<http://www.w3.org/2009/08/skos-reference/skos.html#note>
"CAIMAW - PORTRAIT OF A CANADIAN UNION  by  P A T R I C I A GWEN ATHERTON B.A.,  The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h  A T H E S I S SUBMITTED  C o l u m b i a , 1977  IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF  THE REQUIREMENTS  FOR THE DEGREE OF  MASTER OF SCIENCE  (BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION) in  THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES  (THE FACULTY OF (MERGE /W BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION) We a c c e p t t h i s  t h e s i s as  conforming  to the required standard  THE UNIVERSITY  OF B R I T I S H COLUMBIA  S e p t e m b e r 1981 (6)  Patricia  Gwen A t h e r t o n ,  1981  \u000CIn  presenting  requirements of  British  it  freely  agree for  this for  an  available  that  I  understood  that  financial  by  his  that  or  be  her or  shall  fulfilment at  the  Library  shall  and  study.  I  copying  granted  by  publication be  the  University  of  the  of  allowed  make  further this  head  representatives.  not  of  the  extensive  may  copying  gain  degree  reference  for  purposes  or  partial  agree  for  permission  scholarly  in  advanced  Columbia,  department  for  thesis  It  this  thesis  of  my  is  thesis  without  my  !  ^  written  permission.  Department  of  ^B&gt;ui-g \\r  -  ,  The University of B r i t i s h 2075 W e s b r o o k P l a c e Vancouver, Canada V6T 1W5  R\\R*  c  i  O / -in \\  ^  L  S  .  _  Columbia  S  ^  C  Y  V  %  ^  V  T  O  -  V  I  O  ^  \u000Cii  ABSTRACT  This Canadians  in  and d e v e l o p  study  recent an  independent  of  CAIMAW's  times  traditionally  is  Canadian  in  Canada,  and  i n f a v o u r and m i t i g a t e a g a i n s t  attempt  t o c r e a t e and d e v e l o p s u c h a  study  comprise  cooperation  interviews  an  with  essential  extended  by  and c o n s t i t u t i o n s , p a m p h l e t s , publications  and  other  sources provided secondary  A societal  to  Canadian  unions  own  affairs  decisions and  set  by  the in  and  stage  Winnipeg  the  Vancouver  workers,  making . a u t h o r i t y . respond to t h i s  for  of  search  of  1960's of  and  Refusal  union  a by  on  the  for  Due was  that  in  their  to  this  to  the  conducted  articles,  examined.  union  Published  of t h i s  labour m i l i t a n c y ,  paper.  uncertainty  f o r Canadian s e l f - a s s e r t i o n ,  of  Lack  unrest greater  international  i n Canadian  affairs  breakaway  independent  of  over  their  unpopular  union  membership  created  demand the  an  unions  related  files  newspaper were  formation  and V a n c o u v e r .  officers  found  factors  information.  documents  the  to  those  the  figures  of American i n f l u e n c e  imposition  international  identify  major  to change, a d e s i r e  and a c o r r e s p o n d i n g r e s e n t m e n t combined  from  i n f o r m a t i o n f o r the m a j o r i t y  mood i n t h e  a r i s i n g from adaptation  to  correspondence,  relevant  unions  some  union.  the  a  why  the success of Canadians  source  CAIMAW,  explain  t o determine whether such  different  operate  Personal  to  international  union,  identifiably  operating  attempts  have a b a n d o n e d  independent  union  history  control of  among t h e s e membership unions  Winnipeg decision-  involved  demand r e s u l t e d i n a c o a l i t i o n o f u n i o n d i s s i d e n t s  and  to  \u000Ci i i  nationalists  in  u n i o n s and t h e  The gave r i s e with  the  do n o t , for  its  CAIMAW t o s u r v i v e  as  unions.  breakaway  in philosophical a  struggle  The  and  for  appear  make  differences  rank  business  struggle  between  resolution  of  and  organizational  of  this  authority  CAIMAW  CAIMAW a  international  the  unions  between  practices  practices  as  union  unions file,  that  are  at  least  in  terms  different  structure.  comparable  it that  These  t o have h i n d e r e d CAIMAW's a b i l i t y  due  such as to  the  institutions.  and  and  in  creates  e x i s t s an i m p o r t a n t  But  to  difficulties  place  of  weaknesses  intraunion  to  those  in  its  international within  divisions  have  these allowed  CAIMAW c a n d r a w s u p p o r t f r o m u n i o n  socialists  institutions a society  CAIMAW f a c e s  established  a n d , i n d e e d , grow.  labour  there  and  interunion  traditional  needs,  Vancouver  autonomy.  power  union  labour  nationalists  that  international  national  corresponding  policies  membership  dissidents,  To t h e e x t e n t  a  their  unions.  Canadian such  was  from t r a d i t i o n a l  and d e v e l o p m e n t  institutions  It  and a d i f f e r e n t  An i n d e p e n d e n t  in  and  seated  and  policies  however,  won by i n t e r n a t i o n a l  unions  Winnipeg  the  different  bargaining,  benefits  own, independent  local  decision-making  of  of  o f b u s i n e s s u n i o n i s m and c e n t r a l i z e d  for  These  rejection  battle  and  rejection  today.  formation  the  unionism,  foundations  greater  the  regionalism.  authority  differences win  of  social  identifiably  methods  of  i n the  operates  of  merger  and  centralized  laid  cause,  founding of t h e i r  overtones  struggle  common  to a c o n s t i t u t i o n a l  unionism  is  a  of  Canada  the have  institutions  place  New  Left,  failed  to  groups  accommodate.  in accordance  f o r CAIMAW i n  Canada.  which  with  its  \u000Civ  TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER I. II.  Page  INTRODUCTION THE S I X T I E S  1 - THE AGE OF ANXIETY  8  A Reassessment o f Canadian S o c i e t y  .  A time o f change  9  A time o f awakening  10  A time of controversy  12  The R e o r g a n i z a t i o n o f C a n a d a ' s  III.  9  Left  19  The f o u n d i n g o f t h e NDP  19  The W a f f l e G r o u p  22  The L a b o u r R e l a t i o n s S c e n e  25  THE WINNIPEG MAVERICKS  31  The B r e a k w i t h t h e M o l d e r s  32  Rumblings o f d i s c o n t e n t  33  The b i d f o r a u t o n o m y  37  The b i r t h o f CAIMAW  41  Struggles  42  f o r power  The D e v e l o p m e n t o f CAIMAW Organizational  47  efforts  47  The CLC d e c l a r e s w a r The b a t t l e  50  for Bristol  The s t r i k e a t B e l l  Aerospace  Foundry  CAIMAW a n d p o l i t i c a l  involvement  CAIMAW a n d C a n a d a ' s L a b o u r E s t a b l i s h m e n t .  52 57 67 72  The M a n i t o b a L a b o u r B o a r d  72  CAIMAW a n d t h e CLC  74  \u000CV  CHAPTER  IV.  THE VANCOUVER OUTCASTS  88  The L e n k u r t D i s p u t e  89  IBEW and L o c a l  213  89  The L e n k u r t w a l k o u t  91  The L e n k u r t  94  sellout  The a f t e r m a t h  100  The C a n a d i a n E l e c t r i c a l  Workers  Union  The f o r m a t i o n o f CEW P o l i c i e s and p r a c t i c e s Organizational  o f CEW  efforts Established Structure  108 112 124 127  CEW and t h e House o f L a b o u r  127  CEW and p r o v i n c i a l  132  labour boards  CEW and CAIMAW V.  104 104  A t t a c k s on CEW c e r t i f i c a t i o n s CEW's P l a c e i n t h e  ^  136  THE NEW CAIMAW  150  The B r e a k a w a y s J o i n F o r c e s  151  A question of philosophy  151  The m e r g e r  152  The CCU  158  The S t r u g g l e  between  Competing I d e o l o g i e s  The 1970 n a t i o n a l The f i g h t  convention  161 161  i s on  165  The commies f r o m t h e c o a s t  174  The 1971 c o n v e n t i o n  192  \u000Cvi  CHAPTER  VI.  CAIMAW  IN THE MINING INDUSTRY  209  CAIMAW's M i n i n g C e r t i f i c a t i o n s CAIMAW e n t e r s  210  the mines  210  The m i n e s go CAIMAW  217  Factors  229  i n f l u e n c i n g t h e t u r n t o CAIMAW  CAIMAW's P e r f o r m a n c e  i n the Mines  238  The CAIMAW M i n i n g C o u n c i l  238  A different  239  Strikes  style  of bargaining  and b a r g a i n e d s e t t l e m e n t s  Wage s e t t l e m e n t s  i n the mines  The b a r g a i n i n g s t r u c t u r e  i n B.  251 C. m i n e s  CAIMAW's P h i l o s o p h y a t Work i n t h e M i n e s Rank a n d f i l e Local  control  autonomy  I s s u e s c r y s t a l l i z e d i n the mines VII.  CONCLUSIONS  BIBLIOGRAPHY  243 259 270 270 272 274 293  313  \u000Cvii  L I S T OF TABLES TABLE I II III IV V VI  Page CAIMAW M e m b e r s h i p - 1 9 6 6 - 1 9 8 1  3  CAIMAW C e r t i f i c a t i o n s - 1 9 6 4 - 1 9 7 0  49  Opposing Ideologies  153  CAIMAW B.  211  C.  C e r t i f i c a t i o n s - 1967-1981  Representation  Votes  i n B.  C. M i n e s - 1973-1981  CAIMAW S t r i k e s  and S e t t l e m e n t s  i n B.  C. M i n e s -  227 245  1973-1981 VII  Quarterly  C o m p a r i s o n o f B.  C . Open P i t  Mines  254  p r o d u c i n g Copper a n d / o r Molybdenum ( J o u r n e y m e n and B a s e VIII  Quarterly  Rates)  C o m p a r i s o n o f B.  C.  Underground Mines  255  p r o d u c i n g Copper a n d / o r Molybdenum ( J o u r n e y m e n and B a s e IX  R a n k i n g o f B.  C. M i n e s  Rates) (Copper and Molybdenum)  258  \u000Cvi i i  ACKNOWLEDGMENT  I  e x t e n d my s i n c e r e  the  Canadian  whose  Association  outstanding  possible.  appreciation of  to  the  Industrial  cooperation  and  officers,  staff  Mechanical  and  assistance  has  and members Allied  made  of  Workers,  this  work  \u000C- 1 -  Chapter  I  Introduction  \u000C- 2 -  This  i s a s t u d y o f an i n d e p e n d e n t C a n a d i a n u n i o n ,  Association of a  union  Industrial  that  was  international forces  to  through '  founded  unions  form the  challenge  to  the  rapid  Mechanical  in  in  u n i o n as  it  practice  of  growth,  has  emergence  and  1960's  and  is  Canadian  and A l l i e d W o r k e r s (CAIMAW).  the  Winnipeg  the  by  Vancouver,  known t o d a y .  international  established  dissident  members  dissidents  who  This  union  unionism  itself  It  as  in a  is of  joined  stands  as  Canada  viable  a  and, labour  organization.  The considerable that  CAIMAW u s e s  attacks and  controversy.  on  uses  raids  nationalism,  union  efforts  to  the  CAIMAW s u p p o r t e r s an  organization  the f a i l i n g s of from the  United  membership. emotions, have  enable  that  prejudices  impartial  and  and  is  a  of  and  clouded  as  rather  principled  They  lack  of  counter  the  debate.  No  the  they  are  left  CAIMAW  is  free  of  is  for  been  unions  the  based  union on  involved, factors  documented  to speculate  its  CAIMAW  of Canadian  facts  t o p r o p e r l y u n d e r s t a n d and a s s e s s  Rather,  mount  unorganized.  that  rights  charges 'have  to  that  unionism that  democratic  charge  directing  argue  by  strike-prone  and  than  organizing  charges.  a tool  radical,  u n i o n s - namely c o n t r o l a  accompanied unionism  manner;  and u n i o n p o l i t i c s o f t h o s e  observers  labour organization.  CAIMAW  goal  been  issue,  irresponsible  these  international  has  international  certifications  deny  charges  of  that  an  represents  States,  CAIMAW  irrelevant  principled  flatly  These  distorted  in  union  more  an  unions;  power  international  of  Proponents  international  its  growth  and  the  which  exist  to  CAIMAW as a reach  \u000C- 3 -  Table  I  CAIMAW MEMBERSHIP 1966 - 1981  Branches/ Year  Membership  Locals  Percentage Increase In M e m b e r s h i p  1981  7000  20  8%  1980  6500  18  4%  1978  6250  18  0%  1976-77  6250  17  19%  1974-75  5260  13  82%  1973  2889  7  20%  1972  2406  5  15%  1971  2086  4  26%  1970  1648 '  22  10%  1969  1497  21  31%  1968  1140  17  42%  1966  800  3  Source: Note:  Labour O r g a n i z a t i o n s in Canada, Until  1971, Branches/Locals  plants.  1966-1981.  reported represented  certified  \u000C- 4 -  conclusions study  is  based  on  unsubstantiated  addressed to these  and  impartial  incomplete  observers.  It  information.  This  documents the  birth  o f CAIMAW, a n d CAIMAW's p h i l o s o p h y , p o l i c i e s a n d p r a c t i c e s  as t h e y  today.  understanding  of  This  s t u d y was u n d e r t a k e n  CAIMAW a s  issues  a Canadian  surrounding  its  labour  in order to increase  o r g a n i z a t i o n , and  existence  based  on f a c t  to  our raise  rather  the  than  exist  relevant  emotion  and  prejudice.  Through trade of  the  first  unions extended t h e i r  international  unions.  half  of  sphere  of  They  the  influence  brought  p h i l o s o p h i e s of the American Federation was  dedicated  term  to  objectives  participation  the  achievable  American  appeared Labour the  All  Canadian  i n t o Canada  with  them  the  American  i n the  form  policies  and  o f L a b o u r , an o r g a n i z a t i o n w h i c h  business economic  u n i o n i s m , aimed action,  Although international  and t o  the  immediately.  Congress,  century,  and  for  short  rejected  union  unions q u i c k l y  i n C a n a d i a n o r g a n i z e d l a b o u r , movements o f  unions  almost  of  through  in p o l i t i c s .  the dominant f o r c e to  principles  twentieth  the  Each i n  Canadian  Congress  policies  of  Federation Labour  resistance  and p h i l o s o p h y t h e y  its  turn, of  the  Labour,  battled  for  a  represented  National One  became  Trades  and  Union  and  Big  sovereign  Canadian  l a b o u r movement t h a t w o u l d a l l o w f o r p o l i t i c a l a c t i o n by u n i o n s ,  provide  an a l t e r n a t i v e  t o b u s i n e s s u n i o n i s m , and accommodate t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n o f  workers  industrial  along  organizations Canadian  was  labour,  international  able or  unions  to  even  rather break  than  craft  the  maintain  hold its  h a v e removed many  lines. of  own  sources  Not  one  international existence. of  complaint  of  these  unions  on  Contemporary by  becoming  \u000C- 5 -  politically Party,  involved  and  by  resistance,  in  moving  in  the  Canada  from  form  of  through  craft  support  unionism to  organizations  of  the  New  industrial  such  as  Democratic  unionism.  CAIMAW,  Yet  continues  to  in  to  exist.  This identify  evaluate  of  Canadian  the  abandoned Canadian  reasons  union.  unionism.  Also,  union  traditionally present  unions  in f a c t , in  industrial  mitigate against  the  to  to  independent  of  the  during  the  institutions in  the  chapter forces  1960 s.  that  outlining operative  in in  it  brief Canada  the  in  of  current  is  made  to  recent  times  a  independent  new  whether  identifiably different And  finally,  forces  have  such  from those  attention  that  operate  is  in  in t h e i r attempt  a  and new,  unions paid  to  favour  and  to create  and  union.  s t u d y o f CAIMAW i s why t h e  unionism should  serves,  the  attempt  develop  question  on  the  such as u n i o n s must r e f l e c t  society  an  order  CAIMAW's p h i l o s o p h y , p o l i c i e s  relations  Therefore,  1  and  success of Canadians  Canadian  surrounding  workers  found  An i m p o r t a n t q u e s t i o n i n t h e for  undertaken  factors  Canadian  Canada.  d e v e l o p an i n d e p e n d e n t C a n a d i a n  is  Specifically,  an a n a l y s i s  operating  day  some  itself  is,  history  1  why  addresses  independent  CAIMAW s significant  international  practices  the  of  and  expression identify  study  have  premise  during  the  that  the f o r c e s  my t r e a t m e n t social,  reemerged  of  the  political 1960's.  that  when  the  and These  did  creation  are  topic  it  desire  of  significant  opens  labour were  -  with  a  relations the  forces  \u000C- 6 -  that  provided  the  context  CAIMAW i n 1 9 6 4 , and f o r  Chapter 1 9 6 4 , and i t s in  eighteen  autonomy Molders with  the  plants  that  movement  Union  as  its  1970 m e r g e r  a of  the  within the of  result  this  of  CEW  is  CAIMAW,  survival,  CAIMAW  by  of  and  causes the  in  The  causes  of  of  Winnipeg  in  and  of  the  struggle  is  from on  difficulties  in  of  Vancouver  the  The  bitter  Electrical  The  its  formation  the  growth  of  of  breakaway  Canadian  at  with  Brotherhood  analyzed.  certifications  break  examined,  dispute.  is  of  examined.  results  independent  for  Union  final  the  1966  the  workers  struggle  occurring  and  of  for  the  International  focusing its  birth  International  events  dispute  traced  the  force  1970.  the  the  with  course  formation  with  of  documented,  Lenkurt  to  during  the  174  concerned  for  representative  factories  are  stage  c r e a t i o n o f CAIMAW a r e  The  directed  the  development  for  is  developed  the  struggle  birth  described,  union  1970.  Workers and  is  the  development.  