acer arne

eee

WHAT DOES IT
__MEAN °
THE RIGHT TO
A JOB ?

MM! }

HAVE THE RIGHT
TO WORK

Accommodation to Bill 92 seen

in Fryer’s bargaining strategy

Major contract negotiations in-
volving 34,000 members of the
British Columbia Government
Employees Union are expected to
be underway in mid-June.

The BCGEU members are
covered by the Essential Services
Disputes Act, which the trade union
movement has officially condemn-
ed. %

BCGEU bargaining is carried on
under the Public Service Labor
Relations Act, instead of the Labor
Code and the union negotiates with
a labor relations agency of the pro-
vincial government.

Some concern has been expressed
in labor circles over a statement at-
tributed to John Fryer, general
secretary of the BCGEU in the Van-
couver Express January 19. To
quote that report: ;

“*Traditionally, the government
has rejected union requests for ar-
bitration, he said.”’ :

Acc@ling to the Express, Fryer
outlined the following scenario:

“*Talks break off; the union re-
quests arbitration: the government
refuses and insists the BCGEU con-
tinue bargaining or strike; the union
strikes; cabinet imposes the Essen-
‘tial Services Disputes. Act and
orders a cooling-off period; the
union then applies for binding ar-
bitration under the act which allows
it to do so without the employer’s
aggreement.”’

Then a direct quote from Fryer:
‘“‘Under certain special. cir-

cumstances, I think the bill could be. -

used to embarrass the government.

_ Perhaps we can show the people of

B.C. how unnecessary it would be
for one arm of the government to
encourage binding arbitration while

UIC APPEAL

Continued from pg. 1

allowed the CPR to defer an ad-
ditional $45 in income taxes from
1977, bringing its total deferred
taxes to $558,403.

“The very least the government
should do is allow the unemployed
victims the right to defer repayment
of the amounts demanded at least
until the CPR pays the $558 million
which it owes to the Canadian
people in income taxes,’? Ogden
said.

Labor council unemployed com-
mittee chairman Colin Snell told
last week’s meeting: ‘‘We’re telling
the government: If these overpay-
ments must be repaid — and we
don’t think they should be — then

we’ll pay them when the CPR pays

its deferred taxes.’’

Paddy Neale, council secretary

pointed out that deferred corporate
income taxes now exceed $11 billion
and “‘corporations repeatedly ask
for their taxes to be written off.’

another arm of government refuses
~ to use it.”

Union members after reading
statements like the one above, could
hardly be criticized if they made the
following allegorical comment:
““How come we are led by pygmies?
What happened to the giants?”

Although Fryer might not agree,
he is not pointing to a new road in
this case. On the contrary, the road
he suggests is one of accommoda-
tion to the Essential Services
Disputes Act, which the Socred

provincial government enacted and -

which the B.C. Federation of Labor
is committed to oppose. Further,
the B.C. Federation of Labor, of
which Fryer is a vice-president, has
begun the first of nine public rallies
in various B.C, cities to
demonstrate opposition to the
Essential Services Disputes Act.
Will it help these rallies if Fryer,
the leader of the largest union
covered by the act, is meditating in
the press about utilizing the binding
arbitration procedure provided for
by the act? After all, the main pur-
pose of the legislation is to give the
provincial government the legal
power to prevent an anticipated
strike in the public service by order-
ing a cooling off period of ninety
days — followed by an extension of
14 days, or else to designate certain

employees as essential workers who.

cannot strike: These powers. can
also be used to end a strike already
in progress.

_ This strike-breaking power is
essentially what the labor move-
ment is going to condemn in its nine
rallies — or else the rallies will con-

stitute a shabby pretense to provide _

public platforms for NDP can-
didates in the next provincial elec-
tion. While the active support of the
NDP in opposition to the Essential
Services Disputes Act should be
welcomed, the trade union move-
ment itself should make it clear for
all to see and hear that it is not
prepared to rest until this act is
removed from the statutes. Such a
determined course could help
guarantee the defeat of the Socreds.

How can Fryer expect the
bargaining agency of the provincial
government to undertake any
Serious negotiations with his union
if he is publicly calling for a token
strike, followed by a government
order to return to work and then an
election for binding arbitration
under, the Essential Services
Disputes Act by the BCGEU?

1 am sure that when premier Ben-
nett reads ‘‘the innovative Fryer

Strategy’’ he will be very happy. If

the BCGEU followed such a
Strategy on the eve of a provincial
election, or in the course of that
election, premier Bennett could,
with some justification, claim that
the B.C. labor movement, dispite

PACIFIC TRIBUNE—JANUARY 26, 1979—Page 8

“ee and

disclaimers to the contrary, was
quite happy to live with and work
under the Essential Services
Disputes Act. He would be a fool if
he didn’t! :

Let us examine some of the key
decisions of the 1977 convention of
the B.C. Federation of Labor in
respect to the Essential Services
Disputes Act:

e That the trade union movement
boycott the activities of the Essen-

LABOR
COMMENT

BY JACK PHILLIPS

tial Services Advisory Agency

that no trade unionist
serve on the Agency;

° That the trade union movement
boycott the activities of any fact
finder appointed;

e That the convention guarantees
any affiliate of the Federation max-
imum possible support, if after con-
Sultation and approval of Federa-
tion officers, it chooses to defy a
cooling-off period;

e That any affiliate which, after
consultation and approval of the-
Federation ‘officers, finds itself in
contempt of court for reasons
relating to the passage of Social
Credit anti-labor legislation, receive
the fullest possible support of the
Federation.

