; ; |

Feature

By MAURICE RUSH n Oct. 3, 1948, the B.C. District Council of the International Woodworkers’ of America voted by an overwhelming ; majority to secede from the international and to form a new Canadian woodworkers union, the Woodworkers Industrial Union of Canada (WIUC), It proved to be a major and costly Mistake by the communists and left leadership of the IWA in B.C. which had Negative repercussions on the whole trade union movement in B.C.

_The secession has been the subject of widespread controversy for many years and the full history of the events leading up to this action has not yet been written, although the most accurate account is given in the book One Union in Wood, written by Jerry Lembke and William M. Tattam. TWA and other labour historians have grossly distor- ted the historic event, ignoring important parts of the story and altering others. It is important to set the record straight on what really transpired, without for one moment attempting to apologize for the major res- ponsibility of the B.C. Communist Party leadership (then known as the Labour- Progressive Party) and its leading members in the forest industry, for the serious error.

While acknowledging the mistake that was made, it must also be pointed out that the major work in organizing the forest in- dustry in B.C. and achieving many gains for woodworkers was done by the communists and their militant supporters, often at tre- Mendous sacrifice. The struggle to organize the industry began long before the Com- munist Party was formed in 1921. For many generations militant woodworkers strove to organize the industry, leading in many cases to bitter strike struggles against the powerful timber barons, which usually ended without success.

The struggle to organize the forest in- dustry and abolish the terrible conditions existing in the camps achieved an historic high point in the 1946 general strike in the forest industry. During the war years, the IWA, under the leadership of outstanding organizers like Harold Pritchett, Nigel Mor- gan, Emie Dalskog, Hjalmar Bergren and scores of others, the IWA grew in strength and made the first important breakthroughs.

The province-wide strike called for May 15, 1946 was joined by nearly 30,000 wood- workers. Some 10,000 joined the IWA during the strike which was called around the demand: “25-40 Union Security.”

Immediately after the war, the federal government and the big employer groups decided it was time to crack down on labour and hold the line on post war gains for labour. The federal government, which had frozen wage increases to five cents an hour during the last stage of the war, decided to continue the wage freeze after the war. The first big challenge to the government- employer policy was the IWA strike.

The demand for a 25-cent an hour in- crease, the 40-hour work week and union recognition and security was a major strug- gle to establish labour’s rights in the post war period. While the IWA did not win all its demands, it forced partial union recognition and an industry-wide agreement, it won a 15 cent settlement and agreement to move towards the 40-hour week in the forest in- dustry. It was a landmark victory for all Canadian labour. In the elections that fol- lowed in 1946, the left leadership received an overwhelming mandate from the mem- bership.

But even as woodworkers were celebrat- ing the 1946 victory, behind the scenes plots

IWA, 1948: recalling a divided past

were afoot by right wing forces in the inter- national and in B.C. (called the White Bloc) to attack the communist and left leadership in the IWA in B.C. where more than 50 percent of the left vote in international elec- tions came from. The struggle between the White Bloc and the left wing in the union preceded the formation of the WA as a CIO affiliate in 1937, but it was intensifieed after Harold Pritchett was elected as the union’s first international president.

Despite the bitter struggle, the left retained the upper hand largely because of the strong support for left policies among B.C. woodworkers.

The post war period brought significant political changes which favoured the right wing forces in the union represented by the White Bloc, whose aim was to oust the left and capture control of the union. The main change which took place was the launching of the cold war and the whipping up of anti-communist hysteria. Red-baiting now became the major weapon of the White Bloc.

The White Bloc was able to take ad- vantage of the fact that the U.S. and Can- adian governments had adopted anti-com- munism as their main policy and all state agencies, such as immigration, intelligence services, labour ministries and legislatures were put to the service of fighting com- munism. McCarthyism entered the labour movement and came to the aid of those who for their own purposes wanted to destroy the militancy of labour and oust left and com- munist leaders.

All capitalist agencies able to mold public opinion were opened up to those in the labour movement fighting communism, which gave the White Bloc in the IWA a tremendous boost.

Falling in behind the anti-communist campaign were the top officials of the trade union movement in the U.S. and Canada. The international union leaderships under- took to destroy the militants in the U.S. and in Canadian sections of international unions. Officials of central union bodies in Canada joined in the attack. Some unions were sus- pended, dismembered, raided, expelled, and some placed under trusteeships.

