UNITY ... AUTONOMY . . . DEMOCRACY

‘a
Building T

Statement issued April 7 by the Cent-
ral Executive Committee of the Com-
munist Party of Canada.

The U.S.-controlled building trades
unions issued a proclamation on March
26 over the signature of James McCam-
bly executive secretary of the AFL-CIO
Building and Construction Trades De-
partment. In that proclamation they de-

Canadian trade union centre. In plain
simple terms this means to split the
Canadian trade union movement into
two parts and usher in a period of raiding
and competition between labor.

This takes place at a time when the
need for unity in the ranks of the trade
unions and entire labor movement is cru-
cial, when monopoly is intensifying its
attacks on all fronts against the living and
social standards of working people.

Contrary to efforts in the building

sibility for the impending split on the
Canadian Labor Congress, the responsi-
bility rests squarely on the shoulders of
the Washington-controlled Building
Trades roadmen who run the Canadian
she eae Trades set-up like some private
club.

In Saskatchewan the Saskatchewan
Federation of Labor first proposed to
keep the building trades in the SFL and
Icoal labor councils. The CLC then
threatened to lift the SFL charter if they
did so. Following this a lengthy meeting
took place between the SFL executive
and Shirley Carr, vice-president of the
CLC. At-this meeting the SFL called-on
the CLC to back away from its present

lcare their intention to establish a new _

trades proclamation to place the respon-

ye #

rades solution needs flexibility

the CLC where the matter could be de-
cided by the membership. The CLC
countered with a threat to lift the charter
if the SFL refused to comply with the

order to exclude the buidling trades

unions from ‘its federation and labor
councils. The meeting was a stand-off.

Dividing Labor
The CLC has indicated that industrial
locals which are chartered by the

building-trades unions will not be al-.

lowed to affiliate to the new building
trades set-up proposed by the CLC. It is
through such affiliation that construction
locals would be able to find affiliation to
the CLC, provincial labor federations
and local labor councils. The only way
non-construction locals of the building
trades unions would be able to enter the
CLC however, is by breaking with their
present unions and affiliating directly to
the CLC as CLC-chartered locals, or
affiliating to another member union of the
CLG:

This is no small matter as some’of the
building trades have a large industrial
component. The International Brother-
hood of Electrical Workers, for example,
finds almost half its Canadian member-
ship in this category.

In response to this edict of the CLC,

the Carpenters Union in British Colum- -

bia, a ‘strong and long-time advocate of
full Canadian autonomy for the building
trades, has informed the CLC that its
provincial Federation of Carpenters will
move into the CLC as a body, industrial
component and all, or stay outas.a body.
It appears that the CLC is pursuing a
legitimate aim in a somewhat dangerous,

and what could turn out to be counter
productive manner.

One can understand the impatience
and anger of the CLC leadership at the
arrogance and intransigence of the build-
ing trades leadership. However that must
not allow for a situation where a wedge is
driven into the unity of Canadian labor at
such a crucial moment.

Autonomy and Unity

The Communist Party has fought for
the autonomy of the Canadian labor
movement, with a record second to none
in that movement. It has, however, al-
ways coupled the struggle for autonomy
with the struggle for unity, fighting off
those forces from the right, which denied
the need for autonomy;. and the forces
from some confused elements of the left,
the right and the entire ultra-left, who
chose the pursuit of autonomy through
splitting and division. 4

We stay with this time-tested and es-
sential principle in this current struggle
and urge patience and flexibility in the

-place of haste and confrontation.

One cannot ignore the possibility of
some industrial unions under right-wing
leadership, utilizing the present difficult

-period for raiding the industrial jurisdic-

tions of the building trades in the.fac-
tories, first of all where such industrial
unions hold contracts, and building
trades unions have jurisdiction for in-
plant construction. —

But an equal threat is the raiding of
plants which are not totally organized by
building trades unions. This would be

calamitous for the entire labor move-

ment.

Be

In our opinion the CLC would better
serve its interests and therefore those of
the entire labor movement by approach-
ing the present situation in the following
manner.

Five Constructive Steps

First: Step up the campaign being
waged by the CLC calling on all building
trades local unions to demand of their
leadership that they pay up their back per
capita and come back into the house of
labor. No splits, no second centres.

Second: Allow all building trades loc-
als to remain affiliated to provincial fed-
erations and local labor councils, who
wish to do so. ;

Third: Allow industrial components of
the building trades as well as construc-
tion locals to affiliate to the CLC’s new
building trades set-up.

Fourth: Leave the final resolution of
the matter over until the CLC conven-
tion in 1982, and pursue further negotia-
tions with the building trades in the in-
terim. The position of the CLC can be
continually strengthened in these negoti-
ations by the growing support won for its
positions by all trade unions.