the  Local  resultant  four  being  and  of  international  1966 and  Electrical  Workers  examines  members  Chapter  struggle  set  e s t a b l i s h m e n t as a v i a b l e  encountered i n the  attention  perhaps  subsequent  and A l l i e d W o r k e r s  the  between  its  three  Winnipeg  by  and  in  course 1966  the  Phillips  of  until  CEW, Cable  its in  V a n c o u v e r and A l b e r t a .  Winnipeg Industrial  Chapter  five  union,  CAIMAW,  Mechanical  deals  and  to  with  the  produce  Allied  1970 m e r g e r the  Workers  as  of  Canadian it  the  with  the  Association  of  operates  CEW  today.  The  \u000C- 7 -  reasons  for  resolution are  the  of  merger  the  analyzed.  structure  are  constitutional  Finally,  and  examined, battle  significant  policies  of  and  the  the  that  resulted  features  modern-day  emergence  and  from the  of  the  CAIMAW  that  final merger  constitution, resulted  are  performance  in  described.  Chapter  six  examines  the mining i n d u s t r y of B r i t i s h CAIMAW as the join the  it  reasons  exists why  CAIMAW. mines  bargaining  B.  C.  is  of t h i s  comprise  cooperation and  constitutions,  publications  and  provided secondary  by  analysis  of  seven  a profile  i s made t o  method  of  CAIMAW's  presents  of  identify unions  to  operation  in  successes  the  in  conclusions  study.  with  CAIMAW,  the  source a  pamphlets,  other  and  international  and  an  essential  extended  their  practices  Chapter  interviews  an  into  An a t t e m p t  abandoned  and  undertaken.  Personal  today.  policies,  examined,  r e a c h e d as a r e s u l t  study  miners  entry  Columbia i n order to present  and o p e r a t e s  CAIMAW's  are  CAIMAW's  documents  major of  search  figures  information. of  union  correspondence, were  related  examined.  i n f o r m a t i o n f o r the m a j o r i t y  files  Due was  of this  paper.  this  to  the  conducted  newspapers, Published  to  union sources  \u000C- 8-  Chapter  The S i x t i e s  II  - The Age o f  Anxiety  N o t an e a s y t i m e . . . b u t a t i m e t o e x c i t e t h e d a r i n g , t o t e s t t h e s t r o n g , and t o g i v e new p r o m i s e t o t h e t i m i d .  Lester  Pearson  \u000C- 9 -  A REASSESSMENT OF CANADIAN SOCIETY  A TIME OF CHANGE  Canadians of  the  John  on t h e  Diefenbaker  previous  substantial  ushered i n the  Conservative  decade w i t h  \" A g e o f Happy P r o b l e m s \" ,  to  the  the  existing  nation.* to the  was  social  regarded  status  government.  some s a t i s f a c t i o n .  as  quo  and  Events  of  The  leadership  could  look  1 9 5 0 ' s had  progress.  and  economic Canada  widespread  systems,  It  well.  had  however,  marked  were  to  the  which  shake  psyche these  been  conform were  Optimism, complacency  conservatism  1960's,  systems  back  produced  i n w h i c h t h e m a j o r t a s k had been t o  serving  the  political They  s t a b i l i t y , e c o n o m i c g r o w t h and s o c i a l  the  generally  1960's under the  with  of  the  attitudes  core.  In  the  election  defeated  and  power was  Pearson.  Prompted  by  of  April  8,  1963, the  assumed by t h e  new-guard  liberals  a d m i n i s t r a t i o n unleashed a rapid s e r i e s  Diefenbaker  Liberal within  party,  the  led  party,  of fundamental  government by  the  social  Lester Pearson  changes  in  2 Canada  between  redistribution the  the of  years  1963  constituency  and  1967.  boundaries  These by an  changes  of  transportation Plan,  the  constitutional  reform,  new  and b r o a d c a s t i n g , a new L a b o u r  Canada  Assistance  Plan,  a guaranteed  the  independent commission,  l a y i n g of the foundations f o r a b i l i n g u a l f e d e r a l  beginnings  included  civil  regulatory Code,  the  service, agencies  Canada  minimum i n c o m e  the for  Pension plan  for  \u000C- 10 -  old-age  pensioners,  resources  fund,  collective  medicare  youth  easy  Canadians  was  made  they  introduced..  were  The  allowances,  bargaining for c i v i l  An  changes  l e g i s l a t i o n , the  any  result  difficult The  a  society  by  of  beset  by  major  hesitating,  a  health  divorce  laws,  direction confusion,  failed  to  rational  society  3  changes  h a p h a z a r d way  or a  flag.  social  administration  purpose,  of  of  and a new n a t i o n a l  these  the  Pearson  of  liberalization  servants  assimilation  appearance was  the  establishment  by  in  which  give  these  priorities.  which  began  to  4 view  its  government  Complacency  as  g a v e way  to  a  bumbling  uncertainty,  to a reexamination of t r a d i t i o n a l In  a way,  apiary,  was  punching  chagrined around  Pearson when  him  patterns,  a  like  incompetent  struggle and  to  into  and  settling  to  change  and  institutions. through  beehives.  instead  administration.  adapt  a man w a l k i n g  bees,  briefly  stung the  a  values  stick  the  and  of  He  just  into  v e r y man who had s e t  an  seemed buzzing  new  them  life 5  free.  A TIME OF AWAKENING One was  of  the  major  targets  for  the q u e s t i o n of Canadian n a t i o n a l  given  impetus  continentalist, essential  by  the  Pearson  who b e l i e v e d  that  of  an  independent  identity,  during  closer ties  Canadian  ties  to  the  Pearson United  to B r i t a i n . state  the  1960's  a reexamination that  administration.  in order to loosen Canada's  establishment  reexamination  through  the  was  States  Dedicated  was a were  to  severing  the of  \u000C- 11 -  the B r i t i s h  umbilical  in February  15, 1965.  people, of  The new f l a g was q u i c k l y a c c e p t e d by t h e  a n d no d o u b t made a s i g n i f i c a n t c o n t r i b u t i o n t o  national  pride.  satisfaction Lower  c o r d , he i n t r o d u c e d t o t h e c o u n t r y a C a n a d i a n  with  In  explaining  which  most  point  coming  is  to  interest must.  simply that  see  itself  at  the  himself,  1 9 6 7 , as  new  \"That's  Canadians  proudly  euphoria.  hosted  were  magnificent nationwide  a  regarded  nation\".^  Thirty  Never we  the  new  sense  and  ready  flag,  A.R.M.  is  growing  up,  taking  the  entity,  me!\"  of  '67  that he  to  in  their  hundredth  birthday  Montreal. in  \"the  States joined  the twenty  first.  a  of  e r u p t e d on t h e  greatest  ourselves Britain  know t h a t  twentieth Q  was  to  attended Expo  -  as  year  of  a  boost  nation, national  confederation, first  of  us  - or  an  or  and  Expo,  and  created.  as  we a r e  century  a further  July,  t h i n g we h a v e e v e r done  need t o t h i n k o f  either  They w i l l the  of  It  celebration  party  they  of  says  given  million visitors  think  citizen  p r i d e was  i m p r e s s i o n o f Canada t h a t  need  average  unconsciously  national  sung  again w i l l  the  healthy,  6  birthday  five  appendage  has  flag,  p r o u d l y h a i l e d as  were proud o f t h e  country an  is,  celebrated  Expo  Songs  ' 6 7 was  the as  that  The g r o w i n g s e n s e  Expo  a growing  acceptance  i n i t s e l f t h a t a n y o r g a n i s m , t o be  Each t i m e ,  looks  and  Canadians  quick  Canadian  wrote:  The  in  the  flag  will  impotent  the  United  a nation  which  is  headed  for  a and as  Canadians  \u000C- 12 -  A TIME OF CONTROVERSY  The unifying  forces  filling more  new  flag,  in  the  Canadians w i t h  difficult  nationalism  -  and the  centennial search  for  a sense  divisive issue  this  of  year  of  an  at  Canada's was  Expo  '67  independent  national  force  issue  and  pride.  work ties  the  in  to  positive,  Canadian  identity,  But  t h e r e was a much  the  the  rise  of  United  of  corporations  i n t h e economy o f t h e c o u n t r y , a f a c t o r w h i c h g a v e  Throughout swamped by t h e  the  1950's  investment  of  and  played  by  The  multinational Canadian  flavour.  1960's,  massive  Canadian  States.  cornerstone  nationalism a d i s t i n c t l y anti-American  role  were  U.  S.  the  economy  capital,  and  of  Canada  by  the  was  growing  o w n e r s h i p and c o n t r o l o f C a n a d i a n i n d u s t r i e s by s u b s i d i a r i e s o f  American  Q  corporations. and g a s of  American  investment  resulted  in  the  development  of  r e f i n e r i e s , t h e m i n i n g and s m e l t i n g i n d u s t r i e s and v a r i o u s  secondary  manufacturing.  and r e s u l t e d  It  was  the  i n Canadians e n j o y i n g the  in the w o r l d .  But  the  s c a l e was  power  that  drove  the  lines  economy,  second h i g h e s t standard o f  such t h a t  oil  living  by 1 9 6 0 , some C a n a d i a n s  were  becoming alarmed.  The Walter  Gordon,  believed  that  corporate national to  alarm  was  Finance if  a  first Minister  nation  decision-making economic,  preserve  in  lost  and  political  Canadian  sounded  in  the  Pearson  control  economic  and  even  independence,  a meaningful  he  power,  wanted  in  1963  administration.  over  cultural  way  the it  new  would  pit  the  Gordon  technology, forfeit  independence. to  by  In  power  its order  of  the  \u000C- 13 -  state  against  stated  by  University  the  growing  Professor of  Abraham  politics  corporate  crucial  the  social  face  matter  for  political  his  on  non-Canadians, nonresidents  of  the  economic  powerful good.  of  of  stop  Russell  the  Stock  by  the  of  society who  The s u r v i v a l  and  cultural  pressures powerful  nation  state.^  Gordon a t t e m p t e d  in  to  listed  values of  slow  provided  of  become  most  The b u d g e t  makes  for  a our  down t h e  foreign  a takeover  Canadian  tax  companies  to to  companies  percent  or or  an  whose  increase  shares in  this  were tax  at  for  least firms  25  with  a  to  lower  ownership.**  immediately  of  American  control was  that  Walter  investment  felt  ran to  G o r d o n was  the  and  be  were  tax  so  the  of  of  the to  Kierans, as  \"an  opposition.  great  that  self-interest  detrimental  \"unfit  Eric  takeover  an o u t c r y  against  director  Canada\", saw  produced  either  research  alone  Exchange,  it  honestly  Irvine,  let  decisions  shares  budget  declared  Antarctica,  Montreal  from  paid  benefits  groups,  Congress,  As  r e d u c t i o n o f t h e w i t h h o l d i n g t a x on d i v i d e n d s  and  Gordon's  question  technological  assets.  sales  owned,  to  economist  technological  the  i n s t i t u t i o n s , the  p r o p o r t i o n of Canadian  attempt  corporations.  political  institutions  1963 b u d g e t ,  for  new  on  action  of Canadian  levied  The  the  these in  Canadian  of turns  indigenous  be  multinational  Rotstein,  increasingly  In  of  Toronto:  The  takeover  power  to  the  Canadian manage  the  president axe  to  any of  public Labour affairs of  the  murder  the  \u000C- 14 -  record Prices  of  trust  and  confidence  on t h e T o r o n t o S t o c k  between  Canada  and  other  countries\".  E x c h a n g e p l u m m e t e d a n d , f i n a l l y , on J u n e 1 9 ,  1 9 6 3 , G o r d o n was f o r c e d t o a n n o u n c e t o t h e Commons t h a t  the takeover  tax  12 w o u l d be w i t h d r a w n .  But States  a  subsequent  demonstrated  political  payment to  that  and c u l t u r a l  First,  i m p l e m e n t an  the  of  American  subsidiaries  reserves fell  the  concern  depleted  for  to  business  foreign  began  by $ 1 1 0 m i l l i o n ,  in  led  the  This  by  Canada  United  economic,  tax  of  States  raised  the  percent.  The  dramatic.  dividends  Exchange  Some  and  cash  industrial  index  f o r e i g n exchange  a bigger outflow  balance  United  1.25  was  move  the Toronto Stock  with  Canada's  1963.  to  1 5 . 2 9 p o i n t s , and C a n a d a ' s  the  unfavourable  dollar  in  by  founded.  borrowers  community  hurriedly  actions  for  their  e q u a l i z a t i o n tax  out of the c o u n t r y ,  a record  concerns  sagging American  cost  response  unilaterial  s o v e r e i g n t y were w e l l  interest  interest  of  Gordon's  American  p o s i t i o n and  effective  series  predicted.  reserves The  were  country  13 faced the very real  Walter attempt that  the  had  had  return,  reserves,  Gordon  rescue  they  markets In  to  p o s s i b i l i t y of national  an  been  fully  Canada  discretion.  to  trip  to  Washington  American o f f i c i a l s ,  of  granted  had  a n d t h e e x e m p t i o n was  fate.  aware  integrated\",  however,  president's  emergency  Canada f r o m t h i s  \"not  become  made  bankruptcy.  how Canada  agree  to  closely  the  in  admitting  two  capital  exemption from the restrict  its  an  tax.  exchange  l i m i t e d t o an amount t h a t was s u b j e c t  The  fiscal  crisis  in  C a n a d a was  over,  to but  \u000C- 15 -  the  c o n d i t i o n s p l a c e d on C a n a d a ' s  the c o u n t r y ' s  fiscal  flexibility,  independent monetary agreement Scott  was  \"not  Gordon,  stated  that  President  \"with  more  policy.  in  head  r e s c u e were seen as and t h e r e f o r e  the  one  act  control  of  ability  of  to pursue  an  J o h n D i e f e n b a k e r t o l d t h e Commons t h a t  keeping with  of  its  a restriction  the  Carleton we  our  sovereignty University  have  put  economy  into  than  of  nation\",  Economics  the  the  this  hands  past  the and  Department, of  the  20 y e a r s  of  U.  S.  growth  14 of American investment  Next, American its  ailing  introduced  December, foreign United  brought  guidelines  initially  for  exempt, They  investment, States,  to  balance  1965.  and  to to  S.  Council of the  We  must  all  national  fore  when,  American  increase  the  American. Henry  is  commercial  importance  i n a U.  foreign  they but  policy.  U.  the  S.  were  applied  return  flow  To  alarm  the  of  improve  United  States  to to  abroad.  Canada limit  earnings  of  to  to  investment  corporations  the  those  essential  Therefore,  an a t t e m p t  many  to  in new the  Canadians,  Chamber o f Commerce by  that  and  in  sovereignty  Fowler explained these g u i d e l i n e s  International  recognize  of  guidelines  required  buy  political  position,  direction  these  freedom  S.  Canadian  payment  the  interests  corporations  of  the  of  S e c r e t a r y of the the Treasury t h e U.  represent.\"  vulnerability  p o l i c y was  still  Although  the  i n Canada  reconciliation of  to have  a highly 15  a  stating:  of  multinational future not  only  with a  significant, role  to  \u000C- 16 -  The that  international  policy, of  in  of  Canadianization  and  the  political  opinion,  threatens  a  the  It  threat  attainment  foreign  policy,  independence.  of  The  U.  Canadian  subsidiaries,  interests  of  Act  prevent  could and  By brought to  owned  Department  if  any  nation  joined  grip  on  our  fact  foreign critic  Gordon's  to  Canadian  guidelines  represent,  economy  objectives  and  the  that  are  an  sixties  S.  and  prevent  agreements  mergers  were  that  the  American  in  State  firms  to countries  of  the  best  the  Enemy  from  Department  S.  political  The A m e r i c a n T r a d i n g w i t h of  that  l a w a n d U.  economic  could  Canadian export sales  selling  declared  s u c h as  an  North  China.^  even  by t h e  introduced  publications  threatened  now  guidelines  \"the  S.  an o u t s p o k e n  throughout  laws  subsidiaries  mid-sixties,  Gordon  the  Canadian  such  that  concern inability  Time and R e a d e r s D i g e s t ,  budget,  foreign  obvious  anti-trust  public attention  to regulate 1965  the  He  the  sovereignty\".  even  K o r e a , Cuba and M a i n l a n d  by  economic  threatening S.  prevent  a i m s o f U.  i m p o r t e d i n t o C a n a d a b o t h U.  Canadian to  1963.  American  our  C a n a d i a n economy.  services  and t h u s  coupled with  Kierans,  stating  the  increasingly  thereby  the  posed  of  corporations  Eric in  independence,  tightening  became  multinational  enemy,  guidelines,  policies  i n f r i n g e m e n t on o u r p o l i t i c a l  goods  the  c o r p o r a t i o n s m u s t now s e r v e t h e  condemning  economic my  impact  p r o v e d t o be t o o much e v e n f o r  Gordon's  camp  in  economic  unless  a  of  Canadian the  culture  Canadian  tax Time  to  disallow  deduction. and  was  government  both American p u b l i c a t i o n s .  legislation  as  for  In  advertising  The  Readers D i g e s t  U.  S.  were  his in  State granted  \u000C- 17 -  exemption, reviewed,  Canada's  quotas  and c o n g r e s s i o n a l  n o t be f o r t h c o m i n g . only of  two  approval  its  the  this  House  it  will  be  voting  a  right  to  Canadian sentence  votes  and  by  and  pressure  established  foreign control shifting  subsidiary  voting  society's  to  to  a  a  of  decision  our  the  the  that  the  a  making  of  purely  probable  death  press  with  voyage  Force  on  Force  outside  control  country  of  the fear  mounting episode  that  through  for  Gordon,  the  Structure  economist, concurred  the  all  concern  Walter  i n d u s t r y posed a t h r e a t  of t h e i r foreign policy.  