Pe ae ee

}E 28 is the deadline. All
oo” unemployment
He a benefits cease on that
anadi lefenbaker’s boast that “no
Ei an shall suffer through un-

Yment”’

ewe

e .

A k €xtension of ‘“supplemen-
y benefits,

and his government’s

= amount to so much
ai
‘up the flue.

Noth:
thing has been solved. The

Prom; :
sed jobs program has not

Aterial; 3
; lized, Potential markets in

na .
and other countries have

thy aseically brushed aside.
Mite . the middle of summer,
Mia: Statistical juggling to the
th Y, we still have well over

tee,
u Ses aes

Moths atters of a million jobless
ets,

*

Mon

the a ago this paper placed

Netents oe squarely: Not “sup-

Me hale, ©Xtensions for which
alf 9

Ae the country’s jobless
hen Qualify under an Unemploy-

is murance Act designed to do

t Homes i
benef at, but jobless insurance
8 to ey

* Untit ery unemployed work-

Metatiy. or she again finds re-
the . employment. And in
ton ee, government construc-
Ug 4 J€cts and government poli-
ih, “*tend markets to provide

sein Short of that is playing
"Ligh ty politics with the plight
li Workers and their fami-
ij emned to a sub-standard
tk ® charity handouts.

en Whose struggles during
ie Sty Thirties paved the way

Une
Iy . Ployment insurance fought
1 My, P*nciple of unemployment

ey Payable to all workers

cific Tribune

-?
he MUtual 5-5288

‘1, aj
: Ny, °' — TOM McEWEN

“Agin, :
~  * Editor — HAL GRIFFIN

Subscription Rates:
ere Year: $4.00
1X months: $2.25

Pon);
1; Ublishea weekly at
§ 426 Main Street
‘Ncouver 4, B.C.

thy tna
| nah en and Commonwealth
(iy Year, ,XCePt Australia): $4.00
oth UStralia, United States

er countries: $5.00 one

| year,

Benefits for all jobless

from the termination of one job to
the start of another, regardless of .
“season.”

*

Organised labor must take up
this struggle in earnest to win for
its growing army of jobless mem-
bers ‘“‘portal to portal” jobless
benefits.

As part of this struggle organised
labor must also mount a campaign
to remove the gimmicks from the
present Unemployment Insurance
Act which deprive thousands of
jobless workers of the benefits they
have paid for and are entitled to.

Such a campaign might also serve
to impress upon the Diefenbaker
government the urgency of the need
of construction and trade policies,
which would produce jobs rather
than “promises” and frothy dema-
gogy, neither of which substitute

for pay envelopes.

k EDITORIAL PAGE.

HE participation of the Soviet

jet air liner TU-104 in the Cen-
tennial Air Show during the past
weekend was a welcome event, mark-
ing as it did a growing Canadian-
Soviet friendship despite the hang-
overs of U.S.-inspired cold war
policies.

While some of this was in evi-
dence, as for instance in the abor-
tive attempt of a handful of Hun-
garian immigrants to stage an anti-
Soviet demonstration and in the
biased “news” coverage by staff
writers of both the Province and

the Sun, there was no doubt where
the interest of the more than 100,-
000 citizens who visited the Cen-
tennial air show was centred. The
TU-104 stole the show.

Staff writers on Vancouver's
monopoly daily press, undoubtedly
infected by the cold war political
atmosphere of their respective jour-
nals, had much to say on the “dress”
of the TU-104 captain and crew, of
the Soviet jet liner’s cuisine, her

pA eA erry ate

structure, her “hard” riding charac-
teristics. Any word of praise was
grudgingly (but unavoidably) given.

As could have been expected, the
captain of the U.S. Boeing 707 was

reported as considering the TU-104
“obsolete.” What he just couldn’t
understand was why the majority
of Vancouver citizens preferred to
see the TU-104 rather than the
“sleek” U.S, ship.

It is the view of this paper that
all “guest” planes were magnificent
evidences of man’s jet-propelled
conqugest of aeronautics, each a
tribute to the mechanical and scien-
tific genius of the nations producing
them. ;

In terms of numbers and interest
of people preferring to see the TU-
104 rather than the U.S. and British
jets, it could be assumed that the
TU-104 was voted the “best.”

In terms of. knowing how to be-
have when an invited guest is in
one’s home, some of the staff
writers on our daily press leave
much to be desired.

Tom
McEwen

0”: freeborn freedom in a
“tree” world must be kept

free. No two ways about that.

A new miner’s certificate form,
suggested by the provincial de-
partment of mines will want a
lot of particulars from the appli-
cant seeking to qualify for work
in the guts of some coal or hard-
rock mine. His color, race, the
political views of his grand-
father, his religion and so forth.

As a miner his fight for a
decent wage and working condi-
tions never cease. He may swal-
low silica or coal dust. by the
bushel to hasten his departure
from this “free” world, but his
color, antecedents, and his poli-
tics must measure up to “free”
standards.

The bulk of our large mono-
poly concerns today demand like
particulars from prospective em-
ployees. Race, color, religion,
politics, and, “were you ever a
member of the communist party

or other subversive organiza-
tion?”

Just what this has to do with
selling haberdashery, sawing
logs, digging coal or peddling
vacuum sweepers is beyond me,
except that it is rapidly be-
coming standard practice in our
“free”? way of applying for a
job—with a 1-to-50 chance of not
getting it.

At the moment we have some
850,000 or more workers in our
country enjoying “freedom”
from work; not because they
don’t? want to work, but because
in this “free” way of life there
is no work to be had.

This “freedom” to work or not
to work is far superior we are
told, compared to conditions in
Russia or other socialist coun-
tries were everyone is “forced”
to work. “Forced labor,’ our
freedom-loving spokesmen call it,
with no “freedom” to enjoy a
seasonal nine-months spell of
joblessness!

Which brings me to another
product of this precious “‘free-

dom” of our “free’ world, An
old chap of 80 years, who should
know better after such a long
sojourn in this ‘free’ world,
wrote an open letter to Prime
Minister Diefenbaker, comment-
ing on the prime ministers ad-
dress to the recent Canadian
Labor Congress convention, and

opining that he was laying too
much stress on this human
rights and freedoms angle.

this old chap’s letter, carried in
full in the June edition of the
B.C, Senior Citizen says in part:
““... Iam not conscious of ever
having my _ rights _ interfered
with, except the right to work
unless I belong to a labor union
in a closed shop. The most: fun-

Taking a dim view of all such,

damental of human rights should
be the right to work without
being forced to join a union.”

Now there is a lusty blow
struck for “freedom” which
should evoke loud ‘hozannas
from. “freedom - loving” Cham-
bers of Commerce, nuclear arm-
ament manufacturers, true-blue
Tories and the B.C. Building
Contractors and their “free” as-
sociations, currently exercising
their “free enterprise” by lock-
ing thousands of workers out of
their jobs.

Good old George. Just goes
to show that even at 80 years
the “freedom” of our “free”
world strikes a responsive, if
albeit, a flat chord.

First thing you know the trade
unions will be accused of en-
dangering the “freedom” of over
three quarters of a million job-
less to remain jobless. In fact,
so flexible is our “freedom” in
a “free” world that that is ex-
actly what is happening.

June 20, 1958 — PACIFIC TRIBUNE—PAGE 5