Fed parley ‘advance for labor’ The decisive debate at the November convention-of the B.C. Federation of Labor flared up on the first day as predicted. The issue on the floor was the message in the opening and closing portions of the report of the executive council. Confronted with the report, those delegates support Art Kube had to fight or concede defeat. They chose to fight. The following quotations illustrate the nature and scope of the quarrel: “You are going to have to decide during this convention whether the policies which are passed in convention are to take priority over the interests of any particular affiliates and whether they are to take priority over the interests of any particular: government.” Particular affiliates referred to the International Woodworkers of America and the United Steelworkers of America. Par- ticular government meant the former New Democratic Party government. The report concluded: “Should the delegates to this convention reaffirm the view that the Federation officers and the executive council are to implement the policies passed in convention, then it is equally important to give careful attention to these policies. Facing continued attacks -from a federal government which is committed to serving the interests of the giant corporations in this country and facing the continued threat posed by an anti-labor Socred government in Victoria, it is vitally important that this convention gives a clear mandate to the officers and executive council which will be elected on Friday as to the way in which these attacks are. to be met — whether to continue to place our primary emphasis on united industrial action, supplemented by an ef- fective political action program, or whether to turn to some sort of attempt to find favor with these governments.” In short, the delegates were asked to choose policies of class struggle or policies of class collaboration. They opted for class struggle. When the Munro-Fryer forces lost the standing vote on the report LABOR. | COMMENT BY JACK PHILLIPS by a vote of 427-352, they mustered enough strength to compel the— convention to take a roll call vote. Delegates then voted on_the basis of how many. members they represented, with the exception of delegates from labor councils who could register only one vote each. Predictably, the roll call vote was won by those supporting the policies of the executive council. But fivehours of valuable time that should have been spent in discussing the real problems of the membership were wasted in this futile exercise. It wouldn’t surprise me to see the Canadian labor Congress rule that such multiple voting by the Federation is in-~ consistent with the constitution of the parent body. The constitution stipulates that in a roll call vote at CLC conventions, every delegate is entitled to only one vote. Once they lost these two decisive votes, the Munro-Fryer forces knew they couldn’t win with Art Kube against Len Guy for the key’ position of secretary-treasurer. The best they could hope for was to reduce Guy’s majority. That’s why they were disappointed when Guy won by a majority of 116 votes. As far as the Johnston-Guy team is concerned, they interpret the votes and their re-election as a two- point. mandate: 1.) To promote militant in- dustrial action and to maintain the independence of the trade union movement from the NDP, while continuing to favor that party as an electoral alternative. 2.) To continue their efforts to make the NDP more responsive to the needs and aspirations of the working class. The policy devisions in the convention were best illustrated by the following resolutions: One designated as L-66 and submitted by 32 locals of the UFAWU, called for the breaking up of multi-national corporations; to prohibit conglomerates; to amend the combines act to forbid mergers and takeovers which undermine Canadian sovereighty or the public interest, with failure to | comply resulting in nationalization... .; to begin the process of nationalizing the banks, trusts, Insurance companies and the credit system in order to secure the necessary capital for the planned development of the Canadian economy for. the benefit of the Canadian people. The resolution was endorsed’ in prin- ciple and referred to the CLC for action. On the other side were two resolutions, L-21, submitted by three Steel locals and L-22; sub- mitted by 15 IWA locals; which called for worker directors in. private crown corporations. There was .a sharp debate in which progressive delegates played a major role. However, a motion to refer to the incoming” executive was defeated by a standing vote and because of in- terruptions in proceedings, the resolution vanished in limbo. The speech by NDP provincial leader Dave Barrett, which followed the debate on the two _ resolutions, demonstrated that the party leadership has learned very little from the defeat of the NDP government in December, 1975. Barrett went out of his way to tell the delegates that the party and trade unions are not the same. Open hearings demanded Cont'd from pg. 1 as the UFAWU was the target of a similar attack in 1956. At that time, the UFAWU was investigated at the instigation of the fishing monopolies which had as their objective the dismem- berment of the union as an illegal combine under the act. The action was only dropped when it became apparent that the companies might have to open their books to investigators. Consequently, an. amendment to the Combines Investigation Act was hurriedly pushed through _ Parliament exempting fishing ~ companies and fishermen from the provisions of the act in bargaining. for minimum fish prices. The new inquiry, however, in- dicates that the harassment of the union has nof been ended despite the change in the legislation. ~ “If past practice is any in- dication this investigation and hearing is aimed at the heart of our right to bargain on behalf of B.C. _ UFAWU. business © fishermen,” agent George Hewison commented. this week. ‘Our Operation Strike Relief may have been the pretext but it is the union which is the target.” That point was also stressed by union president Homer Stevens the year before when combines in- vestigators first began their seizure of documents. “The act was designed to control corporations which are fixing poo Rae Oi 9 seins, sito Op eae res MBER 3, 1976—Page 12 one of two Combines investigators sent last year to seize UFAWU documents, sifts through union papers. the act is twisted out of shape into Steve Wapniarski, an instrument for harassing workers’ organizations,’ he declared. ‘ Stevens was speaking to an emergency resolution presented to the 1975 B.C. Federation of Labor convention which called on the federal government to ‘‘cease and desist’’ its investigation which the Federation termed ‘‘an abuse of the letter and ‘spirit of the Com- bines Investigation Act.” The resolution also noted that the fishing