the  might  ^exclusio^  with  It  Pearson  of  Canadian  and  the  locus  potential of  shift  some t y p e s  of  The view  independence warned  that  instruments  stated:  means the  the  Gordon's  to national  country,  Canadian  Mel W a t k i n s .  c o m p a n i e s c o u l d be u s e d by f o r e i g n g o v e r n m e n t s a s  Foreign  due t o  be  Washington  matter  growing  Canadian  Task  that  future  from  Task  leading of  a  periodical  response  conclusions  would  Canada  up  culture  legislation in  In  unanimous  S.  pact with  summed  proposition  for  by  U.  have a f f e c t e d ,  O'Leary  this  the  on C a n a d i a n  headed  the  c a p i t u l a t e d and e x e m p t e d  Canadian  for  concern  Industry,  that  of  can entail 19 history.  administration  auto  government  interfere  this  independence  the  to  Senate:  If has  of  Gratton  independence  c r e a t e d when he t o l d t h e  exports  l e g i s l a t i o n might 1p  retaliation.  for  oil  The P e a r s o n  publications  American  concern  on  outside decision  \u000C- 18 -  making.  To  national  independence  ability is  the  to  extent  make  reduced  confronted  decision  being  decisions  The with  in  the  in  peaks  will  In  the  nature  of  typically  be t h e  home  However, caucus, that  a  caucus  closer  Canada's Liberal  ties  to  Canadian  Report,  the  Report  United the  set  to  Britain.  \"nothing  but  government  States.  Yet  Watkins'  Report,  of  Canadian  independence.  the  had,  Canadian in  policies.  trading  higher  higher  shelved  peak  the  Liberal  continentalists  who  believed  report  in order to  was  opinion  through  it  did  of  loosen  d i s m i s s e d by a  few  the  university  or  to  The r e s u l t was  1971 when  In  they  nationalists  announcing  would  partner  the  of  have the  on  were  United these  or  ease  the  a sense o f  anger  in Canadian  given  a  and  and  further  Richard  identified Again  act  the links  on  the  concern  for  frustration  society.  policies,  States.  to  mounting  introduced  and  Gordon  nothing  States  Canada,  United  Walter  reassessment of Canada's  little  among t h e g r o w i n g number o f n a t i o n a l i s t s  impact  the  must  by  The  in motion a c r i t i c a l  findings  militancy  the 20  was  by  to  is  it  U n i t e d S t a t e s were e s s e n t i a l  ties as  country.  dominated  interest  subsidiary  defer  case,  the  21  The Watkins'  was  the  government  the  Watkins'  which  traditional  teachers\".  with  the  sense,  sovereignty;  c h o o s e and m i g h t be e x p e c t e d t o peak.  eroded,  national  based  of  is  broad  the  Canadian  two  making  push  towards  restrictive Nixon  Japan  Canada  was  trade  ignored as  the  going  the major  to  be  \u000C- 19 -  adversely  affected  reflected  either  policies up t h e  by U.  resentment  really -  or  many  though trade  attitude  of  hard  But  their  moderation  maintain trade  exceeded  States-Japanese  trade  by  some  know t h a t ?  know we  shrugged are  exist.  off  Nixon's  experiencing  and t h e  In  a  another  howler.  mood  of  he  the ten  being,  of  But  United  dollars.  answer  Because we  this United  billion  And t h e  that  he  does  would  have  Canadians  surging  my  increasingly  value  time  them  Richard  1970,  keeps coming back from the v o i d i s : not  summed  1971 when  overrun  been  In  States-Canadian  by  these  strengths,  not  into  has  of  magazine,  and w i s h e d  would  came  effect  society  i n t h e months s i n c e  offensive  How c o u l d N i x o n n o t  the  that  States.  for  they  to  MacLeans  the United  hoped  polite  to  of  t h e m i n - t h e i r woes I  imposed i n a manner  Canadian  Americans  country completely. Nixon's  editor in  towards  respected  action,  insensitivity  Newman, of  sympathized with well  of  Peter  e x p l a i n e d h i s own a t t i t u d e  I.  unilateral  ignorance  on C a n a d a .  growing  S.  today  self-assertion  idea that  t o t h e A m e r i c a n p r e s i d e n t we a r e 22 n o n c o u n t r y makes us b l o o d y mad.  a  THE REORGANIZATION OF CANADA'S L E F T  THE FOUNDING OF THE NDP  As C a n a d a was p r e p a r i n g t o e n t e r social, important  political changes  and  economic  were  changes  occurring  the that  within  1 9 6 0 ' s and f a c e the the  decade  the  would  country's  major bring,  socialist  \u000C- 20 -  movement,  as  the  i n t o Canadian  had  1933,  been  the  Cooperative  founded  Manifesto  established  planning,  socialization  utilities  and  envisaged  that  as  party  the  party's  of  banking  socialized the  the  CCF  health  would  Commonwealth  u n i o n movement partly  refused  because  the  Congress  (TLC),  political  partisanship,  of  Labour  to  of  the  policies and  care  left. as  insurance,  of  a  official  and  opted  making  the  for  the  TLC  involved  fit  The  House  of  American  partly a  1933  Regina  economic  ownership  founding  between  groups.  a  political  But  the  trade This  way.  Labour,  The T r a d e s  and  tradition  the  of  rival  CCF  that  the  of  CCF  at  Labour  avoiding  Canadian  support  of  members  meaningful  because  suspicious  Canada  any  labour  policy  of  for  public  union  in  The  calling  services.  consist  become  followed  (CCL)  convention,  and t o  Federation  s o c i a l i s t m o v e m e n t , o r g a n i z e d l a b o u r and f a r m e r ' s  was  relate  society.  In (CCF)  l e f t w i n g f a c t i o n s o u g h t new w a y s t o  Congress its  1943  supported  dual  23 u n i o n i s m and opposed i n t e r n a t i o n a l  In  1956,  Labour Congress  the  (CLC).  TLC  and  unions.  the  CCL  merged  to  form  the  Canadian  S p u r r e d on by t h e CCL u n i o n s , t h e CLC e l e c t e d  to  24 f o l l o w a course of p o l i t i c a l  The John had  1958 f e d e r a l  Diefenbaker been  and  confident  the  that  involvement.  election  resulted  Conservative a  Liberal  party.  decline  s o c i a l i s m , were b i t t e r l y d i s a p p o i n t e d .  in a landslide victory Members  would  mean  of an  CCF r e p r e s e n t a t i o n  the  CCF,  ascendency in  for who of  parliament  \u000C- 21 -  had b e e n  severely  damaged, making a p p a r e n t  the  need f o r  a  reexamination  25 o f t h e p o l i c i e s and p r a c t i c e s  In for  the  April  formation of  commended t h e but  stressed  which  1958, the  embraces  the  need  people  basic  reform\".  social  1801 d e l e g a t e s  a  \"broadly  CCF,  professional  and  the  other The  gathered  new s o c i a l i s t p a r t y .  contribution it  for  the  party.  CLC c o n v e n t i o n p a s s e d a r e s o l u t i o n  a completely  CCF f o r the  of the  to  d i s s o l v e the CCF.  Thirty  ranks of organized  labour.  based  people's  labour  movement,  liberally  minded  CCF a g r e e d  found the  seven  had made t o  to  of these  society,  political  movement  organizations,  persons  this  declaration  Canadian  farm  interested  proposal  New D e m o c r a t i c  percent  The  calling  and  Party  delegates  in  (NDP)  in  1961, and  to  were from  the  this  new p a r t y  of  the  image o f  27  The f o u n d i n g c o n v e n t i o n was the  left  w o u l d be f r e e  CCF w h i c h ,  it  was  These  factors  stale  doctrinaire  party  which,  of  felt,  included  certain had  the  although  of  friendly  /\u2022labour p a r t i c i p a t i o n , and  the  negative  restricted  image  socialism  optimistic that  of  the  Regina  to  labour, of  in  party's  w h a t was  the  image  factors  now  electoral  considered  Manifesto, had  hostility  not to  the  support. to  be  image  unions  the of  accommodated TLC  the  a  full  through  28 association enjoy  a  with  broader  the base  CCL. of  Therefore, both  labour  the and  NDP  could,  popular  a c h i e v i n g w h a t had a l w a y s e l u d e d t h e CCF - e l e c t o r a l  it  was  support, success.  hoped, thereby  \u000C- 22 -  THE WAFFLE GROUP  The a c t i v i s t s largely  from  the  former  CCF  social  r e f o r m and  a d v o c a t i n g moderate platforms,  they  w i t h i n t h e NDP d u r i n g i t s  made  a  party  conscious  and  e a r l y y e a r s were  from  the  in avoiding  effort  to  CCL  unions.  doctrinaire  move  the  drawn In  socialist  party  to  the  29 right. a  But  in  group t h a t  became  pragmatists\", the  United  a  were  the  support  Canadian  divisive,  new  for  nationalistic  was  to  achieve  decidedly  achieve  the  Self-proclamed electoral  nationalistic,  economic  party,  \"radical  success and  independence  the n a t i o n a l i s t i c , anti-American f e a t u r e s  American domination. its  to  emerged w i t h i n  Young T u r k s .  were  designed  unions  to  goal  faction  for they  from  the  30  program  International  the  policies  program  States.  rallying  central  Their  However Turks'  known a s  their  party.  proposed  1 9 6 5 , a new a c t i v i s t  both  for  were  embarrassed  group  which  the  trade  to  find  preached  by  the  international  p h i l o s o p h y o f t h e Young T u r k s .  economic  dependence  on  the  young  Canadian  The NDP was f a c e d w i t h t h e  and  unions  United  of the and  staff  the  members  with  and  from  reconciling  the  Canadian  \"How c o u l d t h e p a r t y States  NDP.  independence  prospect of  unions  Young  decry  simultaneously  31 justify  international  inconsistencies, nationalism Canadian  and  society.  the desire  unionism?\" NDP for  faced  Due  difficulties  economic  independence  to in  these  internal  accommodating that  was  growing  the in  \u000C-  The party, the  forces  spearheaded  Waffle  by  Group.  philosophy  was  of  23  nationalism  a faction  This based  -  continued  a  build within  o f y o u n g members  group d i f f e r e d on  to  from the  return  to  who  called  socialism  NDP  themselves  Young T u r k s  true  the  in that rather  its than  32 progmatism.  In  the  spring of  Independent S o c i a l i s t  1969, they  tendency  t o w a t e r down s o c i a l i s t t h o u g h t i n o r d e r t o w i n mass e l e c t o r a t e  support,  that  Wafflers,  it  waffled,  socialism  nationalism Watkins,  \"if  could  it  could  be  The d o c u m e n t r e j e c t e d  an  the NDP s  stating  Canada\".  produced a \" M a n i f e s t o f o r  would  be  achieved  achieved through  to  the  left\".  through  the  road  independence  or  particularly account  socialism.  feelings  their  independence  social ism.  socialism,  As  in  own  right.  a serious  the 34  way  necessity  leadership  of  by  the  Russia,  New  for  nationalism  and  For  taken to  Canada  is  a  Mel  pursue make  desirability  of  bureaucratized  and  into  to  socialism  by  the  group:  the contemporary brand of  Left,  distrusted  in  and  The W a f f l e G r o u p a d v o c a t e d characterized  of  To  3  stated  aspirations  a n t i - i m p e r i a l i s m , s h o u l d be  in  visible  to  3  nationalism  a u t h o r o f t h e W a t k i n s ' s r e p o r t and l e a d e r o f t h e On  as  waffle  1  which forms  socialism  rejected of  power,  the and  35 favoured  participatory  nationalization but  also  making,  for  of  \"key  democracy.  It  industries  strategic  \"widespread  particularly  i n the  democratic  called to  not  planning  participation  workplace\".  only  in  for  the  our  economy\"  social  decision  \u000C-  24  -  The W a f f l e saw t h e e s t a b l i s h e d l a b o u r movement a s an ally  in  its  however,  struggle  that  through  first  both  a  prerogatives'  f o r an it  would  'major  and  a  independent have  takeover  'major  s o c i a l i s t Canada.  to  be  by  '\"revitalized  unions  takeover  by  of  important  It  believed,  and  extended'  management's  rank-and-file  present  workers  of  the  37 labour that  bureaucracy's  the major  present  prerogatives'\".  source of o p p o s i t i o n to  its  But  the  Waffle  found  s o c i a l i s t platform arose  from  38 the  ranks  began and  of  the  therefore  called  goal\".  to  for  Waffle  the  pressure  Waffle  voluntarily  supporters, pursue  it  international  union  independent  Canadian  socialist  for  the  movement.  dominance  the p a r t y . as  In  a  creating  rift  and  i k 40 labour.  withdrew  from  trade  leaders  unions.  It  as  reactionary,  as  a  unions  They  placed  between  to some  in  a  union  long  term  the  NDP  later,  the  But  its  in  the  also  stream the  of  in  the  critical of  of  year  not  unable  for  both  of  unable  provide  these  in  and by  influence  an the on  influence  in  socialism  left  to  failures  u n i o n movement  reassessment American  to  thought  and t h e i r  trade  the  only to  political  achievement  members  desirability  NDP was  Canada  international  A  Saskatchewan.  was  blame  unions  affiliates,  Ontario.  NDP  that  but  wing  in  the  apparent  left  roadblock  trade  disband  international  the  its  policies,  resulting of  to  p a r t i c u l a r , the  major a  socialists  of  from  Group  h a d become  nationalist  expression  unions,  attack  international  3 9  ordered  seen  affiliated  \"completely  Under  the  NDP -  in  became Canada,  international some  Canadian  on  Canadian  \u000C- 25 -  THE LABOUR RELATIONS SCENE  During the its a  1960's,  c o m p o s i t i o n , as rapid  influx  twenties,  the  philosophies exhibited  of  baby  group  the  underwent  the  workers  their  that  towards  in  was  Young T u r k s  tendency  force  boom e n t e r e d  younger  age  of  a  the  the work  most  and t h e  labour market. late  The  There  teens  strongly  Waffle.  militancy.  a r a p i d change  and  attracted  They  youth  was early  to  the  were workers  of  the  in  who  1960's  have  41 been  described  memories  of  and q u a l i t y be  as  the  \"Explosive  depression of  or war,  education  influenced,  due  than  to  Generation\",  a generation their  that  elders,  improved  a  generation  enjoyed  a higher  and a g e n e r a t i o n  communications,  with  by  level  that  \"the  no  could violent 42  confrontations  of  youth  with  the  establishment  C o n s e q u e n t l y , many o f t h e y o u n g w o r k e r s e n t e r i n g 1 9 6 0 ' s were workers of  the  quo,  Young T u r k s and  less  that  were most  and t h e  willing  likely  Waffle,  to  more  submit  to  elsewhere\".  the labour force  be d r a w n  to  the  in  philosophy  i n c l i n e d to question the  to  the  authority  the  imposed  status by  the  43 discipline within  of  the  the  modern  workforce  was  industrial a  factor  system. that  no  This doubt  change  in  attitude  contributed  to  the  44 turbulence  that  characterized  During negotiated  by  the  1960's,  union  labour relations an  unusually  officers  i n the  high  1960's.  proportion  were  refused  noted  \"such  of  contracts  ratification  by  the  45 membership.  Crispo  and A r t h u r s  t h e w a n i n g power o f t h e u n i o n h i e r a r c h y undermined Widespread  by  repudiation  violence  and  of  illegality  refusals  whose p r e s t i g e  their  negotiating  are  evidence  and a u t h o r i t y  of are  'successes'\".^  a c c o m p a n i e d many d i s p u t e s  during  6  the  \u000C- 26 -  decade.  Numerous  incidents  occurred  of  violence  and  property  damage,  47 mass d e m o n s t r a t i o n s and c o n f r o n t a t i o n s w i t h  the p o l i c e ,  e x i s t e n c e o f m i l i t a n t u n r e s t among C a n a d a ' s  unionized labour  In seen  as  a  some w a y s ,  reflection  the decade. and  for  themselves  a  place  unilateral  into  Yet  government  sharp  in  actions  focus in  the  Canada  of national  This Canadian system, Gordon, political exported  social  industrial  and out  work  Canadian  force  can  be  change  the by  charged  relations  the  becoming o b v i o u s  that  the  world the  impact did  that  or  positive  States,  and t o  was  uniquely  States  during  Canada  little  uncertainty,  t h a t was u n f e t t e r e d  United  United on  could  be  system.  of  to  towards  that  they  country. this  To  of  were  posed  independence  readily  the  decade  influence. this  achievement  a  by many  incorporated the  under  threat causing in  c r i t i c i s m c o u l d be  other p a r t i c i p a n t i n the system, i n t e r n a t i o n a l  participants attack  to  from  Canadian  decision  Canadian as  into  easily  unions.  the g r e a t e s t  in  the the  Walter  economic,  making  society applied  to  be  it  was  to  the  Headquartered  t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s and d e v e l o p i n g p o l i c i e s g e a r e d t o t h e A m e r i c a n who made up by f a r  carve  alleviate the  by  Canadian.  