-IWA Officials Claim Tha Effort Not Mere Lip Service

Signed editorial appearing

in the February issue of the

B.C. Lumberman, organ of the BCLM.A, and alleging lack of sincerity in professed support of the safety program has caused IWA safety men to wonder if management is pre- paring to abandon the friendly cooperation which has fea-

tured the prograth to date.

In his statemént, Editor Van Perry reports situations, encount- ered by him, where violations of the accident prevention regulations were flagrant. From these ex- periences, he apparently. makes the deduction that the root cause of all such violations of safe procedures stems from the innate perversity of the workers in the industry.

Union Spanked The editorial is more than criti- cal of IWA participation in the! safety program, and says “it is| hard to appreciate why a union button should be permitted to} ‘double’ as a license to threaten life, limb, and working ahility of | others wearing the same button. ‘The implication is that the Union is an obstacle in the way of an

effective safety program.

after serious accidents, but had focussed attention on the steps re- quired to prevent any recurrence of similar accidents. This con- structive attitude, he claimed, had made full cooperation on the job possible.

“Get Tough’

Concern was expressed that a spokesman for the employers, who is well and favorably known for his great personal interest in safety, should now advocate a “get tough” policy toward the Union's members, on the ground that it is their laxity alone which is respon- sible for the defects discavered in the prograin.

It is freely admitted, said the District Secretary, by both labor and management representatives, that the safety program is far from

— 1955

COAST LOCCING AUCIDENTS.

——————

This point of view, as stated in an employers’ publication was dealt with by District Secretary- Treasurer George Mitchell on the Green Gold radio program, March V7.

Union Defended He pointed to the fact that since 1948, the Union has given con- sistent and conscientious support to a safety program, based upon an agreed-upon plan of coopera- tion between management, labor and the Workmen's Compensation Board. He described how the Union had ercised care to ensure that con- flict in any other phase of labor- management relations should not be projected into safety matters. The Union had not persisted, he said, in attempts to “fix blame”

Complaints regarding its exist- ing imperfections should not ob- scure that fact \that progress has been made, with very important results. Any perfectionist may ly spot defects he said, but the only claims made have been in respect of progress, and not per- fection.

Division of Responsibilities

‘The present program is based on the underrstanding gained of the proper division of responsi- bilities in accident prevention. Management is responsible for safety in the maintenance of the premises and equipment, the training of the workers in safe working procedures, and the necessary continued. supervision of working procedures.

The Editor of the B.C. Lumber-

man in describing acts of careles:

Dead...

OCCUPATION: Chokerman EXPERIENCE: 5 or 6 years AGE: 60 Years

The workman, who was normally employed marking logs, wa:

the woods helping: the Cot operator

bring out a tree length log. After

hooking the choker to the log he stook beside the Cat. As the log was

- winched the front end hung up on a tree, Th down a small sapling which struck the workman injuring him fatally. He

was not wearing a Safety Hat.

rear end swung and brought

‘ployer cuts his production costs.

ness or neglect, does not mention to what extent management in these instances had been neligent in supervision or in giving leader- ship ‘to the crews with regard to safety considerations.

Management has always insisted upon the unrestricted right to direct the working force engaged in production. Management must therefore accept full responsibility for the direction of production in such’a manner as to ensure safety. Safe working conditions spell ef- ficient production.

The enforcement of the regula- tions, under-the law, rests with the Workmen's Compensation Board. Labor benefits by such enforce- ment in protection, and the em-

Union’s Responsibility

The Union has recognized that it must uphold safe working pro- cedures. The lives and the work- ing ability of its members are at stake.

It is the proper function of the Union, in respect of accident prevention, to encourage its members to cultivate safe work- ing habits, leading to instinctive compliance with the job require- ments, That IWA members of the safety committees are sincere about this work, would soon be realized by anyone who attends the Union’s safety conferences. The Union is determined that the entire membership shall be enlisted in the effort, and has succeeded in breaking down

aT

t Union

ca

much of the former apathy.

The Editor of the employers’ magazine is on dangerous ground, when he suggests arbitrary action in dealing with an offender.

In the first place, many of the imperfections now to be seen in the safety program stem from long years of neglect. It is not so many years ago that men were regarded as heing expendable, and manage- ment upheld the tradition that it was unmanly to place safety be- fore production demands.

Justice: Vital 7

In the second place, the safety program must rest on considera- tions of justice and fair-play. Be- fore any worker is made to suffer, for any offence under the condi- tions of his employment, proper cause must he proven for any such disciplinary action.

The Union must make its stand for even-handed justice in this re- spect. It is for this reason that protective provisions are written into the contract. These provisions in no way make safety unwork- able, but on the contrary place safety on the only satisfactory basis to gain effective results, The contract stabilizes these results they would not be stabilized by breaching the contract.

‘Threats of drastic penalties will not satisfactorily inculcate the spirit of whole-hearted observance of the safety rul Safety educa- tion, conducted to date, has done far more to inspire men to

work with a deep-rooted regard for the safety code, than any puni- | tive measure proposed or adopted. |

Survey Suggested IWA safety men suggest, that | if the Editor of the employers’ | magazine would make a more} thorough survey of conditions ani all operations, he would in all fair- ss he compelled to reach the

following conclusions

1. Where members of the supervisory staff have under- | stood safety engineering prin- ciples ,and have taken pains to organize cooperation on the job, the accident frequency rates have tumbled.

2. Where members of the supervisory staff have evaded their responsibilities by attempts to shift the blame to the crew

WAVE YOU EVER SEEW'

4 SCMER WORKER, < QRESSED CHKE THIS f

dea caw oawcee PS ORESSED LIKE THE £ —>

members, safety gets shelved.

3. Where the safety program is getting genuine results, care is taken to promote good will and enthusiasm in cooperative relations between labor and management.

4. The program works where both labor and management agree on a proper division of responsibility, and live up to it.

An unsafe habit may be start- ing the very first time you are guilty of an unsafe practice. That first time may not get you into accident trouble, but you're bait- ing the habit trap to catch your- self later.

why tel om

A Word to the Wise; Use

Both Your Eyes.

Undesirable By-Products.

of Industry

OTTO KWOWGETTER ..:;

SOME PEOPLE IT SEEMS STILL HAVE TO BE TAUGHT. |

NOT TO LIFT WITH A STOOP-*

\

f

Perm Cost to lg Days wa

Work follows;

Lumber Const: Trade General Operatio Provinjs Metal miji and Navigati Operati Railroad Light, pq Fishing Coal mii

An accidy interrup| progres

might ré damage ( output.

4 Compensiji

Accident,’

The pra duty, a mr sity and attainmey.

BRI

WORKMEVS COMA

~ | BUT, INSTEAD. |

~ WITH A

souat/