:

neal, ans ha =  el

LABOR

Sudbury Inco forced to negotiate

By RICH ORLANDINI

SUDBURY — The scenario was familiar. Nineteen eighty-two is a
bargaining year between United Steelworkers Local 6500 and the giant
multi-national nickel producer Inco.

And in the face of tough bargaining, Inco has announced the layoff of
850 hourly rated workers. —

The company had made similar moves in previous bargaining years.
Layoffs were announced in 1949, 1951, 1958, 1962, 1972 and 1978. And
as in the past; the company has tried to sell the line the layoffs were due

to weak metal markets. But in 1982, the union bargaining committee

has another explanation for the layoffs by Inco and they call it by a
different name — ‘‘blackmail’’.

This year, however, Inco was unable to do what it has done in the °

past. This year, with the announcement of a layoff, Inco was forced to
consult and negotiate with the local union. This victory for the local,
albeit a small one, was brought on by the massive protests of the 1978
layoffs by both the workers and the community and by the militancy of
Local 6500 in the eight-and-a-half month strike against the company.

‘In an effort to stave off some of the criticism for the layoffs, the
company has negotiated an early retirement program rather than
automatically laying off the most junior hourly workers. Currently,
2,400 of the 10,700 production workers are eligible for the negotiated
early retirement package.

HAMIL TON — The last meet-
ing of the Hamilton and District
Labor Council before Christmas
— usually a quiet affair for tying
up the year’s work — was one of
the hottest meetings of 1981. - »

The debates took place around
the current crisis in Poland.

First, the council’s executive
brought forward a motion which
called on delegates to reaffirm the
council’s support for workers’
rights and trade union rights
around the world, including Po-
and, and to consider further ac-
tion when an official request from
the legitimate trade union move-
ment in Poland was received.

This motion, which was even-
tually passed by .a bote of 28-18
was not, however, found to be

Hamilton
labor
council
upholds
executive's /
Poland |
motion

layoffs

In the program, a worker with 30 years seniority or more, who
accepts the package will be paid 70% of his pay for eight weeks, plus all
benefits. and vacation entitlements. Additionally, the worker will re-
ceive a lump sum of $100 per year for every year of service. After the
vacation periods are completed, the worker will then go on pension.

The company claims the negotiated early pension program is more a
process of attrition than a layoff. But the union executive board mem-
bers and bargaining committee members see the question differently.

ie
“It’s still a massive layoff. It’s still blackmail by any other name. 5
And we're going to fight the layoffs’’, an executive member of Local

6500 told the Tribune.

“The effects of the layoff will be felt throughout the community and

we have a responsibility to fight this irresponsible and callous action by

Q)
The union members said that if 850 workers don’t get the early 4
retirement scheme then they won't allow Inco to lay off any junior w

employees without a fight. 2r

‘We're digging in for a long fight’, a bargaining committee member -
told the Tribune. ‘“‘We won a small victory in forcing Inco to talk to us
about the layoffs, but we will not allow the issue of the layoffs to be
diffused by the company through calling the early retirement package

‘attrition’.

acceptable by the handful of
pseudo leftists, including the
‘‘Workers’” Communist party,
the ‘‘Revolutionary Workers’’
League and the so-called *““Com-
munist’’ Party of Canada *‘Marx-
ist-Leninist’’, present nor by the
right-wing brass in the United
Steelworkers establishment.
They were joined in their pique in

_the gallery by a well-heeled and

vociferous bunch of right wing
Polish nationalists.

A second motion, introduced
under new business by a spokes-
person for the WCP, attempted to
scuttle the previous resolution
and called on council to give un-
conditional. support ‘to the ““Soli-
darity’’ organization, presently at
the centre of the crisis. It was de-

feated, also by a vote of 28 to 18.

In the course of the two de-
bates, in which labor council pres-
ident Harry Greenwood pointed
out several times that the situa-
tion in Poland was unclear and
that precipitate action on this
basis could endanger peace and
stability in Europe and in the
world, it became clear that two
distinct positions and two distinct
line-ups were evident.

One comprised the genuine
left, standing with the honest and
responsible council delegates.
The other was made up of a coali-
tion-of the pseudo-left, the tradi-
tional right wing forces in the
labor leadership, and the extreme
right wing of the Polish commu-
nity.

O 3

the company.”’ QF

Mass protests against the 1978
layoffs at Inco forced the company
to negotiate this matter preceed-
ing this set of contract talks.

This unholy alliance, in the
name of freedom and democracy,
worked furiously throughout the
course of the meeting to turn the

labor council’s original decision —

into a reactionary position.

The delegates, for their part,
refused to be pushed and pro-
voked into letting the right win-
gers and their “‘leftist’’ friends
move the council from the sound
position they chose to adopt fol-
lowing a full and extensive de-
bate.

The majority of delegates saw
their support the executive as a
part of the Hamilton council’s
long and active history of fighting
on behalf of working people
throughout Canada and around
the world.