companies ‘thave not been curbed in their price-gouging of the public and, in fact, have not sub- jected to any such investigation.” The UFAWU has again se ite ee harassment ~Hewison pointed out, it is taking ‘‘a calculated risk” Federation of Labor and the Canadian Labor Congress for assistance in fighting the latest — although, as in doing so, since the inquiry is supposed to fs private and confidential. Both Stevens and Nichol are entitled to counsel when they appear before the commissioner but the hearing itself is closed. “But we've got nothing to hide,” Hewison stated in reiterating the union executive board’s demand for open hearings. “‘If there is to be .acase brought against the union it should be done publicly.” The demand has been echoed by the Nanaimo, Duncan and District . Labor Council which this week sent a telegram to justice minister Ron Basford demanding that all hearings be open to the public “with all parties in the fishing industry including the huge fish monopolies required to appear and give evidence.” The telegram, signed by council secretary Jo Jones, cited ‘flagrant abuse’ of the Combines In- vestigation Act and charged that the UFAWU was being harassed “by means of star chamber proceedings. “The Nanaimo, Duncan and District Labor Council demands an immediate halt to all actions against the UFAWU,” it stated. . Other labor councils were ex- pected to take similar action in meetings scheduled for Aes this ngewe es “We've had our disputes in the past — and we will have them in the future. We are a party of the or- dinary people, and ordinary people gained the most from our govern- ment.” In short, if the Barrett leadership forms the government again, the trade union movement can expect very little sympathy, understanding and cooperation. It is precisely this attitude which increases the possibility that the Socreds will go back in next time. It is in this context that we must evaluate the position of Syd Thompson of the IWA who told delegates during the debate on the executive council report: ‘‘We are part and parcel of the NDP. The leadership of the Federation did not support the NDP in the last JACK PHILLIPS election the way the convention instructed them to. The IWA is dissatisfied with the leadership of the Federation.” In making this statement, Thompson, whose creed is ‘‘NDP right or wrong,’’ conveniently ignored the following words in .the Political Education Report, which was never debated, because of the pressure of other business: “ . the majority of the funds used by the NDP in the election campaign came from B.C. trade unionists. Unfortunately, our efforts were not enough to prevent the Socreds from returning.” The truth of the matter is that George Johnston, Len Guy and their close associates are also members and supporters of the NDP. But they refuse to subor- dinate the interests of the Federation to the right-wing leadership of the NDP. They continue to insist that organized labor must perform its legitimate economic functions no matter which government is in office. Worse still, at least in the eyes of the Thompsons, Munros, and Fryers, the Johnston-Guy leadership protested loudly when the NDP government introduced legislation harmful to the rights of organized labor. Thus, the attack on the Johnston- Guy leadership was an extension of the struggle of the Barrett leader ship to tighten its hold on the party in B.C. The objective in the Federation convention was to elect a leadership more acceptable to the right-wing leadership of the party. The attitude of the Federation to independent unions outside the Federation was also an issue with the leadership of the IWA and Steel. The Federation usually takes a principled position when non-affiliates are under attack from the employers or government and gives them whatever assistance is possible. When the IWA, the Canadian Paper Workers Union and the Pulp, Paper and Woodworkers Union of Canada were involved ina majority dispute with their in- tegrated employers, the Federation Officers tried to assist all three unions. The fact that the ‘rights. and the nationalization ‘positive achievement. PPWC was outside the CLC di deter them. This, in the ey: Munro and Thompson, w cardinal sin. Their idea of was to destroy the P Similarly, certain elements i PPWC would rather raid unite. In that situation, Federation policy was in the b interest of all workers conce unity against the corporations conglomerates who dominat industry. Thatis the best answ division and raiding — the way to end needless division The Guy-Johnston forces wo elections handily. Jack M the IWA was not opposed fo position of first vice-president recognition of the importan the largest union in the pro John Fryer of the B.C. Go ment Employers, Erich Ewert the IWA and Mike Kramer of 1 Canadian Union of Public E ployees were defeated, weakening the right-wing block ! the executive council. The left-center: unity which | Munro-Fryer group tried destroy has been strengthened. B it would be wrong to overlook fact that the leadership ra reflected the crisis of capitali: and the resulting debate ov policy which is taking place in. leadership of the Canadian Congress and the New Democ -Party. Will the trade union move ‘be won for. some form of — collaboration, such as tripa or worker-directors? Or will labor movement be won for extension of collective bargaini key industries? Will the trade union move become the captive of the NDP, ! will it become the base for democratic alternative that include the Communist Part NDP, the trade union movem working farmers and 0 democratic elements? These are some of th questions to which progress the labor movement must add themselves. The Federa convention did not give clear answers to these questions, b defeated those who would close door to further advance. That New bigger attacks by the corporat and their governments lie ah These attacks will increase possibilities for unity, and at U same time increase the temptatit for some leaders to get out fi under by moving to the right retreating. The iessons. of the Federatid convention should be discussed debated in every local union every labor council. Progress can play a key role in winning membership for the line of vance that came out of Federation convention. Xmas issue The Tribune’s special Christi edition will come out on Dece 17 this year, providing plenty reading for the Christmas sea As in past years, the Christi edition will include a numbe' special items reviewing the p year and features on events particular significance to the la and progressive movement. In addition to the spe features, our pages will con greetings from individuals — organizations to our readers. deadline for the submission these greetings is noon, Decem 8. : If you want your sp Christmas message to go out to readers, or if you want extra co of the Christmas Tribune, ge' st with our office.