Hid

| oe |

te | ee

LABOUR

Rail battle crucial test for labour

By MIKE PHILLIPS

OTTAWA — A country-wide
railway strike looms distinctly on
the Canadian horizon as federal
Labour Minister Pierre Cadieux
ponders conciliation commissioner
Douglas Stanley’s report on the
talks involving 47,000 railway
workers at Canadian National and
CP Rail.

Since the expiry of rail contracts
last December, the railways’ inces-
sant demands for sweeping rol-

Ibacks and concessions have com- |

peted with the récent heat-wave in
lowering the boiling point of the
workers’ frustration.

Backed by an 86 per cent strike
mandate, union negotiators like
the CBRT’s Tommy McGrath
sense a determined mood aong the
membership.

“They're looking for a collective
agreement but they’re not expect-
ing to see it in the one that’s going
to be offered by the railways,” he
said last week.

Though management has moved
from some concessionary demands,
there have been no improvements
proposed and the companies’ end-
less poverty pleas have conditioned

the workers not to expect any sig-
nificant departure from the empl-
oyers’ agenda in Stanley’s report.

There hasn’t been a Canada-
wide strike in rail since 1973 when
the Trudeau Liberals crushed it
with back to work legislation after
10 days of rotating strikes that
escalated into a general walkout.

Armand Passeretti chief nego-
tiator for the nine-union Asso-
ciated Railway Unions, has sug-
gested that a strike this year might
involve taking on the companies
one at a time with a series of rotat-
ing walkouts. The ARU represents
the operating and running trades
and were expected to be meeting
Aug. 12 to map out a course of
action in response to Stanley’s
report.

Under legislation governing the
railway talks, the unions would be
in a strike position seven days
from the Labour Minister’s re-
lease of the conciliation report. If
Cadieux takes the full 15 days
available to him to study Stan-
ley’s report, that would mean the
possibility of strike action at the
end of August.

The railways have countered

the unions’ demand for 5 per cent
wage increases in each year of a
two-year pact, with insistence on

a two year wage freeze and a $500.

two-staged lump sum payment in
the second year. The ARU was
able to force the companies to re-
treat from a proposed two-tiered
wage set up that would require a
new hire to take five years to
reach a full base rate that would
be 90 percent of the current level.

Also on the corporate shopping
list are numerous demands for
work rule concessions and
changes that undermine job sec-
urity in the name of achieving
greater management ‘‘flexibil-
ity”.

Job security and better wages
are uppermost in the workers’
minds as they confront the effects
of tech change and the Mulroney
government’s obsession with de-
regulation.

Both factors —tech change and
the drive for deregulation — have
resulted in the railway work force

being cut in half since the 60s, .

union officials point out.
The recent letter carriers strike,

looming with the inside workers,
share the same themes as are pre-
sent in this battle. The L@UC’s

victory rested on the massive.

outpouring of trade union solidar-
ity and public support for the
union in what was perceived as a
fight for job security.

With its current campaign to
block the privatization of wicket
services and contracting out of
the post office, the Canadian
Union of Postal Workers has been
trying to link the public’s interest
in efficient economic service with
the workers’ right to job security.

As McGrath said in an inter-
view, the battle railway workers
are entering could put the Cana-
dian labour movement to yet an-
other crucial test if the Tories, like
the 1973 Liberals, choose to go
the legislative route to block the
workers from reaching their

objective. oot
‘“*An isolated walkout in
Newfoundland or Victoria

doesn’t ring too many bells, but a
walkout on the railway system
certainly will ring bells all the way
from Newfoundland to Victoria,”’

Railway workers on the job.
Tech change and the drive to
deregulation has resulted in the
work force being slashed by 50

and the next postal confrontation he said.

~ per cent since the 60s.

Labour briefs

CUPW fighting
to save Canpost

OTTAWA W— Darrell
_ Tingley, first vice president of
the 23,000-member Canadian
Union of Postal Workers
launched the union’s
Country-wide campaign, July
29, to save the post office from
being privatized to the Tory
government's corporate
friends.

With the aim of improving
Canada Post as a public ser-
vice, and to protect as well as
create unionized, decent-pay-
ing jobs, CUPW last week de-
monstrated outside sub post
offices and franchise opera-
tions which have taken over
certain wicket services from

_ regular postal facilities.

Tingley said the union has
tabled contract demands that
would help the crown corpora-
tion increase revenues by ex-
panding profitable counter
services, but management and
the government persist in their
blind desire to sell off Canada
Post’s most profitable parts.

“The union is totally op-
posed to their privatization
schemes,” he said. *‘Canada
Post and the Tories see this as a
way to cut costs and reward
their friends in the business
community. But we see it as a
dangerous policy designed to
convert union wage jobs into
low-wage jobs, in other words,
a cheap labour strategy for
working Canadians.”

Jobless set to
march against poverty

LONDON — Setting their
sights on a 25 per cent hike in
Ontario social assistance rates,
the unemployed workers’
union, here, is gearing up for

what’s billed as a ‘‘March
Against Poverty’’ to the On-
tario capital.

