The Rand — inquisition By RAE MURPHY OYAL commissions are many splendored things. By their nature, they are the most flexible instruments de- vised by any government. They arise as a solution to an imme- diate crisis for they are a form of not doing anything about anything while appearing to do something about everything. The crises may fester and the solu- tions become ever more obscure but royal commissions go on forever seeking ‘impartial truth,’ ‘justice’ and, above all, time. Royal commissions are also an excellent means for govern- ments to send up trial balloons, to test the ground for new legis- _ -lation as they provide a guise -of impartiality to cover precon- ceived ideas. Commissions are also useful devices to allow. the public or democratic opinion let off steam. A commission’s findings is not binding on anybody and, if need be, can be referred- to another royal commission, as for exam- ple, the Freedman Commission’s findings have been referred to the Woods Commission. The versatility of royal com- missions are remarkable, as a rule they are like soft putty in the hands of the government that brings them into being. None of this is new to any- body in’ the labor movement and when the Royal: Commission In- quiry into Labor Disputes (the Rand Commission) was estab- lished’ by the Robarts gov- ernment to take the heat off the injunction battle in Ontario it was greeted with a lot of ex- _pressions of “gosh” -and other four letter words. The scepticism of the Ontario labor movement when this com- mission was established was based on both long and bitter experience with commissions in general as well as on the parti- cular instance and background on which the commission “came. into being. There had been a- widespread and developing cam- paign to abolish the use of in- junctions in labor disputes. The legal and moral case for their abolition was beyond question and the last ditch argument in defense of the use of injunctions was simply that “the law, any law, had to respected until changed.” The legal cloak for the use of injunctions could be removed by amendment to the Juridicure Act of Ontario. Democratic opi- nion both within and without the labor movement was forcing the issue. The establishment of the Rand Commission at this time. was seen correctly as a means to short circuit this cam- paign and, in effect, take the heat off the whole situation. From the first day of its hear- ings the Rand Commission went beyond this. A sweeping terms of reference and the attitude of IVAN C. RAND Former Chief Justice Justice, the Hon. Ivan C. Rand himself set the stage for a real inquisition against labor. Justice Rand said at the open- ing of the hearings that he wanted a frank exchange of views to “tear the clothes off ideas and see them in their nakedness.” He has gone from. this position to tearing a few strips off the back of labor which enters into the realm of challenging the very existence of an independent trade union movement. “What is so sacred about the union treasury? asks Rand in relation to the idea of making the trade union movement a legal entity and responsible as a whole for the actions of indi- vidual members. “Why not a law that would prohibit the dropping of charges as part of the settlement of a labor dispute?” he asks in mock innocence. And so on and on. Meanwhile those lovely exam- ples of modern labor relations, the scab-produced Toronto dai- lies, were having a field day. The Toronto Star, for example, _editorialized one day that ‘‘The Labor Movement Has Some Warts Also.” This was in rela- tion to a point developed in one of the hearings about the ex- tent of American control over some unions operating in Can- ada. Naturally this is a problem for some unions, yet one is forced to ask if there is any- thing wrong with the present structure of the trade union movement in Canada that either Justice Rand or the Tory Rob- arts government is going to cure. The Ontario Federation of Labor, while critical earlier of Robarts for evading the issue of injunctions in the appointment of the commission, has particip- February 17, 1967—PACIFIC TRIBUNE—Page 4 ated in the hearings, as have most other unions in the pro- vince. The OFL brief was a masterpiece of understatement and legal rationale for labor’s position, the only mistake be- ing that that wasn’t what Rand was looking for. Most of the ground covered in the OFL brief, and this appears to be true of the other union submissions to the commission, has been covered before, and Rand has made it quite clear that he isn’t inter- ested in the briefs presented to him or in their argumentations. What Justice Rand is probab- ly looking for in this commis- © sion was expressed by the Teamsters Joint Council 52 in Hamilton when they decided not to participate in the hearings. In a statement to the press the joint council said: “Based upon the performance (of the Rand Commission) so far, it is our opinion contrary to what we understood as its ori- ginal purpose, it is nothing but a sounding board from which various management associa- tions are spreading anti-labor propaganda and calling for even more restrictive legislation than we have at the present time. Based on the record of the On- tario government, it appears that the labor movement has been hoodwinked and the com- mission is merely setting the stage for changes in the labor and other Jaws that will make it even more difficult for workers to organize and negotiate effec- tively.” _ Whether the labor movement has been hoodwinked or whether a good section of it is merely being fitted with the noose at the inevitable end of its own rope of legalism, the plot is thickening. The Rand Commis- sion has already accomplished one thing: it has submerged the anti-injunction fight until after the next election, which by itself will be a demobilization factor in labor’s struggle to unseat the Tory government. But there are even more serious consequences for the labor movement shaping. up. When the venerable. Justice returns from his jaunt in the land of compulsory arbitration, Australia, his report could con- stitute the framework for a dis- astrous attack on labor, which will fit Ontario into a nation- wide pattern of restrictive legis- lation. A British lord who faced the chopping block once uttered these last words before the axe fell: “Put not your faith in kings.” We could well up-date that: “Put not your faith in Royal Commissions.” The axe Justice Rand is sharpening may well be aimed at some of the root problems of labor relations, but it Jooks more as if he wants to use it on the body of organ- ized labor. No doubt the Justice could later be persuaded to also do an autopsy. ‘ers, to have Rabbi A. Feinberg address the council On” GE workers strike} Zero weather welcomed striking United Electrical W? the picket lines around General Electric plants in the @ Guelph, Barrie, Peterborough, Trenton and Brampton reek members went on strike at 12 p.m. Monday night to back ut demands for a 35 percent wage increase over two years elimination of geographical wage differentials within the © and for job and wage protection in the event of tech” | changes. They rejected an earlier company offer of 13 per” four cents over three years. Negotiations between union oe pany officials are continuing. a HAMILTON Labor Council delegates almost unanimo ; ported a motion by Ted Powel, of Local 1005 United a ty trip to North Vietnam. : Another motion by Don Stewart, of Local 105 BE” demned Premier Robarts’ policy on education costs. It was shown, he said, that the province should take over educall because the money should rightfully come from the bib interests and the province is the only one who can carly | poration tax. = i * * * _ FIFTY SIX percent of West Germany’s working pa enjoy a five-day week. Only 29 percent had this Juxuly Between 1957 and 1961 this number increased by 23 per has only increased by four percent since. * * * PROMPT APPROVAL by the U.S. Senate of the “4 consular treaty was urged by the International Executive the United Auto Workers as a further step “toward 4 9 of world tensions and greater mutual understanding if (4 ests of world peace.” Other top labor leaders made stat favor of the treaty and said they will urge their unions — the UAW’s example. : : * * * 4 THE AMERICAN Guild of Variety Artists finds itself divided over a matter of policy. Owners of burlesque thea night clubs have proposed that strip-teasers take off if they used to take off. Some of the girls are in favor 7 exposure, some are opposed. As a result the union doe what to do. According to American columnist Bill SlocuM pers have always been a major problem for the AGV® they are the last of the free souls. AGVA can handle a tenor with ease or even a German weightlifter, both note temperament. But strippers brook no interference. Matt, AGVA would rather forget all about strippers. But it cal that luxury because there are virtually no Italian tenor man weightlifters working. But there are hundreds ant | of strippers gainfully employed.” Aa To date this problem has not arisen in Canada, but ty experts predict that it will be referred to the Canadl Congress’s committee on structure.