\
\
\

The November 18-20 meeting
of the Preparatory Committee

to prepare an international con- -

ference of Communist and-
Workers’ Parties made -a. posi- -
tive contribution to the cause
of strengthening the unity of
the world communist movement.

The urge towards unity was
expressed in the almost unani-
mous-decision of the 67 parties
present to convene an interna-
tional conference in Moscow in
May of 1969. The exact date in
May will be set by the next
meeting of the Preparatory
Committee which will meet in
Moscow on March 17.

The March meeting of the
Preparatory Committee will in-
clude also on its agenda: a) dis-
cussion of the draft document
to be submitted to the interna-
tional conference; b) sugges-
tions for the celebration of the
100th anniversary of Lenin’s
birth.

In addition to reaching agree-
ment -of the time for the inter-

‘nantional conference the Prepa-

ratory Meeting, the 67 parties
present reaffirmed their Solidar-
ity with the heroic people of
Vietnam, and will continue to
increase their action with all.
peace forces with the aim of!
achieving the total withdrawal
of American troops from Viet-
nam and to assure to the Viet-
namese people the right to run
their own affairs in sovereignty,
national independence ‘and.
peace. :

The meeting issued a Decla-
ration which condemned “with
anger and indignation the bru-
tal war of extermination of In-
donesian reaction against Com-
munists and other..democrats.”
The Declaration ‘called for “the
voice of protest to ring out
throughout the world” against
the evil deeds of the Indonesian
reactionaries.

‘Other statements were adopt-
ed also. One protested the death.
sentence passed by an Athen’s
court on Alexander Panagulis,
anti-fascist fighter for freedom
and peace, for the democracy

a

, WO Wi, igs a WY

Towards world Com

and independence of Greece.
Another statement expressed

“deep indignation at the cruel .

and bloody - reprisals of the

_American imperialists and their
‘local henchmen against the re-

volutionary forces fighting for
their countries’ freedom and in-
dependence in Guatemala, Para-
guay and Haiti.”

Of the 65- parties attending
the Budapest meeting with full
Status (Norway and Sweden had
observer status only) three par-
ties were -not in favor of a May
meeting. However these parties,
Great Britain, Switzerland and
Reunion, were in agreement
that an international conference
should be held. But only after
the creation of a “proper atmo-
sphere” necessary, in their

boon aera

view, to ensure a fruitful meet-
ing.

However, many other parties
argued that existing ‘political
conditions demanded holding
the international conference as
quickly as the preparatory work
would allow. While these par-
ties hold differing opinions on
the August events in Czechoslo-
vakia they did not consider
that these differences warranted
any further postponement in

setting the time of the confer- -

ence. In fact, a number of par-
ties contended that it was pre-
cisely because of these different
views of the August events that
the conference should be held
as soon as possible.

In supporting the May date,
the Canadian delegation drew

CNTU anti-war position

“The Confederation of Nation-
al Trade Unions,” according to
its president, Marcel.Pepin, “has

condemned without any reserva-
tion the American aggression in -

Vietnam and: called for the peo-
ple of Vietnam to ‘have the in-
alienable right to have a govern-
ment of their own choice.”
Pepin was speaking at the
opening plenary sessions of the
Hemispheric Conference to End
the War held last weekend in
Montreal. He went on to say

that the CNTU had also demand- .

éd of the Canadian government
that we “cease manufacturing
war goods for the United
States” and that our country
take a position “against this
monstrous war, which revolts
the conscience of humanity.”

Pepin continued, “The war in
Vietnam is a result of the Amer-
ican ‘military-industrial com-
plex’, this immense
which, in the United States, and
above all by its western rarnifi-
cations and influence, consti-
tutes a considerable. menace for
democracy and liberty.”

Stating that it was obvious
that a war such as that in Viet-

power -

nam which was costing the
United States $25 billion a year,
Pepin said, “It pushes to con-
solidate in such a configuration
the military, industrial and pol-

.itical forces, to the point of

directly menacing the capacity
of the nation to judge events
sanely.”

