- CAIMAW — catalyst for change:

Recently, | had a lengthy discus- sion with Jess Succamore, national secretary-treasurer of the Canadian Association of Industrial Mechanical and Allied Workers. He spoke freely about his union and his personal trade union philosophy. Also, he gave me sample copies of their newspaper (CAIMAW - Review), some fact sheets and a copy of their constitution.

The first article in the constitu- tion describes CAIMAW as a pure- ly Canadian union. This is best understood by reference to Clause (i) of Article two:

“To promote the right and freedom of Canadian workers to belong to labor organizations that are effective, democratic and not dominated by any element foreign to, or not in the best interests of the people of Canada.”’

The full meaning of that clause was demonstrated by a one-page feature in the (CAIMAW Review) ~ for September/October 1978: The heading reads as follows: CLC: Jr. Partner of the AFL-CIO. A smaller headline reads this way: CCU — Alternative Labor Central.

Thus, the CLC exemplifies what is bad in our trade union a ment. In contrast, the CCU, which CAIMAW is affiliated is of. fered as the alternative. If only were

that simple! The short piece on the CCU referred to above informed all

readers that the CCU had 30,000 members. in Canada, of whom 16,000 were in B.C. The member- ship of the Canadian Labor Con- gress (Canada’s largest trade union _ central) was listed on the same page as being 2.2 million strong. ~ Labor Organization In Canada, 1978, published by the Labor Data Branch in Ottawa, credits the CLC with 2,203,812 members and the CCU with 26,007 members. Accor- -dingly, the CLC represented 67.2 percent of the organized workers as against 0.8 percent for the CCU.

‘right’ to raid internationals

It is against this background that we must evaluate the following statements from the CAIMAW Review (Sept./Oct. 1978).

“Although the membership of the CCU is small compared to that of the CLC, there is no doubt that the presence of an alternative labor central has served as a catalyst to promote Canadian unionism within the larger body.

“The 14 unions affiliated to the CCU are all independent Canadian

LABOR COMMENT

BY JACK PHILLIPS

unions, all dedicated to the struggle for a sovereign Canadian labor movement.”’

If the catalyst theory is to be con- sidered, then we must examine a few more facts. The Confederation of National Trade Unions, a purely Canadian trade union center based in Quebec, had 188,000 members in 1978. Further, the Congress of Democratic Unions in Quebec (founded in 1972 after a break- away from the CNTU) had 38,000 members. Thus, if we accept the catalyst theory, then we must say that these two Quebec centrals also serve as catalysts to promote Cana- dian unionism within the larger body, namely the CLC. Carrying this argument to its logical conclu- sion, we could then point to a number of other independent unions and describe them in turn as catalysts, thus presenting separa- tion from the CLC as a virtue in itself.

There are those within the leader- ship of the CCU and among their

‘Profits before safety’ behind CPR derailment

Continued from page 1 ears, despite the denials of the ex- ecutive vice-president of the CPR, is contrary to the regulations of the Canadian Transport Commission. Propane, according to the regula- tions, when transported by rail, must be placarded ‘*Dangerous,”’ _ while phosgene, the gas which was used in gas warfare in World War I, must be placarded ‘‘Poison Gas”’

tor shipment by rail tank car.

The ignoring of the law by CPR management does not stop with the overlooking of a specific section or

subsection of the regulations. Pro- — minently displayed on the wall of the foyer in the offices of the Cana- dian Transport Commission in downtown Toronto is a chart which graphically outlines the positioning of cars with dangerous commod- ities. The chart, which carries the logo CPR, shows, in two places, that tank cars carrying placards reading *‘Dangerous’’ must not be placed next to cars with placards reading *‘Poison Gas.’’ A worker at the CTC offices told the Tribune that it was his understanding that the charts “are posted in every CPR ~ marshalling yard office.”’ In an interview, a railway trade union official, who asked that his name not be used because of the an- ticipated investigations into the ac- cident, told the Tribune, ‘‘They {the CPR) are not going to be able

to stick some poor yard marshal for

_this. The decision for the position- ing of that many chemical tank cars is not made by a yard marshal but by railway management. They “(CPR management) obviously posi- tioned the cars not by the regula- tions but for convenience in off- loading.”

Another trade union official, who also asked not to be named, told the Tribune that he wasn’t ‘“‘surprised that the regulations had been. ignored.’” When asked how the accident and the evacuation could have been prevented he said, ‘*It could have been prevented from the start if the CPR didn’t put pro- tits before safety. The railways have had the technology for the electron- ic sensors to detect hot boxes since the 1960s.’” It was a hot box or broken axle that is the suspected cause of the initial derailment. ‘“*But,’’ he continued, ‘‘the CPR hadn’t put them on one of the most heavily used lines for the transport of dangerous chemicals because the placement of the sensors would ob- viously have cut into their precious profits. And perhaps the position- ing of the cars could have been straightened out by a yard marshal it the CPR wasn’t constantly put- ting pressure on the yard marshal: to couple the trains and get them out of the yards as soon as possible. Again it’s profit before safety.