The unemployed organiza-
tion intends to lead a con-
tingent of the poor and jobless
from London, Sept. 5, with
plans to reach the Ontario
Legislature in Toronto on
Sept. 14.

Already, a ‘“‘Committee for
the March Against Poverty”’
has been set up in Woodstock,
with plans afoot to organize a
reception rally for the mar-
chers when they arrive in town
Sept. 8.

The union says it has so far
collected well over a thousand
names in ‘the London area
alone. It-is also calling for
financial support to help cover
a projected budget of $1,500
for the march.

In a recent letter to LUUW
supporters and community
groups, union president John
Clarke put out a call for the
loan of a van or covered truck
for the 10 day march, and
added that the marchers will
also need such items as sleep-
ing bags, foot wear, water-
proof clothing and non-perish-
able food items to help them
along their way.

Urging labour and commun-
ity support in the endeavour,
Clarke predicted that the
march, ‘‘can play a vital role in
building resistance to the at-
tempt now under way to break
the spirit of a whole section of
the poor and unemployed
workers so that they. can be
used as a strike breaking force
by the employers.”

Anyone wishing to support
the march should forward
donations to the union at: 337
Richmond St., London Ont.,
N6A 3C2, or call (519) 673-
3402.

6 e PACIFIC TRIBUNE, AUGUST 12, 1987

Historic victory in fight —

against sexual harassment

NORTH BAY — A jubilant Bonnie Robichaud
is celebrating her July 29 federal Supreme Court
victory which set an historic precedent in the fight
against sexual harassment.

In a unanimous decision brought down in Otta-
wa, the court ruled that all employers under federal

jurisdiction are responsible for any acts of harass-

ment carried out by their employees on the job.

‘“T’'m very happy about the decision,’’
Robichaud said last week, ‘‘because it means
employers won't be able to look the other way
when a worker complains about sexual harass-
ment.”’

The landmark decision, she added, will also be
good news for the complainants in some 300 similar
cases now before the court who had filed their
actions prior to the Canadian Human Rights Act
amendments in July 1983.

It means that federally-regulated employers, like
crown corporations, the federal civil service,
banks, as well as the railways and airlines, will not
be able to ignore complaints of harassment, since
tribunals appointed by the human rights com-
mission will have the power to hold management
responsible for their employees’ behaviour.

Sweet Victory

Health and safety activists will also see the ruling

as a clear indication of the employer's” responsibil-

ity to create a healthy work place environment.

It will also boost the tribunals’ capacity to issue
effective affirmative action decisions to remedy
complaints of harassment.

The victory was sweet for Robichaud who has
conducted an often lonely and frustrating battle for
justice since filing her sexual harassment com-
plaints in 1979 against Dennis Brennan, her

foreman, in the cleaning and maintenance depart-

ment at Canadian Forces Base, North Bay.
During her probationary period as a supervisor
of cleaners, Brennan had coerced Robichaud, a
mother of five, into a number of sexual acts under
the threat of losing her job. Her harassment com-
plaint unleashed a vicious campaign against her

including attempts to ostracize her from her fellow _

workers.

Robichaud got a heavier workload and di-
minished responsibilities, while Brennan was al-

lowed to carry on completely unchecked by super-

vision.
Persistent battle

She battled on, however, gathering support

throughout the country from labour and the wo-

men’s movement and persistently brought her case

into the spotlight of national attention.
It was hard slogging. In 1982 she lost at a federal

human rights commission hearing, but her com-
plaint was upheld the next year and the tribunal —
ruled that the employer was liable for the actions of

those under its employment.

In 1985, a federal court of appeal found that she *

had been a sexual harassment victim, but refused
to recognize employer liability for its supervisor $
behaviour.

Brennan got fired for his offenses, but Depart-

ment of National Defence also put Robichaud out

the door alleging unsatisfactory work. Yet, she
reached an out of court settlement with the —

government for an undisclosed amount and Robi-

chaud has moved from the cleaning trade to study-

ing office management through the North Bay
Affiliate of Laurentian University.

Employer is liable

The July 29 ruling was Robichaud’s appeal to the —

Supreme Court to overturn the 1985 Court of AP-

peal decision upholding her harassment complaint

but letting the employer off the hook on the liability
issue. In a two-to one majority decision the court
held there could be no employer liability since 1
could not be proven that management intended or
authorized the harassment.

The July 29 Supreme Court ruling, which was

also historic in that it was the first time in Canada —

that the seven person judicial panel included tw

women, ruled that whether a discriminatory prac.
tice was intended or authorized, ‘‘a discriminatory —
practice by the employee is to be considered to bea _

discriminatory practice by the employer ...”

The ruling went on: ‘‘Only an employer caf ie
remedy undesirable effects; only an employer cane a ;
provide the most important remedy — a healthy EG

work environment ... The commission must be

empowered to strike at the heart of the problem, to7 |
prevent its recurrence and to require that steps be ad

taken to enhance the work environment.”

oa