American  nothing  steps  One  corporations,  cultural of  or  and  Canadian s e l f - a s s e r t i o n .  ferment  multinational who  social  Britain  source of f r u s t r a t i o n , or to take of the goal  to  in  attempted to e s t a b l i s h a s o c i e t y  brought the  adaptation  growing  the  values  e x e r t e d by e i t h e r  Unfortunate  unrest  by  Canadians, prodded i n t o a q u e s t i o n i n g o f e s t a b l i s h e d by  the  exhibited  force.  during  enthusiastically  out  of  unrest  the  society  institutions  influences  the  indicating  in  workers  p r o p o r t i o n o f t h e i r membership, were  not  \u000C- 27 -  the  decisions  country?  that  To  a  work  self-assertion, increasingly labour  affected  a  force  was  also  a  growing  tendency  towards  attitude  system  workers  with  greater  sceptical  relations  Canadian  towards  no  longer  the  exported desire  for  to  quo, be  of  the  Canadian  militancy,  status  likely  out  and  the  an  existing  accepted  without  question.  Gordon, international limited  his  unionism battle  multinational expression the  possibly  to  the  of  banner  repatriating  i m p l y an a t t a c k  surging labour  no  existing  relations  mounting Canadian  for  of  nationalism  Canadian  trade  It  that is  movement could  that of  its  on  behalf  could of  1960's c o u l d not  were not  the  c o u l d do so s h o u l d a r i s e ,  carry  the  from the and up the  Canadian with  There  expression  to  worker.  accommodate  the  nationalism  the  felt  was, the The  growing and  the  throughout  therefore,  namely  but  To do s o w o u l d  itself.  strongly  surprising,  made  hardly  Canadian  rising  becoming  was  involvement  give  the  for  movement  affected  u n i o n movement that  economy  labour  t o such a cause e i t h e r .  self-assertion,  anti-Americanism society.  the  the  attack  independence,  Canadian  union  NDP, b e c a u s e  not  institutions  are  making  institution  system of  i n s t i t u t i o n s which unions.  official  the  unions which  decision  could not r a l l y on t h e  forces  desire  unions,  the  of  Canada trade  did  Canadian  traditional  in  official  same t o k e n , t h e  l a b o u r movement,  therefore,  The  reasons,  for  repatriation  international  By t h e  fight  interests  primarily  worker.  political  his  the  workers'  However  of  in  corporations.  of  NDP.  for  independent  that  new  national  \u000C- 28 -  FOOTNOTES 1.  S. J a m i e s o n , Industrial Relations i n Canada, M a c m i l l a n o f Canada L t d . , 1 9 7 3 , p p . 9 2 - 9 3 .  2.  P. C. Newman, The D i s t e m p e r Stewart L t d . , 1968, p.45.  3.  Ibid.  4.  Ibid.,  p.44.  5.  Ibid.,  p.45.  6.  A.R.M. ibid.,  Lower, Queen's p.263.  7.  P. C . 1973,  8.  Ibid.,  9.  G. V. H a y t h o r n e , \" C a n a d a : P o s t w a r C h a n g e s and C u r r e n t W o r k e r M i l i t a n c y and i t s C o n s e q u e n c e s , S. B a r k i n , e d . , Praeger P u b l i s h e r s , 1975, p.321.  Newman, p.232.  Home  of  Quarterly,  Country,  Our  Times,  Summer  Toronto,  2nd  ed.,  Toronto,  1 9 6 7 , as  McClelland  quoted  McClelland  &amp;  Toronto,  in  &amp;  Newman,  Stewart  Ltd.,  pp.232-233.  10.  A . R o t s t e i n , T a m a r a c k R e v i e w , F a l l 1 9 6 6 , as D i s t e m p e r o f Our T i m e s , o p . c i t . , p . 2 2 0 .  quoted  11.  Newman, The D i s t e m p e r o f O u r T i m e s , o p . c i t . ,  p.18.  12.  Ibid.,  pp.20-21.  13.  Ibid.,  pp.27-28.  14.  Ibid.,  pp.29-30.  15.  D. G o d f r e y , p.47.  16.  Ibid.,  17.  Newman, The D i s t e m p e r o f O u r T i m e s , o p . c i t . , p p . 2 2 2 - 2 2 3 .  18.  Ibid.,  pp.224-226.  19.  Ibid.,  p.226.  20.  M. W a t k i n s , R e p o r t o f t h e T a s k F o r c e on t h e S t r u c t u r e o f C a n a d i a n I n d u s t r y , J a n . 1 2 , 1 9 6 8 , a s q u o t e d i n Newman, The D i s t e m p e r o f O u r Times, i b i d . , p.222.  Gordon  to  Watkins  to  You,  Toronto,  New  in  Ferment\", New Y o r k ,  Newman,  Press,  The  1970,  p.51.  \u000C- 29 -  21.  Godfrey,  22.  Newman, Home C o u n t r y ,  23.  R. U. M i l l e r , \" O r g a n i z e d L a b o u r and P o l i t i c s i n C a n a d a \" , L a b o u r i n T r a n s i t i o n , R. U. M i l l e r and F. I s b e s t e r , e d s . , P r e n t i c e - H a l l o f Canada L t d . , 1 9 7 1 , p p . 2 0 8 - 2 0 9 .  24.  Ibid.,  25.  G. H o r o w i t z , C a n a d i a n L a b o u r Toronto P r e s s , 1968, p.210.  26.  Miller,  27.  Horowitz, op. c i t . ,  28.  Ibid.,  29.  Miller,  30.  Ibid.,  p.227.  31.  Ibid.,  p.228.  32.  Ibid.  33.  D. M o r t o n , 1974, p.92.  34.  Ibid.,  35.  R. Hackett, v o l . 1 5 , no.  36.  Ibid.,  p.7.  37.  Ibid.,  p.8.  38.  Ibid.,  p.41.  39.  Ibid.,  p.54.  40.  op. c i t . ,  p.23. op. c i t . ,  pp.229-230. Canadian Toronto,  p.212.  op.  cit.,  in  Politics,  Toronto,  University  of  p.213. p.226.  p.204. op. c i t ,  p.227.  p.93  Information  Canadian personal 41.  Jamieson,  42.  Ibid.,  43.  Ibid.  .  . w  *  v  m  I \\_ \u00AB;  A s s o c i a t i o n of I n d u s t r i a l Mechanical i n t e r v i e w , V a n c o u v e r , B. C. op.  p.112.  cit.,  pp.111-112.  \\_ \\^ I U  and  UUI  J  ~  Allied  I I L.U  I V_ i  9  Workers,  \u000C- 30 -  44.  I b i d . , pp.110-112.  45.  Ibid.,  46.  J . H. C r i s p o and H. W. A r t h u r s , \" I n d u s t r i a l U n r e s t i n C a n a d a : A D i a g n o s i s of Recent E x p e r i e n c e \" , Paper presented to j o i n t meeting of the Canadian P o l i t i c a l S c i e n c e A s s o c i a t i o n and C a n a d i a n Law T e a c h e r s A s s o c i a t i o n , O t t a w a , June 8 , 1 9 6 7 , as q u o t e d i n J a m i e s o n , ibid.  47.  Jamieson,  p.97.  op. c i t ,  p.98.  \u000C- 31 -  Chapter  The W i n n i p e g  III  Mavericks  It i s the r i g h t of i n d i v i d u a l s to belong to the union of t h e i r choice in a democratic s o c i e t y . Pat  McEvoy  \u000C- 32 -  THE BREAK WITH THE MOLDERS  RUMBLINGS OF DISCONTENT  The and  labour  unrest,  militancy  critical that  was  found e x p r e s s i o n i n Winnipeg drastic  step  independent Industrial Local  of  Mechanical  174 o f t h e  The Ohio,  had  organized  majority  certifications  known  Molders  of  Local  the  its  numbered  was  be  Molders  in  existing  Canada  international as  and A l l i e d W o r k e r s .  International  members  in  of  the  institutions  during  1 9 6 4 , when some w o r k e r s  their  to  International  been  overwhelming Canadian  union  occurring  in  breaking with  Canadian  reexamination  the  1960's  took the  rather  union  to  Canadian  form a  new,  Association  of  T h e s e w o r k e r s w e r e members  of  Union.  Union,  United  headquartered  States  membership 7,500.  was  in  1859.  American,  Included  174 i n W i n n i p e g ,  in  among  made up o f  Cincinnati, Although  the  by  its  its  1960  Canadian  sixteen plants  and  c o m p r i s e d o f a p p r o x i m a t e l y 560 u n i o n members.'''  The The f i r s t  unrest  complaint  local  union.  dues,  and o u t o f  per  capita  union  and  tax had  Each  be  Local  174  i n v o l v e d the member  this  was to  in  of  the  centered  around  d i s t r i b u t i o n of local  paid  paid  down by  in all  the  $5.00  constitution  chartered  basic  issues.  f u n d s c o l l e c t e d by  a m o u n t , $ 3 . 7 5 had t o be s e n t  laid  three  locals.  per  in  union  to C i n c i n n a t i .  This  of  the But  month  the  international Local  174  felt  \u000C- 33 -  that  they  were  obligations  of  remained, Al  receiving the  provided  by  the  Capri,  Vancouver.  position  by  the or  Pat McEvoy,  then  in to  additional  staff  Reporting to the for  the  salary share were  area  local  was  of  allowed  to  of  the  servicing,  international  the  of  174,  small  he  of  and  However,  to  not  in  did  enjoy  to to  cost  union,  the  the  an  hire  an  post.  part-time  The  dues  -  In  the  he w o r k e d  membership  by.  ineffective  John Gugulyn  local  full  described  1959  international.  his  the  international\".  and t h e  to  174 w a s ,  enjoy  was  representative,  Gugulyn  Local  Bay  he was a p p o i n t e d t o  decided  proportion of  servicing  Thunder  \"completely  elected  the  the  representative,  from  He  the  said  white\".  staff  did  as  local  international  the  keep.  for  and  that  were\",  from  he c o u l d g i v e  side  staff  part-time  \"They  stemmed  membership.  Local  representative,  and  out  the of  always  s h a r e d by t h e  coming  office,  financial  $ 1 . 2 5 p e r member  stretching  that  major  \" b l e e d i n g us  To make m a t t e r s w o r s e ,  president  improve  the  international  huge  international  and  of  Many  expenses.  unrest  The  a  support  town  return.  the t i m e ,  of  Molders.  limited.  confidence  attempt  174 a t  source  serviced  very  in  arbitration  The t i m e a n d a t t e n t i o n  therefore,  rarely  all  second  little  had t o be met o u t  a member o f L o c a l  The  Michael  local  including  Pitt,  very  of  his  local's  that  confidence  they and  4 support of the  The autonomy  in  committee, contract o..  membership.  third  issue  bargaining. an  of  Although  international  negotiations.  concern the  centered local  representative  Progress  reports  around  elected was on  its  always  the own  question  bargaining  present  negotiations  of  had  during to  be  \u000C- 34 -  forwarded final  to  say\".  too o f t e n yet,  Cincinnati, To t h e  local  were  not  This  withheld  from  workers  available  only  when  Michael  settlement ballot never  Capri.^ are  now  said  Pat  to changing the  The of  of  local  The  methods  \"the  local, in  for  membership by  have  gone  to  that  four  the  if  votes.  funds  strike  as  a long time  Worse  funds and  to  not were  became pressure  impose  interfering  ready  afterwards,  a guy  a  with  o f t e n w o n d e r e d why  seemed t o us t h e m e m b e r s h i p was \"But  was  would  considerable  \"We  say  Cincinnati's  weeks,  far  the  final  international  as  had  settlement.  strike  exerted  used  always  this  1963 when  Metal  drain  leaders  the  unrest  in in  large  violate and  hire local  and f i r e  sums  of  to  we  take  admitted  Canadian  sovereignty  g complex\".  by  since,  Canadian  varied  In  the  critics  of  things,  that  Canada,  that  interfering  executives  charges  generalization, of  from  in  union o f f i c i a l s  Such  extremely  unique.  society,  money  international  relationships  not  c h a r g e d , among o t h e r  membership.  are  174 w e r e  Canadian  Canadian  that  through  affiliates  and h i g h l y  Local  have i n c r e a s i n g l y  unions  actual  international  the  ratification  of  bargaining,  of  seemed t h a t  an i n a d e q u a t e  real  nationalism  oversimplification  to another  it  that  boxes.  arbitrarily  wishes  out,  Canada  McEvoy.  unions  union  collective  the  at  suspected  growing  international  States  became  the  sources  international  by  fear  had a s t r i k e when i t  American  Cincinnati  operated under the f e a r  accepted  b o x e s on c o n t r a c t  a stand,\"  wake  was  membership,  n e g o t i a t i n g committees  forthcoming.  on  \"it  i n the d i r e c t i o n of accepting  recommendations be  and  the  in  United  regardless  of  are  no d o u b t  guilty  as  Jamieson  points  unions  to  f r o m one i n d u s t r y o r  their trade  \u000C- 35 -  Crispo evidence, new f l o w  \"one of  notes  is  bound t o  funds  international  unions\".*^  membership  value  for  fill  their  find  fertile  service  where  Crispo the  did  The  charge  were  notes  that  and  hardly  for  there  in  the  surprising\"  that  dollars  was  he n o t e s ,  in  international  headquarters  that  international  although  power t o e x e r t c o n s i d e r a b l e (e.g.  by v e t o i n g  local  that  many  the  distances \"that  those  involved  bargaining,  s t r i k e votes  typically  over  to  likely  to the  adequate Canada  has  been  where  small  expensive.  should  question  union.\"'''*  in  control  tend  in  servicing  about  executives  getting  an  unions  generalizing collective  in  Maritimes  make  that  particular,  instances  international and  were  therefore,  in  study,  state  unions  In  the  States  this  to  they  forthcoming  been  of  sufficient  workers.  t h e v a l u e o f b e l o n g i n g t o an i n t e r n a t i o n a l  Similarly,  statistical  United  purpose  was,  not  have  the  international  Prairies  geographical  is  perceive  by  reliable  and  the  It  Winnipeg  provided  populations  large  these  paying  servicing  for  not  dues  of  Canada  necessary.  Canadian  among  lack  e a s e when g e n e r a l i z i n g a b o u t  between  174  particularly  is  at  Local  on  the  ill  not  inadequate,  \"It  feel  are  ground they  to  Fortunately,  money.  coffers  that  manner.  of  their  due  and b e n e f i t s  such g e n e r a l i z a t i o n s the  that  the  interference it  has  have the  collective  been  of  argued  constitutional  bargaining  in  Canada  and w i t h h o l d i n g s t r i k e b e n e f i t s ) ,  in  12 practice, Molders that  \"this  Union  this  power  did  practice  is  rarely  interfere by  in  invoked\".  Local  international  174's  unions  But  the  bargaining. tends  to  International Jamieson  \"cause  a great  notes deal  13 of  hostility\"  certainly  within  their  Canadian  be a p p l i e d t o L o c a l  174.  locals,  an o b s e r v a t i o n  that  could  \u000C- 36 -  Finally, unions that  in  regard  craft  Labour  although to  unions  typically  administrative  the  variation  appointment  formally appoint  of  affiliated  the  districts  may  in  exist  officials, with  the  international Canada,  within  international  Jamieson  American  who  out  Federation  of  assigned  to  subject  to  representatives  representatives  points  are  14 removal Union,  by  the  international  an o l d c r a f t  union,  s u r p r i s i n g that Michael highest  authority,  Cincinnati  pursued t h i s  Capri  rather  the membership d i d not the  president.  than  the  concur with  union  and  critical  international  into  nationalistic  unionism of  its  is  Cincinnati  it  is  not  officers  as  his  Local  the  representative  choice  of  174 was  its  at  a  reexaminations  174.  Worse  yet,  made by  the If  As  question  an  time of  of  of  believe  does  that  national  translated  out,  versus  \"Some  international  a good j o b  their  of  institutions,  points  Canadian  issue  rising  existing  Adams  international  members  s p a r k e d by t h e  d i s s e n t c o u l d q u i c k l y be  argument.  hold that  and  Local  unions, this  irrelevant.  members  As a r e s u l t ,  membership o f  representation,  including  continentalists  Molders  officers.  unsatisfactory  a  International  policy.  should view the  Although dissent within  aspirations  The  on  interests  behalf  are  best 15  s e r v e d by an i n t e r n a t i o n a l But of  conversely, many  demand arise  of by  - if  provided.  the  in  c a s e s w h e r e an  deficiencies  Canadians for  u n i o n , then the n a t i o n a l i s t s  for  no o t h e r  that  control reason  international nationalists over  than  to  their improve  union have own the  h a v e no is  clearly  identified,  affairs union  will  case.\" guilty then  a  likely  representation  \u000C- 37 -  THE BID  FOR AUTONOMY  In held  in  1 9 6 0 , an i n t e r n a t i o n a l  Cincinnati.  their  elected  clear  to  the  request  demand more f i n a n c i a l  Local  174's  rejected  by t h e  the  convention  the  issue  on  A last  convention  delegation  prepared f o r the treatment to  them was  dictatorial knowledge  of  of  prime  manner.  down  simply  was  to  dissatisfaction  was by make  within  autonomy,  and  to  6  dismal  degree and was  attempt  Union  convention  delegation  to  a greater  floor  the  Canadian  members.'''  ditch  at  of  of  committee,  by  defeat.  Their  of  Canadian  not  allowed  to  reach  delegation  to  raise  the  resulted  in  the  neither  expected  autonomy  microphones  table.  from  Local  their  resolution received.  importance Worse y e t ,  Canadian  the  sources  went  calling for  b e i n g s h u t o f f f r o m t h e head  The  local  resolutions  of  degree  objective  floor. the  the  greater  the Molders  represented  mission  union  aid for  resolution  was  a  was  The  international  to  delegates'  174  delegation.  the  local,  Local  convention of  labour  had they  174  been  brushed  found that  history  and  Canadian  A resolution  aside  the  nor  in  an  \"American  were that  offhand,  delegates'  u n i o n i s m was  so  poor 18  they  c o u l d n ' t even e f f e c t i v e l y  As f o r a n y a w a r e n e s s was  asked,  Winnipeg union were  \"Where  delegation  showed really  little  of the is  debate  the  knowledge  shattered\"  issue of Canadian  problems of Local  Winnipeg?