- Duke Point battle over, but issues remain

.
Nat: the house of labor, with the help of
. the Canadian Labor Congress and

Continued from page 1
on surpluses from present
generating capacity only.

Mitchell was followed by a
representative from the provincial.
attorney general’s department
-with the surprise announcement
that the government would inter-
vene in the hearings to support the
application. The export license
was only for surplus power, he ad-
ded in unison with Hydro.

Hydro’s arguments were met
head on Tuesday by Communist
Party provincial leader Maurice
Rush who filed a supplementary
brief to the NEB dealing with
Hydro’s generating capacity.

Hydro’s present generating
capacity is based on a policy of
overbuilding for export, the CP
argued, and the proposed license
renewal will lead to even further
overbuilding. Hydro and the
Socred government are conscious-
ly putting into place a continental
energy policy, the party said.

‘Bonner (Hydro chairman
Robert Bonner) says in normal
and good years for water supply,
B.C. has surplus hydro power to

sell,’’ the CP brief quoted from
B.C. Business Week, a short-lived

_ weekly which ceased publication

last year, ‘‘But he says that five to
ten years lead time is required if
B.C. is deliberately to overbuild
hydro projects to regularly supply
U.S. demands with surplus
power.”

With new generating facilities

on existing dams, together with
the new Revelstoke dam due to

* come on stream in 1983, Hydro’s

generating capacity will increase
by 52 percent over the next five
years. That, with the proposed
new Site C cam on the Peace River
and other proposals for dams on
the Liard, Iskut and Stikine Rivers
before the end of the decade adds
up to a ‘“‘master plan,’’ the CP
said.

“If one takes all of these inten-
tions and definite plans into con-
sideration, it becomes clear that
the application before the NEB is
not a mere modification of ex-
isting licenses, but rather the
opening shot in a master plan to
dedicate B.C.’s rivers and valleys

Hydro charged with ‘master
plan’ to export electricity

to the benefit of industry and
commerce in a foreign country,”
it said.

“Hydro development in B.C.
should be orderly and modest,”’
the CP brief continued. ‘‘We
should be careful to meet our own
needs. in a rational fashion
without jeopardizing our scarce
agricultural valleys, timber stands
or the needs of our Native
Peoples.”’

Approval of Hydro’s applica-
tion would he ‘‘imprudent,”’ the
brief added, because it would
‘‘undercut the possibilities for an
all Canadian electric power grid.”’
Instead of further developing
north-south power lines, the CP
advocates the construction of an
east-west power grid which would
feed surplus B.C. electric power
east across the prairies and to
eastern Canada.

_ The CP was the only intervenor
to present new evidence as the
hearings resumed, but other op-
position -groups are expected to
add new information to their sub-

TRIBUNE PHOTO — SEAN GRIFFIN

"A

¢

dams primarily for export.

missions as their turn comes to
speak to their submissions..

The Union of B.C. Indian
Chiefs, the Fishermen’s Union
and SPEC are reserving their fire
for cross examination of Hydro’s
application which should continue
until well into next week.

The resumption of the hearings.
Tuesday was punctuated by yet
another delay as the NEB wrangl-
ed over a demand from the Tex-
ada Environmental group, backed
by other intervenors, for the right

_to tape proceedings. The con-
troversy ended with the board
refusing permission for taping and

Hydro spokesman W. Mitchell (left) opened Tuesday’s NEB hear-
ing on the defensive, denying charges that Hydro is building |

_only five years ago when Hydro’s

bringing in police to enforce the
ruling. ©

The incident was a reminder of
the seclusion which the NEB has
operated in, and the unspoken
hostility which it has for the Op-
position intervenors. But in spite
of its bias towards the energy in-
dustry in this country and in the
U.S., both the NEB and Hydro
are facing a new situation. It was

license renewal was grante

without a single intervention. This
time the decision must be made
‘under the glare of 15 intervening

organizations and the public at-}

tention they have drawn to it.

The six-month battle of Duke
Point in Nanaimo is over. But the
jurisdictional dispute between the
British Columbia and Yukon
Building Trades Council and the In-
ternational Woodworkers of
America is not resolved.