’ trial Organization (CIO),

Militant action to lead coming battle —

An informative article by Mike Phillips in the pre-
Christmas issue of the Canadian Tribune showed that the
collective bargaining scene for 1982 in Candda shapes up
as the biggest, and in many respects the most critical in
the history of Canada. - :

This is so, not just because the largest number of
workers, as well as key industries are at the table this
year, but because the gut issue involved for the sum total
of workers (more than 1,500,000) looking across the
table at employers, is: who is going to foot the bill for the
present economic crisis? And, what is the way out of the
crisis?

In the last similar period faced by the Canadian trade
union movement, the 1930s, the movement was small
and largely confined to the crafts. This was the old
American Federation of Labor (AFL). The position
taken by the leadership of these unions was that it was
Not possible to win any gains or wage any battles during
such a period of economic downturn. —

The workers of Canada and the United States, suffer-
ing under the effects of the depression, saw the matter
differently and moved to set up the Committee of Indus-
which together with the Work-
set about organizing the

-ers’ Unity League in Canada,
in the teeth of

industrial workers of our two countries,
the depression.

They succeeded in doing this and led some of the most
heroic and successful battles, strikes and political cam-
paigns for major social gains like unemployment insur-
ance, welfare, etc. They were decisive in defeating
right-wing Tory and Republican governments and were
the main force winning the New Deal in the USA, major
changes in economic policies and new rights for the trade
union movement in both countries.

Such battles understandably were not fought out
under ‘‘Marquis de Queensbury rules’’ in the parlor. In
Oshawa workers faced tanks in their struggle to establish
bargaining rights. In Windsor the workers tied up the

entire city with a traffic snarl. Workers were shot and

Labor in action
William Stewart

killed on picket lines. Thousands of militants were in-
carcerated. Daily and even hourly, pitched battled took
place between workers and bailiffs and police trying to
repossess workers’ homes. Similar struggles were being
enacted in the farm communities across Canada. The
unemployed organized, marched, demonstrated, pic-
keted, lobbied and fought tirelessly for new policies for
jobs, for unemployed insurance.

Today matters stand somewhat differently. The
Canadian working class has built up a powerful trade
union movement in both English and French Canada. It
has gained considerable experience in its battle to pro-
tect and extend the interests of the working people. The

demonstration on Parliament Hill is a testimony to the ~

strength, vitality and discipline of this movement. But
likewise the tasks facing it are more formidable.

The process of capitalist accumulation has been so
intense in the intervening years that workers now face
huge transnational corporations who are able to play one
country off against another in their bid to push the cost of
this crisis onto the shoulders of working people and to
further expand their control and wealth.

Every bit of experience and wisdom gained by the
trade unions in their struggle to properly represent their
members must now be brought to bear in this key year of
collective bargaining. Statements like those made by
Cliff Pilkey, president of the Ontario Federation of
Labor, and Robert White, Canadian director of the Un-

ited Auto Workers need to find reflection in the approach.

of all labor to bargaining in 1982.
White and Pilkey called for a massive fightback by
organized labor and refused to accept the view that

workers would have to leave the bargaining table empty
handed. They called for militant leadership to protect
and extend the living standards of working people. *‘ The
fightback is going to take strong militant leadership’,
said White.

This is absolutely correct. It is also going to take total
unity, and direction from the labor centrals. The slogan
put forward by Dennis McDermott at the last CLC con-
vention most surely needs to be activated now, as it was
on November 21, ‘‘collective action’’.

Workers don’t need to be told that 1982 is going to be a
tough year for bargaining. They already know that. Nor
should any labor leader even suggest that this will make
good settlements unlikely. Rather what is required is the
kind of leadership implicit in November 21, translated to
the 1,500,000 workers at the table this year. .

_ Workers in English and French Canada are prepared

to fight like hell for the protection and extension of their

living standards. They are not prepared to fork out for
- the monopolies. The task of leadership is to lead this
movement — to tap this mighty power.

If needed it appears that there is a contradiction bet-
ween the legitimate demands of workers for the protec-
tion and extension of their living standards ... and the
‘‘ability’’ of the corporations to pay, then let me quote
another line from Bob White’s message to Canadian
autoworkers. ‘‘I have great faith in our ability to fight
back. If they don’t change the system, we'll change it for
them.” ‘

Good words and a good sentiment. But it will obvious-_
ly require more than words and sentiment to make it real.
Our watchwords for this year should be: Inco 78, Postal
Workers 1981, Fleck 1978, Radio Shack 1979, PSAC
1980, B.C. Communications Workers 1981, Stelco 1981.

This kind of leadership, this kind of struggle, this kind
of unity can win gains for workers in 1982 and begin to
turn around the crisis situation in Canada.

What about it Dennis? I think maybe the Polish work-
ers can look after themselves. The Canadian workers
sure need your help.

x * - ad . Poe
PACIFIC TRIBUNE—JAN. 15, 1982—Page9