‘Job Mart brea Job Mart Publications, the private agency which sells information about job openings to untold number of Lower Mainland jobless, clearly violates the provincial Employment Standards Act, a hearing at the ministry of labor’s Employment Standards Branch office in Burnaby was told Tuesday. While representatives of labor and the unemployed action centre looked on, three witnesses for the labor ministry related how they had paid a $50 fee for a list of job open- ings that they later found were mainly duplications of classified ads carried daily in local newspapers. Absent from the proceedings, called after Job Mart appealed an earlier ruling that found the company in violation of Section 76 of the Act, was Job Mart proprietor Trevor Maddern, whose name has also been linked with Canadian Homelocators, a ren- tal agency that sought to circumvent a city bylaw during the worst period of the housing crisis in Vancouver. The selling of jobs or information about job openings is illegal under Section 76 of the Act. The employment standards branch board — consisting of labor representatives Doug Evans of the International Wood- workers and Cy Stairs of the Building Trades Council, labor relations consultant David Ritchie, Victoria lawyer Gertrude Friesen, retired farmer Oscar Austring and chaired by ministry of labor employee Jim Edgett — is expected to give its ruling within a week of the hearing. Job Mart is guilty not only of contraven- ing the Act, but of the deceptive practice of selling recycled information under the claim that the agency represents the employers named in Job Mart’s lists of job openings, according to the case put before the board by labor ministry lawyer James Ramsey. Cathy Karpes, a young high school graduate who holds two part-time jobs, testified that she contacted Job Mart after reading an ad in the new Westminster Col- ~ umbian listing ‘‘about 10types of jobs.’’ She said she paid Job Mart’s $50 fee after talking with manager Glen Hamilton, and was given a list of openings ‘‘on about 20 pages.” Karpes said she wrote down about six ad- dresses and contacted all the potential employers. No one granted her an interview “and some said they had no idea who Job Mart was.”’ After approximately 142 months of phoning the agency “‘every other day’”’ and using the job lists, she came to realize that the same openings were available in the help wanted section of the Vancouver Sun. Some jobs on Job Mart’s list gave as contact ad- dress a box number in the Sun office, she ad- ded. Karpes, who had been told that Job Mart “would do all the looking-(for jobs) for me,”’ then filed a complaint with the Better Business Bureau. The bureau referred her to the ministry of labor, and, after filing her complaint, she received a refund ‘‘about one week later.”’ Another high school graduate, Carolyn Fee, also became aware of Job Mart through a Columbian ad. But after her pay her $50 next week. fee, she found that instead of the job classifications ‘listed in the advertisement, Job Mart’s list offered mainly ‘sales jobs and phone soliciting.” Fee, who was seeking secretarial work, found no jobs through the agency and, after filing a complaint with the labor ministry, also received a refund. Damian Power, a 37-year-old part-time worker with experience in photo lab work, film sound recording and mining read about Job Mart in a West Ender ad. He found one job opening through Job Mart’s list, although the employer ‘‘didn’t seem to understand when I mentioned I’d learned of the job through Job Mart.”’ Power had to turn down the subsequent job offer — general laborer — because of a scheduling conflict with night classes. But he continued to use Job Mart’s services, finding no other offers, until February, when he overheard a Job Mart worker inform a pro- spective client that the $50 was refundable if the applicant was unsuccessful in finding work. Power had to turn down the subsequent job offer — general laborer — because of a scheduling conflict with night classes. But he continued to use Job Mart’s services, finding no other offers, until February, when he overheard a Job Mart worker inform a pro- spective client that the $50 fee was refun- ‘dable if the applicant was unsuccessful in finding work. Power was told he was not eligible for are- fund because he paid his fee in mid- December, before the alleged refund policy was effected. He complained to the Better Business bureau and the ministry, and short- ly after his money was refunded. Power had also noticed ‘‘on several occa- sions, that the jobs were the same as those listed in the Sun and the Province.’’ Ron Dixon, industrial relations officer with the labor ministry who had conducted an investigation of the agency, told Ramsey his office has received 26 complaints regar- ding Job Mart. In summarizing his case, Ramsey also _noted that the ‘magazine’ Job Mart publishes was only available to clients ‘in a haphazard manner”? — Power noted he received a copy only after using Job Mart’s service for one month — and that there were June 25. $45,000 needed — 3 weeks left The financial situation is still a bit too tight for comfort, we must remind our friends and supporters, as we near the home stretch in our 1983 press drive. So far $39,994.48 has come in, which still leaves a hard-to-ignore gap between the target and what has been achieved. We ask everyone to make that extra effort — ask your friends fora donation, and don’t forget Tribune fund-raising socials and the Burke Mountain Labor Festival Sunday — so that we can all drink a toast to our success at making the “‘spirit of 85,000” come alive at the biggest Tribune social — the Victory Banquet (for which tickets are now available) on Target: $85,000 EMPLOYMENT STANDARDS BRANCH BOARD | LABOR_ law,’ hearing told . ruling on Job Mart expected no issues published after ‘‘Vol. 1, No. 1,” which Ramsey submitted as evidence. Although the agency carries a Vancouver business licence listing it as a publisher, ‘‘n fact, the magazine is nothing more than an ad brochure,’’ Ramsey contended, ‘‘and there is no connection between that publica- tion and daily newspapers such as the Sun and Province.” Job Mart lawyer Gerald Martin had con- tended that the ‘“‘magazine’’ — a collection of brief articles on job hunting — was as in- nocent or guilty as the daily papers, which charge a subscription or news stand price. Martin showed up to represent Job Mart even though Maddern had that morning delivered to the board documentation in his defence with an accompanying letter stating that the agency would not seek to represent itself at a “press conference.’’ Several televi- sion, radio and newspaper reporters were present. The lawyer tried unsuccessfully,-during two recesses granted at his request, to reach Maddern by telephone, and was also re- jected in his bid to have the hearing adjourn- ed until. Martin could gather rebuttal witnesses (the board reminded Martin that Job Mart had been informed of the appeal date Apr. 18). He subsequently withdrew from the case, citing a lack of ‘‘competent instructions’ from Maddern. Ramsey told the board it was ‘‘clear that the agency violates Section .76”’ and called the publisher status claim ‘‘a visible attempt to evade”’ the section of the Employment Standards Act. If the board confirms the initial ruling against Job Mart — which is not registered under any name with the B.C. Registrar of Companies — the agency must either ‘“‘come into compliance’’ ‘with the Employment Standards Act or face possible prosecution in provincial court. The branch may also decide to order a refund of all fees charged by Job Mart. The agency, which has offices in Australia, the United States and Canada, has come under fire in several cities for its practices. The Vancouver and District Labor Council’s unemployed action committee, several of whose members were present at the appeal hearing, pickets the Vancouver office every Friday.. Maddern’s name was linked by the Tribune in a recent article with the Calgary office of Canadian Homelocaters, a com- pany which for years made money from thousands desperately seeking rental accom- modation. Lower Mainland tenant activists also recall dealing with Maddern. Vancouver city council has scheduled a hearing for June 14, at which Job Mart must “show cause’? why its business licence should not be suspended or revoked. dian Association of Industrial, Socred axe sharpened Continued from page1 B.C. Fed president Jim Kinnaird strov’ to minimize disunity by seeking clos# relations among affiliates and nom affiliates. The Building Trades have continued! work closely with the federation — some unions pay per capita to a special fund — and some other non-affiliates including the Hospital Employees’ Union, the B.C: Teachers Federation and the B.C. Nursé Union have worked with federation com: mittees, making their participation in thé conference likely. Whether the Confederation of Can@ dian Union affiliates, some of which havé raided federation affiliates, would take part is a question mark. But at least thre major CCU unions — the Pulp, Pap# and Woodworkers of Canada, the Cana" Mechanical and Allied Workers and thé Canadian Association of Smelter and Allied Workers in Kitimat — are in thé midst of tough bargaining and ul doubtedly, both those unions and thé federation would be strengthened by the! participation. ~ ; The urgency of co-ordinated actiol has been underscored by the number of major contracts expiring this spring 1 which employers have sought a wagé freeze or wage rollbacks for the unioni work force. That employers’ drive has coincided with threats by the Socred government to put more restrictions 0? labor including a wider strike ban and more restraint. The demand for a first year wage freeze in a three year pact was put on thé table this week by the Pulp and Paper In- dustrial Relations Bureau, echoing thé same demand advanced by Forest In- dustrial Relations at talks which opened last month with the International Wood- workers of America. Cominco has demanded that 5,500 steelworkers in Trail eliminate thell COLA clause in current contract talks and Alcan has not moved in bargaining since CASAW members in Kitimat r& jected a company offer that included 4 three-month wage freeze. In the public sector, some 15,000 workers in the Greater Vancouvél Regional District have seen no change # the employers’ demand for a wage freez® even though their contract expired # April. igs In all, some 140,000 workers will bé |, coming up for bargaining this year. Among them will be nearly 40,000 members of the B.C. Government Employees’ Union whose contract e% pires in October. Even before it come up, government workers will face thé restraint axe of thé Socred government which was being sharpened by the new provincial cabinet meeting in thé Okanagan this week. : The clear indication from that meeting is that the Socreds will seek to wield thet! increased mandate both to increase thé duration of public sector wage controls and to drive down wage levels even ful ther. Program cuts are also in the offing» increasing the threat of layoffs. The government has already stated that changes in labor code are imminent and those are likely to include incr restrictions on the right to strike and picket. : —@ maa a ( —‘TRisUNE —) Published weekly at Suite 101 — 1416 Commercial Drive, Vancouver, B.C. V5L-3X9 Phone 251-1186 1am enciosing: 1 yr. $14] 2yrs.$250 6mo.$8( Foreign 1 year $15 Bill me fater (1 Donation §............ READ THE PAPER THAT FIGHTS FOR LABOR Sie LF SS LY LF LS LP LT LD LE LED LE ES LP EF : : PACIFIC TRIBUNE—JUNE 3, 1983—Pag® wv 2 , Add Uc 8 er ey re eS ae N s N Ls