FEATURE

ccording to Labour Minister
Lyall Hanson, the Industrial
Relations Act will be pro-
claimed into law next week.
With proclamation comes a
new era of labour relations in B.C., cer-
tain to be recorded as a period of rag-
ing class struggle.

That is so because the new Industrial
Relations Act is a step most capitalist
governments have been reluctant to
take in the post-war years. It has elimi-
nated all pretense of neutrality in
labour relations and placed the state
firmly in the employer camp, ready to
intervene in any dispute. Any labour
dispute can now become a political bat-
tle with the government.

The new Act is there to be used.
And with proclamation the govern-
ment’s agenda moves from the policy
stage to implementation. The premier
and his ministers have been candid
enough on what that agenda is: to
weaken trade unions decisively and to
enforce a “labour peace” while employ-
ers de-unionize and drive down stand-
ards for those remaining under collective
agreements. Already, Building Trades
unions expect demands from the Con-
struction Labour Relations Association
to re-open the collective agreement ty
before the master contract expires next
May 1. The aim is to secure new con-
cessions, on the threat of using the pro-
visions of the new Act to de-unionize.

Following the Industrial Relations
Act, the government is ready to
implement its next major initiative,
already prepared. Across-the-board
privatization of government services
and Crown corporations is being care-
fully planned and made ready for
sweeping measures likely to be brought
down this fall or winter. Privatization
will be public-sector union busting, and
a lucrative opportunity for private
acquisition by the investors the Socreds
are courting.

This process will be greatly facili-
tated by a free trade deal with the U.S.,
which is the third main objective of the
Vander Zalm government.

For the trade union movement, the
proclamation of the Industrial Rela-
tions Act means that the government
and employers have loaded weapons
that dramatically increase the risks
involved for labour in the inevitable
confrontations over the Socred agenda.
Until now the labour movement has
been engaged in political protest over
Bill 19 with little or no consequences
for unions or union members.

Under the terms of the Industrial
Relations Act strikes will be broken,
certifications will be lost by IRC rul-
ings, unions will be sued for damages
in the courts, and employers will fire
workers for any failure to abide by the
Act’s provisions. Brian Smith’s ill-fated
attempt to silence all protest under the
threat of seditious conspiracy charges
show how far this government is pre-
pared to go.

B.C.’s labour movement faces a new
era more challenging than any pre-
vious. Unions have fought without
legal nghts before, and the labour
movement was built in the struggle to
secure a measure of union security.

But for almost 50 years trade union
battles have taken place within the con-
text of a legal framework — one that
still gave the edge to the employer but
recognized the existence of unions. The
Industrial Relations Act has a different
objective: to limit and eliminate unions
in B.C. And that is why for the first
time, the trade union movement is pre-
paring to defy not just an aspect of the
law, but the entire state mechanism for
labour relations.

nce Ken Georgetti and Cliff
Andstein declared to anti-Bill
19 rallies that labour would
not accept the provisions of
the Industrial Relations Act,
trade union strategists have been pre-
paring plans for a boycott of the appa-
ratus to administer that law, the
Industrial Relations Commission.

There are two general purposes
behind the boycott tactic. The first is
based on the assessment that unions
will lose the vast majority of decisions
taken by the commission. Many deci-
sions will be unacceptable and will have
to be defied in any event, but the ability
of the union to do that may be com-
promised by participating in the unfair
process before the IRC.

So the boycott tactic makes it clear
to the union membership that they will
have to rely on their organized strength
and not expect justice under the law,
and it makes it clear to employers that
the union will take direct action when
necessary to defend its members..

The campaign’s second objective is
intensely political. The boycott chal-
lenges the legitimacy of the govern-
ment’s labour legislation and leads to
certain confrontation when the
government seeks to enforce the Act’s
laws. That confrontation may reach
unprecedented proportions, and with
close to 75 per cent of the public
opposed to the Industrial Relations
Act, the possible political crisis could
force the government to restore trade
union rights.

These objectives have underpinned
the wide ranging discussion in the
labour movement over the scope of the
boycott. All sorts of options have been
considered, from a total boycott to a
partial boycott. Although the B.C.
Fed’s executive council has not yet
determined the scope of the boycott,
there is a growing consensus that it
makes little sense to draw artificial lines
through the Act or the IRC-machinery.
It is the whole Industrial Relations Act,
from its statement of principles to its
redefinition of unfair labour practices,
to the sweeping powers of Commis-
sioner Ed Peck, which labour c can’t
accept.

here is also a strong consen-
sus that the boycott must be
implemented tactically. The
B.C. Teachers’ Federation,

j for example, has to re-
organize its membership and secure
certification as of Jan. 1, 1988 before it
can join the boycott. There will be
other cases where decisions will have to
be made by the trade union leadership
concerning things like certifications,
and “Section 7” applications, in which
members charge a union or union offi-
cial with failure to represent them.

But its in the field of collective bar-
gaining that the more difficult tactical
problems are faced. The Industrial
Relations Act requires unions to notify
the IRC upon commencing bargaining,
and failure to do so makes the whole
bargaining process illegal from that

point.

The expected flash sent will be
when Ed Peck enters the scene, usually
to appoint a mediator. In the event that
a decision is made to boycott, the IRC
will file its order in the court and it
then has the force of a court order.
Failure to comply puts the union in
contempt of court. That presents
labour the choice of compliance or a
show-down with the government and
the courts. The tactical question is
whether that show-down comes on
ground selected by the labour move-
ment or by the government.

'
|

6 e PACIFIC TRIBUNE, JULY 22, 1987