Ph LL EID TORREAI ot ATTA AG AAT

LABOR

Labor mobilization urgent

mM

as gov’t-employer actions
signal full assault on rights

Continued from page 1

over possible changes was the result ofa
struggle between ‘“‘the far right wing
who are anti-union and don’t see unions
as useful and those, like myself, who
figure that organized labor is a very
significant element in society and
therefore we should have a framework
in which we can work things out.”’

There seem to be only two possible

explanations for that shift. The
Hamilton may only have been pro-
viding a cover for a behind-the-scenes
campaign for labor code alterations (an
unlikely possibility) — or the council,
which represents the major corporate
employers in the province, has now
become convinced that the time is op-
portune to take on the trade union
movement in the way that the far right
wing has been demanding.
_ The substantive changes to the code
sought by the Employers Council in its
brief are an indication that the latter is
the case. It called for:

e Removal of the Labor Relations
Board’s authority to use discretion in
decertification applications and provi-
sion for automatic votes;

e A broadened definition of strikes
to restrict workers’ rights to work stop-
pages or slowdowns;

e Restriction of secondary picketing
(already prescribed by previous code
amendments) to only those companies
where employers are in a lockout posi-
tion;

¢ Legislation to prevent strike votes
in advance of any ‘‘meaningful’’
bargaining;

Another provision sought by the
council would force all construction
employers into the boses’ bargaining
association, Construction Labor Rela-
tions Association (That demand, which
is intended to prevent smaller employers
from making their own collective
agreements with construction unions, is
a measure of the employers’ hypocrisy
since they want the union for themselves
but want it eliminated or at least
restricted for their employees.)

The amendments sought by the
council echo those demanded by
employers although the B.C. Construc-
tion Association which met with Mc-
Clelland early in February, added a few
demands of its own, some of which are
even more far-reaching. Among provi-
sions it sought:

© Legislation to prohibit closed shop
agreements and ‘‘non-affiliation
clauses (which give construction unions
the right to refuse to work with non-
union or non-affiliated workers);

e The institution of an appeal pro-
cedure on LRB rulings;

e Extension of current exemptions
from the Employment Standards Act to
include shop workers in addition to on-
site construction workers.

The charges hinted at by Mc-
Clelland have in his speech Mar. 14 to
the Canadian Manufacturers’ Associa-
tion indicated that the employers
demands have largely been met — in-
cluding one of the BCCA demands pro-
viding for possible appeal of LRB deci-
sions to the government or cabinet.

Roy Gautier, president of the B.C.
and Yukon Building Trades Council
added Friday that some of
McCielland’s proposals ‘‘are directly in
line with demands of right-to-work
employers such as the Independent
Canadian Businessmen’s Association.””

If the” Socreds proceed with the
legislative changes this province would
be saddled with some of the most reac-

tionary labor legislation in the country.

The proposed amendments are a
political echo of former Socred premier
W.A.C. Bennett’s infamous Bills 42
and 43 — with current mass unemploy-
ment and the threat of layoffs giving a
razor’s edge to the knife cutting away at
trade union rights.

Several recent incidents have also
demonstrated that there is an increasing
vehemence in the Socreds attack against
long established labor rights.

e The Mining Association of B.C.,
representing the major mining corpora-
tions in the province, announced Tues-
day that it was filing a complaint under.
the Combines Investigation Act against
the 17 Building Trades unions and has
called on the federal consumer and cor-
porate affairs department, which ad-
ministers the Act, to investigate the
unions’ collective agreements.

The association has charged that the
non-affiliation clauses contained in the
agreements ‘‘adversely affect the future
of the mining industry.”

The action by the association has par-
ticular significance in that Tex
Enemark, association president, is both
a former special advisor to Rob Basford
when he was federal Liberal minister for
consumer and corporate affairs, and
the former deputy minister for the
Social Credit government’s ministry of
consumer and corporate affairs.

e Last year, Janbar Enterprises, one
of several cedar shingle mills in the
Fraser Valley, shut down because of
slumping markets. But early in 1983, a
former mill supervisor gathered
together a non-union crew and — in
consultation with right wing Socred
backbencher Bill Ritchie — went back
to work at the newly-reopened plant at
less than union rates. At the same time,
they applied for decertification of the
IWA at the mill.

Another. [WA-certified mill in
Revelstoke was recently decertified
when the employer claimed he would
re-open if employees accepted substan-
tial concessions. Both incidents have
come amidst an increasingly tempo of
demands for concessions from the main
forest employer, Forest Industrial Rela-
tions.

e In what even the industry’s bible,
the Journal of Commerce acknowledg-
ed was a precedent-setting decision, the
B.C. Building Corporation granted the
$12.7 million contract for the Kamloops
courthouse construction to anon-union
Chilliwack firm, J. C. Kerkhoff and
Sons Construction Ltd.

Kerkhoff, in turn, gave much of the
work to sub-contractors but when the
Building Trades Council applied for
certification for one of them, Erco Con-
struction, Kerkhoof promptly fired that
sub-contractor.

The Building Trades Council has fil-
ed an unfair labor practice charge
against Kerkhoff, charging a violation
of the labor code. Hearings are continu-
ing at the LRB.

But company president Bill
Kerkhoff’s comments were significant.
“Tf we can get away with this project,”’
he told the Journal of Commerce Mar.

14, ‘‘it will open the floodgate for more
non-union work.”

® Acopy of a draft bill obtained by
trade unionists has revealed that Pat
McGeer, socred minister for science and
technology, has proposed legislation
that would allow employers seeking to
locate high technology industries in the
government’s Discovery Park research

PACIFIC TRIBUNE—MARCH 25, 1983—Page 12

facilities to be exempted from the provi-
sions of the labor code.

