but very ea

I ranks.

than ever befor

—
2
a
2
Zz
Z
2
2
a
za
2
A
e
=e

TO

a

I
——iO

N ITS postwar struggles for greater economic security, labor not only welcomed

i tside its own
gerly sought out the support of all progressive forces ou :
It did fet st consciously and (despite all shortcomings) more effectively

: e. Labor honestly and correctly felt that its program was in the best
interests of the majority of Canadians and should, therefore, be fought for by all

fair-minded and forward-looking
people. ;
Those public men from out-
Side labor’s Yanks who displayed
Sympathy with labor’s aims and
who gave public expression to
those sympathies rendered valu-
. able service to labor and the
nation. Their prestige among
the common people was greatly
enhanced thereby. But their
responsibility also assumed new
Proportions. Their actions and
utterances could lend effective-
ness to labor’s efforts or they
Could very effectively be utilized
by extreme reaction in its fight
against labor and progress. A
widely publicized speech recently
‘Made by David. A. Croll, MP, il-
lustrates this point very sharply.
Addressing the Brantford, Ont.,
Shop stewards of the United Auto ~
Workers Union, Croll is report-
ed to have said “Don’t overdo
your public popularity. Don’t.
ask for the moon.” Had such
a statement been made by a
Notorious antilabor MP it
Would have had very little re-
Percussion. But Croll, though a
Spokesman for a capitalist party
is not a ‘Tory MP’. He is a
_ progressive in the ranks of the
Liberal Party. He is a left-of-
center parliamentarian to whom
labor looks more hopefully than
to most of his party colleagues.
His remarks on labor matters
are, therefore, far more impo:
tant than if made by an ordin-
ary-run-of-the-mill MP.
Croll’s warning to the Brant-
_ ford auto workers was a regret-
table event; it did not help la-
bor. This is true despite the
favorable remarks which he al-
So made on that occasion. It

Wasn't the other things but
‘the warning’ that the daily
press featured,

»“Don’t Ask For Moon, Croll

Warns Labor,” was the Way even
_the more liberal press featured
the news. The Globe and Mail,
_ whose ‘prejudiced and anti-labor
Policy is notorious, pounced on

‘PACIFIC TRIBUNE — PAGE 11
U 5

the labor

the statement with joy and elab-

““orated it in its leading editorial ~

the next morning under the
significant heading — ‘From a
Friend.’

Most headlines and editorial-
izing based on Croll’s remarks
were angled to extend the im-
pression that labor is asking too
much, that labor is responsible

‘for the strikes which take place

and that public sympathy should
not therefore, be wasted on la-
bor. Regardless of Croll’s inten-
tions, his ‘warning’ was used
by reaction to advance its ends.
Nor did his ‘warning’ help to
orientate labor correctly. It un-
doubtedly contributed to some
confusion among certain sec-
tions of labor.

This incident raises a number
of important questions which
must be answered. Clarity in
movement, a_ better
understanding of the role of
progressives and the cause of

labor-progressive unity, demand
such answers.
e
OES LABOR “ask for the
moon?” Are labor demands

unreasonable? Do those demands
alienate public opinion? What
is the task of the genuine pro-
gressive in the present struggle?
Let’s restate some hard and ir-
refutable facts. :

LABOR’S AIM

f—Since the end of the war

: labor has been engaged in
the fight for a bigger share of

our national income for the
workers, farmers, the white col-
lar and _ professional groups.

That is a fight for national wel-
fare. It’s a struggle to right, to
a degree, an ancient wrong. The
outcome will determine whether
we shall have a higher rather
than a lower living standard,
an expanding rather than a
stagnant home market and

_ whether the inevitable capitalist

crisis will be on us soon with
all its disastrous. effects or

“ unionism;

whether the crisis shall be
saverted fora while and its ef-
fect cushioned. That is really
the essence of labor’s post-war
battle for higher wages, price
entrols, union security and so-
cial legislation.
MONOPOLY POLICIES
2 Big Business in our country
as in the U.S., pursues a
policy diametrically opposed to
that of labor and the people.
It fights wage demands; fights
strives to destroy
price controls completely; so as
to ‘make a killing’; narrows the
home market by widening the
gap between wages ahd prices;
resists social legislation; seeks
profits from exports at the ex-
pense of the living standards of
the workers, the farmers and
the middle class, Big Business,
as a result of its campaign, has
reported. higher peaks of earn-
‘ings month after month during
the past year. The people’s liv-
ing standards are falling.
PRICE CEILING
3-Prices rose before wages
were increased. The govern-
ment lifted price ceilings from
tremendously wide economic
areas and removed _ subsidies
from living essentials before
the wage movement of last
summer.
LIVING COSTS
@—The wage increases won by
labor after a bitter struggle
did not provide for a higher
living standard. At best they
covered the higher living - costs

“which had already taken place.

