Briefly, this is Dean Perry’s ‘package’ for us. We get a wage in- crease of sixteen cents an hour across the board over a two-year period; an additional week’s vacation after twenty years’ service; fuller medical coverage in the agreement with portability and lay- off coverage identical with our Health and Welfare Plan and im- proved seniority provisions. Please note that the ‘package’ does not include such employers’ proposals as increased board rates, and lowered wage rates for a number of categories. Every single member of the Policy Committee had hoped for more generous terms. The point is whether we can toss this ‘pack- age’ away and take the gamble that we might or might not get a better one. I use the word ‘gamble’ advisedly because I firmly believe that our Union should not gamble with the welfare of our members and their families. It’s a real gamble, because if we reject this settle- ment we must make a fresh start in negotiations which were already deadlocked. At the same time, we must use all our economic strength to bring the operators back to the bargaining table. Both concilia- tion and mediation are over. Think of the steps we must take if we reject it. There’s only one step—a government strike vote—probably supervised. In this vote you will be asked to approve strike action. Many of you have said that you don’t want to commit the Union to strike action this year. Some have said that they are preparfed to go the limit for a better settlement. That is your choice, but the Policy Committee decided that this would be an unwise gamble under the circumstances. We must take a careful look at the situation in which we would find ourselves. Let me say that it is easy to talk loudly about our militancy. It is not so easy to ask for common sense. Before we com- mit our Union to a course which may lead to a long and bitter strike, we must remember the cost to our families. Some of our members argue that if we reject this settlement and then back it up with a solid strike vote (eighty per cent or better would be required), we would be able to negotiate a better settle- ment. I cannot agree. The Pulp and Sulphite workers have nego- tiated. with the same employers a wage increase of 342 per cent which raises their basic rate by seven cents an hour, with the same additional week’s vacation after twenty years. We can’t expect to break that pattern without a bitter struggle. Rejection of the present settlement means that we must also take the chance that we may not get a solid strike vote. What then? The employers could then propose a much worse one. Certainly we don’t want to hear them bargaining again for lower wage rates for some categories, and loss of seniority. As we may easily reach such a deadlock, in which we would be forced to strike, we must take into consideration the possibility of a long and bitter fight on the picket lines. We should all think now whether we are likely to get a settlement then that is so much better that it would be worth taking such a gamble. I don’t think so. If you think as I do about the well-being of our people, you will vote ‘Yes’ in support of your Policy Committee’s recommendation to accept the settlement now proposed by Commissioner Perry.” DUNCAN BUSINESS GUIDE LOUTET AGENCIES LTD. INSURANCE AND REAL ESTATE J. Lindsay Loutet Gordon R. Loutet Duncan Lake Cowichan 131 Jubilee St. S. Shore Road HANEY BUSINESS GUIDE ESQUIRE MEN’S WEAR (Graham Mowatt) Complete Stock of Work and Dress Clothing “THE STORE WITH THE POPULAR BRANDS” BRITISH COLUMBIA PORT ALBERNI BUSINESS GUIDE MacGREGOR’S MEN’S WEAR For Everything A Man Wears * WORK, SPORT or DRESS * We Can Afford To Sell The... BEST For LESS! Woodward STORES (PORT ALBERNI) iD. YOUR FAMILY SHOPPING CENTRE SHOP AT WOODWARD’S FOR A COMPLETE SELECTION OF kkk wk KK kK * STAR WORK WEAR ‘UNION MADE’ BY B.C. CRAFTSMEN Your guide to better value STORE HOURS OPEN 9 AM TO 5:30 PM CLOSED ALL DAY MONDAY OPEN FRI. NITE ‘TILL 9 PM PHONE 723-5641 Regional Secretary-Treasurer Fred Fieber said: At this time it is my duty to speak directly and bluntly to my fellow members in the IWA. I warn you against attempts that are being made by some individuals to mislead you as you prepare to vote either for or against the settlement proposed by Commissioner Neil Perry in our dis- pute with the coast lumber opera- tors. The decision is yours to be made in the light of all the facts. I speak, as I do now, in opposition-to mis- representation or distortion of facts. The Policy Committee gave sound reasons for its recommendation that the proposed settlement be accepted. These reasons have since been under attack in a campaign waged inside and outside our Union, and led by the President of our largest Local Union. Although a member of the Negotiating Committee, for reasons that suit his own purposes, he has now chosen to smear the motives of his colleagues on the Policy Com- mittee. I take direct issue with him on certain statements that he is making to members of our Union. I take issue with him on the ground that he is not giving a true picture of the consequences that will follow a vote for rejection. I deny his claim that the Union is in a posi- tion to re-negotiate the dispute with- out commitment to strike action. Anyone who believes that our Union should now take a course leading to strike action should say so without any double talk. I challenge him to allow both sides of the question to be heard when he tries to stir up prejudice against the recommenda- tion for acceptance which was made in an honest endeavour to safeguard the interests of the membership. Suppression of any of the facts is contemptible in the circumstances. It is our duty as members of the Policy Committee to make all the facts known, clearly and accurately, that the entire membership may make their own decisions in their own best interests. I take the posi- tion, on my responsibility as a Re- gional Officer, that nothing should be said or done to hoodwink the members of our Union. If our mem- bers desire to commit the Union to strike action, that is their right, but the issue should be plainly stated in advance. The issue is so vital to the welfare of our members and their families, that every responsible officer is required to subordinate his personal views and ambitions to the good of the whole membership. I know that the terms of settle- ment proposed by Dean Perry are not as generous as the economic position of the industry warrants. We demanded more. We negotiated vigorously for more. Those who now most bitterly attack the Policy Com- mittee’s decision shared responsi- bility for those negotiations. Our Union would not agree to an unsatis- factory compromise with the em- ployers. Dean Perry made his report to the Minister of Labour on his own responsibility. With both con- ciliation and mediation at an end, we are now required to accept or