FEATURE

By NAN McDONALD

On March 8th women of the world will
be making their voices heard for a world
without war, a world without nuclear
weapons. Survival of our planet is the
primary question which faces us all. It is
the fundamental right without which all
other rights are meaningless.

March 8, 1987 sees the women of Can-
ada in a strong position to demand that
right. In our country as everywhere in the
world the women’s movement has become
a powerful force which cannot be ignored.

A measure of the impact of the
women’s movement in Canada is that the
people who want to turn Canada back-
ward, who want reactionary policies have
been compelled to create a counter
women’s organization — the so-called
“REAL Women.” By preying on the fears
and vulnerability of women with dema-
gogic policies of “kirke, kuche and kinde”
and on old prejudices and outmoded tra-

By CONSTANZA ALLEVATTO

In the ongoing struggle for equal pay
for work of equal value, the women’s
movement across Canada is now having
to deal with the way employers and their
governments can turn around a just de-

mand for equal pay into an instrument
against the working class — using legisla-
tion to divide men and women.

Twelve years ago, George Harris,
Secretary Treasurer of the United Elec-
trical Workers and a noted labor journal-
ist, writing for Communist Viewpoint,
the theoretical journal of the Communist
Party, warned of the dangers inherent in
seeing legislation as the only solution to
working people’ s fundamental problems:

Most companies have developed job
evaluation plans, and each company in-
sists that their plan is scientifically con-
structed, with predetermined informa-
tion and properly weighted values as-
signed to particular jobs. But they often
have two sets of values, male and female,
with the so-called scientific factors ap-
plying differently according to the sex of
the operator. Scratch below the surface,
and gross wage discrimination is being
practised with a science label.

Peace, Equality, |
Development

ditions, they hope to head off the gains —

made by Canadian women. It is not an
organization of real women so much as a
real attempt to block the women’s move-
ment.

This attempt will not be able to stop the
inevitable process of women taking their
equal place in the political and social
struggles of the country. Women are
active participants in the struggle against
the policies of the reactionary, neoconser-
vative Tory federal government. The
women’s movement is relating the fight
against Reagan’s Star Wars plan to the
fight against economic exploitation, to the
fight against racism in all its forms. The
class base of exploitation, inequality and
racism is emerging as a strong perspective
in the women’s movement.

Working women are demanding equal
pay legislation, and are increasingly
alerted to parliamentary trickery which

see PEACE page 8

It is also practised with the consent of
governments and under the shelter of
law.

Legislation, wage and job discrimination

In response to years of persistent de-
mands by the labor movement and wom-
en’s organizations for legislation to pre-
vent employers from engaging in wage
and job discrimination, most provincial
governments some years ago enacted
so-called equal pay for equal work regu-
lations.

The trouble with the legislation was
that it never worked and was not intend-
ed to work. It constituted nothing more
than tokenism in response to the de-
mands of labor and women. The legisla-
tion had as many holes as a colander
through which every employer evaded
equal wage payment. The law was thor-
oughly discredited in the eyes of every
knowledgeable citizen.

A few years ago, the government of

“Ontario conceded that equal pay legisla-

tion had not worked, and with much fan-
fare announced enactment of The
Human Rights Code and legislation to
give equal opportunities to women. The
government prefaced the legislation with
a fine and flourishing introduction which
said: ‘‘Whereas recognition of the inher-
ent dignity and the equal and inalienable
rights of all members of the human family
is the foundation of freedom, justice and
peace in the world and is in accord with
the Universal Declaration of Human
Rights as proclaimed by the United Na-
tions . .. Therefore, Her Majesty, by and
with the advice and consent of the Legis-
lative Assembly of the Province of On-
tario enacts as follows.”

What followed was said to provide
equality of opportunity for women in On-
tario. It banned job advertising which
placed a limitation by reason of race,
creed, color, age, sex, marital status, and
nationality. It prohibited an employer
from designating seniority lists and wage
rate schedules as pertaining to male and
female workers, and it imposed certain

restrictions on the news media with re--

gard to race, creed, sex, etc.

