IE WE Vol. XXX, No. 24 revision starts ! 1 ! ! I i J {| Revision of rates for 1 new and revised jobs as ! provided for in the coast ! master agreement will be resumed in February, it ; is announced by the IWA , Regional Officers. | The four-man team, al- | ready appointed, is pre- | paring to act on informa- ! tion supplied by the Local I Unions. Final determina- ! tion of rates to be nego- tiated will be made by l the Regional Executive | Board in conformity with | the settlement given 1 membership approval in | the 1965 coast settlement. |! For further explana- ! tion, see Jack Holst’s column, page 4. 1. “W \ eh es ee ee SS ee ee ee ee ee ee ee Plywood plant bargains Local 1-207 IWA has open- Forest Products Ltd. at Grande Prairie, for a revised - The plywood plant’s com- : 220 em- oyees, Was by Re- _ Vice - President, Ye CANADIAN & ae Authorized as Second Class Mail, ‘Post Office Dept., VANCOUVER, B.C. search & Educational Director, Elwood Taub, December 16-17, at Wood- workers’ House, Vancouver. Students are officers and committee members of the Coast Local Unions. i Incorporating Jhe ©.@. Lumbersworker Official Publication of the Jeteraatlonal Woedworkers of rémertea Regional Council No. 1 TO BUILD THE UNION PS Union protests insurance hike The protest made by the IWA Regional Executive Board against the twenty per cent increase in auto insur- ance rates has been brought to the attention of all mem- bers of the B.C. Legislature. It is pointed out in a submis- sion made on behalf of the Board by Regional President, Jack Moore, that the increase imposes a distinct hardship on workers whose operation of cars is a necessity for transportation to their places of employment. The Regional Executive Board contended that the in- crease was unwarranted as the profits of the insurance firms are at an all-time high. Much of the cost, it was said, is due to the duplication of services provided by 200 com- panies in the province. The payment of commissions by these companies is another important factor in boosting the costs of insurance. A leaflet, sponsored by the New Democratic Party, re- peats the question asked by the Vancouver Sun: Congress sets political plans December 16. Charter for Canadians.” now in | during A and the Federal convention in Toronto “Is it economically possible for B.C.’s 200 licenced car in- surance companies — most, surely, with the duplicatory management costs — to give anything approaching as good a deal as a compulsory prov- ince-run plan? “These demands will be- come louder and more persu- asive than ever unless the in- dustry can show not only that the 20 per cent is merited, but that there is no good economic alternative to the system itself.” New Democratic Party M.L.A.’s have announced their intention to press for a publicly-owned car insurance plan at the next session of the Legislature. They contend that the Saskatchewan plan has proven that exorbitant rates are wholly unnecessary, and that better coverage can be provided at cost between 25 and 50 per cent lower than present rates in B.C. The Saskatchewan public plan re- ported a $4 million surplus in 1963. | I 1 I ! I I “Interest in political action to serve the pressing ! legislative aims of organized labour in Canada was never ! at a higher pitch,” reported Regional 1st Vice-President, | Jack MacKenzie, following his attendance at the meet- ; ing of the CLC Political Education Committee in Toronto, ; I l ! ! ! I l ! 1 ! | The thirty-man committee heard and approved the completed plans for Citizenship Month in February. Theme of an all-out national campaign will be “A Health Congress affiliates will be asked to prepare for full participation in Federal NDP nominating conventions i) ill SORA Ottawa, and for Payment of Postage in Cash. 5c PER COPY 2nd Issue Dec. 1964 —S>* LOCAL 1-28 UMPIRES An appeal made by Local 1-288 IWA against the dis- qualification of lumber in- spectors for unemployment insurance benefits during the 1964 Port Alberni strike has been sustained by the Umpire of the Unemployment Insur- ance Commission. The evidence indicated that the inspectors were em- ployed by the Pacific Lumber Inspection Bureau and not by the companies directly af- fected. The inspectors were laid off because there was no work for them to do. As they were not ordered by their employer to cross the picket line, they could not be prop- erly charged with participa- tion in a labour dispute, said the Umpire, over-ruling the decision of the Board of Re- ferees. The Umpire, Hon. Justice J. D. Kearney, concluded: “The record shows that the claimant and those represent- ed in this appeal lost their employment by reason of g stoppage of work attributable to a labour dispute at. the premises at which they were employed. As the evidence also indicates that they were not financing nor directly in- terested in the dispute and that no member of their grade or class of workers was financing or directly interest- ed therein, the only question ie % pe ae ne Ee eran i, =#7 t La) ta . eek rd ae ae CS. 38 WINS DECISION at issue, therefore, is whether they were rightly disqualified under section 63 of the Act for having failed to prove that they did not participate in the aforementioned dis- pute and that no member of their grade or class of work- ers had done so. “According to the evidence in the record, the only reason for which the inspectors could possibly have become participants in the labour dis- pute is because they did not cross the picket line. . “In that connection, how- ever, there is unrefuted evi- dence from three sources (the Pacific Lumber Inspection Bureau, the Inspectors’ Union and the Forest Industrial Re- lations Limited) that the in- spectors’ reason for not cross- ing the picket line was prim- arily, if not exclusively, be- cause their own employer de- cided to lay them off. “Consequently, in absence of definite proof that the em- ployer’s action was taken at the instance of the inspectors or of their Union, the fact that the said inspectors did not cross the picket line cannot be said to have amounted to participation in the labour dispute, because it was not a voluntary withdrawal of their labour. “In view of the foregoing, I decide to allow the Union’s appeal.” Fine alarms B.C. unions The $2.3 million fine im- posed on the United Steel- workers of America by the Quebec Superior Court has given legitimate cause for alarm to B.C. trade unions. Under similar circumstances the labour laws of the prov- ince would make B.C. unions equally vulnerable. The court held that the USA strike against Gaspe Copper Mines Ltd. at Mur- dochville, Que., was illegal and was conducted with il- legal methods. The Interna- _ tional Union, although not in- corporated in Canada, was held responsible. Social Credit laws‘in Brit- ish Columbia, the Trade Unions Act and the Labour Relations Act, make it possi- ' ble for employers to sue unions for damages for loss of profits during a strike de- clared to be illegal. United Steelworkers of America has been ordered to pay $1,747,645 for losses during the seven - month strike in 1957 plus 5% simple interest on this total from Dec. 31, 1957. Legal expenses cost the union about $750,000. In -addition, about $800,000 had been expended for wel- fare payments during the strike. The decision has been ap- pealed. The union has been required to post a bond equal to the amount of the judgment and provide twelve copies of the evidence and exhibits. The trial lasted two years and heard 350 witnesses with 20,365 pages of testi- mony and almost 900 ex- hibits. — A management journal chortles “Labour has no place to hide.” Throughout manage- ment circles it is held that the decision in Quebec estab- lishes a precedent to be fol- lowed elsewhere in Canada. Where else but in British Columbia, where the legal stage has been set? Management’s glee is based on some of the findings made by the Quebec court: @ Trade unions are given no exception in the general law of responsibility in ob- See “FINE ALARMS” — Page 3