=

J

arte se fe

10

THE WESTERN CANADIAN LUMBER WORKER
SEE EI FS oY ERTS

a most glaring example. Claimants are ex-
pected to travel from Kelsey Bay and Gold
River to Victoria, a distance of 250 miles, to
appear before a Board of Referees. New
Westminster serves the Fraser Valley to
beyond Hope, so the same circumstances
prevail. The end result is that many ap-
pellants are prevented from making a per-
sonal appearance. It is our position that
appearance in person before the Board is of
paramount importance.

We suggest that the services of a Board of «

Referees be available to hear appeals of

Claimants who live in distant places. This

could be accomplished by creating more

Boards or by creating travelling Boards. of

Referees, the latter being the most logical.
ELDERLY WORKERS

We are concerned about the plight of many
of our elderly workers, who are available and
capable of performing many more years of
satisfactory performance but who are
compelled by company policy, pension
provisions, or other reasons, to retire from
that employment.

This group of workers, and with particular
reference to the age group of 65-70, are
subject to the same tests of availability in
accordance with Regulations 145 (9), ‘‘by
making reasonable and customary hardship
on this group because as we all know, em-
ployers are not at all likely to hire people in
this age group when younger people are
available.

We suggest that there should be estab-
lished a special provision for these people so
that they would be automatically entitled to a

benefit period, directly related to their years .

of employment service.

SICK BENEFITS

If the principle of payment of benefits for
unemployment periods while sick, injured or
in quarantine is to be maintained, then those
advantages should extend to Major Attach-
ment Claimants whose claims have con-
tinued into the extended benefit period, etc.

The present legislation which establishes
eligibility only to those claims in the initial
benefit period, work a hardship on workers
who are employed in an intermittent voca-
tion. (Loggers, construction workers, etc.).
These workers whose claim “year” is already
established are too often caught in the
provision which does not allow payments of
sick benefits in the Extended or Re-Estab-
lished Benefit periods.

We suggest that these restrictive
provisions be removed and the principle
established under the previous Act be estab-
lished in its place.

We take strong exception to the admini-
stration of that section relating to illness,
injury, or quarantine. While there is no objec-
tion to the requirement that a medical certifi-
cate showing proof of illness be produced, we
do disagree with the provision of a Medical
Advisor whose authority. overrides that
certificate.

We understand there is a yardstick called
No. 288 that is used by the Medical Advisor.

The Medical Advisor incidentally is Regional

and National. By the use of this “yardstick”
these Advisors rule that a certain illness, e.g.,
hernia operation, requires or merits a certain
number of weeks’ benefits. After the elapse
of this papuites t time benefits cease.

aaweeey
tween eww

We contend that cases differ for any
serious illness; one individual recovers more
quickly than another so that the attending
doctor’s Certificate should prevail. We fail to
see how a “Medical Advisor’ who never
examines the patient can make a determina-
tion as to how long that patient is required to
be off work.

We suggest that the worker’s own doctor
alone can or should certify as to the period
required for recovery.

- There are a number of aggravating policies
established in the operation of the Act, which
are mostly supported by Regulations which
we Said earlier are in complete contradiction
to the principles and objectives of the Act. We

will briefly enumerate just a few of them.

REGULATIONS 172 and 173

Many problems arise from the implementa-
tion of these Regulations. Provisions con-
tained in these Regulations are most unfair
and detrimental to workers who have a
history of long and industrious service to an
employer.

Long service employees who receive from
their employer separation pay in the sum of,
say, several months’ salary, which they have
earned at a rate of so much time for each year
worked, are most unfairly dealt with. They are
required to refrain from collecting unemploy-
ment insurance benefits until they have used
up this money. That is, they are considered to
be on the payroll of that employer for the
number of weeks required, at their normal
rate of pay, to use up this amount of separa-
tion pay.

Similarly, unemployed workers who have
earned Vacation Pay calculated on a per-
centage basis of wages earned, must also
refrain from collecting Unemployment Insur-
ance benefits until they have exhausted this
Vacation Pay, again allocated to the number
of weeks at their weekly rated pay, required
to use up that amount of money.

Probably the most vicious and aggravating
of these Regulations appears as Regulation
173 (17), which states, and we quote,

“Retroactive increases in salary or wages
shall be Miser to the Weer in which they
are paid.”

This means that a Claimant who_ has
worked several months or any length of time,
while a renewal of a union contract is being
negotiated and who is laid off before a settle-
ment of the contract is achieved, is punished.
It has many times occurred that a worker, in
such circumstances, has been penalized a
week or more of benefit simply because he
was on claim at the time the retroactive wage
was paid.

By all methods of reasoning this retro-
active money was wages that were earned
during his period of employment and by no
stretch of imagination should such money be
applied to curtail his benefit pence:

SECTION 57
This Section legislates against workers
bona fidely employed in forestry, logging and
lumbering.
It is not unusual in the forest products

industry for an employee to have worked less —

than twenty-five (25) days in a year for an
employer.
Working in the forest products industry is

_ prove “unjust dismissal or discharge”. Alte

an occupation from which tens of thousa
of workers derive their living therefo
propose that FORESTRY, LOGGING |
LUMBERING be deleted from the said

57 and made insurable employment elimin,
ing the PRESENT EXCEPTIONS.

PROPOSED LEGISLATION

We have noted that proposed amendmen
to the Act are now before Parliament ai
while our information at this time is ver
limited, we are opposed to amendments tha
will mandatorily disqualify a claiman rts
because he was (a) discharged or (b) he n
voluntarily terminated, and (c) that he mu
be re-employed for eight weeks before he
could qualify for insurance benefits.
We believe this type of restrictive legisla
tion is not needed and will work a hardshj
on thousands of workers. There is no way in
which a large segment of the work force ca

nately, no person should be forced to wo rf
under intolerable conditions. Many example
could be given.

GENERAL :

In general there are a few items the
should be considered. We believe that A
Advisory Boards, such as were in operatio ®)
under previous legislation, served a valuabh
purpose. These Boards met periodically a
acted as a sounding board for both la
and management. We suggest that these be |
again established. The feelings of all!
segments of society could be quickly ’
brought to the attention of U.I.C. authorities |
by the functioning of such committees. The
functions and malfunctions of the Act and it:
administration could be rapidly exposed t
the light and conveyed to the point where.
corrections are necessary they could &
quickly made. 4
We are of the opinion that the whole seri
of Regulations should now be reviewed, wi
the purpose in mind of making a determin
tion, after experience with the use of
whether or not they are serving the purpe¢
intended when such Regulations
devised. ia
We believe that since the Unemployme
Insurance Act is typed as social legislatio
then it should be administered with com

passion. There is too much effort expended |
hewing exactly to the written word, al
forgetting the social aspects that are, A
necessity, inherent in such legislation.
Too many honest, industrious wo
people are completely frustrated and
illusioned under the present administra
practices.

“SUPPORT