It is crystal clear from the
budgets and every public policy
pronouncement that capitalist
governments are out to rob the
working people and the poor in
every way they can to bolster
the strength and profits of the
corporations and international
monopolies. It sounds a bit
strange, therefore, to hear UAW
President Leonard Woodcock
say in an interview with the
New York Times (1/28/73):
“There is no big roadblock in
the way to labor peace this
year.”

Taken by itself this statement
would be contrary to what one
_ would expect tc come from a
responsible leader of a big union
about to enter into bargaining
with the giant auto companies
in U.S. and in Canada.

But Woodcock goes further

and joins in the propaganda at-. ©

tack on the poor, the Blacks
and the low income workers. He
is reported as saying that while
he and the UAW are always for
aiding the poor, he claims to
have seen ‘studies’ of welfare
mothers taking grants and sec-
retly working and bringing in
$10,000 a year. This is simply
cowardly double-talk that smells
of betrayal to the class enemy
of the working men and wo-
men, who are supposed to be
Mr. Woodcock’s constituents
’ and whose interests he is sup-
posed to protect.

Discrimination Built-in

Mr. Woodcock admits during
the course of the above. men-
tioned interview that racism is
growing in the UAW, but says
that “he has no ready answers
to this problem.”

The fact is that racism, and
all other’ forms of discrimina-
tion on the job, are built right
into the division of labor and
wage ratings imposed on the
workers by the boss. Certain
workers are always discriminat-
ed against. This set-up produces

racism, elitism and all sorts of.

divisions among the members of
unions whose members are sub-
jected to the system. It grows
more where the leadership of a
union, as in the case of the
UAW,
berately ignores it and tries to
act as if the problem did not

BY BRUCE MAGNUSON

consistently and deli- .

LABOR SCENE Mauss and betrayal

is the road to defeat

exist, or, if ignored, it will sim-
ply go away. The answer to the
problem is to unite the union
membership to fight discrimina-
tion of any sort, to practice a
policy of uncompromising strug-
gle on principle, against any
and all forms of elitism and
practices that set one union
member against another.

Mr. Woodcock knows the

answers to the problems very -

well. He simply chooses to
ignore the real answers in favor
of a deliberate policy of class”
collaboration rather than class
struggle. In fact, he sets out to
divide the membership of the
UAW by ffostering © elitism
among the skilled trades, and
catering to the elitist demands
of certain sections at the ex-
pense of other sections of work-
ers.

Absence of Program

This kind of approach stood
out clearly in Mr. Woodcock’s
speech to the recent conference
of skilled trades in New Or-
leans, where he revived the
ghost of the 1958 profit-sharing.
Speaking as if he possessed un-
limited power of decision in the
matter, Mr: Woodcock issued a
virtual ultimatum to the big
auto monopolies. “Either they
reduce their monstrously high
profit target and reduce their
cost to the consumer,” he said,
“or we should demand they
share those profits on an equit-
able basis.” But neither this
‘demand,’ nor the other neo-
paternalistic demand of making
overtime voluntary as a means
of “humanizing the work place,”
is going to worry the companies
very much in the absence of a
real program to reduce hours of
work, provide raises in pay, end
the speed-up, and a united effort
to achieve such a program.

Big Business is out to, not
prevent gains in this year’s bar-
gaining, but smash all gains
of the past and drive the work-
ers’ standard of living back.

In the face of such an on-
slaught it is obvious that no
section of labor can go. it alone,
or seek temporary advantage at
the expense of other sections of
labor or the poor.

Monopolies Out to Rob

The policy presently pursued

.in the United States, are out to

by Mr. Woodcock and the UAW
leaders is an opportunist policy
that will lead straight into de-
feat and disaster for the auto
workers in their 1973 bargain-
ing,

Mr. Woodcock’s statement
that profit sharing is the most
‘non-inflamatory way to better
the lot of workers” since it
would provide more money only
when the companies could de-
monstrably afford it, is on par
with an assertion in the Toron-
to Star Feb. 8, while dealing
editorially with how to “assure
a decent standard of living.”

“Mm Canada today, the social
problem with which govern-
ments are grappling is that fami-
lies may get more money living
on welfare, or collecting unem-
ployment insurance, than work-
ing for minimum wages.”

The monopolies in Canada, as

rob the working class to main-
tain their profits and to increase
them. Any labor leaders, seek-
ing temporary advantage by
aligning themselves with this
policy at the expense of other
sections of workers, are not only
fooling themselves, but consti-
tute a menace to the workers
‘everywhere, who face an on-
slaught on their living condi-
tions and jobs.

Need Struggle to Win

Both leaders and members of
the UAW ought to give careful
thought to the strategy and tac-
tics which will most effectively
unite the membership behind a
program to advance the: econo-
mic position and power of their.
union as against the profits and
power of the auto monopolies.
If need be, every worker should
be prepared to fight on to vic-
tory, even if this means a strike
in the auto industry.