\"  that  the  said  It  centre of  or  was of  174 i t s e l f ,  a  bitter  decision  interest  Pat McEvoy.  \"We  in  autonomy\".  the  delegation  revelation  making their  power  to in  problems.  couldn't  believe  the their \"We the  \u000C- 38 -  arrogance  and t h e  delegation  treatment  returned  to Winnipeg  i s o l a t e d from the centre  In Canadian  fact,  First,  are  less  the  convention  angry,  delegation's  within it  feeling  f r o m o u r own u n i o n . \" frustrated,  o f union d e c i s i o n making  the  autonomy  beginning.  we had r e c e i v e d  has  the  chances  union  were  been f o u n d t h a t  l i k e l y t o s u c c e e d when t h e y a r e f l o o r t h a n when t h e y  are  The  i y  and no  doubt  power.  for  achieving  probably  appeals  poor  for  greater from  Canadian  the  autonomy  r a i s e d by C a n a d i a n d e l e g a t e s raised  by t h e  union's  on  Executive  20 Board.  The d e l e g a t i o n f r o m L o c a l  Executive defeat. tends  Board  and  Secondly, to  be  executives  therefore  and  their  in old craft  \"considerably  174 d i d n o t e n j o y efforts  unions  greater  were  s u c h as  greater  support of  probably  in  the  control  the  doomed  the Molders U n i o n ,  centralization  correspondingly  the  to  there  international  over  Canadian  21 subsidiaries with  the  segments  than  fear of  of  the  occurs  in  setting  union,  former a  has  CIO  unions.  \"dangerous  resulted  in  This  precedent\" old  craft  fact,  combined  the  American  for unions  such  as  the 22  Molders being p a r t i c u l a r l y Nevertheless, their  dissatisfactions  sponsoring mission  a  was  special to  decision  sensitivity international  the  trip  by  delegates to  autonomy.  174 a t t e m p t e d o n c e more t o  attention  brief  f o r Canadian  the  of to  the  international  Cincinnati.  international  The  what  Instead Local  president,  174  William  of felt  were  Lazzerini,  any  legitimate made  it  Board, autonomy  sympathy  grievances,  clear  by  delegates'  Executive  demonstrating  bring  union  s e r v i c e , more money a n d a g r e a t e r d e g r e e o f  making. to  a  to pleas  1962, Local  to  present  pleading for better in  in  resistant  that  he  or the was  \u000C- 39 -  \"opposed to Canadian  i n d e p e n d e n c e \" and r e m i n d e d t h e d e l e g a t i o n t h a t  \"the  23 tail  does  not  wag  s u r p r i s e d by t h e the  the  reception  p o s s i b i l i t y of  their  concerns  dog\".  This  that  their  breaking with  was  not  time,  the  request  the  received.  Molders  forthcoming.  delegation  Union  However,  if  the  was  They  not  hinted  at  some r e s p o n s e  to  international  union 24  d i d not take these In Cincinnati The  trip  to  was  threats  1963,  Local  plead  before  a last  s e r i o u s l y and i g n o r e d L o c a l 174  sent  the  ditch  one  more  Executive  effort  to  get  1 7 4 ' s demands.  special  Board.  It  delegation  w o u l d be t h e  some r e d r e s s  to  their  to  last.  concerns  from w i t h i n the e x i s t i n g system.  But  the only response forthcoming from  the  the  local  Executive  survival  if  Board  it  was  struck  to  out  give  on i t s  own.  an  estimate  \"You w i l l  of  regret  eight  it\",  weeks  they  told 25  the  Winnipeg  Clearly,  delegation.  Cincinnati  \"In  still  eight  did  not  weeks  you  will  be  take  the  unrest  finished.\" in  Local  174  part  of  the  seriously. This  was  a  major  international  union,  Local  c o u l d overcome  exist First, local  174 t h a t among  because  Canadians  inadequate  to  had been  a belief  change  from  totally  by t h e within  the  a  the  issue  perceived  local.  that  existing  on  the  factors  apathy of  that  operative has  of  dues  money  from  b a r g a i n i n g had g i v e n  by  the  international  it  was  futile  to  Further,  union,  attempt the  to  unions.  Attempts to gain redress  system.  within  been f o u n d  international  drain  in c o l l e c t i v e  rebuffed  dissidents  were  general the  interference  to union d i s s i d e n t s w i t h i n the concerns  there  towards  servicing,  and unwelcome  miscalculation  to  to  the rise  their  leading achieve  arrogant  and  \u000C- 40 -  dictatorial  response  of  desire  Canadian  self-assertion  over  for  Canadian  easily  join  determined  affairs  forces  and  conceivably  with  international  of  that  of  Federation  of  western  27  Canada,  and  along  of  of  a  growing  American  control  could quickly  and  of  nationalists  to  In  keeping  the  labour  could  quite  this  form  with  challenge of  seen' a s  the  early  operating  the the  policy  organization  breaking  174  born  part  Canada,  mount  with  ties  1919  the  a  the  the  particularly  the  to  lines,  the  by  the  Union,  one  to  One  Big  that  had  represented unionism  socialism,  the  American  neutrality  international  unionism,  western  challenged  industrial  political  of  of  1900's,  than  had in  radical  a  affiliated of  policies  advocated  in  rather  unions  Local  the  be  craft  fact,  upon had  could  unions  and  In  labour  assault  Canada\",  number  since  of  Labour,  movement.  28  a time  union dissidents  drastic  174  had,  workers  conservatism  western  rather  Local  perceived  such  in  at  resentment  international.  occurring  international  organization  labour  union  union.  tradition  policies  and  growing  the  the  Moreover, labour  the  to  unrest take  international  meant t h a t t h e  challenge  militancy  the  \"a in  syndicalism 29  and  the  organization  of  was  an  organization  which  order  to  pursue  ranks  the  certification  until  the  1950's,  president, Union,  R.  Pat B.  its  had  McEvoy,  Russell.  workers  into  had  broken  independent for been  Ideal held  was  a  The  two  one  large  with  policies. Brass by  friend  One of  men had  international Local  Limited, Big one spent  industrial  174  the  many  Also, leaders  hours  It  unionism within  a certification  Union. of  had  union.  its  which,  Local of  in  174 s 1  One  Big  discussing  the  \u000C- 41 -  philosophy Russell.  of  unionism,  therefore,  union  had  International over  Union  dissidents  an  example  Molders  Union.  Canadian  union  international Big  McEvoy  had  been  \"greatly  influenced\"  by  3 0  The  control  and  and  to  nationalists  follow  Better affairs  in  union could  u n i o n i s m and f o r m i n g t h e i r  had  done  before  them.  their  within  Local  174,  quarrel  with  the  representation be  achieved  and  by  Canadian  breaking  with  own l a b o u r o r g a n i z a t i o n , as  At  the  suggestion  of  taking  One this  31 action,  \"many t h o u g h t t h e y  Local Board,  174's  therefore,  international inappropriate. Pat McEvoy.  \"The  \"But  final  was  union  it  c o u l d s e e One B i g U n i o n a l l  not  to  plea an  the  before  idle  the  threat,  problems  over  again\".  International and  plagueing  the the  Executive  response local  of  was  the  totally  p o s s i b i l i t y o f b r e a k i n g away was a l w a y s t h e r e \" took the  arrogance  we e n c o u n t e r e d  said  in Cincinnati  to  32  finally  make us do i t .  T h e r e was no o t h e r way  out.\"  THE BIRTH OF CAIMAW Immediately achieve  any  calling  meetings  these  response  meetings,  appealed  to the  of they  following to the  its  the  failure  demands,  workers  pressed  membership t o  at  the  the  for  a break  be  \"masters  of  the  executive  local's with in  1963 of  delegation  Local  individual the  their  174  began  plants.  international own h o u s e \"  to  At  union,  and  urged  33 the  establishment  discussed above,  of they  a  \"truly  received  democratic strong  union\".  Due  support from the  to  the  factors  membership.  All  \u000C- 42 -  that  r e m a i n e d was t o w a i t  f o r the appropriate  open s e a s o n  t o come up a t 34  each  plant,  and t o s i g n t h e w o r k e r s  The unions  first  happened  meeting  to  of G r i f f i n  Temple,  and  Canadian  a  plant be  of  vote  for  in  t h e new u n i o n .  the  b a r g a i n i n g agent  into  Molders the  open  Union  Molder's  exodus.  and j o i n  Unit  union,  to  be  and  in  1964, a  known  Labour as  Allied  CAIMAW.  using  his  to Pat  Foundry.  A  the  Workers  at G r i f f i n  made  McEvoy to  successfully  victory  the Molders  as  Steel.  up L o c a l  use the  position  certification  i n an o v e r w h e l m i n g  1 , CAIMAW, r e p l a c e d  that  and began  i n 1965, a f t e r  s i x of the l o c a l ' s  change  On J u n e 1 4 ,  Mechanical  f o r the employees  season  Finally,  new  1964 r e s u l t e d  Subordinate  local,  the  a  i n the o l d Winnipeg  at the G r i f f i n  One by o n e , t h e p l a n t s came  was h e l d  for  On J u n e 2 1 , 1 9 6 4 , CAIMAW a p p l i e d t o t h e M a n i t o b a  September,  for  eligible  Foundries.  Industrial  for certification  conducted  legally  Steel  employees  constitution  Association  Board  become  Griffin  Steel  ( C A I M A W ) , was a d o p t e d . Labour  to  up i n t o t h e new u n i o n .  174 o f  opportunity  retained  the  engineer  and  the  to  Molders  leave  presidency organize  of the  changing the a l l e g i a n c e  s i x t e e n p l a n t s , he knew he h a d e x h a u s t e d h i s  the  of  support,  35 resigned  from h i s p o s i t i o n  and j o i n e d  CAIMAW had been s u c c e s s f u l l y  CAIMAW h i m s e l f .  By  this  time,  launched.  STRUGGLES FOR POWER  While Molders  Union,  waiting  for  the executive  the  legal  of Local  opportunity  174 d e c i d e d  to  break  with  to u n i l a t e r a l l y  the solve  \u000C- 43 -  the to  problem of  the  on t h e  local's  Under  permitted to set and  $100.  member  in  was  were  the  entitled  usual  of  174  of  to  increased  the  off  They  fee  was  did  fully  required  to  174 up u n t i l  S.  orders  constitution,  Boychuk,  Vice  dues. each  in in  In  fee  from  Prospective  twenty  monthly  good  standing  international  The n e t e f f e c t  on  a  thereafter.  initiation  fee  the  $10  union $8.75 of  dues  was of  not these  local  in  for  the  their  behalf  fee.  Local  174  kept  unresponsive  to.  the  initiation  to  remit  dues  suspended  five  from  named  John  vigorously for  officers  them  officers  President;  Board,  reacted  L a z z a r i n i charged f i v e  The  membership  members  nothing  now,  ignored, Mr.  trial.  paying  time.  was  became  p a i d $5 p e r month t o t h e  Executive  After  stand  that  the  rebellion.  the  and  union's  local  employee  constitution.  become  paid,  each  able  3fi  International  Local  off  the  initiation  received  pay  paid,  the  were  a n y amount b e t w e e n  membership  not  tax u n t i l  at  monthly  under this  they  international  international $5  pay  the  and began  the  Cincinnati  amount.  The  union  This  constitution,  was  a l t h o u g h new r e c r u i t s  manner,  the e n t i r e  problems  $3.75  per c a p i t a  that  months  the  fee  remit to the  $5 e a c h .  its  c h a n g e s was  twenty  of  initiation to  of  the  in  i n i t i a t i o n fee  maximum a l l o w e d  allowed  installments until  and  the  of  initiation  1963, Local  $100,  members  terms  required to  fee,  December, to  the  good s t a n d i n g  initiation  $10  the  t h e membership  After  The l o c a l  of  finances.  do by f i n d i n g and e x p l o i t i n g a l o o p h o l e  constitution.  the  drain  the  of the office  were  \"P.  Thiessen,  new local and  J.  to  this  outright  recruits with  were  violation  ordered  them  to  McEvoy,  President;  Corresponding  Secretary; 37  Harvey  Singbell,  Treasurer;  and  Jack  Kuhtney,  Recording  Secretary.\"  \u000C- 44 -  In  s h o r t , the ijrebellion a g a i n s t  executive  of  Local  174.  The  with  none  other  trusteeship,  the  international  international than  the  encompassed the  then  placed  unpopular  Local  entire  174  under  international  staff  38 representative, actions  only  Michael  Capri,  appointed  The the  that  executive  imposition of  Bench.  Naming M r .  they  administrator.  i n c r e a s e d the unrest w i t h i n Local  impetus to the break w i t h the Molders  and  as  were  of  Local  the  \"acting  on  174  decided in  and M r .  behalf  1 7 4 , and p r o v i d e d  further  Union.  trusteeship  Lazzarini  Such  the  Capri  of  to  fight  the  Manitoba  as  Court  defendants,  themselves  and  suspensions  the  of  and  Queens  claiming  more  than  500  39 members o f the  the  local\",  c o n s t i t u t i o n to  and t h a t  the  the  prevent  $100 f e e  was  executive it  argued t h a t  t a k i n g the  \"there  i n i t i a t i o n fee  p a s s e d December 17 a t  is  nothing  i n easy  a meeting  of  in  stages  the  local  40 membership\". the  Manitoba  placed its  on  Finally, Court  the  local  rebellious As  international Unable John  of  after  lengthy  Appeal  by  the  lifted  court the  battles,  on  suspensions  international  union.  May 1 1 ,  and  the  1964  control  Local  174 w o u l d  keep  got  underway,  the  executive. the  exodus  increased  to d i s l o d g e the Gugulyn,  the  of its  i n the  International  Executive  efforts  executive,  local's  participating  Local  Mr.  elected  break w i t h Board  174's to  plants  regain  control  Lazzarini turned business  the Molders.  suspended  agent  of  his who  the  local.  attention was  actively  On November 3 0 , 1 9 6 4 ,  him from h o l d i n g o f f i c e  to  in  the the  41 local  for  five  local  responded  years, by  and  ordered  unanimously  him f i r e d  reelecting  from  him  to  his  position.  his  job  for  The another  \u000C- 45 -  three  year  term.^  membership's Pat  McEvoy  But  wishes.  again,  On  January  demanding the  I  would  remind you  with  the  union secure  the  local's  court  decision,  against  XVI,  of  of  that  he  Lazzerini  the  wrote  to  for  the  any 43  of  Local  in  You  are and  right  of  and  accordance  Constitution  of  174,  of  under  this  bond  will  to  be  held that  Local  174's  funds  courts,  which  upheld  Gugulyn.  agent  to to  the keep  International  was  ignore  responsibilities  funds  his  job.  Executive  G u g u l y n , b a r r i n g him from membership  grounds  to  responsibilities  therewith  returned  the  these  Part 46).  liable  business  chose  William  an o f f i c e r  handling  compliance  174  as  Among  the  paid to J .  Local  1965,  assumed c e r t a i n  provisions  personally are  is  (Art  11,  that  obligations.  obligations  international  immediate d i s m i s s a l o f John Gugulyn.  you have p e r s o n a l l y and  the  \"unworthy  to  be  Instead Board  the  of  opposing  passed  a  new  ruling  i n t h e M o l d e r s U n i o n on  part  of  a  Canadian  the  the  labour  44 organization\". the  local  Canadian  This  who  were  union,  \"unworthy\"  was  statement  working  because his  to  there  suspected  must h a v e seemed i r o n i c t o t h o s e replace  was  the  little  Molders  doubt  participation  with  that  an  what  within  independent had  made  in  the  breakaways  of  the  Molders  him  already  45 occurring within As  the  Local  joined  CAIMAW,  Michael  Capri  the went  local. 174 s 1  plants  moved  international  union  door  trying  to  door,  out  became to  increasingly  convince  the  Union  and  concerned.  membership  to  \u000C- 46 -  remain great  with  the  Molders.  numbers,  and  The  international  threatened  that  distributed  membership  in  the  pamphlets  union  would  in be  46 suspended i f  s u p p o r t was g i v e n t o CAIMAW.  were h e l d between  o f f i c i a l s of  the  and  the  representative workers Labour  on  to  discuss  i n the Winnipeg  the  (MFL)  Molders  shop  began  floor,  area  and  Molders  between  the  Union  the CLC,  Molders  meetings  in  Ottawa,  CLC-affiliated  problems. ^  The  4  CLC  e m b a r k e d on a c a m p a i g n o f t a l k i n g  the  distributing  1965, top l e v e l  CLC and t h e  and o t h e r m e e t i n g s w e r e h e l d i n W i n n i p e g unions  In  CLC and  the  literature  in  Manitoba an  Federation  attempt  to  to of  dissuade  48 workers  f r o m j o i n i n g CAIMAW. Many e m p l o y e r s j o i n e d t h e M o l d e r s U n i o n i n c a m p a i g n i n g  the  turn  to  CAIMAW.  the  employees  that  They they  also  were  put  out  \"lucky  literature,  to  have  such  trying a  to  against convince  good u n i o n  as  the  49 Molders the  .  shop  Employees floor.  certification, the  employees  to anarchy  were suspended f o r  Employers claiming  and  that  also  that the  intervened  CAIMAW  granting  and c h a o s on t h e  signing others  did of  shop f l o o r .  