e Continued from Page 7
accomplished within the framework of
unity. Neither dual unionism nor seces-
sion, brought about by raiding or other
means will solve any problems for the
workers. On the contrary, they will
only increase fragmentation, promote
internicine warfare, put worker against
worker, and intensify the problems.
That is why the struggle for an inde-
pendent and sovereign trade union
movement on the Canadian railways
has to be won within the framework
of an organizational policy and pro-
gram of all-inclusive unity.

In other words, the aim in the in-
dustry should be to struggle for an
integrated Canadian transportation
system, represented by one Canadian
transport federation of labor unions.
Such a federation of transportation
unions being a part of one house of
labor through affiliation with the
Canadian Labor Congress.

NO BREAK-UP OF
BARGAINING UNITS

Mr. Munro, Liberal Labor Minister,
is now talking about steps tq avoid
any further country-wide railway
strikes. A means to accomplish this
may be some form of splitting up the
present country-wide bargaining units
in the industry. This must be resisted
and defeated.

Not labor solidarity in bargaining and
trade unions, but the anti-labor. and
anti-popular majority in parliament is
what has to go. This majority of capi-
talist politicians represent and speak
for monopoly interests. They have not
lifted a finger to protect the workers
and the rest of the public from the un-
conscionable profit-gouging by the rail-
way companies or any other monopo-
lies that cause inflation and rising
prices. But they acted quickly and
with great dispatch to break the rail-
way workers’ strike for a living wage
and some measure of economic and
job security.

MORE LABOR SOLIDARTITY
NEEDED

The reason they succeeded is due in
no small measures to the lack of labor
unity in action behind the railway
workers’ strike. The fundamental issue
of government strike-breaking goes far
beyond the kind of contract the rail-
way workers were seeking. The prin-
cipal issue of strike-breaking concerns
the whole trade union movement. But
it must be said that apart from general
statements issued, there were no seri-
ous efforts made by the CLC, provin-
cial federations, or labor councils, to
mobilize the whole trade union move-
ment and the general public in support
of the railway workers just and legi-

Rail workers want to benefit from increased productivity. They want wages equal

to workers in similar work; they want to protect the right to collective bargaining

and the democratic right to strike...

timate demands, much less _ basic

rights.
DEFEND THE RIGHT TO STRIKE

The talk about alternatives to
strikes in essential services, like the
railroads is part of the monopoly’s
campaign to deprive workers of the
fundamental right to strike. This is a
threat to democracy for all. Those who
support this stuff and nonsense are the
same people who think that class
society and class struggle can be
wished away, or do not exist. Such
opinions, unfortunately are not uncom-
mon in labor’s own ranks. An example
can be found on page 6517 of Com-
mons Debates of Sept. 11, 1973:

“Mr. Paddy Neale (Vancouver East)
NDP: Mr. Speaker, I shoud like to
direct my question to the Minister of
Labor. In view of the fact that any
contract put into effect under Bill
C-217 will expire at the end of Decem-
ber, 1974, and in view of the fact
that this House will no doubt be called
on to legislate the railroad workers
back to work in the event of another
strike, would the minister give con-
sideration to breaking up the bargain-
ing unit so that separate negotiations
can ensue between the railroad unions
and the two major railways, namely,
the CNR and the CPR, in order that
in the event a strike is necessitated
between the workers and either one of
the two major companies it would not
constitute a threat to the Canadian
economy?

“Hon. John Munro (Lib. Minister of
Labor): Mr. Speaker, without acknowl-
edging at such an early stage the
inevitability of legislation again at the
termination of the. present collective
agreement, may I say, as I indicated
earlier, that we will study the history
of the present events that led up to the
strike we have just experienced to see
whether we cannot-come up with a
formula to reduce the motivation to
strike next time. Having said that, may
I say with particular reference to the

-hon. member’s suggestion; yes, that is

under consideration.” :

It ought to be clear that fragmenta-
tion of bargaining units as between
various companies in the railway in-
dustry, or on any other basis, is going
to weaken the unions’ position and
strengthen the employers position.
Like the substitution of compulsory
arbitration for the right to strike, it is
an attack on the workers and their
unions. Only industry-wide bargaining
and the unfettered right to strike meet
the needs of workers in the railway
industry. It must be defended.

PACIFIC TRIBUNE — FRIDAY, OCTOBER 5, 1973 — PAGE 8

ONLY THE COMMUNIST PARTY
GAVE CONSISTENT SUPPORT
_ TO THE WORKERS

It is well to remember that from the
time of negotiations and all the way
through the strike, only the Commun-
ist Party stood solidly with the work-
ers. It demanded that the government
put pressure on the companies to quit
stalling and come to terms with the
union before a strike became neces-
sary. It exposed company-government
collusion to provoke a strike. It sup-
ported workers who defied the parlia-
mentary edict to go back to work
without a contract. It condemaed gov-
ernment strike-breaking. It demanded
charges against all strikers be dropped.

NAME... .

ADDRESS... .

‘against the galloping inflationary pri

EACH “‘PT’’ PASSED INTO NEW HANDS
EVERY NEW READER WON FOR

THE WORKING CLASS PRESS
STRENGTHENS OUR STRUGGLE FOR
A BETTER LIFE

CLIP AND MAIL TO
No. 3 MEZ., 193 E. HASTINGS, VANCOUVER 4

ENCLOSED IS MY M.O. FOR.A RENEWAL (NEW SUB) TO THE P.T.
1 YEAR $5.00, 2 YEAR $9.00, 5 YEAR $12.00. : 7 i

fectly justified in rejecting the
standard wage settlement pressed
a parliamentary majority... 5, ©
On September 3, the Comm
Party ran an advertisement in the 1%
ronto Globe and Mail over the sign |
ture of its leader, William Kashtalh |
which stated: “The non-ops are Pe |
“The railway workers have a jv
case. They want to protect themselves

spiral. They want to benefit from it |
creased productivity. They want was®
equal to. workers in similar type °
work. They want to protect the right
to collective bargaining and the dem?
cratic right to strike . 1

“The entire labor rhovement, #
democratic forces throughout ee
country, must help them achieve it. I
they win, the whole working class
wins. If they lose, the Canadian publi¢
loses and monopoly gains.”

CONCLUSION t

The obvious conclusion. one a
draw from the railway workers expe! |
ence is that the monopoly interes®
are determined to load the cost of Ut
employment and _ inflation arising
out of profiteering on the backs
the remaining workers in the indush”
To force this policy on their worké
and the community at large, they te
on the power of their bourgeois §
to crush any and all resistance. ie

Consequently no reliance pet: fa
placed on the process of arbitra
and mediation, now in the hands
former supreme court justice, Mr a
mett “Hall, to bring about any PP a
ciable gains for the railway worker

The crisis in labor relations Wit™
the transportation industry reflects I
much deeper and growing crisis 10
state-monopoly capitalism as an ec on
mic system of super- exploital
where government policy servesi “4
monopolies and monopoly Pro
workers’ and public expense.

To come to ibs with this prob
requires both economic and po 4
action, in which all anti-monopoly ef
democratic forces are brought tos,
in common struggle for common 4 viet
this to include a curb monopoly Po nde |
to win new national policies of Mi
pendence, to assure economic, ° opel
and -democratic progress, and tO "i
the path for advance. to socialis™ — |
Canada.

‘

-——