SBR a

in relation to ‘treatment

Refinery workers get $2.07 in Canada, $2.65 in United States

Wages of Canadian oil workers
agging behind U.5., brief shows

“If productivity were used
criterion, Canadian oil
wages should be higher than
United States rates,”
study of the Canadian oil in-
dustry conducted by the re-
search department of the Oil,
Chemical and» Atomic Work-
ers Union. “If wages had kept
even with rising productivity
the hourly earnings for 1956
would: have equalled $3.49 in-
stead of $1.98.”

says a

The union brief was com-
piled to answer the claim of
employers that wages'can go
up only if productivity goes
up.

An oil production worker’s
productivity has increased 136
percent’ from 1951 to 1956
while his wages went up only
28 percent.

The same situation exists in
refineries, where hourly earn-
ings would have been $2.69 in
1956 instead of $2: if wages had
kept pace with productivity.

U.S. companies own three-
quarters of the Canadian oil
industry. Canadian workers are
“grossly discriminated against
i re-
ceived by U.S. employees,’ the
brief states. The refinery work-
er who gets $2.65 in the U.S.
gets only. $2.07°in Canada, a
spread of 58 cents an hour.

Canadian production work-
ors who produced 4.7 barrels
of crude oil an hour in 1951,
turned out 11.1 barrels in-1956.

—"

Labor costs per barrel went
down from 32.4 cents in 1951
to 17.1 cents in 1956.

“Canada’s oil resources. and
oil boom should be passed

along in wages and other eco-

nomic gains,” stressed - the
brief. ‘Certainly this is the
preferred way to benefit our
people — rather than have the
wealth from our national re-
sources drained off in the form
of profits to foreign corpora-
tions.”

The boom in Canadian oil
production began with the
Leduc discovery in Alberta in

Jones takes stand against

1948. In the following eight
years annual crude oil pro-
duction zoomed from 12 mil-
lion to 171 million barrels, re-
finery output from 81 million
to about 236 million’ barrels.

Sales and. profits
shown a tremendous increase.
Imperial Oil boosted sales 38
percent from 1951 to 1955; Mc-
Coll. Frontenac 25 percent;
Royalite 190 percent and North
Star 146 percent. .The seven
biggest. companies showed a
combined increase in profits of
67 percent from 1951 to 1955,
according to the union survey.

s

continuation of H-tests

continus,” said W. J.

NEW WESTMINSTER, B.C.

Scientists are agreed that d&nger exists if nuclear tests
(Jack) Jones, CCF tandidate for New

Westminster, in a speech here last week. “Let us back ‘up the
stand of informed men and call for peaceful uses of this new

modern power.”

Only .a vote for the CCF
will bring what workers want
—development of Canadian re-
sources for Canadians,’ ade-
quai‘e old. age pensions, a com-
prehensive health plan and
improved export markets, said
Jones. ’ :

“If you.:.vote Liberal you
are endorsing the pitiful $6

:
raise in ld age pensions,” he
said. “If you vote ‘Liberal or
Socred you are saying, in ef-
fect, “go ahead, give .away
our Canadian. resources. Give
away our ore. Give away our
we don’t mind.’ If you
vote -Conservative you are
voting for a party with a past
but no future.”

oil,

have.

IN NEW WEST —

“LPP WITHDRAWS

IN CCF FAVOR ©

NEW WESTMINSTER, B.C.
Withdrawal of Alf Dewhurst as Labor-Progressive
federal candidate for New Westminster was announced

last wéekend by New Westminster LPP committee:

Coupled with the announcement was an appeal by Dew-

hurst to workers, farmers and pensioners in New West-

minster riding to unite their efforts-in the campaign to

elect W. J. Jones, CCF can-
didate.

The LPP statement noted
that Jones advocated suspen-

sion of all H-tests, recognition
of People’s China, Canadian
development of Canadian: re-
sources and many other mea-
sures in the interests of work-
ing people.

It reported that before de-
ciding upon withdrawal, the
LPP had held discussions with
trade Farm Union
members and ~ community
workers. All were concerned
that division of the progres-
sive vote would result in re-
election of George Hahn, So-
cred candidate, whose anti-la-
bor record is well known in
trade union circles. :

unionists,

Cited as instances of Hahn’s
anti-labor position are his de-
mand at the last session of
parliament for outlawing of
strikes by railroad workers
and his refusal to support the
Fishermen’s union in its fight
against action brought under
the Combines Investigation
Act.

his with-
week, Dewhurst

Commenting - on
drawal -this
said:

“The LPP. believes that by
uniting their votes around
one candidate at the polls
progressive . voters. can elect
candidates who will take a
stand. in the Hduse of -Com-
mons for the things the ma-

jority of working people want

—peace, world trade, social
advance and welfare, and the
independence of their country.

“Creation of that unity is
not the responsibility of the
LPP. Itgis also the respensi-
bility of the CCF, which polls
the votes of thousands of
working” people.

“For that reason it is regret-
table that Jones, in his com-
ments to the New Westminster
British Columbian did not re-

fuse to retreat from the text of~

his official statement issued
to the press when I withdrew.

“The LPP is not ‘trying to

embarrass the CCF party at
the last minute’ as the British

CCF

Columbian quated Jones as
Saying.” The LPP is sincerely
throwing its full support be-
hind the campaign to elect

Jones.
“Statesments such as this
only make it more. difficult

for the-LPP to rally its sup-
porters to work whole-heart-
edly and consequently weak-
en the campaign.

“The CCF is not strong
enough to elect Jones by its
own efforts alone But Jones
can be elected provided all
progressive voters can be ral-
lied behind him.

“I hope that my withdraw-
al will facilitate this and I ap-
peal to all progressive people
in the constituency to work
for it. I appeal to the CCF to
give the leadership that will
further this endeavor to unite
the progressive vote.

“The LPP has many differ-
ences with the CCF on basic
questions pertaining to soc-
ialist theory and practice. But
in the interests of winning a
victory ‘for the ordinary peo-
ple, the LPP pledges its sup-
port to the cause of labor-
farmer electoral unity in this
election.”

The LPP statement warned
that any reactionary coalition
formed from. Conservative-So-
cred and Union Nationale-sup-
ported candidates in Quebec
would be certain of support
from Hahn.

This week, Jones released a
statement which said:

“In the June 10 election I
welcome the support of any
qualified elector regardless of
such supporters’s previous
political convictions.

“T must however, remind all
concerned that I was nomin-
ated by and represent only
the CCF party and that, if
elected, I pledge my loyalty
only to the program of the
party as determined in
regular national conventions.”

MAY 31, 1957 — PACIFIC TRIBUNE—PAGE 8