not  in  the  into  CAIMAW on  new a p p l i c a t i o n s  represent  the  for  majority  of  such a c e r t i f i c a t i o n would \" A f t e r a l l \" , they  argued  lead  before 50  the Manitoba Labour Board,  \"who i s g o i n g t o c o n t r o l  By m i d 1 9 6 6 , CAIMAW had e x h a u s t e d multiplant  local.  \"By  then  the  its  international's  these  support  people?\" from w i t h i n  c a m p a i g n was  the  having  an  51 effect.\" and j o i n e d the  Seven p l a n t s CAIMAW,  employees  plants  represented  h a d , by t h i s that by  represented  Local  on w o u l d h a v e t o come f r o m o t h e r  t i m e , abandoned the  174.  sources.  But  approximately  Molders  Union  45 p e r c e n t  CAIMAW's g r o w t h  from  of then  \u000C- 47 -  THE DEVELOPMENT OF CAIMAW  ORGANIZATION EFFORTS  The new u n i o n , CAIMAW, was t o be \" c o m p l e t e l y c o n t r o l l e d b y  the  52 rank  and  file\".  dissidents officers, of  This  who  resented  to the  union a f f a i r s  syndicalist  philosophy the  degree  in  views  the  of  be no f u l l - t i m e  control  in  the  a full-time power.  of  no  hands  One B i g  of  new u n i o n .  business  agent,  Only o f f i c e r s  in  that  attractive  exerted  a method o f  by  or  to  union  the  Molders  placing  control  and t o t h o s e who s h a r e d it  gave  the  workers  n o t t h e means o f p r o d u c t i o n .  officers  In  as  Canadians,  Union  appointed  doubt  control  n a t i o n a l i s t s who saw i t  o v e r t h e i r own o r g a n i z a t i o n , i f to  was  professionals  in  the  control  There  were  positions  of  1 9 6 5 , J o h n G u g u l y n was h i r e d by CAIMAW a s  but  his  e l e c t e d by t h e  p o s i t i o n brought with r a n k and f i l e  it  no  voting  had v o t i n g p o w e r ,  and  53 hence having  control the  over  right  decision  to  elect  making.  Each  one member e a c h  to  plant the  was  represented  Executive  Board.  by The  u n i o n a p p e a l e d t o p r o s p e c t i v e members o n t h e g r o u n d s o f d e m o c r a c y ,  grass  54 roots  r a n k and f i l e One o f  its  first  National formed  formal body\".  in  May,  55  c o n t r o l , and a u t o n o m y i n d e c i s i o n m a k i n g .  the  earliest  meeting With  in  this  objectives July, aim  1965, charged with  of  1964,  in the  the was  new u n i o n , l a i d down to  \"expand  to  a  at  larger  mind,  an  o r g a n i z i n g committee  was  task  of  o r g a n i z i n g new s h o p s  and  56 p r o m o t i n g t h e g r o w t h o f CAIMAW. other  unions  organizing  was  by  committee  no was  means to  Although obtaining c e r t i f i c a t i o n ruled  be  out,  the  unorganized  specific shops,  target  which  were  for to  from the be  \u000C- 48 -  \"handbilled union  was  the  rate  The won  Union  Pat  union  the  this  McEvoy  grew  (see  international  week\". hire  In the  II).  included  a  June,  full-time  task.  the  years  Molders  1966,  the  organizer  The f i r s t  between  Union,  of  to  convention  1964 and  the  Machinists  Typical  poor  By  0 7  position.  Association  Table  unions  to  to the  from  a  important  rapidly.  International  (IAM)  one  established  certifications  and  Workers  about  responsibility for  union e l e c t e d  CAIMAW  of  sufficiently  assume t h e of the  at  Retail and  complaints  service,  high  per  1970, Clerks  Aerospace  about  capita  these  dues  and  58 inadequate  strike  certifications, unorganized difficult  p r i d e to the Asbestonos  however,  shops,  to  assistance.  places  organize CAIMAW  and  were  for  that  have  to  These  majority  perhaps  service  two  groups  staff were  of  relatively  (see  and t h e the  Table  Of  very  particular  c e r t i f i c a t i o n s won  of  Products  their  new  previously  themselves  II).  Coldstream  first  CAIMAW's  small,  proved  o r g a n i z i n g committee were the  Corporation office  employees.  The  for  service  kind  to  ever  59 unionize  in  chose  organize  to  traditionally  the  area. after  It CAIMAW  is  perhaps had won  u n i o n i z e d employees  at  significant  the  their  that  certifications plants.  both for  groups  the  more  \u000C- 49 Table II CAIMAW C e r t i f i c a t i o n s 1964 - 1970 DATE  PREVIOUS CERTIFICATION  EMPLOYER  Sep  1964  Griffin  Dec  1964  Winnipeg  Mar  1965  Canada  Mar  1965  Ideal  Mar  1965  Bullocks  Mar  1965  Canada  Sep  1965  Freuhauf  Steel  Int.  Molders  174  60  Motors  Int.  Molders  174  100  Iron  Int.  Molders  174  70  Brass  Int.  Molders  174  150  Ltd  Int.  Molders  174  60  Metal  Int.  Molders  174  30  Trailer  A p r 1966  Asbestonos  A p r 1966  Electrol1ier  A p r 1966  Automatic Metal  A p r 1967  Coldstream  A p r 1967 May  1967  Silverline  Jan  1967  Acme  Jim  1967  May  1968  Jun  1968  Hartline  Jun  1968  Rodway  Jun  1968  Sep  1968  Flemming &amp;  Mar 1969  Western  M a r 1969 A p r 1969 A p r 1969 M a r 1970 Source:  Uncertified Int.  Press  Asbestonos O f f i c e  Staff  Chrome  Bristol  174  20  Uncertified  80  Uncertified  20  Uncertified  125  Uncertified  5  Molders  40 80  Uncertified  140  Refrigeration  Uncertified  12  Furniture  Uncertified  25  Refridg.  Uncertified  5  Uncertified  5  Peddlar  Uncertified  20  Flyer  Uncertified  300  Uncertified  80  Air  Cond.  Containers  National Bell  30  Uncertified  Commercial  Dicks  Molders  Abandoned  Coldstream S e r v i c e Employees Kwolson  NO. OF EMPLOYEES  Drugs  Retail  Foundry  Bulletin,  Union  Uncertified  Aerospace  Various i s s u e s of the 1964-1970  Clerks  I.A.M. the  R e v i e w and t h e  50 70 600  CAIMAW R e v i e w ,  \u000C- 50 -  THE CLC DECLARES WAR  In strong, Labour  early  had  two  important  Board.  hundred  The  employees  d e c e r t i f i e d the international  rights  represented  by  after  a  represent  National the  about  the  P r e s s was  last  of  were  to Winnipeg. and  in Winnipeg  reporting  \"it  hands\".  6 3  to  who,  members Manitoba  the  in  three had  they were \" d i s s a t i s f i e d w i t h  the  s e c o n d a p p l i c a t i o n was six  hundred  were d i s s a t i s f i e d not also  and  the  represent  \"with  with in  100 p e r c e n t  the  the these in  pay  strike two  its  for  the  workers,  also  only with rates pay  the  settled they  had  applications,  membership  and  it  would  IAM.  concerned  and  Rygus,  the  sent  drive\".  By  an open s e c r e t  o f f i c e s , that  some  of  their  top  d i r e c t o r of education  Canadian  in January to \"confer with  is  before  employees  Harold Thayer,  Mike  CAIMAW m e m b e r s h i p  o f many a d m i n i s t r a t i v e its  f o r the  thousand  1968,  successful  almost  Machinists  Union  right  Coach,  but  year  CAIMAW w e r e  officers  both a r r i v e d  workers  one  pending  Aerospace's  servicing,  heavy l o s s e s  Machinists  the  Flyer  Bristol  Bristol  boost  The  for  s e r v i c i n g \" T h e  for  IAM.  If a  was  Western  strike  6  mean  at  union's  received\". * would  first  union's  international  certifications  IAM on t h e g r o u n d s t h a t  bargaining  for  1 9 6 9 , CAIMAW, now a p p r o x i m a t e l y  head  the  u n i o n and  February, in the  of  Union  the  union,  management  Winnipeg  Centre,  for  the  Free home  t h e M a c h i n i s t s U n i o n has t r o u b l e  on  \u000C- 51 -  Up  until  this  time,  the  Canadian  t r i e d t o i g n o r e the presence o f the breakaway But  the  membership  protection  of  formulated. Winnipeg to  drive  the In  now u n d e r w a y  jurisdictions  a  closed  of  meeting,  CLC  out  National  the  Director  Canadian of  the  too  much.  A policy  affiliates of  would  the  CLC,  acted  as  J o h n F.  Simonds,  spokesman  in  for  MFL  had  scene.  have  to  and  (WDLC) d e c i d e d t o l a u n c h a  organization.  CLC  establishment  u n i o n on t h e l a b o u r  officials  and D i s t r i c t L a b o u r C o u n c i l  wipe  was  Labour  the be the  campaign Assistant  announcing  to  the  press:  A c a m p a i g n has been l a u n c h e d t o b r i n g t h e of  the  independent  Industrial the  Mechanical  ranks  The t i m e  of  the  has  which  unionists with accusations be  how t h e  Canadian  Allied  Workers  trade  been  this  wooing  the  not  removing  allow  independent local  trade  and m a l i c i o u s  these the  into  movement.  workers  themselves  labour c o u n c i l , 64  of  back  union  r a s h p r o m i s e s and f a l s e into  of  Association  an end t o  has  the Canadian Labour  Just  put  a n d we m u s t  seduced  protection  and  legitimate  come t o  organization  Canadian  membership  from  to the  Federation  or  Congress.  u n i o n was  to  be  destroyed  was  left  unexplained, 65  but Mr.  Simonds p r o m i s e d t h a t  To many o b s e r v e r s , doom f o r CAIMAW. long the  if  the  money  this  declaration  o f war  to  members fight.  of In  the fact,  CLC has it  is  its  scale\".  by t h e  L a b o u r r e p o r t e r D u d l e y Magnus w a r n e d ,  \\\\ m i l l i o n  and t i m e  t h e c a m p a i g n w o u l d be \" f u l l  way,  CLC  spelled  \"They w o n ' t and t h e  indeed backs  to  last  CLC  the  has  wall,  \u000C- 52 -  men,  you've  had  capitulate. that  it\".  \"We  we w o u l d  0  0  h a v e been  use  all  our  workers  at  Union  CLC  since  in t h e i r  announcement  Bristol Centre,  Machinist  union  official  attempt  and  kicked,  \"Bristol  Employees  Employees  will  complaint  is  the  Protest  Fight  that  and  for  of  a  to  thwart the  strong  from  flag  the  and a  the  going  to  resolution any  move  by  development  of  plant  MFL  Choose  and  a  from  The  Canadian  CAIMAW b u t a r e  on  of  effigy  signs WDLC\"  the  descended  life-size effigy  displayed  of  international  reaction  building.  picketers  they want t o j o i n  d o i n g s o by t h e a t t e m p t s  in  of  Right  not  said Gugulyn.  Interference  the  to  to defeat  Machinists  front  were  1966 when we p a s s e d a  and manpower  a Canadian in  officials  resulted  Aerospace. parading  dragged  union.  ready  i n d e p e n d e n t C a n a d i a n movement\"  The  the  CAIMAW  resources  American dominated unions a truly  But  a  was  announcing and  \"Bristol  Union\".  \"The  being prevented  unions to destroy  the  from  Canadian  .,68  THE BATTLE FOR BRISTOL AEROSPACE  The within  the  CAIMAW  Bristol  certification  plant  local  - Lodge 7 4 1 .  union meeting f o r e v a s i v e answers president, dozen  several  shop  \"harrassment  members  stewards tactics  of  resigned and h a l f  campaign  Mike  t o members'  the  executive  from truths  their  caused  a  major  Rygus was  upheaval  booed a t  a  q u e s t i o n s , and t h e  lodge's  committee  than  posts.  u s e d by t h e  and  more  a  Complaints  included  international  officers  69 in  dealing  with  the  membership\",  lack  of  service,  and  inadequate  \u000C- 53 -  assistance  in  union  business.  a n n o u n c e d \"Members a r e j u s t  The 280  in  results  favour  of  of  A  disgusted\".^  a  CAIMAW and  251  l a b o u r law o f the d a y ,  required  before  had  eligible  not  certification cast  to vote,  The decision  ballots,  of  a majority  CAIMAW  struggle  Union ordered t h a t  charges  \"promoting dual  Bert  Chatfield  and p o s s i b l e f i n e s  IAM.  However,  March  1969  three  of those e l i g i b l e to vote  was  won  Bristol The  Since  many  a majority  found g u i l t y of the  L o d g e 741  was  did  still  not  it  workers  denied.  with  office  L o d g e 741 s t a n d was  eligible  of  end  international  members o f  u n i o n i s m \" , and  were the  not  at  member  under  had  and Wayne Nowazek  if  However, meeting of  in  granted.  n i n e men w o u l d be c h a r g e d a t a f u t u r e d a t e . Behma,  held  be  Manitoba Labour Board.  Machinists of  vote  favour  could  committee  and t h e i r a p p l i c a t i o n f o r c e r t i f i c a t i o n was  interunion  by t h e  in  executive  0  certification  Manitoba  voters  resigned  this  of  the  trial  rumoured t h a t  another  The t h r e e men c h a r g e d ,  faced  suspension  of  on  Bill  membership  charges.^*  in  a  state  of  t h e m e m b e r s h i p h e l d on May 2 6 , 1 9 6 9 , t h e  revolt.  At  lodge voted to  a  drop 72  the  trial  proceedings  The  membership a l s o  an e x p e n d i t u r e o f the with  campaign only  one  the executive  to  and d i s m i s s  demanded  that  $5,000 from the  defeat  the  \"it  charges  the  executive  lodge's  Canadian  dissenting vote, because  the  the  union.  against  funds At  the  explain that the  membership urged  \"accused\".  the  details  had b e e n  end o f the  had l o s t t h e c o n f i d e n c e o f t h e  the  spent  of in  meeting,  resignation members\".  7 3  of  \u000C- 54 -  Instead certification  of  providing  battle  without  international  placed  international  representative  of  the  lodge  and  its  74  to  the  point  the  of  union  placed  despite  charged  these  actions  as  the  men w o u l d  \"examples  the  Carter,  in  charge  the  w o r k e r s who w e r e f i g h t i n g t h e  to  in  Stanley  in Winnipeg,  three  spent  membership,  with  Furthermore,  the  funds  the  trusteeship,  business. subject,  of  approval  under  of  Those B r i s t o l  u n i o n were q u i c k  accounting  the  L o d g e 741  e x p r e s s e d v i e w s on t h e as o r d e r e d .  an  lodge's  stand  trial  international  of  interference  75 from  Washington\".  Mr.  for  IAM i n T o r o n t o ,  not  a  supervisor workers  own  were  the  is  no  the chief  it  their  While  a supervisor treasurer \"have  to  is  a  takes party  of  this  signing  However  veto\". degree  complete  to  vice-president. 7fi  greater  whether  representative  trustee a third  power  a  Lodge  i m p o s e d on L o d g e 741 was  is  and  the  achieve  doubtful  U.  S.\" of  attitudes  and  issue  file  shop s t e w a r d  raised  own C a n a d i a n  \"There  interference  rank  the  anxious  central  McEvoy.  representatives different  with  Grand  To of  Bristol  autonomy  distinction  a  would  in have  clear.  men w a n t  from  \"supervision\".  admitted,  affairs,  The  s a i d Pat  he  official  t h a t w h a t had been  he a r g u e d ,  along  did,  who  seemed t o o  \"The  but  of a union,  expenditures,  their  retorted  trusteeship  control  Goodison,  Jim  is  no l o c a l  are  the  flatly  Canadian  in  the  international  at  Bristol  still  not  All  Canada\"  by  was run  denied  b a r g a i n i n g than  did  to  autonomy.  towards  and t h e n  battle  institution  Goodison  unions  in  i n the  one their  the  a member o f t h e  own  affairs\" comes  charge.  \"All  stated.  \"We  United States.  organization.\"^ agree.  autonomy.  direction  this he  of  Mike  But  Kostanski,  international  have There  many  of  former reported  \u000C- 55 -  \"We're  treated  like  a  bunch  of  kids...big  brother  in  the  States  is  78 supposed  to  know b e s t . \"  lodge's wishes imposed  on  Certainly,  regarding the  the  lodge  assessment  had  a  dissidents  was  almost  by  view  of  the  overruling  \" a c c u s e d \" , and i n v i e w o f t h e  the  great  in  international,  deal  of  merit.  inseparably  it  to  seem  that  the  cause  of  the  the  \"supervision\"  would  Again,  linked  of  cause  of  this union  Canadian  nationalists. The the  trials  resulted labour  i n s i s t e n c e of the M a c h i n i s t s  of  the  three  i n unexpected r e a c t i o n s establishment  Manitoba  men  district  Railway  Transport  members  of  in  charged  of  and G e n e r a l  with  the  In  CLC-affi1iated union,  In  the  explaining  stand  taken  Hapin, secretary  country  come t o when t h r e e men c a n ' t  want w i t h o u t dropped  to?\"  The the  being t r i e d  the  trials  were conducted  held,  move,  Brotherhood  support the  the  the  the  actions  Canadian  stated,  of  rebel of  the  railway  \"What has  this  s t a n d up a n d s a y w h a t  they  - w h a t d e p t h s o f d e s p a i r h a v e we  in attempting to  flame  of  in July,  nationalistic  \"demonstrating  1969.  regain control  hundred people paraded o u t s i d e the Hotel being  unionism  7 9  international  fanning  by  f o r the c o u n c i l  by W a s h i n g t o n  to  and o p p o s e  u n i o n , Mr. Harry (Canada)  Canadian  with  recognized  unprecedented  (CBRT) v o t e d  another  Machinists.  an  dual  ranks of the  nationalistic  Workers  to proceed  promoting  from w i t h i n the  Winnipeg.  council  international  Canadian  But  of the  the  policies  of  lodge were  only  Approximately  one  F o r t Gary where t h e t r i a l s  were  resentment.  solidarity  against  the  control 80  e x e r c i s e d i n C a n a d a by U n i t e d S t a t e s o f f i c e s  of  international  unions.