NDP fli

‘By WILLIAM KASHTAN

Although the New Democratic
Party’s national leader, T, C.
Douglas, has vehemently denied
that he or anyone acting on his
authority has held meetings with
officials of the Liberal Party,
there is no doubt that meetings
between leading Liberals and
some prominent NDP members
have taken place.

In this connection, this column
and the Canadian Tribune have
drawn attention to similar dis-
cussions between some officers
of the Steel union and John Win-
termeyer of Ontario’s Liberal
Party proir to the provincial el-
ections,

Murray Cotterill of the Steel-
workers made no bones about
it then and was reported as say-"
ing that ‘undoubtedly there have
been dicussions going on be-
tween individuals’? but he knew
nothing of an ‘‘official nature’
about meetings between union-
ists or NDP officials with the
Liberals,

* * *
Now this question has come

up again, One must presume
that Cotterill did not act on his

‘own but with the benevolent sup-

port of other national officers
of the Steel union, presumably
nudged by their international
headquarters. In fact, it is the
Steel union leadership which
seems to have been the main
stimulator of such negotiations
and the initiator of are-examina-
tion of Canadian Labor Congress
policy with respect to support
of the NDP.

This was made clear at the
last policy conference of that
union where William Mahoney,
its Canadian director, in effect
backed away from that policy
and proposed instead that steel
workers be active in all political
parties in which they were mem-
bers.

Since then Val Scott, a mem-
ber of the provincial NDP com-
mittee, let loose a blast at trade
union support of the NDP as
constituting a hindrance to its
political fortunes, remarks which
he since claimed were a distor-
tion of what he actually said.

Whether or not Scott’s re-
marks were interpreted cor-
rectly, it is no _ secret that
such views are held in the NDP
based on the idea that the NDP
should appear in the public eye
as free from ‘‘trade union domi-
nation’’ and, more particularly,
free from U.S, trade union con-
trol,

es ery
In all the current behind-
the-scenes manoeuvres, the

trade unions affiliated tothe NDP
seem to have been bypassed and
ignored,

After all, the CLC was a ma-
jor factor in helping to bring the
NDP into existence, Was it asked
or ‘involved in these not-so-sec-
ret negotiations with the Liberal
Party? And if it was, where did
it get the mandate to concur in

‘such a voyage of exploration?

It would be useful were the

union locals affiliated to fhe NDP

to ask these questions and de-
mand an answer.

2 * *
The main question which many
NDP members and union

“locals must be asking is: ‘‘what’s

behind these discussions?”’
According to statements made
by Donald McDonald, Ontario
NDP leader, and Cotterill, the ne-
gotiations are aimed at finding
a basis for joint action between
the NDP and Liberal Party on

"WILLIAM KASHTAN

questions they hold in common
and is not directed to merging
the two parties.

That may be so. But if press

’ accounts are coreect, the reas-

ons given by NDP spokesmen for
not effecting a union or merger
are so thin as to create the im-
pression there isnot much stand-
ing in the way of such a union.

The NDP claims the Liberals
took the initiative in calling for
discussions. That may be so. But
what is the purpose of such dis-
cussions? What did the leader-
ship of the NDP seek to find out?

Some NDP spokesmen may
claim that this is part of the ef-
fort to bring about a political
realignment — forcing the right-
wing Liberals into the Tory
camp and the left-wing Liberals
into the NDP camp.