reject definite proposals for settle- ment, without any available proced- ures to compel re-negotiation except a government strike vote. I can readily understand that many are disappointed. We must ask ourselves—where do we go from here? Will those steps that we can now take make certain of a better deal? If there is no such certainty, are we justified in tossing away the settlement in hand to gamble for ACCEPTANCE URGED ON PERRY RE what we are not likely to get? In any such gamble, I ask you to re- member that we would be gambling with the well-being of the workers in our industry. Should we take such a gamble, when we do not hold the right cards? The vital questions are: What is the next step after rejection? Will this step assure us of a better deal. Rejection would leave us without any means of re-opening negotiations at the time. It is altogether too naive to expect the employers to accom- modate us. The only possible step is a strike vote, supervised by the government. On the ballot you would be asked to vote “yes” or “no” in answer to the question, “Do you favour a strike?” Let us think our way through about the possible results. Some members of our Union have said that they don’t want a strike this year. Others are prepared to go the limit. A strike vote would commit us to one of two positions. One possibility is that a majority of the members would vote for strike action. An effective strike vote should indicate that at least eighty per cent of the membership are pre- pared to strike if necessary. Only then could the employers be persuaded to come back to the bar- gaining table. Then what? Negoti- ations that have been constantly deadlocked would start from scratch. The employers have always op- posed any substantial wage increase. We might easily wind up defending something like the present settle- ment. ; The same employers have been negotiating with the Pulp and Sul- phite Workers. Our companion Union in the forest products indus- try is recommending a wage settle- ment of a 3% per cent increase or seven cents on their base rate, to- gether with the same additional week’s vacation after twenty years. It is not difficult to imagine how stubbornly the employers will oppose a better deal for their employees in the woodworking section of the in- dustry. We must consider the further pos- sibility that we would remain dead- locked in the present position. The Union would then be compelled to act on the mandate of the member- ship and call a strike. We have never backed away from a fight, but with so much at stake, we can’t get reckless about taking the employers on in what would probably be the longest and bitterest fight in our history. We should ask ourselves first—what do we stand to gain? Any strike must finally be settled on terms determined by the success or failure of the strike. It’s always a gamble that the final settle- ment will be worth the sacrifices im- posed by a strike on our families. Let’s face realities. Would a strike this year be so successful that we could force a settlement so much better than the present one that it would be justified? There is another possibility. We have no crystal ball to tell us whether the members of the Union are prepared to strike. Our most reliable reports from the Local Unions indicate that opinion is di- vided on this issue. We can’t discount the possibility that the Union might not get a solid strike vote. We would then give every advantage to the employers. In their present mood they might be expected to propose a worse settlement. Even if they went along with Commissioner Perry, which would be doubtful, they would we » certainly renew their demar * such contract changes as iner board rates, loss of seniority rights 4 and cuts in wage rates for a “ic of categories. Jos There is a third possibility which should not be overlooked or played down. We could, if we so vote, accept the present proposed settle ment. We should take a good look at it before we vote to reject it, In this proposed settlement we can get a wage increase of sixteen cents over a period of two years. We can have an additional week's vacation after twenty years of con- tinuous service, making it four weeks’ vacation for a large number of our members. We are also given a chance to Negotiate extended vacations for those with less than twenty years’ service. We can have fuller medical cover. age, written into the Master Agree- ment, with portability, lay-off cover- age and administration identical with our Health and Welfare Plan negoti- ated last year. We can have improved seniority provisions as well as other contract improvements, We can stop the attempts of the employers to increase board rates, and alter the status of production workers. These items in the package repre- sent substantial gains for all the workers in the industry, and should not be described as entirely negli- gible. Let the employers reject the settle- ment proposed by Commissioner Perry if they dare. If they do so, the fight is on. The whole situation will change with the advantages on our side. We are now in the dark about their intentions. We are not playing for marbles, We must make each move with thought for the moves which follow, If we reject the proposed settlement, we must consider all alternatives with the possible effects on our family budgets. I have tried to spell out the al- ternatives which will follow rejec- tion. These alternatives should have your careful consideration now be- fore you vote. I deplore the fact that certain members of the Policy Com- mittee are not spelling these alterna- tives out for the membership in some quarters of the Union. I can assure you that the members of the Policy Committee gave long and careful consideration to every possibility of getting a better settle- ment. The majority would not pre- tend that they were magicians, able to work miracles in negotiating with the employers. Their views were based on down-to-earth considera- tion of action that would in the end bring the best possible results for the membership. Again, I suggest that you make your decision only after you have considered all the facts I have men- tioned. Make your decision in your own right, and not on the say-so of anyone who may have an axe to grind. When all the pros and cons are weighed in the balance, you will agree with me that the practical and common-sense course is to vote for acceptance as recommended by your Policy Committee. Otherwise you risk the gains already made by our Union. I urge you to do the same. Vote according to your conscience with the same motives. I believe that you will then vote “Yes” to accept the settlement recommended by your Policy Committee. TED MAHER’S OWN CHOICE— t PIONEER SUPER 6.20 =n’ PIONEER’S = NEW FORM in woodcutting Duwaceut chain [er WESTERN PIONEER CHAIN SAW SALES 328 Carrall St., Vancouver 4, B.C. Phone: MU 4-18 a :