The odds are that unless the issue
_of jurisdiction can be settled within

the B.C. Federation of Labor, there
will be more conflict between the
Building Trades and the IWA. ~

The battle took place at a 350-
acre development site on a land spit
known as Duke Point located with-
in the limits of the city of Nanaimo.

The B.C. Development Corpora-
tion, a provincial crown corpora-
tion, is in the process of developing
a major industrial park on that pro-
perty. Its construction activities are
under the management of Duke
Point Development Limited, a
wholly owned subsidiary. In
January 1979, Duke Point Develop-
ment entered into a contract with
BACM Construction Limited.
Under the agreement, BACM was
to prepare the entire Duke Point
site for construction of the various
industrial facilities to be located
there.

BACM is a member of the Con-
struction Labor Relations Associa-
tion and its construction workers
are represented by the Building
Trades Bargaining Council. The
four key unions involved at Duke
Point are the Operating Engineers,
Local 115; Teamsters Local 213;
Laborers Local 1093 and Laborers
Local 168.

BACM started the clearing, fill- —

ing and levelling work the contract
called for in early February 1979.
The contract was approximately 30
percent completed by mid-July
when members of the four con-
struction unions quit work. They
did not go back till six months later.

The work stoppage was sparked
by the presence at Duke Point of
tradesmen represented by the Inter-
national Woodworkers of America.
The IWA tradesmen were employed
by Industrial Mill Installations
Limited, which had a contract to
construct a sawmill for Doman’
Forest Products Limited, one of the
tenants of the industrial park.

The IWA is not affiliated with
the Building Trades Council and it

PACIFIC TRIBUNE—JANUARY 25, 1980—Page 8

is the contention of the Building
Trades that sawmills should be built
by construction workers
represented by the that body.
When they stopped work on July
17, the four unions invoked the

rights contained in the non-
affiliation clauses of their collective
agreements.

The clause in the Operating.

Engineers’ collective agreement, for
example, reads as follows:

“‘The union reserves the right to
render assistance to other labor
organizations. Refusal on the part
of union members to work with
non-union workmen or workmen
whose organization is not affiliated
with the Building Trades Council
shall not be deemed a breach of this
agreement.”’

LABOR
COMMENT

BY JACK PHILLIPS

However, the work stoppage on -

July 17 brought an immediate com-
plaint from BACM to the Labor
Relations Board, alleging that the
stoppage was in violation of the
provincial Labor Code. All in-
terested parties were advised of the
hearing, but the IWA and In-
dustrial Mill Installations withdrew
from the hearing at an early stage.

BACM’s complaint was that the
four unions were engaging in a
strike in- contravention of Section
19 of the Labor Code and that the
non-affiliation clauses were unen-
forceable under the circumstances.

The Labor Relations Board in a
63-page ruling, upheld the position
of the Building Trades, as follows:

1) The cessation of work did not
constitute a strike within the mean-
ing of that term in the Labor Code.

2) The workers had the right
under their non-affiliation clauses,
to refuse to work alongside of
workmen not represented by the
Building Trades Council.

3) The LRB declined to make a
declaration under Section 90 of the
Labor Code which would have
voided or made unenforceable the
non-affiliation clauses.

On August 10, after the land-
mark decision was announced, Roy

Gautier, president of the B.C. and
Yukon Building Trades Council,
issued a carefully worded statement
which held out the olive branch to
the IWA. His statement concluded

’ with the following:

“‘We again propose to the IWA
leadership, for whom we have a
considerable respect, that the only
answer is to work out an understan-
ding based on the 1971 report of the
CLC impartial umpire, Carl
Goldenberg.”’

The substance of the Goldenberg
report was that:

a) New construction falls within
the traditional jurisdiction of the
building trades unions;

b) The basic jurisdiction of the
woodworkers is the processing and
handling of wood products at all
stages and includes maintenance
and repair in existing mills.

It is significant that Gautier’s
statement called for ‘‘an understan-
ding based on the 1971 report,”’
thus making it clear that the
Building Trades was prepared to
enter into serious and meaningful
negotiations to settle the dispute.
With all the problems the trade
union movement is faced with to-
day, such as unemployment, infla-
tion, housing shortages, soaring
energy costs, high interest rates and
the constant threat of more anti-
labor legislation, the emphasis
should be on unity of action based
on common goals. Jurisdictional
quarrels bring nothing but disunity.