The point is that labor never
has, and never can, hope to win
any concessions from the boss
without struggle. Conditions in
1973, are not such as to allow
anyone to draw any different
conclusions with respect to col-
lective bargaining. If anything,
those conditions confirm the tra-
ditional need for readiness to
struggle and to sacrifice if any-
thing worth while is to be
gained.

Last week, 400 pickets march-
ed in front of the two gates of
the Acme Screw and Gear plant
in Toronto. The plant, which
management closed because they
said it was unprofitable, now
has two companies operating in
the same building, with the
same machines—Canac Shock
Absorbers Ltd. and Excel Nut
and Bolt Products Ltd.

The picketers, carrying signs
reading “Acme Screws — Canac
Shocks Workers,” were protest-
ing because the union believes
that the former owners of Acme
are the principals in the new com-
panies and are just trying to de-
stroy the union and avoid pay-
ing $1.3 million in benefits owed

All but the name is
same at Acme Screw Lv

“th

to’ the workers whe?
closed. ;

J

Although managemetd
denied that Acme 35 E,
either of the two .
Dennis McDermott, 1
Canadian vice-presia®?
“You have to go t

prous! f

of mental gymnastics a)
up with this, but we'V? 9
and discovered there ® (i
tario company register
name of Excel Bolt a” this
You add the fact that ©
ration is being carne ig!
the Acme premises,
supervision . . . simp ‘i
leads me to believe ita
Screw and Gear.”

Labor

body protests Tr

C union-

By RICHARD ORLANDINI
Members of the Toronto Labor
Council “challanged) what they
called “the retrograde decision
of the Toronto Transit Commis-
sion, changing a 17-year old
policy, which will permit non-
union companies to bid for TTC
contracts.” In an_ executive
board statement the council de-
manded that the TTC action be
rescinded and recommended
that the council protest the
move “in the strongest possible
terms.”

Additional action by the coun-
cil was suggested when an emer-
gency resolution was brought
forward from the Toronto Inter-
national Typographical Union.
The ITU resolution called for a
joint committee of members of
the council and delegates from
the unions affected to present
their demands tc the next meet-
ing of the TTC.

The need for the actions by
the council arose when the TTC
commissioners voted last week
to discontinue using only: union
shops in the bids for contracts.
The commissioners were unan-
imous in their decision and this
most recent attack on organized
labor was led by commissioner
Karl Mallette. Mallette, who
has been an outspoken critic of
labor ever since he was expelled
from the ITU after he scabbed
during the Toronto Daily Star
strike, maintained that the Tran-
sit Commission “had to give
non-union employers a chance.”

Union Busting

The unions most directly af-
‘fected by the: Commission’s at-
tempts at union busting would
have been the printing trades
which produce the TTC publica-
tions and the Amalgamated
Clothing Workers who make the

PACIFIC TRIBUNE—FRIDAY,, FEBRUARY, 23, 1973=-PAGE 8. .

uniforms of the transit workers.

The executive board state-
ment also noted “the decision
also points to the fallacious
practice of appointing political
‘has beens’

patronage.” The statement went
on to demand that the Metro
Council abandon the practice of
appointing Alderman to the TTC,
“whose very narrow perspectives
are compensated by the volume
of their voice.”

Jim Buller, delegate from the
Toronto Typographical Union,
read a letter from his local’s
president to the TTC. The letter

read, in part, “The TTC action

is a retrograde step that could
encourage a return to sweat-
shop conditions,” and the “‘print-
ing of material with a union
label is the only means by which
we can be assured of realistic
fair wage conditions.” The let-

’ to public boards
and commissions as a form of.

ter from the union that expelled
Mallette also made mention of
the scab. “It is a disappoint-
ment to us that the TTC suc-
cumbed to the biandishments of
Mr. Karl Malette. His views of
the unions are- tainted by his
demagogic and opportunistic be-
havior for many years.”

Undermines Workers

Delegate Sam Fox, from the
Amalgamated Clothing Workers,
said that other effective action
was forthcoming from the Transit
workers. Fox went on to quote
the president of the Amalga-
mated Transit Union who said,
“I cannot see a driver who is
asked to buy union-made cloth-
ing off the job being forced to
wear a non-union made uniform.
We also believe union people
should handle union-made
things. And we’ll take this case
to arbitration if necessary,” and

{ (q
“The men might be: vel i
to hand out non-unio? ~ |
and tickets.”

The possibility of t@ 8
against Mallette for 4 “it x
interest was raised bY A
kovitz of the Fur Work og y
is a man expelled by his 0 f
ing his position to ger i ti
the members of Hf ¢
union. What right has asl 8
of this calibre, wh? witty P
placed in a positio? iti
can undermine the CO?” fi y
thousands of workers mee TS
his own ends?” 4 k

The vote on the
tions by the delegat
unanimous acceptanc® ;
the only response from
has been a statement ag f
chairman of the nal h
Frank Jones when hé
hadn’t anticipated th? — <

reactions.”

D
ying 4