"THE WESTERN CANADIAN LUMBER WORKER AUTHORIZED AS SECOND CLASS MAIL, POST OFFICE DEPARTMENT, OTTAWA, AND FOR PAYMENT OF POSTAGE IN CASH. ; Vol. XXXII, No. 14 VANCOUVER, B.C. 5c PER COPY 2nd Issue July, 1965 SPECIAL TOPIC — SPECIAL ISSUE No attempt will be made by the IWA to distribute any issues of The Western Canadian Lumber Worker until the postal strike is settled. The IWA will continue to honour the Postal Workers’ original picket lines, and give the strike full support. At the time of publication, it is not pos- sible to predict when the regular mail service will be fully restored. For this reason, the present issue will deal- exclusively with a - topic which is timely on any mailing date. This preliminary review of some bar- gaining approaches to problems of techno- logical changes was compiled to furnish some starting points for group discussion during IWA educational seminars now planned. No attempt is made to develop any IWA bar- gaining strategy. Membership discussion along general lines of a whole range of con- tract clauses likely to be effected by auto- mation can only help to clarify the final bar- gaining decisions of a Wage and Contract conference. Developments in other industries may or may not appeal to lumber workers in Western Canada. Nevertheless, an examin- ation of what other unions are doing about automation and their contracts will help to crystalize our own ideas. It will also indicate whether we are prepared to accept innova- tions adapted to our own purposes. We can judge whether or not we are keeping step with progress in the whole trade union movement. It is suggested that this issue be kept on hand for reference as membership discus- sion on bargaining and technological change gathers momentum in the next few months. By GRANT MacNEIL IWA Regional Education Director “Iga TIME for down-to-earth thinking about “the unkept promises of automation.” We have been told by employers: “(1) That automation and modern forms of technological change always create more jobs than they eliminate.” This may be true in the long run, but in the long run we’ll all be dead. We know that in the short run, technological change has already displaced countless workers who have not since been placed in satisfactory employment. “(2) That automation (or mechanization) is a slow and evolutionary process.” The truth is that automation, even as we know it today, has already increased the outout per man-hour of labour, with an accelerated trend. As the output per man-hour increases, either the same amount of lumber is produced with fewer workers or more lumber is being pro- duced with the same number of workers. “(3) That automation is upgrading the work force.” Actually, official studies indicate that workers now employed are frequently downgraded. Jobs and skills are being made obsolete. Frequently when the job is upgraded, the em- ployee on the job is downgraded. “(4) That the ordinary functioning of free enterprise will automatically ensure normal employment for everyone.” The sad fact is that management is shirking its responsibilities toward the displaced workers. A blatant disregard is shown for the immediate livelihood and future of these workers. The promised new, permanent jobs have not material- ized or if there are any, they are often far re- moved from the displaced workers. Trade unions have not always been on the target in propaganda dealing with automation. A frank admission of mis-direction is a useful start- ing point in our search for answers. “Automation” has been so carelessly defined that in the minds of many workers it represents only some vague threat in the far distant future. Unions for the most part have talked in vague generalities. We have failed to measure accurately the im- pact of changed production methods now in ef- fect. While we anticipate future and still more revolutionary changes, it is the present fate of groups of displaced workers that requires atten- tion. Many skills and jobs are now being made obsolete. We have been confused by contradictory claims for automation. Fears based on uncer- tainty are rife throughout the work force. As a result, the pressure on our union negotiators is WHERE DOES THE IWA GO FROM HERE? A SEARCH FOR ANSWERS becoming acute, without clarity in specific con- tract demands. ‘Union officials are heard to say, “Something must be done, but we don’t know the answers.” In the area of negotiations, little has been done ‘in comparison with what has been proposed. The trade union movement was the first to express concern about the immediate consequences of automation but has since been largely on the de- fensive. On this continent, contract changes have appeared mainly after production changes have already occurred. One reason is that the main emphasis in bar- gaining has been on wage increases. One labour leader has pointed out the danger: “We’ll find our unions working harder and harder for fewer and fewer workers.” To a great extent the public has been misled by the expansion of production in the lumber ; industry which has disguised the downgrading and actual number of displacements, only tem- porarily retained. As the IWA well knows, any slump in the market would quickly reveal the damaging consequences to large categories of lumber workers. One error has been to suppose that any one single major contract change would remedy the situation. The IWA represents workers of widely diver- sified skills in widely diversified occupations, em- ployed in big and small operations. As a contract in an industrial union is expect-