Fifth: Issue a clear and unequivocal
statement that no raiding of any building
trades unions will be tolerated by the
GLG:

This kind of stance, together with a
stepped up campaign by the CLC for
Canadian autonomy for the building
trades unions, and maintainance of the
present democratic structure of the CLC
against attempts. by the right wing to
undermine its rank and file character, can
win a victory for autonomy, unity and
democracy.

a and call a special convention of

oy

_ Fight is on for labor unity, autonomy

- ated by the AFL-CIO building trades set-up, and hardly

A peculiarity of the Canadian trade union movement is
the influence and control exercised over its formation
ae life by unions with their head-quarters in the United

tates. ;

This was not always necessarily a negative factor.
When the great upsurge in organization of industrial
workers took place in the United States in the thirties
(over the objections of the American Federation of
Labor dominated by the building trades unions) it gave
rise to the Committee of Industrial Organization (CIO).
This new movement, under the leadership of John L.
a, struck out to organize the great industries in the

_ Atthe same time, and together with progressive forces
in Canada, this movement reached across the border and
Played a major role in helping to organize industrial
unions in our country. Many of these industries, such as
auto plants, rubber, electrical and others, were part of
U.S.-owned and operated multi-nationals.

The Communist Party and the entire left were very
active and often played an initiating role in these joint
Organizing efforts. The assistance and strength given
these efforts by our fellow workers in the U.S. were
decisive factors in the establishment of the now great,
United 2.3-million strong Canadian Labor Congress, and
the other 1 million organized workers in Quebec and the
test of Canada. ;

_ The close unity between Canadian and U.S. workers
in international unions often (not always) played a post-
tive role in co-ordinating their actions against a common
employer. But it did not provide Canadian workers with
unions which could respond to Canada’s different needs

. and join their political struggles with their economic

Struggles. This left them to fight the boss with one arm.
The struggle for Canadian autonomy became a major
feature of the Canadian scene, the struggle for the ulti-
mate establishment of a full independent, sovereign, and
United Canadian trade union movement. Pursuing such
an objective by-a process of trying to ‘break connections
€-border,”’ through splits and open confrontations

with parent bodies in the U.S. would have led to fratici-
dal struggles between workers and: disunity in their
ranks. Instead, the concept of autonomy, on the path to
complete independence was developed by Canadian
labor. The Communist Party and the left were the major
protagonists of this path and have continued to champ-
ion it to this day.

Most Reactionary Sections
The result of this process is that Canadian trade

“unions have remained largely united in one centre, while

the movement for autonomy and toward independence

Labor in action
William Stewart

has been gradually going on in most major unions (albeit
not fast or far enough).

The one major exception is found in the building

trades. These are the most reactionary sections of U.S.
labor. For years they blocked the organization of U.S.
industrial workers. They have continually supported the
most right-wing U.S. governments and policies, in-
cluding backing reactionary and fascist regimes in places
like El Salvador. :
The Canadian trade union movement, and the Cana-
dian Labor Congress have patiently tried, as have Cana-

dian building trades workers, to compel the inter- |

nationals to grant autonomy to their Canadian members
similar at least to that enjoyed by most other workers.
In answer the Washington roadmen have used their
undemocratic power, given by the very nature of the
constitutions of their unions, to thwart this legitimate
demand and keep the Canadian unions completely under
the thumb of the building trades headquarters. Even the
international unions themselves in the U.S. are domin-

free to make a choice in the matter.
: : Sinister Aim __
There is something even more sinister than this lying
behind the present attempts of the U.S. building trades

leadership to set up a second trade union centre in Cana-

da. Autonomy for them is not an abstraction. The ques-
tion is rather one of control, and behind control, it is a
matter of policy. .

The building trades leadership does not like the

~ policies being followed by the Canadian trade union

movement. They would rather have the policies fol-
lowed by the AFL-CIO in the United States.

Clearly what the building trades want for Canada is a
trade-union movement which will be tied to the policies
of a foreign government and not free to develop policies
which are designed to serve the interests of Canada.

In a period where the USA is trying to dictate to
Canada what her energy policy should be, trying to force
acompletely unfair fishing treaty on Canada and prevent
us from in any way breaking the strangle-hold that giant
U.S. multi-national companies have on our economy,
we can ill afford to have a trade union movement which is

* tied to U.S. policies.

Every Worker’s Fight

This is why Canadian building trades workers must
demand of their leaders that they pay up their per capita
tax and allow Canadian building trades workers to take
their rightful place in the house of labor.

This is why all labor, and trade unionists in the first
place, should appeal to the CLC leadership to play it
cool. Don’t give the Washington-controlled roadmen
any excuse to set up another centre. In whatever way it
can be done, building trades workers must be provided
witha haven inside the house of labor while this matter is
fought out within the internationals and the Canadian
trade union movement.

Together Canadian workers have the savvy and capa-
city to win this crucial battle. They must be given the
time and opportunity to exercise it.

PACIFIC TRIBUNE—MAY 1, 1981—Page 15