In Canada the offensix2 against the left was led by the Canadian Congress of Labour (CCL) and its top officers, Pat Conroy and Aaron Mosher. They assigned the job to “clean out the reds in B.C.” to William Mahoney, a Steelworkers organizer, who was given the title Western Canadian Direc- tor to oust the leaderships of central labour bodies in B.C., with special emphasis on the IWA and Mine Mill. He was to rely heavily on the White Bloc to do the job in the IWA. : he first sign that this new alliance of right wing forces with the White Bloc was in operation came with the moves by the U.S. government to bar Harold - Pritchett permanently from entering the U.S. in 1947. For years, Pritchett had been able to carry out his duties as international president on visitor’s visas, but now he was barred completely, forcing him to give up the presidency of the TWA.

The action coincided with the adoption by the U.S. of the Taft-Hartley Act which John L. Lewis, head of the CIO, described as “the first ugly thrust of fascism in America.” The Act required all union of- ficers to take oaths that they were not mem- bers of the Communist Party. Failure to do so disqualified the union involved from recognition by the National Labour Board. Those signing the affidavits were subject to perjury charges.

It was no coincidence that at the TWA

Harold Pritchett (r), first international president of the IWA, with Mine-Mill president,

Reid Robinson (centre) and Internationa

international convention held in St. Louis in August, 1947, at which the Taft-Hartley Act was to be considered, and at which the White Bloc forced through compliance with the Act, the U.S. immigration department barred all left wing delegates from B.C. from entering the U.S. Immediately following the convention the international officers, headed by president James Fadling, ordered all IWA officers to sign the Taft-Hartley affidavits or resign. The order was to apply to all elected officials.

The attempt to compel Canadian trade unionsts to comply with American anti- labour laws was a violation of Canadian sovereignty but it brought no condemnation from the Canadian government, its labour department or from top Canadian union of- ficials.

Shortly after that, the White Bloc in Be. opened a new attack on the leadership of the IWA in the B.C. District by charging that district funds were missing. Much was made of this charge by the big business media, especially the Vancouver Sun whose labour reporter at the time was Jack Webster. In his recently published autobiography he ad- mits: “Mahony would feed me details about money missing from union treasuries.” The charges are dealt with in the book One Union in Wood which reports the findings of two auditing firms which “produced no evidence that the funds had been misused.”

Every effort was made to attack the B.C. district officers and to create doubt and con- fusion among the membership. Despite that, in the March, 1948 elections, the district officers won re-election overwhelmingly, and every local except the New Westminster local retumed left wing and communist of- ficers. But that did not stop the White Bloc from continuing their attacks, including the launching of a weekly radio broadcast.

In 1948, the U.S. immigration depart- ment again denied entry into the U.S. of the entire left wing B.C. delegation to attend the IWA intemational convention in Portland. About this time, Mahoney attended an inter- national executive board meeting in the same city to plan joint strategy between the CCL and the IWA international to oust the B.C. IWA leaership. Many reports came back to the B.C. district officers that the

| Longshoremen’s president Harry Bridges.

intemational was planning to seize the district’s assets and put it into receivership.

In July the B.C. district wamed the inter- national to cease its campaign of disruption or face the possibility of secession, but it was ignored by the international.

& eanwhile, the left and communist leadership in the TWA undertook discussions on how to meet this attack and decided the only "= course open to them was to secede from the international and form a Canadian woodworkers union. The B.C. District Council meeting with delegates from all B.C. locals was coming up on Oct. 3, 1948 and it was felt that if any action was to be taken to fight off the attack on the B.C. district and save the union from a takeover, it had to come at that meeting.

Just before the meeting took place, the provincial executive of the Labour Pro- gressive Party met to discuss the sitiuation in the forest industry. The party leadership supported the proposed action which was recommended by the labour committee of the party and endorsed by a meeting of the caucus of communist and left leaders in the IWA.

The executive meeting instructed B.C. provincial leader Nigel Morgan to phone Tim Buck, national party leader, and inform him of developments in B.C. Morgan reported back to the meeting that Buck had questioned the action being proposed but when the situation was explained to him, Buck had acknowledged that the people in B.C. were closest to the situation. In any case, he said that they had obviously made up their minds that this was the best thing to do, but he urged caution in whatever action was undertaken.

Shortly before the District Council meet- ing was to take place, a large caucus of leading members of the IWA, including the top and secondary leadership, met to discuss the crisis the union faced. I attended that meeting as an observer and didn’t hear a single disagreement with the proposed secession. In fact, there was considerable enthusiasm among those present for the for- mation of a Canadian woodworkers union.

see SECESSION page 12 Pacific Tribune, December 17, 1990 « 17