__ PACIFIC TRIBUNE— NOVEMBER 23, 1979—Page 12

supporters who use the catalyst theory to justify signing up members in a unit covered by any Canadian branch of an _ interna- tional union (union with head-

‘quarters in the U.S.) and then ap-

plying for certification during the ‘‘open season.’’ The major part of the CCU membership in British

Columbia has resulted from such_

practices. It must also be said that some unions within the CLC have raided each other from time to time. However, the practice of raiding is generally frowned upon in the trade union movement, because it places union against union and worker against worker and causes division and disruption. Also, it is very costly, in terms of union funds that could be put to a better use.

When I visited Succamore, he was kind enough to give me a full morning of his time. He came across as a sincere, devoted trade union leader, but I cannot say that I agree with all of his trade union philosophy. For that matter, he ex- pected me to disagree on some ques- tions.

According to Succamore, about 70 per cent of CAIMAW’s member-

ship previously belonged to interna-

tional unions and the remainder were first organized by CAIMAW. About half the existing certifica- tions are made up of members gain- ed through signing up unorganized workers.

He told me that the breakdown ~

of the CAIMAW membership is as follows: B.C. 4,500; -Manitoba 2,220; Saskatchewan 80 and Alber- ta 175.

Approximately =o 000 B.C. members are in mining locals, in five open pit mines and in one underground mine in the Gold River area on Vancouver Island. According to CAIMAW statistics, it is the largest union in open pit mining in B.C., a jurisdiction which

| an

|

has been claimed by a number of unions, including the Steelworkers, the Operating Engineers and the Laborers. Steel represents only 1,400 members in this field. However, it is the dominant union ‘in underground mining.

CAIMAW has become the major union in truck manufacturing and assembly in Western Canada, representing workers at Kenworth, Freightliner and International Harvester.

It is also the certified bargaining agency for the mechanical and maintenance staff of Fogg Motors, Northridge Chrysler, Surrey Dodge, Arrow Transfer and Inland

Kenworth. In addition, CAIMAW is the

largest: union in the foundries, with some 350 members.

This membership in truck, auto and foundries was gained by replac- ing other unions as_ bargaining agencies.

An obvious question is whether ten years of fighting the established

unions affiliated to the CLC has’

really paid off. For example, all CAIMAW has to show in B.C. for its tremendous efforts in this ‘decade, a decade marked by jurisdictional squabbling, raiding and bitter. quarrels, is 4,500 members. However, this is more than a statistical question.

CAIMAW first came into ex- istence in 1966 as a union for elec- trical workers after the Lenkurt strike in Burnaby. When it failed to make any serious inroads against the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, it transformed itself into a general union, in 1969.

In my interview with Succamore, he defined CAIMAW’s philosophy as follows:

“I see our union as one that ex- poses foreign domination of our economy by U.S. interests and U.S. business unionism. We are trying to

put the labor movement back focus.”’ When I raised the. question’ raiding other unions, Succa' said it is the policy of his unio to raid another Canadian u This implies, of course, CAIMAW reserves the right to any branch of an_internatiol union. ] When I advanced the -idea t there should be one independeé sovereign nd united trade uni movement in Canada, embr all unions, he agreed, in words: ‘‘The labor movement more important than any union.” However, when a general u such as CAIMAW is prepare sign up members belonging to al international union in Canada; argues that its mission is to prov! a sovereign trade union movemt by ‘‘liberating”’ a very large secll of the organized workers If established unions. Frankly, I believe that this is the metho which the Canadian trade ul movement will be transformed f damentally, irrespective of © many legitimate grievances that ist within the international uni Saying that is not to deny” sincerity, dedication and deepl desire for democratic and eff trade unionism of men like camore and those who follow # leadership. However, it is my | nion that being honest, sincere dedicated is no guarantee making wrong estimations. I intend to elaborate on U matters, among others, in myg Labor Comment. Also, I will try to show CAIMAW stands in relation t jor policy questions affectin labor movement as a whole, om basis of its own policy statemen! published in their offi newspaper. ‘

=

The power that newspaper is bragging about is its readers.

_TWO-FSTED,

oe raat wg wal nse

struggle need _win. -Every wee more and mot

About 75% of them are busi- ness executives, managers and

professionals. Their average

are turning » the Tribune 0 cause they see as their nev

their interests.

personal income is $32,000 per year. As they say, ‘‘Our readers are power- ful.’? And the Post exists to help keep them that way.

Our readers are not rich or _ influential But they want and need power too.

That is why they read this newspaper every week. To get

the information, an- alysis and solidarity which people in

PACIFi

RIiBUNE Read the paper that fights for

Name....... oe See Se

Address

eR NG CNN NG ON Ant

GIGDYAOWD:. «3 Sask oas teak Province. .

Postal Codec. =~ es

| am enclosing:

1 year $10 2 years $180 +6 months $6 0 OldO New cen 1 ie $12 0

Donation $. .

SS ks Se eo

And with every neé reader our pow grows. Get your SI today.

jell

ot ae Sie Soa ce 8a Ree

nwa Oe

ee : af Sieg <7