The majority of Canadian work-

‘ers and employees, unorganized .

as they are, did not receive
those increases. The masses of
people have not yet gained a
bigger share of the national in-
come as the index of corpora-
tion dividend payments plainly
show, Prices, on the other
hand, continue to rise and are
wiping out the gains made dur-
ing the summer by the labor
unions.

KK
7 AA

NM
: oo“

| i
——

PROFITS UP

&—The December 10 issue of
the Glace Bay Gazette

organ of the Miners’ union—of-

fers the following:

“The Dominion Bureau of Sta-
tistics has just issued a report
on the economic conditions in
Canada during the first nine
months of 1946. Here are some
of the more significant figures:

First Nine Months... .

Cost of ' 1945 1946 %

Living Index 119.43 122.5 x 2.7

Divi- : g

dends $172,982,605 $202,563 x17.1

Employment

General 176.5 170.3 —3.5

Aggregate Weekly

Payrolls 143.2 138.6 —3.2
(Decrease— Increase x)

WAGES DOWN

@—The Workers Educational
Association research depart-

ment reports (Labor News, May
1946) that in 1945 wages and
salaries were 59 percent of the
national income as against 62
percent in 1938. :
WIDENING GAP

7—The Same source reveals
that in October 1946 the
average weekly wage in all

manufacturing was $32.79 while
the minimum required to main-
tain an average Canadian fam-
ily for the same month is
$37.17, -

A long way from the moon!
Yes, a long way from plain de-
cency!

WAGES AND: PRICES.
@—It is not true that wage in-
creases automatically cause
price increases. Marxists long
ago proved the falsity of ‘this
‘theory’. Every one seeking the
truth would be well. rewarded
by a reading and study of Tim
Buck’s recent pamphlet Wages
and Prices. Professor Lubin and
other American government
economists have also refuted this
fallacy. The famous Nathan re-
port now issued by the CIO ex-
ploded it. The AFL Survey for
November 1946 quotes the Cleve-
land Trust Company to show
that in “manufacturing ‘indus-
tries which employ five million
workers average hourly
earnings of all workers rose 5
percent (or 5c) from March to
July 1946; but the average
manufacturers’ wage cost (or
labor cost) for each unit of pro-
duct ‘turned out did not in-

A

N
oN

crease at all, but declined very

slightly (1 percent),’ and the
same is the case in Canada.”
PUBLIC SUPPORT
g—it is not true that ‘the pub-
lic’ is opposed to labor’s
wage demands. To the credit
of the people it should be said
that they saw through the bar-
rage of misleading propaganda
which came ~- from anti-labor
sources. A recent Gallup Poll
asked Canadians: :
“Generally speaking, do you
think labor “is. entitled or not
entitled to the higher wages
they are demanding?” The an-
Swer given was:

Yes, entitled ....53 percent
Some entitled ...25 percent
Not entitled ..... 15 percent
Undecideg 2 5.-.4- 7 percent

What does it all add up to?

It adds up to the following:
That the people’s battle for their
economic needs has not yet been
won but the interests of labor
and the country demands that
the battle be won. Labor does
not ask for. the moon. It is not
unreasonable. It is modest—very
modest. :

e ‘

N THIS battle for a better life

and a better Canada every
genuine liberal (with a small
‘T’) and every progressive wor-
thy of that label must stand
unwaveringly with labor, with
the people. -

The offensive of reaction is
terrific. The enemy seeks to
cow, intimidate, confuse and di-
vide labor and to alienate the
public and the progressives
from labor.

Labor must reject all division
influences from with and with-*%
out and must not -fall victim to
the false, catastrophic economic
policies and ‘theories’ of the
monopolists and their spokes-
men and organs.

The progressives ‘among Ca-
nadian public men must not play
into the hands of reaction and
must not begin to appease the
money barons by admonishing
labor. It is a dangerous path to
embark upon. The urgent need
for the progressives is not to
shake a finger at labor but to
shake a fist at reaction—and
against the makers of low liv-
ing standards, crises and ruin.

And finally, the labor move-
ment must redouble its efforts
for the building of the most
powerful people’s unity around
its program.

FRIDAY, JANUARY 10, 1947

»