“As. democrats, as_ trade
unionists, as workers, as peo-
ple,” he continued, “we do not
intend to allow democracy to
capitulate before supra-state
power.” :

The war in Vietnam, said the
trade union leader, “which is
scandalous from the humane and
moral point of view, which is
dangerous politically, destruc-
tive socially, must also be reject-
ed from the point of view of the
solidarity of peoples and their
trade union needs.”

“Contrary to those who walk
over people,” said Pepin in con-
clusion, “whether directly or in-
directly, by force of arms or in-
fluence, we wish to remain with
those who march with the peo-
ples. Trade unionists will never
be characterized by the black
mark of stopping -justice.”

i

attention to the position of their
party of the urgent need for
convening the conference at the
earliest possible date in order to
lay a sound political-ideological
basis for the consolidation of
the unity of the worfd commu-
nist. movement.

This unity, contended the
Canadian delegation, is vitally

munist unit

.ties in company with all othe

necessary in order that all
Communist and Workers’ pat

democratic and progressive fore
es can better counter and tum
back the aggressive designs 2
imperialism against the gains
socialism, the working class
the capitalist countries and th
world-wide liberation movemen|

Victory in

fare fight

A partial victory was scored
by the Labor Election Commit-
tee last week in its- campaign
to prevent a transit fare in-
crease in Winnipeg. Faced with
a delegation of 35 students and
transit patrons, members of
Metro Council agreed fully with
all of the major recommenda-
tions of the LEC. The key LEC
proposal to arrange an emer-
gency meeting with the provin-
cial cabinet for increased tran-
sit subsidy and return of 100
percent of the gas and vehicle
taxes was: implemented and the
meeting will take place later
next month.

Under heavy public pressure
not to increase fares, Metro
council members claimed that
they had not decided to raise
fares, that this was an admini-
stration proposal and that no
fare increases had ever been
imposed by Metro.

There has been no fare in-
crease in’ Winnipeg since 1958
and Winnipeg enjoys one of the
lowest fare structures in the
country. The low fare structure
is due partly to the consistent
campaign of the Labor Election
Committee over the years to
prevent increases.

Alderman Zuken, Schoo]
Trustee Mary Kardash and LEC
secretary’ Don Currie, were

“warmly applauded by a group

of University of Manitoba Stu-
dents who showed up to back
the protest. The LEC spokes-
men charged that a fare in-

“plementary submission on be& —

_prevent the increase.

crease on top of the 2 percent
increase in income tax, the 9
percent sales tax, the 12 mill it
crease on homeowners would -

be an intolerable burden on i

income families, Ald. Zukel
warned that an increase in Wa"
ter rates was also being com ~
sidered by Metro and charge?
that even life’s basic necesst
ties, bread and water, are belNé
taxed. (Bread prices went UP
recently in Winnipeg.) é 3
‘Trustee Kardash was warmly
applauded by the students whe? —
she demanded a lower fare fol
students and pointed out thal
with a threatened increase 1% —
tuition fees, students were fing —
ing it more and more difficult”
to continue in school. ‘

Don Currie presented a sup

half of the LEC demanding im
mediate public release of thé
long delayed urban transporta-
tion study. Currie charge®
Metro with operating without 2
coherent plan for transit which —
spends millions on freeway com” —
struction instead of investing 7
a rapid transit system. Freeway —
development and major arterial
toads’ were being built mofe —
with an eye to shopping centfe
development than with an ey® —
to moving large numbers © —
people quickly and cheaply he
said. ae
The LEC will now await the —
outcome of the Metro-Provily —
cial government talks before —
deciding on further moves t —

a
a ne

a

alf dewhurst |

No accommodation

“The union movement repre-
Sents one-third of Canadian
workers and what they are do-
ing is sharing with management.
the fruits of the exploitation of
60 to 70 percent of those work-
ers who remain unorganized: ’

the disabled,
Sfons {°, .”
So declared Douglas Smith,
a special assistant to John
Crispo, director of the univer-
sity’s Centre for Industrial Re-
lations and a member of the
four man Wood’s task force on
labor relations, now dubbed
Prime Minister Trudeau’s task

those on pen-

‘force.

Mr. Smith is reported as stat-
ing in the course of his argu-
ment that the organized few
have tended to pursue their
monetary goals often against
the interests of the more deserv-
ing, disorganized many—the 40
percent of Canadian families
earning less than $4,000 a year.