Letters accompanying the bill have
indicated that the legislation may be in-
troduced into a spring session of the
legislature — if in fact a session is called
before an election.

Following recent visits to various
Pacific Rim countries, McGeer and
other Socred ministers hope to attract
some of the major multinational high
technology corporations to British Col-
umbia to establish industry here based
on the Discovery Park research facilities
set up by the Socreds. But the price,
evidently, is a guarantee of virtual im-
munity from union organization.

With unemployment creating
desperation among many workers, the
employer and government offensive
against the trade union movement has
intensified in the past few weeks. And
restriction of union rights could well be
the focus of an impending provincial
election — under the guise of “‘giving
those who want to work for lower wages
the right to do so.” :

If the Social Credit government were
to be re-elected with a mandate to
change the code along the lines in-
dicated, it would have catastrophic con-
sequences, opening the way for wage-
cutting on a major scale with workers
faced with the threat of plant closures
and possible decertification.

Repudiation of the polls of any at-
tempt by the Socreds to make the labor
movement a target would be the most
welcome outcome ofan election call.

But even the defeat of the Socreds —
if an election is indeed called — will not
alone defend the trade union movement
since the employers’ front will not be
dismantled the day after the voteis held.
And thousands of union members in
the mining and forest industries will still
face demands for concessions at the

- bargaining table.

The labor movement clearly needs to

mobilize its ranks against the attack, not ~

only on its long established rights —
buat also on its continued existence.
But since January there has been too
little from the B.C. Federation of Labor
to indicate the ferocity of the assault on
the labor movement. In that, there is
an echo of the stand taken last year,

following the announcement of Ben-,

nett’s Compensation Stablization Pro-
gram, when the B.C. Fed and the New
Democratic Party argued that controls
should not be fought so as not to give
the Socreds the pretext for a snap elec-
tion.

The provincial council of the NDP
did vote last month to favor “‘the
restoration, enhancement and preserva-
tion of the labor code’’ and to “‘con-
demn any Socred attempt to create con-

flict amongst British Columbians for -

political gain.”” But the condemnation
of the Socreds’ proposed labor code
amendment has not been voiced by the
NDP caucus.

Just three weeks before his death,
former B.C. Fed president Jim Kin-
naird warned that with the changes to
the labor code sought by the Socreds,
“Jabor faces the most serious threat to
its existence since the so-called ‘right-to-
work’ campaign of the mid and late
70's.”

Kinnaird declared that the Federa-
tion was prepared to fight the govern-
ment over the changes and called on the
500 affiliates ‘‘to begin to mobilize their
members to fight the amendments.”’

Two months later, that mobilization
is more urgent than ever.

VDT case han
on board rulin

Members of the Hospital
Employees Union at Surrey —
Memorial Hospital stuck to
their words this week and
turned off suspect video
display terminals (VDTs),
precipitating a Labor Rela- —
tions Board case that could
effect thousands of VDT
operators throughout the
province.

The action was promp-
ted by hospital manage- 4 2
ment’s refusal to imple- DR. HARI SHARMA.
ment the recommendations ‘ecommendations ne
for improved VDT safety Plemented.
contained in the report issued last. week by Dr.
Sharma.

Only the VDTs in the accounting office are 40
however, and operators there are continuing to carry
other work.

No date has been set for a:LRB hearing at press 0©
although one could still be scheduled before the end 0
the week. : “3

Dr. Sharma, a nuclear chemist, had been commissl0
ed by the union to test the hospital VDTs for poss!
radiation following the appearance of several abno’
pregnancies among operators. ;

His report, issued Mar. 14, indicated that the vpTs ov
the accounting office did emit high levels of puslaUle
electric field radiation. #

Although he estalished no definite link between the
emissions and the abnormal pregnancies, he noted that
the accounting office operators whom he intervieweos
reported various adverse effects whereas those oper ator
in the medical records office, using terminals made by
different manufacturer, reported no illeffects. |

Asaresult, Dr. Sharma outlined six recommendatio”” |
for improved operator safety including shielding of o
VDTs and eventual replacement of the terminals 12 the
accounting office. a

HEU secretary-business manager Jack Gerow h@ |
given the hospital until this week to implement 0"
recommendation or operators would shut down tho”
machines which were considered unsafe.

In turning the machines off, he said, operators We
exercising their rights under Section 83(3) of the lab
code which states: ‘‘An act of mission by a trade union

by the employees shall not constitute a strike where its
dé

required for the safety or health of those employees-
That section was recently upheld by the LRBina lan® =
mark decision Feb. 15. a
Surrey Memorial management and Health Labo!
Relations have charged, however, that the HEU
members are taking illegal job action.
The hospital has also called in technicians from the
Workers’ Compensation Board and the radiation pro”
tection branch of the provincial governement to condu®
further tests on the VDTs. But both department hav
already tested the terminals and because of inadequalt”
equipment, were unable to detect the emissions which
Dr. Sharma found. .
The LRB decision on the case could have broadr a
cussions in the province since there are an estimate
50,000 VDT operators in B.C. — most of them wome?

JOIN THE GREAT

GE ANY

wit

For any of your trav"
needs, big or ane
Let Globe Tours fi
the best way for y°U

Hawaii @ Mexico @ F'!
Las Vegas @ Reno @ Calg@"’
Montreal @ Paris @ Lond°’

GLOBE TOURS

2679 East Hastings Stree’
Vancouver, B.C. V5K12-

253-1221

| rae