LABOR = Se es id ‘‘100 percent of their memberships” by _ » B.C. Federation of Labor secretary. Mike Kramer Sept. 28. Krameriold the New Westrigcer and 2 10 District Labor council that the march and - rally “gives us an opportunity to persuade ~ _ the premier and cabinet that what they’re _ - doing is not right and they should change _ _ their minds.” : Bese ‘Failing that, said Kramer, “From Nov. el rs Se ee re ee ae Pavate sector union Sins a = “Wehavetolear that everyunionistinthe province is under the heel of ‘Iron Heel — representative Rod Doran. “The bottom line is that employers } here are after the $2.50 an hour starting rate, the same as in California, and they hope to a __ show the way for employers right across — Canada.” warned Bert Ogden of ae - United Fishermen and Allied Workers — Union | in urging greater pa scipation. 2s vate ‘sector mons, | Benzeti,? ” said: Longshoremen’ e: : Socreds’ nite heciies fol-n anger Continued from page 1 for escalating walkouts if any member is fired as a result of the legislation. Asked if action in support of the BCGEU could lead to a general strike, he replied: “‘I think there’s a great likelihood of such ac- tion.”’ But the Socreds have created the condi- tions for that action, he said, emphasizing that the ‘‘ball has always been in the govern- ment’s court. It’s up to the government to remove the legislation which is so dangerous to people.” The two Coalition leaders also ‘stressed that as a result of the Socreds new drive to railroad legislation through the house, in- voking closure and calling night sessions, “there is a great amount of anger among community groups in the Coalition. “They’ve tried everything — rallies, demonstrations, a petition — but the government is still hidebound to proceed.” The tough stand outlined at the press con- ference — indeed at the Coalition meeting — spiked earlier speculation that a sawoff might be sought with the government over some of the pieces of legislation. A story carried over late night television Wednesday as well as a report in the Van- couver Province Thursday — both based on comments from a source in the Solidarity leadership — suggested that Solidarity might be prepared to reach a compromise based on total withdrawal of the legislation abolishing the Human Rights Act coupled with amend- ments to other contentious pieces of legisla- tion. The reports touched off an uproar among ~ several Coalition member organizations since no such compromises had ever been discussed in the Coalition which has main- tained that only withdrawal of all of the legislation would be acceptable. Kube ended speculation formally with a statement Thursday which emphasized that the Solidarity Coalition and Operation . Solidarity “Shave from the beginning, urged” the government to back off on the unaccep- table bills and to begin a process of consulta- tion with community groups and the labor movement . . . Q.E. PLAYHOUSE ALL SEATS $6.00 RENATE SHEARER, ART KUBE...announce Solidarity Coalition support for BCGEU. ‘Unfortunately, there has been no indica- tion from the premier that the government’s position has changed,” the statement said. “Furthermore, the government’s decision once again to use closure to force legislation through the legislature suggests that there is no intention at the present time of a new ap- proach on the government’s part. Asa result there is little likelihood of any negotiations at this time. “Instead, the only option open at present to Operation Solidarity is to give full support to those unions facing direct confrontation with the government — and to those com- munity organizations whose members will be adversely affected by the passage of various bills,’” he warned. Even before the time for that ‘‘direct con- frontation’”’ comes, following the Oct. 31 deadline, the pressure on the government to back off from passage of the 26 bills is mounting. The NDP Opposition in the legislature, although hampered by the Socreds’ use of closure to cut off debate, are continuing to speak out against the restrictive legislation, utilizing speaking time to the fullest extent possible. Criticism that the NDP had allow- ed some bills to go through had earlier been voiced, but following a meeting of Solidarity representatives with the caucus, the NDP stated that it would ‘‘fight every bill.”’ Even the Socreds’ use of closure has so far only speeded up second reading of the legislation. Third, and final reading entails clause by clause debate of the bills and although the Socreds could repeatedly in- voke closure to force passage, that process could still take a long time, allowing the pro- test movement to build new momentum. The Solidarity Coalition has targeted Oct. 15 for a major demonstration aimed at the: Social Credit convention (see above). On Oct. 29, only two days before the ex- piry of the critical BCGEU contract, the Coalition will hold a tag day throughout the province to raise money to fund the Coali- tion’s broad campaign. Applications are go- ing to city and municipal councils in various centres across the province seeking permis- sion to hold the tag day in each community. A week earlier, on Oct. 22, a delegated conference of organizations within the Solidarity Coalition will discuss the continu- ing campaign and plans for the long term as well as alternatives to the ‘‘anti-democratic, repressive and recessionary policies of the provincial government.” Throughout the month, the emphasis will continue to be on the Coalition’s petition campaign which has already reached thousands of people through door-to-door and street corner signature gathering. A se- cond petition blitz day has been set for Oct. is The petition campaign as well as the ac- tions of the government in forcing legislation through ha also prompted new affiliations to the Coalition and new support for its cam- paign. One significant gesture of support last week came from the Vancouver-Burrard presbytery of the United Church which takes in several congregations in an area which voted solidly Socred in the May 5 election. The presbytery voted to endorse the petition, to so inform the Coalition and the provincial government and to ‘‘send copies of the peti- tion for action to all congregations within the bounds.” SEAN GRIFFIN TRIBUNE PHOTO ~ Vancouver, B.C. baer fines Sunencarnomend’ ipa arsi MF LE BF BO LEP LE LP ST. ‘ Nae eras eee TOSS wc rece ec eee ence eeees . : : Published weekly at Suite 101 — 1416 Commercial Drive, V5L-3X9 | |Loager action) dramatizes | contracting | out issue The issue of contracting-out of logging was thrust into centre stage of forest if dustry bargaining as Forest Industria representatives closeted themselves in 4 meeting Monday to discuss lockout ac tion in response to the continuing wal. out of 50 loggers in the Nimpkish Vall on northern Vancouver Island. The results of that meeting were nol}| known at Tribune press time but the]| employers had already cancelled @}| > scheduled bargaining session slated to be held Monday. : || The International Woodworkers itsé had filed 72 hourse strike notice witl Canadian Forest Products’ Englewood | logging division to protect loggers from }} contempt of court charges. The charges | loomed after loggers voted to defy 4]| Labor Relations Board cease and desist i order which was then filed in B.C: Supreme Court for enforcement. The strike notice became effective Sum day, Oct. 2, presumably preceding atl effective legal action since the men mu! be served with a court order before the can be held in contempt. The dispute was touched off Sept. when CFP, in what many see was 4 deliberately provocative move contracted-out five jobs through a su™ contractor. The 500 loggers walked out il! protest. Significantly, CFP had earlier sent 4 its employees a letter, telling them | “‘yes’’ vote for strike would virtua guarantee a strike. The company could only have € e pected that its latest action, taken at time when contracting-out of logging! one of the most explosive issues negotiations, would trigger the walkout | One of the central employer conces |) . sion demands is for elimination from U® | coast master contract of the ‘‘Billings let ter’, a longstanding memorandum of agreement made between the IWA and4 |, former FIR chairman, under which U* employers agreed not to hire subcontraee tors. AL Employers claim that the change is) necessary to allow ‘‘flexibility”’ and would not mean much change but wood |) workers have only to look to the indu in the Interior where hundreds of IWA | jobs have been lost to non-union contra® tors. The Interior IWA contracts do no! contain the same protection fro™ || — contracting-out. 4] The IWA has dismissed as “‘wind a |) — b.s.”? company arguments that contra® | ting out would not affect their membelS: |) “1 think the employers ... should realize they are telling us that they wl destroy any job security we now through this contracting-out kick they’ t | on,” said IWA regional vice-preside™ Bob Blanchard. Phone 251-1186 PACIFIC TRIBUNE—OCTOBER 5, 1983— £