“Trade unions in North Ame-
rica,” he said, “are regarded by
their members not as a radical
social force but as a slot ma-
chine that is expected to yield
the big pay-off in every nego-
tiation . : ..Unionism has been
termed the, capitalism of, the
middle class and is certainly

PACIFIC TRIBUNE—DECEMBER 6, 1968—Page 4

more opportunistic ‘than ideal-
istic.” te
This economist, turned labor
relations expert, goes on to ad-
vise the trade union movement
to “devote’ equal time to devis-
ing methods-to reduce the fre-
quency of ‘situations (strikes—
A.D.) that led’ to the public de-
mand for the Rand Report.”
And, again on 'this theme, he
said, “if remedies consistent
with collective bargaining are
not forthcoming, the public will
demand measures inconsistent
with collective bargaining, such
as those of Mr. Justice Rand.”
Mr. Smith’s thesis that organ-
ized labor shares with the em-
ployers in the exploitation of
the unorganized, the poor and
the dispossessed is not original.
It has been going the rounds
for some time. It is a relatively
new twist to the old myth that
high wages cause high prices—
which has been the battle cry
of the employing class for many
a year. :
_Nothing could be further from
the truth than this baseless
charge. For all working people
—organized and unorganized —
are exploited at the point of
production. And, the more mod-
ern the plant the greater the

rate of exploitation. Proof of
this is to be seen in the profit
and productivity figures of the
big corporations like General
Motors, Ford, Stelco, General
Electric and so ‘on.

But economist Smith knows
this. His purpose, however, is to
attack the trade unions from
the’ standpoint of morality. He
is in effect saying shame on you
demanding and_ striking for
higher wages which you know
are passed on to the consumer
in the form of higher prices. His
motive is to shame the organ-
ized workers, to inhibit them
from demanding justifiable wage
increases.

What he does in reality is to
mock the plight of the poor and
the unorganized who are the
special victims of monopoly-
rigged prices. These are times
of monopoly control of the
market. This is true whether it
be food, clothing, shelter, medi-
cines, autos or appliances. The
motto of the monopolists is to
charge all the traffic will bear,
while charging the “greed” of
the organized workers as the
cause of their price manipula-
tions.

As distinct from Mr. Justice

Rand.

Rand whose attack against the
trade unions is from the far
right, Mr. Smith attacks from
“left” positions. Under the um-
brella of concern for the loss of
“‘Gdealism” on the part of the
unions, he actually threatens
them with coming to terms with
the big employers in matters of
bargaining or suffer the restric-
tive procedures favored by Mr.

Proceeding from the basis
that organized labor and the
employers are “partners” in the
exploitation of the poor and un-
organized, Mr. Smith proposes
an accommodation between the
trade unions and the employers.
An accommodation between
partners is a natural conse-

-quence of a partnership. But an

accommodation between the
employers and organized labor
is an unnatural act. For they are
on opposite sides of a class bat-
tle over hours, wages and con-
ditions.

This battle is growing in in-
tensity. Witness the trend to-
wards more and more restric-
tive labor legislation aimed at
protecting the positions of capi-
tal against those of the work-
ing class. For the unions to

ee eee

Se ee PEE aod

allow tendencies to develop fol —
an accommodation with the em
ployers is tantamount to dis: —
arming the workers in theif
struggle for a living wage.

An accommodation with the
employers comes about in sub-
tle ways—and in some not SO —
subtle ways. When labor lead- |
ers accept appointments to me
diation boards in the face of
trade union struggles against
crippling labor legislation, th
is an accommodation. Whe
union leaders suggest joint
union-management research f0
statistics pertinent to bargain
ing, that also is an accommoda-
tion. ; ;

Organized labor can provid
the answer for the distresse
state of the unorganized and thé
poor. It can organize them.
can lead them in struggle to
raise wages, for higher pension
and welfare payments. The bi
unions have the material mean:
and moral stamina to cart
these tasks through to the en¢
The job should be underta
at once.

And, for organized labor t
achieve its just goals, crippling
anti-strike laws should likewi
be fought through the end.

x