\"  \u000C- 56 -  H a n d b i l l s were g i v e n out t o the p i c k e t e r s Students, been  stating  organized  their  by  the  support CBRT,  for  by t h e M a n i t o b a A s s o c i a t i o n  the  parade.  protesting  the  The fact  demonstration that  a  of had  \"trial  of  81 Canadians  was  However,  taking  the  place  railway  grounds t h a t  on a U n i t e d  brotherhood's  States  insignia  members w e r e d e m o n s t r a t i n g a s  The r e a s o n g i v e n f o r m a k i n g t h i s an a f f i l i a t e  of  the  based was  not  orders.\"  displayed  i n d i v i d u a l s , not  d i s t i n c t i o n was  CLC t o d e m o n s t r a t e  union's  \"it  isn't  as  on a  union.  customary  p u b l i c l y concerning the  the  for  internal  82 affairs three  of  another  men  were  found  membership i n the The applied voted union. for  the  would  now  In  the union  year,  at  Labour  John  Board  Gugulyn  of and  next  Bristol in  granted  announced  complete  protests,  were  legal  suspended  favour  of  CAIMAW t h e  to  autonomy  opportunity,  Aerospace.  the  and  This the  all from  the  CAIMAW  time,  312  international  bargaining  press  l o c a l . . . i s no l o n g e r i n e f f e c t \"  \"enjoy  these  indefinitely.  the  at  spite  charges,  CAIMAW and 251 v o t e d  Manitoba  plant.  of  certification  of  t r u s t e e s h i p of the group  guilty  international  for  favour The  affiliate.\"  following  again  in  CLC  that  rights  \"the  former  and p r o m i s e d t h a t freedom  to  decide  the on  84 how  their  Bristol better  local  plant, union  Canadian  this  will  operate.\"  promise  no  representation.  control  sentiments,  unit  over  Canadian  both advantages  c o u l d be s e e n as  To  inseparably  doubt the  affairs.  To  the  meant  union that  nationalists,  dissidents  they it  the  achieve  probably  meant  To t h o s e who s h a r e d b o t h  these  w o u l d be f o r t h c o m i n g , b e c a u s e linked.  would  at  t h e two  issues  \u000C- 57 -  THE S T R I K E AT BELL FOUNDRY  In  September  d a t e as a u n i o n - i t s at Bell  violence  the  first  strike.  was  a difficult strike  faced  its  The s e v e n t y  from p i c k e t i n g , o u t r i g h t  negotiate, 85  and  continued  Although  company  the  refused  to  give  crucial  from the  refusal  part  the  assurances  that  the of  was  of  restraining  of  use  picketing  to  contract.  Accusations  injunctions  with  against  first  beginning.  on t h e  test  organized workers  to s t r i k e f o r t h e i r  production  injunction  most  newly  by b o t h s i d e s w e r e a c c o m p a n i e d by c o u r t  employees  labour.  1 9 6 9 , CAIMAW  Foundry v o t e d overwhelmingly  It  to  of  employer non-union  soon  lifted,  \"out-of-town  strike  86 breakers\" that  it  would would  strike  not \"ask  breakers  strikers.\"  87  be the  It  \"I'm  sure  to  that  in.  provincial  from o p e r a t i n g  and  The  union  government it  hopes  responded  to  assist  other  the if  the CAIMAW  the  Allied  W o r k e r s was  strike  breaking  president  to  strikers.  of  MFL, He  Mr.  told  Canadian A s s o c i a t i o n of ask  tactics  the of  assistance  Bell  of  Foundry,  H.  the  the  by  stating  preventing help  the  counts.  L.  Stevens,  Winnipeg  Industrial  the  by  unions w i l l  was t o be s o r e l y d i s a p p o i n t e d on b o t h  Initially, sympathetic  brought  Free  Press,  Mechanical  Federation executive  seemed  to  stop  council  and the  would  88 give  it  full,  speculated,  unbiased  consideration.\"  The  Winnipeg  Free  Press  \u000C- 58 -  If  the  Federation  strikers  on  council  moral  strengthen  strikers...The  move  with  top  destroy  the  \"legitimate  CAIMAW sought  support  the  on  sent a terse affiliate  union  reply,  cause in  line  the would  of  the  considerable  Ottawa,  as  it  l a i d down by t h e  CLC  into  the  movement\".  responding  assistance  picket  morale  also  policy  assist  u n i o n and b r i n g t h e members 89  trade  the  decision  a  officials  the  officials,  statement,  such the  would  CLC  would c o n f l i c t w i t h to  to  grounds,  considerably  concern  decides  of  would  to  the  be  Mr. S t e v e n ' s  Federation  with  forthcoming.  the  But  r e f u s i n g h e l p on t h e g r o u n d s t h a t  published hope  the  that  Federation  CAIMAW \"was  a n d was u s i n g m e t h o d s o f o p e r a t i o n i n o p p o s i t i o n t o  not  an  Federation  90 principles\". followed the  terse  after  The  CLC's  all.  refusal  \"It by  policy  is  of  the  believed  several  MFL  he  destruction [Len  members  of  CAIMAW w o u l d  Stevens^was who  have  pressured  no  love  be  into  for  the  91 Canadian u n i o n \"  reported the Winnipeg  However, with  the  stand  many  taken  by  Canadian the  Free  Press.  affiliates  Federation,  of  and  the  MFL  refused  did  to  not  adhere  agree to  it.  The f o u r h u n d r e d M a n i t o b a members o f t h e L e t t e r  Carriers  Union of  Canada  voted  support  for  CAIMAW  to  strikers. saying,  provide Their  food,  financial  representative  and  moral  condemned  the  stand  taken  the by  the  MFL  \u000C- 59 -  It  is  the  basic  support a l l I  workers report  against  this  l a b o u r group  genuine  rights  Board,  oriented  This  MFL  with  the  (CAIMAW)  that  just  I  by  the  and t h e  The  Canadian  in  their  Union o f  Postal  opposition  to  fighting  the  Manitoba  two C a n a d i a n CAIMAW's  at  the  managerially hoot  worried  for about  union. 92  about.  (CUPW) j o i n e d  Federation's  unions  strike  in  Canadian  Workers  the  was  is  a  I'm  When  ammunition  give  MFL  to  stand  people  providing  t h e men on t h e p i c k e t l i n e  a n d WDLC t h a t  that  certain  don't  between  the  employers.  Federation  Its  Together,  movements  o f L a b o u r h a v e been  is  employer  labour  acknowledged  believe  Federation  differences  that as  Manitoba the  of  I  of  strife  this  Labour  CAIMAW.  in  read  for  Carriers  principle  the  policy  demanded a t  Bell  Foundry  regular  meeting  Letter  regarding  a closed \"against  meeting terrible  w o r k i n g c o n d i t i o n s \" be s u p p o r t e d .  About  80  council  delegates in  the  dissenters, visitors  Union  to  evident Bell  The . change the  its  the  Centre  voted,  with  the  meeting  to  close  and o t h e r  were aware t h a t presence  at  of  the  a  few  only the  unauthorized persons.  press,  Delegates  some h o t d e b a t e w o u l d come when  of  top  postal  and  that  a  union  plea  representatives  from 93  them  to  the was  support  the  s t r i k e r s w o u l d be made.  meeting  was  s t a n d on t h e  Federation.  The  described  Bell  Letter  strike  as  \"stormy\".  and a s  Carriers,  not  The  a result, members  of  MFL  refused  CUPW w i t h d r e w the  MFL,  to from  acted  by  \u000C- 60 -  withdrawing  from  representatives fold  if  the  the  of  WDLC.  the  Although  postal  Federation  unions  tenders  'at  it  say  least  was  they  reported  will  moral  that  return  to  \"both the  support f o r the  MFL  striking  94 workers,\"  the  1  unions  to  this  day  remain  unaffiliated  to  the  95 Federation. however,  Their  establish  actions  close  ties  have e n d u r e d t o t h e p r e s e n t Another movement  source  because  occurring  on  of  lines.  James  the  Bell postal  discomfort  when  be  lines three  in  Winnipeg  Dowell,  carrying  and,  ranking  hearing  of  the  second  sympathy  with  a union that  Winnipeg  Free  Press:  Their stir  picketing behind  Congress the  the  independent a  and  union  sympathy.  9 6  the  has  Just  injunction of  established  CAIMAW  did, that  director  of  of  the  education,  union  more  of  morale  union's  affiliated  with  to  an  at  its  the  of  three CLC  had  picket  in  members  acted  acted  Reported  an in  the  happened  the  Labour  lowest  the  McMillan,  ordinary  because the  on  on  By t h i s a c t ,  destroy.  Canadian  ranks  company m i l i t a n c y ,  John  Canada  than  the was  of  workers  appeared  in  CLC h a d vowed  caused  incident  research d i r e c t o r ,  strike,  largest  an  labour  officers  (CUPE) j o i n e d t h e B e l l  scenes when  was  National  s i g n s t o show s u p p o r t f o r t h e s t r i k e r s .  officers  dispute  u n i o n s and CAIMAW  the  regarding  high  Employees  for  d i r e c t o r o f o r g a n i z a t i o n and G i l b e r t L e v i n e , to  Foundry  time.  policies  October 3,  the  between  of  its  Canadian Union of P u b l i c picket  during  the in the  \u000C- 61 -  Donald MacDonald, matter.  But  president were  on  Stanley  of  CUPE,  doing.  discussed the  president  He  the  said  did  line  the  Little, he  of  of  refused  that  his  \"seem  national  union  that  outright  vice-president  faith  however,  his  a  CLC  general  had  not,  subject  picket  of  of  officers  the  discuss the  to  be  CLC  man  parading with  supposed  the and  knew w h a t  happiest  staffers  is  to  they  when a  he  placard  outlawed  by  the  97 Canadian Labour  On serious  November 2 0 ,  defiance  Brotherhood and  of  financial  striking strike  Congress\".  union,  breaking  of  the  their  Railway,  MFL  edict  support\"  to  Harry  Haplin  Bell  wrote, at  were  twenty  and G e n e r a l  the  used  CLC  when  Transport  tactics  and  locals  with  of  the  the  In  deplore  Foundry  a  and We  letter  protest  most  Canadian  Workers gave t h e i r  strikers. \"We  Bell  faced  \"moral to  the  the  scab  have a u t h o r i z e d  our  98 members Railway  not  to  cross  the  picket  line.\"  Local  U n i o n t h e n d e l i v e r e d an u l t i m a t u m t o MFL.  announce, withdraw  in  public,  support  from both the  of  CBRT,  Mr.  Hogan,  clear-cut  the  MFL and t h e  representing  3,500  representing statement,  for  the  Bell  107  of  Either  Strikers,  or  the the  the  local,  in  Manitoba,  said  made p u b l i c l y by t h e  that  to  the  council,  Federation local  WDLC and w o u l d u r g e a l l  workers  other do  it  would locals  the  local  that  Canadian  same.  wanted  \"a  specifically 99  backs  the  He a d d e d delegation  Bell \"We  strikers,  shall  and  attend  demand  c e a s e t o pay p e r c a p i t a  the  actually the  naming, where  next  statement  tax\".*^  council from  they  meeting the  are  on  (December  council  or  strike\". 16)  withdraw  as  a  and  \u000C- 62 -  The u l t i m a t u m c a u s e d \" t u r m o i l hierarchy\". and was -  in  On t h e  1 0 1  therefore  this  one h a n d , t h e  expected to  case,  the  behind the  c o u n c i l was  follow a policy  destruction  of  international  unions,  withdrawal  the  event  of  which  unions, openly moral  break  up  affiliated  to  sympathetic  The  two  Federation,  and  threatening  to  officials be a  unions  the  i  nvely  T  release  one  II  .  the  the  3,500 It  that  \"they  press  WDLC  a model  support  of  for  were  labour  both  will  shown  far  perhaps  council  did  hand,  given  so,  an  to  be and  council's  break  Railway  a  Canadian  financial  of the  to  the  unlikely,  themselves  as  an  expected the  with  the  Union  understatement  was when  December 16 m e e t i n g  not  at and  Alb  Bell  has and  and  other  always moral,  including  Bell  condemned hand,  given to  those  Foundry  cannot  issued  On t h e one h a n d , he  strikers On t h e  Walker  o f CAIMAW as a u n i o n .  council  workers, line  Secretary  striking.  sympathetic  striking picket  so  it  other  Canadian  compromise.  the  strong disapproval  The  the  be  in defiance  gone  was  to  had a l r e a d y  strong  same.  December 7 ,  whom t h e y  council's  the  the  had  strikers had  If  felt  On  council,  unions  tax.  not  council.  directives  to  102  w h i c h was  council's  against  now  the  was  if  CLC,  be b r e a k i n g f a i t h w i t h  capita  CAIMAW, a n d many  postal  do  told  On  the  to  per  s u p p o r t t o t h e u n i o n and i t s  policies.  k  paying  international  would  also  also  council  to the  b a c k i n g CLC  Besides,  backed the maverick u n i o n , i t would i n e f f e c t  i n the  affiliated  of  CAIMAW.  scenes  support  support  bona  labour  any  indicated employer  His statement  currently  The  press  he made c l e a r  full  all  the  a  fide on  the  council  union  that  the  read:  \u000C- 63 -  constantly  raids  and u n d e r m i n e s  recognized labour bodies the  Canadian  and  Allied  Foundry,  who c h o o s e s  other  faith.  1  This  0  the  cancelled.\"  Local  the  who w e r e  any  to  not  condone  employer,  use  the  ex  than  Mechanical the  including  parte  Bell  injunction  bargain  in  good  the  Canadian  107 and f i v e  other  Railway  CBRT L o c a l s  who had  council's  press  from  release  the  the  labour  action  council)  of  support  some  country\".  of  and  \"disgusted  press.  by  the  The  its  Canadian  sympathy  so-called  105  regarding the  of  we  d i s p u t e not o n l y  affiliates,  some members  treatment  a  international  Federation  Bell  also  of  Canadian  but the  \"In were be  also  The  organized  understandably help  foundry.  a  labour  general  in  itself  is  The u n i o n a n d t h e  on  public  or American unions o p e r a t i n g  movement  union  brought  at  under  is  Free  attack  strike  s t r i k e are  o v e r wages a n d w o r k i n g c o n d i t i o n s .  It  Press,  having  d i f f i c u l t time e x p l a i n i n g i t s  certain  aroused  receiving  found  union  W r o t e D u d l e y Magnus o f t h e W i n n i p e g  to  already  will  1 r\\c  the  union.  1 0 4  t h e hands o f t h e this  of  do  satisfied  (withdrawal  opposition  CAIMAW  We  rather  The M F L ' s p o l i c i e s the  Industrial  includes  o f d i s a f f i l i a t i o n f r o m MFL and WDLC t o l d r e p o r t e r s , labour  contemplating  of  to  3  of  d r a w n up l e t t e r s of  means,  statement  Representatives  view  Workers  practices  and  i n Canada and t h i s  Association  unethical  unions a f f i l i a t e d  at  refusal a  legal. fits  an local It  is  properly  from  \u000C- 64 -  into labour's man.  What makes t h i s  that  it  financial  labour  and  that  the  its  CLC  has who  condone  But  in  is  The to  concern the  in  able  and  its  members  the  for  all  CLC has  a  to  trade  and  thereby  the  labour  movement's  organized  or  e x p l a i n i n g to  do  1 0 7  Bell  fact,  the  in  difficult  the  no  doubt  against  engaged  legitimate  a  sectarian its  the  Canadian  Due t o  the  interests  head  Bell  determination  to  Bell  based  jurisdiction, in  Foundry.  dispute  on  trade  the  having  principle  with  before trade  placed  the  going  CLC  to  principle  union  struggle  angry  had  position of  its  satisfaction.  union  of  help  justify  workers, lot  which  CLC  on and why a t  interests,  labour,  \"raiding\" be  of  the  union  of  from  union  understand what i s  organizations  its  another  away  b e f o r e t h e a v e r a g e man w i l l  In  and s e v e r a l  should  to  difference  broke  independent  Why  different  Congress  The  may  own  light  unorganized,  an  join  CLC  Canadian  Foundry  called  its  the  expressed  Bell  joined to  the  working  s u p p o r t , not  affiliates?  outlawed.  what  position  down on  at  quit  movement?  of  Winnipeg  employees  workers  place  help,  CLC \u00A3 s i c j a n d  the  p a r t i c u l a r s t r i k e so  d o e s n ' t even m e r i t the moral  mention is  l o n g s t r u g g l e on b e h a l f o f t h e  balance  of  of  affiliated  protection  support  employer.  sectarian  By  for  opposition of  the  general  workers  choosing  u n i o n p r i n c i p l e s , t h e MFL public,  of  to  brought  the  press  affiliates.  Foundry's continue  CAIMAW o f f i c i a l s  also  refusal  to negotiate  production  with  hoped t o e l i c i t  the  the  with use  CAIMAW and of  to  non-union  aid of Manitoba's  NDP  \u000C- 65 -  government  in  their  government,  however,  efforts  to  did nothing to  L a b o u r M i n i s t e r Russ  Paul l e y  use  injunction  of  action  the  ex p a r t e  was  a  proposing  obtain  statement  legislation  stated  that  to  by  the  scrap  a  help  collective  resolve  that  he was  the  dispute.  \"strongly  employer\",  \"Manitoba  the  the  agreement.  his  law  only  of  injunctions  for  the  in  distant  strikers.  