The Building Trades workers at
Duke Point were solid for some
four months and a number of
tradesmen working for sub-
contractors also stayed off the job.
Then, the Vancouver Island local of
the International Brotherhood of
Electrical Workers, through their
business manager, Jim McAvoy,
announced their decision to go to

_ work at Doman Mill,-alongside the

IWA tradesmen.

McAvoy was quoted in the Van-
couver Sun Nov. 22 as stating the
IBEW had sent members to do the
wiring ‘‘because we believe if we
don’t do it, somebody else will.”’

The Sun also quoted him as say-
ing ‘‘that somebody will be the
IWA.”’

Picket lines were set up-to turn
back the IBEW members, but when
the Labor Relations Board issued
several cease and desist orders, the
picket lines came down and IBEW
members went to work at Doman
Mill.

It .was. shortly after. Christmas

when the B.C. and the Vancouver
Island Building Trades Councils
recommended to the 130 members
that they reconsider their position
and go back to work.

In the words of one business
agent, it was a bitter pill for the
workers to swallow, after staying
off the job for six months.
However, they have the satisfaction
of knowing they were fighting.to
protect their jobs, wages and work-
ing conditions, not only at Duke
Point, but everywhere that new
construction is carried on.

Chuck McVeigh, president of the
Construction Labor Relations
Association, representing most con-
tractors in B.C., issued a revealing
statement after the return to work:
“I’ve said it before and I’m saying
it again that the solution is for the
building trades to cut some fat from
their agreements so that the con-
tractors they work for can become
competitive with those employing
IWA members.”’

Is it any wonder that many IWA
members feel uneasy when they
read statements like that — sug-
gesting that their union is involved
in undercutting established trade
union wage scales and working
conditions?

It is significant to note, in view of
McVeigh’s statement, that the
operations of the Industrial Mill In-
stallations Limited (IMI), under con-
tract with the IWA, are twice as
large as they were ten years ago. ©

It should also be noted that IMI
has a sister company known as
Regent Construction. In the words
of the Labor Relations Board, ‘‘the
two companies represent a classic
‘double-breasted employer’.’’ The
same seven persons serve as the
board of directors for both com-
panies. They also hold the shares of

City or town
Postal Code ......... Saeece

SENS NS ON TACZN NS ND

;

= Donation $

SENATE NEE NEES

TP ye me ee) See Fe ORY Cee we BOS STS
EB i ee hice pa a Ye BEY ie, Br es Ie al 2 TP

eis wis ph ene-0-0 e s\0-5 0 6g rs

| am enclosing:
1 year $10 2years $18) 6 months $6 ()
Old New Foreign 1 year $12 L)

ES

both companies, although they do
so in different proportions ang”
there is one additional shareholder —

of IMI. The secretary and director

of IMI doubles as an officer of 4

Regent.

The day to day control of both a
companies is exercised by the same
people working out of the same of- a

fice and their superintendents work —

on the projects of either company. —
The August 8, 1979 report of the =

Labor Relations Board, which
upheld the right of the Building

Trades to refuse to work alongside —
of IWA tradesmen at Duke Point, —
commented on the implications of —
the connection between the two ~

companies:

“‘Regent, however, is a member ~
of CLRA and its employees are ~

represented by the Building Trades a

Bargaining Council. In view of the —

degree of integration and co- —

ordination between the operations —

of these two companies, it seems —

clear that Regent—IMI can provide a

an owner contemplating a major

construction project the option to —
with —

choose whether to build

tradesmen represented by the IWA —

or tradesmen represented by the a

building trades unions.”’

The provincial Building Trades —
Council represents some 60,000 —

members and the IWA some 47,000

members in B.C. No one who is ac- —
tive in the labor movement and who ~

believes in the goals of that move-
ment can be happy about the cur-
rent situation.

The Duke Point work stoppage is
over, but the issue that gave rise to
that stoppage is unresolved. That
presents a challenge for the leader-

ship of the CLC and the B.C. —

Federation of Labor. The sooner
they accept the challenge the bet-
ter, in my opinion.

Published weekly at Suite 101 — 1416 Commercial Drive,
Vancouver, B.C. V5L 3X9. Phone 251-1186

Read the paper that fights for labor

0 0 as og ete. 4

‘ ~

Penne