|
WSWS : News
& Analysis : North
America : Canada
British Columbia: Unions suppress ferry and forest strikes
By David Adelaide and Keith Jones
18 December 2003
Use
this version to print
| Send this
link by email | Email the
author
The union leadership has suppressed two pivotal strikes in
British Columbia, inviting arbitrators to dictate their members
collective agreements and under terms set by the violently anti-working-class
Liberal provincial government.
Last Friday morning, the BC Ferry and Marine Workers Unions
(BCFMWU) torpedoed a strike that risked becoming an all-out confrontation
between the working class and the Liberal regime.
Two days later, Dave Haggard, the president of the Industrial,
Wood and Allied Workers Union (IWA), stood beside BC premier Gordon
Campbell as he announced that his government wouldwith the
unions supportenact emergency legislation to force
an end to a three-week-old strike by 10,000 workers in BCs
coastal forest industry. On Tuesday evening, the strikebreaking
legislation became law.
For two days last week, the 4,600 ferry workers defied threats
of fines, jail terms and the imminent deployment of strikebreakers,
shutting down the ferry service that connects Vancouver Island
with the mainland to protest against the Liberals suspension
of their right to strike. The corporate media denounced the strike,
claiming it was ravaging the provinces economy and disrupting
the lives of tens of thousands of commuters and tourists. But
the ferry workers were deluged by messages of support. Many workers
hoped the strike would escalate into a general strike against
the Campbell government, which since coming to power in June 2001
has made drastic social spending cuts, gutted labor and environmental
standards, and created a mechanism to throw thousands off of welfare,
while rewarding big business and the rich with steep tax cuts.
It was precisely the possibility of such an outcome that led
the union bureaucracy to move decisively to end the ferry workers
struggle. Under pressure from the British Columbia Federation
of Labour (BCFL) and the ferry workers parent unionthe
BC Government Employees Unions (BCGEU)BCFMWU leaders accepted
binding arbitration.
Of particular significance are the roles played by BCFL president
Jim Sinclair and BCGEU president George Heyman, who joined the
ferry worker negotiations after the illegal strike had entered
its second full day. No doubt, these pillars of the BC labor bureaucracy
made it clear that if the ferry workers continued their defiance
and faced an all-out strikebreaking campaign by the Liberal government,
they would be on their own.
This was underlined the comments of John Fryer, a past BCGEU
general-secretary, former president of the National Unions of
Public and General Employees, and current labor relations consultant
to the World Bank. In an interview with the Canadian Press, Fryer
disparaged the militancy of the ferry workers, then declared,
Jim [Sinclair] and George [Heyman] would be there to explain
to them how labor relations works in British Columbia. Fryer
suggested it was likely that the BC government had itself called
on Sinclair and Heyman to intervene in the talks, so as to defuse
the situation. I believe that kind of thing has happened
countless times in British Columbia.
The BCFMWU leaders have justified their capitulationthe
membership was not even given the right to vote on the arbitration
dealon the grounds that the arbitrator is someone who listens
attentively to the workers grievances. BCFMWU president
Jackie Miller declared, What we will have at binding arbitration
is the opportunity to actually have someone listen to our arguments.
What we didnt have with the negotiating team for B.C. Ferries
Services was any sort of reciprocal dialogue from across the table
other than ideology.
This is poppycock. The arbitrator will have to work under the
terms of the Coastal Ferry Act, the antiunion legislation that
the Liberals adopted last March and which essentially privatizes
the ferry service. The Liberals legislation goes so far
as to explicitly require BC Ferries to contract out as much of
its operations as possible, and mandates that the ferry operators
return a rate of profit based on government bond rates plus a
risk premium.
Section 26 of the Coastal Ferry Act explicitly states that
the contents of the Act trump any and all collective agreements.
In other words, irrespective of the collective agreement drawn
up by the arbitrator, the ferry company will remain entirely free
to pursue the contracting out of labor.
No sooner was the ferry strike over, than an emboldened Campbell
vowed to introduce legislation permanently stripping the ferry
workers of the right to strike. Said Campbell: We cant
allow coastal communities to be held hostage as they were when
this ferry service was closed down. We have to be sure that kind
of thing cant happen again.
The union bureaucracys suppression of the forest workers
strike was even more blatant, for here the union officialdom could
not even point to the imminent threat of fines and jailings. Rather,
it was the IWA leadership that invited the government to strip
its members of their right to strike and impose binding arbitration,
for it feared that otherwise it would not be able to coerce its
members into accepting the massive contract concessions demanded
by the industry.
Under Bill 99, the Coastal Forest Industry Dispute Settlement
Act, an arbitrator will dictate the terms of the forest workers
contract, should the IWA and the employers not negotiate
a settlement by the end of May. Moreover, the legislation stipulates
that any imposed settlement must be consistent with the
economic viability and competitiveness of the coastal forest industry
in both the short and long term.
The employer bargaining agent, Forest Industrial Relations
(FIR), is claiming that its labor costs are as much as 70 percent
higher than at sawmills in the US northwest. As a minimum, it
is demanding a 15 percent cut in labor costs from the IWA.
The union leadership has repeatedly said it is ready to work
with the employers to make the industry more productive. But it
proved unable to prevent the outbreak of walkouts and then a full-scale
strike, when the FIR, impatient at the pace of negotiations, unilaterally
imposed concessions, including reduced vacation benefits, greater
flexibility in scheduling, and no overtime pay for weekend work.
Needless to say, the striking forest workers were not even
consulted before Haggard and the IWA leadership agreed to let
the Liberals take away their right to strike and imprison them
in a mediation-binding arbitration process designed to ensure
that the employers extract sweeping contract concessions.
Even the social-democratic New Democratic Party (NDP)which
for decades has enjoyed the closest relations with the IWA leadershiphas
felt forced to condemn Haggard, so blatant is his role as an agent
of the forest bosses and the right-wing Liberal government. As
union members see the onerous nature of this legislation and how
much they are losing...they, too, will have questions for their
union leadership, warned NDP House leader Joy MacPhail
Two presidents of Vancouver Island IWA locals have also criticized
the union leadership, claiming that they had not agreed to binding
arbitration, only mediation. Haggard has responded by accusing
them of lying. Its just not true. They all knew it
[the legislation] was coming, they were canvassed and talked to,
and the majority [of local union officials] supported it.
See Also:
British Columbia: Ferry workers defy
government strikebreaking
[12 December 2003]
British Columbia: Tens of thousands
may be cut off welfare next April
[24 October 2003]
Top of page
The WSWS invites your comments.
Copyright 1998-2008
World Socialist Web Site
All rights reserved |