Labour

By FRANK COX

Labour day, it seems, is an opportunity
taken by labour leaders to offer up some
analysis of the state of the labour movement
in the world today and to project the main
priorities ahead. Such reflection are timely
as the labour movement faces a rapidly
changing global political and economic
reality and the increasingly voracious bite of
neo-conservatism at home. Two such con-
tributions I have seen this labour day are
noteworthy for quite different reasons.

In an article in the Sept. 1 Globe and
Mail, Canadian Labour Congress president
Shirley Carr sets out to situate the Canadian
labour movement with its policies and ob-
Jectives within the context of continental
and global economic developments and to
highlight implications for Canadian labour.

She starts by recounting the period prior
to the mid-Seventies when, relatively speak-
ing, workers in advanced industrialized
countries enjoyed fuller employment, im-
proving social programs, and an expansion
of the scope of collective bargaining and
workers rights.

But “today, that has changed,” she says.
“The dominant neo-conservative orthodoxy
holds that full employment, the welfare state
and strong unions undermine growth and
competitiveness.The role of government in
the economy and society has been rolled
back. Privatization, deregulation and pro-
motion of so-called free markets are the
order of the day.”

“Sharply divergent national labour stan-
dards in competing countries”, and the abil-
ity of capital to be “much more mobile ...
free to flow unimpeded to countries where
costs are lower and retums higher” are iden-
tified in the statement as factors that, togeth-
er with other global economic develop-
ments, have a severe impact on labour’s
bargaining power.

Three main goals are identified for the
labour movement ’to meet the challenges
ahead.

First, “to build a more productive econ-
omy that can compete in global markets
without reducing wages, working condi-
tions and social standards to the lowest com-
mon denominator.” Carr argues that high-

_ What direction after Labour Day?

Labour Forum

wage, high-productivity jobs are not readily
available to replace the jobs lost to low-wage
imports and reiterates CLC policy in urging
the development of training programs with
input from labour to “move towards a more
productive, globally competitive economy.”

Second: “To achieve the degree of insula-
tion from global market forces and unres-
tricted international competitive pressures
that is necessary to maintain an advanced
standard of living ... Canadian labour can-
not-and will not- accept competition that
degrades wages and working conditions to
the level of the lowest-cost producer in the
global marketplace ... Canada must retain
the economic sovereignty required to build
a more diversified, stable and productive
economy. The activities of multinational
corporations must be made to serve the in-
dustrial development needs of our regions
and communities.”

Third: “To take action on a global basis
to regulate the international economy in the

Strike at B.C. Rail

Rail worker Charanjit Sdhese maintains picket outside B.C. Rail’s yard at
Capilano in North Vancouver (see Labour Notes, page 2).

GEORGETTI (1), CARR ... two different Labour Day messages.

interests of workers every where.” Carr asks:
“ Why should labour alone be excluded from
the protection afforded by an intemational
standard?”

“Going beyond minimum labour stand-
ards, Canadian labour is committed to secur-
ing concerted international action to prevent
an erosion of wages, working conditions and
social programs to the lowest common de-
nominator. Indeed, Canada should be at-
tempting to bring about upward harmoniz-
ing — a general raising — of labour
standards to the level in place in the most
advanced economies.”

The statement concludes by stating:
“That objective — united international ac-
tion to defend the interests of all workers —
is what Labour Day is all about.”

It could be justifiably argued that the
statement from Shirley Carr reflects still a
willingness to accommodate to continental
and global economic restructuring to the
extent that training programs take a higher
profile than any fighting program to stop
plant closures and a failure to clearly reject
global market competitiveness as an ac-
ceptable criterion for economic organiza-
tion.

Other weaknesses can be identified in the
statement such as the lack of recognition of
the environmental crisis facing the world, or
the rising movement everywhere for grass
roots democracy, or the fight for a people
oriented constitutional process in Canada
that recognizes aboriginal title and the right
to self-determination and the right of self
determination for the Quebec nation.

On the whole, however, the statement
reflects the sharpening of debate such as was
evidenced at the last CLC convention, dem-
onstrating in my opinion a growing aware-
ness of the array of political and economic
forces that face the trade union movement
and a determination to find effective ways to
defend the interests of working people here
and elsewhere.

The Labour Day message from Ken
Georgetti, president of the B.C. Federation
of Labour sets a somewhat different tone,
opening with: “Labour Day of 1990 is a
holiday on which working people in B.C.
can take pride in what-we have accom-
plished so early in this new decade. We have
been faced with some very tough challenges
from experienced adversaries in both in-
dustry and government, but we’ve worked
hard for positive solutions in which all Brit-
ish Columbians can share.”

He recounts that workers were told to
choose between a sound environment and
jobs. Instead this was rejected and the labour

movement opened up discussion among
environmentalists, Native leaders, commu-
nity leaders and some“ enlightened business
representatives, "with the goal of making
B.C. ... an environmentally sound and pros-
perous province in which we can all live."

The statement notes that we are faced
with the “devastating Goods and Services
Tax,” recalls labour’s opposition to it and
declares: “Again, we need action to make
sure taxes are made fair and everyone, in-
cluding the wealthy and big business, all pay
their share.”

Confrontational actions of government
leaders are recalled, including the imposi-
tion of the “clumsy and unnecessary” Bill
79, as well as the failure of this government
to deal with pay equity and engage in serious
negotiations with the aboriginal peoples of
this province.

The statement then gives the following
assurance: “On all of these issues, we did not
rise to the bait — confrontation is not our
style. Instead, we tried to work with inter-
ested parties to get positive solutions that we
can all live with.

“However,” it continues, “the problems
still remain because government and busi-
ness leaders have chosen not to listen to us.
That must change. The challenge remains:
governments and business must join with us
and resolve the main concerns of the econ-
omy, the environment, women, Natives and
a host of others.”

Referring to the next 12 months of what
Business Council president Jim Matkin has
agreed will be the most intensive bargaining
period since 1983, suggests: “It will be an
opportunity for all of us to ensure economic
stability and growth for B.C. in a climate of
social and economic justice.

“However,” he says,"that means that
negotiations must be conducted equitably
and fairly — not through confrontation."

He winds up stating: “Our record in the
union movement shows that we have and
will continue to negotiate reasonably.”

The question comes to my mind whether
this statement can actually reflect the views
of someone who attended the last CLC con-
vention, or represent the views of an or-
ganization that last year setup the committee
to fight free trade, defended affiliates facing
increasingly aggressive employers, and is
currently preparing for a conference addres-
sing some of the crucial issues referred to by
Shirley Carr.

Is an over-emphasis on a “non-confron-
tational” approach appropriate in the com-
ing period of negotiations at a time that
employers are armed with anti-labour legis-
lation and a continental and national econ-
omic restructuring plan? Or at a time when
postal workers are calling for support from
the labour movement in anticipation of a
massive assault by Canada Post against their
union and union rights?

Is Bill 79 just “clumsy and unnecessary”
or is it the extension of anti-labour legisla-
tion and a form of wage controls?

Serious debate at the CLC convention
earlier this year equipped that organization
with both an analysis of the situation facing
the labour movement and the program to
combat it.

The B.C. Fed’s Labour Day message un-
derlines the urgency of federation affiliates
preparing to ensure that the upcoming con-
vention provides the same vital tools for the
coming year at the provincial level. Direc-
tion from those in daily confrontation with
the economic and social realities of neo-con-
servative policies is obviously needed by the
federation.

Pacific Tribune, September 10, 1990 « 3

a

einen scien

i A ai nA

TR

ieenctadansilnics as

ile