All of this hardly suggests that
the way to defeat Socred anti-labor
legislation is to play cute games that
fool nobody and then opt meekly
for binding arbitration which, in
the last analysis, the Socreds want
to impose on the public sector as a
permanent way of life, thus
destroying free collective bargaining
for more than 100,000 workers.

If Fryer’s public meditation.

represents innovative thinking, then —

the command ‘forward march’’
really means ‘‘advance to the rear.”’

John Fryer and the other officers
of the Federation should also be
asked why they turned their backs
on this decision of the 1977 Federa-
tion convention:

“That this convention instructs
the Federation executive council to
call a designated emergency conven-
tion, as provided for in the constitu-
tion, the next time the provincial
government introduces legislation
which, in the opinion of the ex-
ecutive Council, seriously attacks
collective bargaining, the right to
trade union representation or the
trade union movement, and that
such an emergency convention be
instructed to plan and co-ordinate

all the moves necessary to resist
such legislation.”’

Instead of a special convention
when the provincial government on
December 8, 1978 widened the
scope. of those covered by the
Essential Services Disputes Act, a
staff conference was called and a
rather weak program was adopted.

Subsequent to the staff con-
ference, the word was widely spread
in labor circles that with a provin-
cial election in the offing, organized
labor should back away from any
confrontation over the Essential
Services Disputes Act and concen-
trate on electing an NDP govern-
ment. In short, don’t struggle and
don’t join in struggle with others
who have good reason to be
dissatisfied with the regressive
policies of the Socred government.
Play it quiet and play it cool: The
NDP will look-after us after it
forms the next government. That
was the message!

Even a superficial study of the

labor record of the NDP during the
period it was in government
(1972-1975) will prove that while an
NDP government under Barrett
would introduce some positive
reforms, it cannot be counted on to
introduce the kind of labor legisla-
tion desired by organized labor, at
least of its own volition.

A fighting, militant policy on the.

part of organized labor-at this time
could compel the NDP leadership
to commit itself publicly to restore
full collective bargaining rights to
all public employees. The. Fryer
position can only be construed, by
both the leadership of the Socreds
and the NDP, as signifying that the
trade union movement is willing to
accept binding arbitration as the
norm in place of free collective
bargaining, at least for public sector
employees.

It is late in the game, but not too
late. The leadership of the B.C.
trade union movement should make
it crystal clear it has no intention of
blissfully cohabiting with the Essen-
tial Services Disputes Act.

m ==8 =

4 Read the paper that fights for labor 1

LeBlanc tol

to reinstate)
UFAWU rep)

The United Fishermen and Alli
Workers Union has told fee
fisheries minister Romeo LeB
that it will not replace union sé
tary-treasurer George Hewison
its advisor to the Canada-
salmon and boundary negotiati

LeBlanc had removed Hewlly
from the advisory team will
hours of a UFAWU rally ©
December called to expose 0
impending salmon treaty with
U.S. that the union said would be”
sellout of Canadian resources ®
sovereignty. B

LeBlanc claimed that Hews
was releasing ‘‘confidential’”
formation and compromis
Canada’s bargaining position ¥
the U.S. _

- But at its general executive DO®
meeting Jan. 19 the UFAWU vow
full confidence in Hewison ®
wired LeBlanc that it -was ™
prepared to nominate —
replacement. The union sugg@
to LeBlanc that arrangements ©
made for his attendance at Seall
— where the talks will reconv@
Jan. 30 — ‘‘otherwise the la
single organization of fisherly
and allied trades will not be rf
sented on the advisory committe

Union president Jack Nichol
it was ridiculous to imagine }
some other union represental
would act differently 4
Hewison. ‘‘Hewison is not a}
agent but acts on instructions 1
the union’s executive and is 1
answerable to the union’s gov
ing bodies and indeed its mem’
ship,” the wire to LeBlanc stale}

Hewison has also received a
support of the Native Brotherh¢
which wired LeBlanc protesting:
removal from the talks and insist
on the right of advisors to ll
speech.

‘Fire minister’
says UE leadet

The president of the
member United Electrical Work
Union (UE) has come to the defen
of postal workers in a scathing 1)
gram to prime minister Trude
urging the immediate firing of po
-master-general Gilles Lamontag)
and the 500 top supervisory P®!
sonnel in the post office.

UE president C. S. Jackson Wy
responding to a statement by t
postmaster-general January 18 ti
the firing of 500 postal work)
would cure the country’s mé
trouble. a

Jackson responded that the stali\
ment was ‘‘vengeful and vi)
dictive’’ and a. cover-up for
government’s own ineptnes
“Urge you immediately fire L\
montagne and sack the top »
supervisory personnel, and not u
workers, to get Canada’s post
service back on the rails again,”’ DM
wire said. =

s Nam@iaac ee hae ws ants cea tp 7
% Address -.. Sees SiaiBin nit «nme nian ¢, 2f0 “cian c9 o's ictielsce tine
Y City ortown ........ ene ...Province. ...
eae oes BaP na eicatecs
g 1 am enclosing:
¢ 1 year $10[ ] 2 years $18[ ] 6 months $6 [ ]
é Old{ ] New[ 1] Foreign 1 year $12 [ ]

Donation $........