But the legislation did nothing to re-
strict the employers from using the old
seniority and wage schedules so long as

Struggle for equal pay
for work of equal value

they did not designate them male and
female. So most employers simply called
the old lists ‘‘A’’ and ‘‘B’’, and they were
home free. Nothing in the legislation
obligated the employers to provide em-
ployees with equal pay for producing
equal value. Wage discrimination re-
mains and equality for women is a sham
under existing law.

The trade unions have long made the
demand for equal pay a feature of their
bargaining programs, and as mentioned
some progress has been made. But by
and large less on this important issue

than on most demands made on the em-

ployers. Women workers have, of
course, improved their position and
benefited substantially together with
men from the successes achieved in the
overall bargaining struggles.

However, it is valid to question the
slow advance in the struggle for equal
pay and equal opportunity for women.

The trade union movement, and the
labor movement generally, while
staunchly committed to the struggle for
equality, still has a distance to go in con-
vincing the membership as a whole that

.the achievement of wage equality and
equality of opportunity for women will
serve both their individual and class in-
terests. The employers and the society
they control have quite successfully
created harmful attitudes in the work-
places on this issue, as they have created
differences on the question of youth in
industry, bonus and day rate workers,
and skilled and unskilled labor.

How have women fared over recent
years?

In 1983 the average salary for men was
$26,000; the average salary for women
was $16,000. During the same year, 57
per cent of immigrant and visible minor-
ity women earned less than $10,000 per
year. Today more women than men are
living below the level of poverty. Eight
out of 10 single parent families are head-
ed by women, and 46 per cent of women
living alone have annual incomes below
the poverty line. Studies show that work-
ing women are clustered into 20 out of
500 occupations listed in Canada and
more male workers are organized into
unions than women.

These statistics illustrate part of the
reality facing women in Canada; that is, a
huge wage gap, racism, poverty and job
ghettoization. For corporations these
facts indicate enormous savings and
huge profits.

In response to pressure from the trade
union and women’s movements the On-
tario Liberal government has introduced
pay equity legislation — Bills 105 and 154
which as George Harris warned, pose a
serious threat to trade unions and have
marginal benefits for working women.

The proposed legislation will exclude
work places with less than 10 employees
and businesses with 10 to 100 employees
will only be covered by “‘voluntary pay

_€quity’’ measures. In other words, over |
600,000 working women in Ontario will |_

not benefit from mandatory pay equity
legislation. In addition, casuals and
part-time workers will be excluded. Over

65 per cent of part-time workers are |
women, many of whom are immigrant 4 |

and visible minority women, who, be-
cause of employment discrimination,
often find it impossible to get full time
jobs.

While the legislation incorporates the
pay equity plan into the collective
agreement; it is unclear where the mo-
nies to pay for the plan will come from.
The proposed legislation permits em-
ployers to defer general wage increases;
thereby, blaming unions and women for
declining salaries. This is particularly
dangerous as it pits male workers against
female workers and such a division can
only undermine the power of the labor
movement. As well, this legislation takes
negotiations of wages out of the control
of labor; and therefore, undermines the
militancy of the trade unions.

These are but a few of the pitfalls of the

’ proposed legislation. Equal pay legisla-

tion must provide benefits to all women
workers and not undercut the power and

_ authority of trade unions.

Since Bills 105 and 154 fall so short of
the mark, the question is now whether
they can be amended to overcome their
fundamental inadequacies or withdrawn
completely in favor of an altogether fresh
start.

Pay equity legislation in itself will not
bring about women’s economic equality.
Only together with mandatory affirma-
tive action, organizing the unorganized,
increasing the minimum wage, publicly
funded child care and full employment,
will equal pay for work of equal value
help to lay the foundation for achieving
this goal.