That may be so, although it is
a strange way to bring about
such realignments which can
only take place as the political
conditions ripen for them,

The leadership of the NDP
knows this very well and is
trying to catch the unwary with
such a smokescreen, ;

‘weight behind some kind of coa-

irtation

More likely it is part of the
Liberal Party’s manoeuvering —

‘diracted at repeating history by

sucking the NDP into the Liberal ©
Partty as the Liberals didsosuc- ~
cessfully with the Progressive
Party after the 1921 federal elec- ~
tion. 4

Then, too, the Liberals were a —
minority government with the —
Progressives holding 63 seats :
and constituting the balance of —

power. The Liberal government —

of the day gave them some con- —
cessions in return for keeping —
the government in office and ~

‘gradually put them in a position ~

where in the 1926 federal elec-
tion the group of 63 dropped to —
11. The strategy of the Liberals ~
paid off, the concessions were ©
well worth their while and the 9 j

‘mistaken position ofthe Progres- —

sives eliminated them as a poli- ©
tical factor in the country. ;

Now the Liberal Party is try-—
ing to repeat this same strategy.
And in this it is receiving the -
support of elements in the trade —
union movement who seek to
separate themselves from the ©
NDP and return to the oldGomp- —
ers policy. 7

It is no secret that in the re- 4
cent period, because of the in- —
ability of the NDP to break
through in a big way, some trade ©
union officials who opposed labor ~
political action by the CLC have 4
raised their voices again andare ~
demanding a re-examination of ©
CLC policy with respect to sup- ~
port of the NDP. q

Nor is it a secret that some —
right-wing NDP leaders, seeing —
no immediate perspective of —
great electoral advances for the —
NDP, are prepared tothrow their —

lition with the Liberal Party. —

a

* * *

What therefore started out as_
a flirtation could lead to an en-—
gagement and a marriage ofcon-
‘venience at the expense of inde-
pendent labor political action. It
is one thing to develop coopera-
tion around issues which advance ~
the interests of the working peo-
ple; it is another to work out an~
arrangement which would spell
death to independent labor poli-
tical action. 4

This is not a private affair of
the Cotterills and others like him. ~
It is a matter of deep concern
to all who see the need to ad-
vance political action around a
program which would check U.S.
domination of our country and
curb the power of monopoly.

As_ such it ought to be dis-
cussed in union ranks now and
in the coming Canadian Lebeg
Congress convention.

Local union demands

The Western Canada confer-
ence of The Street Railwaymen’s
union has given ‘‘universal sup-
port” to Canadian labor’s
condemnation of AFL - CIO
president George Meany’s stand
on the maritime trusteeship
issue.

According to ‘‘Hi-Lights’’,
organ of Division 101 ofthe union,
‘¢International Secretary-Treas-
urer Mischo also took a good
stand on this issue, He assured
the Western conference delegates
that (the) international union’s
delegation to the AFL-CIO con-
vention would tell Meany that
(we) oppose his dictatorial inter-
vention in Canada’s affairs.’’

The bulletin then pointed out
regretfully that the international
does not support the idea, pro-

posed at the conference, that a
x

Canadian section should be set
up within the international.

In rejecting this plea for Can-_

adian autonomy, Mischo stated

he would ‘‘be equally opposed to.

the idea . .. of forming an
American council.’’

In examining this attitude, ‘‘Hi-
Lights’? makes the following
points:

‘Firstly, it is not necessary
for our U.S.A. sister locals to
meet in this way because about
90 percent of delegates to our
international convention are
Americans,

‘Secondly, Canada is a separ-
ate country in the same way as
the U.S.A. has its separate ident-
ity; we are not a 5lst state,
In fact, to our descredit, Canada
is the only country in the world
in which its trade union move-

January 10, 1964. —PACIFIC TRIBUNE—Page 2

autonom

ment isn’t autonomous .

*tIn addition to the foregoing]
other good specific reasons fo
an autonomous Canadian section
within our international uice
are: 3

“*Qur labor and social legisla-
tion in Canada is substantially
different than in the U.S., thus
requiring the use of a different
approach, in many instances, to
what may be common problems.
" ¢¢* Canadian members of- the
Union should elect their own
international representatives, q

¢¢* Like trade unionists of other
countries we should be permitted
to determine our own policies
in our own country.’’

The bulletin then pointed out
that a number of international
unions had already set up auton=

See: LOCAL UNION pg. 12