connection future  The  with  was,  labour  of  the  picket  course,  minister  department would i n v e s t i g a t e  the  also  of  told  the  union charges  This help  to  use  promise the  legislature  that  the  no  lines\". little  of  considering  permits  I  the  promise  is  that  Although  opposed t o  government  provincial  The  Bell  that  his  s t r i k e breakers  were  109 being brought  in  to  replace  such  an  never  a n n o u n c e d , and i t  request  investigation  by  the  commission to this of  refusal  inquiry  allow  ever  for  the the  d i s p u t e was  legislature  refusal  under  that  together  under  He c i t e d  the  of  attack the  the  Manitoba of  for the  from  the  the  Labour  to  achievement  of  a  an  Paulley  d i d not time  the  parties\".  Act  the as  first  in  examples  inquiry  this  the  type not  at  dispute  Mr.  Mowatt  the  plant,  opposing such  a  1 1 0  in  abattoir  time  Also,  law d i d  Union.  brought  were  explained  feel  time c o n t r a c t  If  results  industrial  Mr.  Carriers  Relations  children  its  intervene  often  bricklayers,  crippled  \"he  on t h e  Letter  had  of  present  government  government  disputes  in  the  foundry.  from the government.  that  the  the  however,  d i s p u t e was f o r a f i r s t  the  drivers  involvement  at  at  denied.  impose c o m p u l s o r y a r b i t r a t i o n  it  noted  conducted,  establishment  s h o u l d be e s t a b l i s h e d  pointed out t h a t  Teamster  s t r i k i n g workers  p r o d u c e d no a c t i o n  investigate  The  and  was  by t e l l i n g t h e  him t o  brought  union  the  parties  circumstances.  workers of  contract.  and  the  government \"Labour  \u000C- 66 -  Minister  Paulley  Foundry,  said  receipt\"  of  the  has  Mr. Mowatt.  the  telegram  commission.'''  dispute  agreed  useful  in  failed  that  bringing  duties\"  from the  union  Winnipeg  the the  his  regarding  He e v e n a c c u s e d  The  1 1  in  Paulley  requesting  newspapers  intervention  parties  Mr.  of  together,  the  the  of  the  that  strike now  were  could  Bell  \"denying  establishment  not  of  covering  government  and  at  the  could  prove  understand  why  112 Mr.  Paulley  was  But  refusing to  Manitoba  had  act.  an  NDP  relationship that  e x i s t e d between  cabinet  many m i n i s t e r s  contained  unions  which  had  labour  minister  international Natural  himself  railway  Resources,  during the He  pledged  had,  court  apparently,  themselves had  come  the  that  to  the  Sid  legal  to  the  ranks  Green,  at  that  of  a  for  the a  CAIMAW.  of  of  \"passionate  -  The  affiliated Mines  Molders  breakup  The  unions  CLC  the  close  unions.  of  Minister  advisor  time  the  international  destruction  had a c c o m p a n i e d  developed  reflected  NDP and i n t e r n a t i o n a l  from  Mr.  been  battles  the  that  who had t i e s  union.  had  government  and Union  Local  174.  hatred  for  113 CAIMAW \" 1  union  within  There  was  the  ranks  CAIMAW o f f i c i a l s , the  no p a r t i c u l a r of  explained  love  for  the  Schreyer  the  government's  the  independent  government,  a  reluctance  fact to  Canadian which,  to  intervene  in  Bel 1 d i s p u t e . Finally,  U n i o n s i g n e d up t h e and were g r a n t e d collective resistance\".  fourteen  after  non-union employees  certification  agreement 114  months  with  at the  CAIMAW's f i r s t  the  the  began,  working behind the  plant.  Molders  strike  strike  The e m p l o y e r \"quietly  and  had b e e n e f f e c t i v e l y  the  Molders  picket  line,  then signed a without broken.  any  \u000C-  CLC a f f i l i a t e s  67  -  in Manitoba often proved themselves  to  have  \"an  which  no  view  of  115 inadequate  respect  for  each  others  picket  lines,\"  doubt proved d e t r i m e n t a l  to the e f f e c t i v e n e s s  the  in  stand  taken  by  strikes,  CAIMAW was  breaking  tactics  unions  within  assistance time,  however,  international CAIMAW t h e the  press  NDP, NDP  the  MFL's  sympathy  factors,  a s a u n i o n was  The to  Molders Local  the  174  CAIMAW was the  workers concept  Union  had  was  at  support  the  not  and  vulnerable the  such  of  to  a  of  strike  at  Bell  CAIMAW  to the use o f  strike  of  international  receive  wholehearted  the  At  the  of  Canadian  same  jurisdictions  union p r i n c i p l e s  some members  importantly,  aid  situation.  protecting  In to  influence  likely  in  strike.  financial  the expense of t r a d e  most  the  general  affiliates  of  of  earned public,  the  CLC.  F o u n d r y was b r o k e n - b u t CAIMAW  INVOLVEMENT  who of  itself  of  i I . . 116 would adopt.  broke  the  away  political  supported  the  affiliated  established,  question  policy  to  o f any  fact  not.  CAIMAW AND P O L I T I C A L  used  government  and  and p e r h a p s  Due  CAIMAW was  the  moral  particularly  employers.  affiliates  Due t o t h e s e  refusing  perhaps  by  the  from  MFL  a  partisan  the  to  the its  policies  Molders  involvement  establishment  therefore,  political  from  NDP  of in  members that  the  Union by  NDP  Manitoba. addressed  the  new  had  been  unions.  The  in  and  1960, As  soon  as  themselves  to  breakaway  union  \u000C- 68 -  Initially, logical Union  direction had  been  dictatorial for  the  to  many  After  to  a  attitude  of  the  of  Molder's  support  political  party  in  the  the  their  break  with  the  funds,  lack  of  drain  workers.  of  that  factor  executive  They  Besides,  had  the  of  the  as  the  NDP  seemed  and l a c k no  the  a  Molders service,  of  quarrel  the  NDP w i t h  in preventing  the  NDP was  c o u l d be v i e w e d  relationship  p r o v e d t o be a c r u c i a l  for  international  NDP.  Canada  support  all,  perceived  Canadian  for  However,  members,  take.  due  rights  labour.  to  respect  with  only  the  existing  political  arm  international  of  unions  union from adopting  this  policy.  First, NDP was  going  some o f  far  the  enough  in  t h e NDP seemed \" n o d i f f e r e n t as  the  Waffle  conservative  group  with  another  was  a factor  and  instead  party\"  that  labour.  which to  of  socialist  rest\".'''  conclude,  that  movement  ideals,  CAIMAW d i d n o t  it  that  a belief  that  led  would  this  group  f o r .the more  was  feel  that  goals.  Perhaps  1 7  f o r opposing i n t e r n a t i o n a l  \"look  they  the  To  concluded,  the  would p r o v i d e unionism.  actively  of  a  represent  this  a  from group  Certainly,  completely the  of  NDP  t o o p p o s e CAIMAW s u p p o r t f o r  formation  them,  influence  prevented  the  the  it NDP,  new  political  of  Canadian  needs  1 1 8  Secondly, their  in  pursuit  from the  labour  socialist  reason  the  came t o  American  promoting true  membership  attitude  operating  many  when,  outside  the  CAIMAW members who d i d s u p p o r t  as  members  ranks  of  of  the  an  independent  traditional  labour  the  NDP  breakaway  changed group  establishment, 119  they  found t h e i r  offers  of  campaign  assistance  politely  refused.  To  \u000C- 69 -  accept open  support to  the  f r o m members same  no d o u b t  political  them b i t t e r support  anxious  party  for  a  constitution  of  of  support  group of  would  dual  leave  unionism  the  NDP  that  had  the  support of  the  CCL.  This,  avoid.  But  CAIMAW members  felt  shunned  supported.  \"soured  a  lot  political the  maverick  accepted  to  they  and  the  accusations  p l a g u e d t h e CCF when i t was  of  new  The  of  people\" 120  party.  union  NDP's  policies  towards  For  prohibited  NDP  by  the  towards  them  concept  of  the  both  the  these  affiliation  left  CAIMAW  reasons,  and  the  donations  to  121 \"any  political  party\".  This change  constitutional  because,  increased.  In  upon B r i s t o l CAIMAW's  as  CAIMAW  1969, Mr.  employees  on t h e  developed,  L.  Orlikow,  to cast  certification  intervention  provision  their  campaign  grounds  not  its  differences  NDP  of  plant.  workers  to  with  of the He  \"need  undergo  any  the  Parliament,  in favour  their  the  likely  Member  ballots  at  that  was  NDP  called  IAM  during  justified  powerful  his  assistance  122 in  the  event  overlooked from  is  what  of that  they  international comments  of the  considered  could  not of  international  strike\".  part  union  inconsistency  Liberal  a  during have  the  Member  of  was  to  be  strike  done  much  position brought  Parliament  for  in  constituency  the I  free  of the  the to in to  year.  the  supporting the  fore  Winnipeg \"having  NDP  to  both  when  South taken  to  workers  assistance  previous endear  appears  Bristol  inadequate  M r . O r l i k o w i n t h e House o f Commons f o r intervene  Mr. O r l i k o w  discontent  a  NDP's  unions  What  have  stemmed  from  their  Certainly,  his  CAIMAW.  The  nationalism Mr.  E.  Centre, it  B.  and  Osier,  criticized  upon h i m s e l f  to  e l e c t i o n of workers at B r i s t o l Aerospace in the 123 represent\". He p o i n t e d o u t t h a t M r . O r l i k o w w a s , i n  \u000C- 70 -  effect,  urging unionists  from  member  a  of  a  Canadian s o c i e t y ,  conduct  by  one  party  this  Commons, M r . O s i e r  to  that  is  on t h e  members  their  power o f  decries  strange t a l k  asked of  rely  of  all  foreign unions.  American  influence  i n d e e d \" he s a i d .  the  party.  NDP w h a t  \"I  In  they  received\"  \"This our  t h e House  thought  he  in  of  of  this  reported,  \"no  124 understandable  reply\".  Moreover, hostile  environment  discussed for  t h e M a n i t o b a NDP g o v e r n m e n t p r o v i d e d , i f  above,  CAIMAW.  The  dispute  could  refrain  from  situation  it  did  the government  for was  the  development  a government  government's  only NDP  support.  not  change.  run F l y e r  that  refusal  be e x p e c t e d t o  to  the  the  the midst  Industries,  h a v e no  intervene  in  the  the  Schreyer of  in  Labour  Russ  if  stated  the  answered  government \"That  obviously  McEvoy.  1 2 6  doesn't meant  was  strike  that  enough p e o p l e were p r e p a r e d  meant  \"He  Paulley  \"he to  necessarily he  would  if  to mean  hire  the the  CAIMAW  in  necessary.  goon  open  breakers,  type  non-goon  1974  at  non-union  the  When a s k e d  strike  this  Minister to  to  management  he w o u l d h i r e  to work\". hire  Foundry  administration,  w o u l d be w i l l i n g  return  prepared  of  S i d Green announced t h a t  labour  Industries  resolve  As  sympathy  Bell  a CAIMAW s t r i k e  r i g h t t o h i r e n o n - u n i o n l a b o u r , and t h a t Flyer  union.  to  had t h e  the  breakaway  appeared  strengthen  During In  of  anything, a  of  plant  if  that  Paulley  strikebreaking.\" kind,\"  retorted  \u000C- 71 -  CAIMAW 1976 s t r i k e and  a  at  and  Griffin  commission  regulate  the  evaluating  the  sure was  overtime,  the  response  didn't fiddle  around  Today, hand,  CAIMAW  recognizes  to  we  and  compulsory  between  politicians NDP  party  have  as  the board  as  was  a  in  the  dispute.  request  to In  complained:  All  they  three-quarter needed  was  overtime  h a v e t o make up i t s  during  a conciliation  us.  really  relationship  the  help  time  or i t  some NDP  issue  again  s t r i k e , McEvoy  of the workers  the  On one  major  with  for  Paul l e y ,  to the  regulating  going to  by  what  clashed  request  do a n y t h i n g  when  legislation  is a party  A union denied  legislation  NDP i s  government  flatly  government  They did  Steel.  was  compulsory  Schreyer  The  mind w h e t h e r 127  it  isn't!  CAIMAW and  been  the  the  supportive  political  party  NDP  is  mixed.  of  CAIMAW,  in  Canada  and most  128 likely  to  be  experiences  favourable  with  bitterness  the  towards  \"some p o l i t i c a l  to  labour.  Schreyer  the  are  the  administration  NDP w i t h i n  parties  On  CAIMAW's  better  than  other  have  ranks,  others,  left  and  but  hand,  an  a  CAIMAW's legacy  of  attitude  that  none o f them c a n  be  129 completely  trusted\".  beliefs  are  subject  appropriate  CAIMAW s t i l l political  the  Also,  personal for  follows  party,  concern a  the  CAIMAW a d h e r e s  union  policy  \"preferring  of  to  of as  individual an  such  that  members,  organization.  refraining  leave  to the view  political and  not  Consequently,  from a f f i l i a t i o n w i t h  choice  to  the  a  member  any  on  an  130 individual National unions  basis\". convention  to  \"support  A that a  policy would  particular  resolution  allow party  the in  put  National a  forward  at  union  or  particular  the the  1979 local  circumstance\",  \u000C- 72 -  including they  providing  did  to  us?\"  financial  asked  some  donations,  was  defeated. ^  convention  delegates.  1  \"After  1  \"Remember  what  Griffin  132 Steel!\"  The N a t i o n a l  support  pro-labour  union does, however,  legislation  and  oppose  c a n and d o e s p u r s u e a p o l i c y o f p o l i t i c a l with  such  issues  legislation.  It  as  Workmans  supports  right  anti-labour  condemns  to  concerning  legislation  political  actively  legislation.  involvement,  Compensation  1  or  have the  and  policies,  It  itself mining  including  133 those  of  the  political  NDP,  but  remains  aloof  from  partisan  politics  and  parties. CAIMAW AND CANADA'S LABOUR ESTABLISHMENT  THE MANITOBA  LABOUR BOARD  The  CLC's  concern  to  Manitoba  Labour Board.  man  panel,  and  a  new  union  consisting  of  firmly  drawn  from  entrenched these  unions  CAIMAW  receive  impartial  cases  labour.  But  ranks in  of  the  and  it  caused  particular  presented  representative labour  international  Canada's  officers  CAIMAW  before  t h e b o a r d w e r e h e a r d by a  a  hearing,  the present  on  chairman,  were bound t o  CAIMAW,  \"disqualify  the  war  put before  from  position  destroying an  a  of  regarding  Cases  representative  typically  Since  the  declaration  labour  CLC's  publicly  doubted  whether  upon  three  management  representatives unions,  recognized  called  from  the  the  due  to  were their  establishment.  declared their Labour  policy  cases  would  Minister  labour r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s . . .from adjudicating  of  any  to  \u000C- 73 -  matter  involving  the  Canadian  Association\".  be l i k e a s k i n g t h e a s s o c i a t i o n ' s  enemies  matters  to  if  present  the  association  labour representatives  Such with of  little  the  that  were  disqualifications  choice  Labour  this  but to take  Board.  was  a  But  factor  was  not  a  board  forthcoming,  chances w i t h  officers  that  before  in  \"It  would  certification on w h i c h  the  1 or  were  its  argued,  for assistance  appear  sit.\"  They  1 J \u00A3 f  of  the  new  detrimental  leaving  the e x i s t i n g union  to  composition  remained  their  CAIMAW  convinced  interests.  Such  beliefs  w e r e s t r e n g t h e n e d when t h e M a n i t o b a L a b o u r B o a r d made r u l i n g s  CAIMAW  certifications  example o f for  the  plant.  these that  to  CAIMAW  such a r u l i n g o c c u r r e d  bargaining The  mechanics  which,  union  rights  had  signed  and m e c h a n i c s  employees office  did  employees  certification  at  i n December,  Community up a  working at  not  v o t e on t h e  be  a  included  grounds  that  in  Motors,  of  plant. unit  seemed  unfair.  1965 when CAIMAW  Chev  majority the  represent  must  officers,  the  the  applied  auto-body  board r u l e d  appropriate  for  application  CAIMAW d i d n o t  One  unorganized  painters,  But  the  an  on  that  bargaining, and d e n i e d  a  h a v e as members  a  136 majority  of  this  CAIMAW o f f i c e r s certification  larger  t o be an u n j u s t attempt  underground mine. early  part  of  at  February,  application  But  4,  April  application employees  as  for  1968,  with the  of  its  Mining  in  of  and  Corporation,  on  90 p e r c e n t  union.  April of  the  Steelworkers  claiming  what  to  have  appeared  to  1968 d u r i n g a CAIMAW  organizing drive  United  their  example  ruling occurred  1968  certification,  members  Another  Tantalum  CAIMAW b e g a n  certification on  unit.  at  10,  an the  mine  1968,  employees of  uncertified  as  America a  CAIMAW p o i n t e d  majority out  to  in  filed  the a  members. filed of the  an the  board  \u000C- 74 -  that  under  the  Manitoba  of  unorganized  certification urged  the  board  to  CAIMAW t h e v o t e ,  hold  a  Labour  Relations  workers  could  certification  Act  be  application  made  vote.  at  But  any  the  and c e r t i f i e d t h e U n i t e d S t e e l w o r k e r s  for  time,  board  and  denied  o f A m e r i c a as  the  137 bargaining view  of  agent  for  the  CAIMAW o f f i c e r s  technicality  at  all  mine.  that,  would  Such  due t o  result  rulings  the  in  merely  composition of  our  application  reinforced the  for  the  board,  \"any  certification  I 00  being dismissed\".  CAIMAW AND THE  In hostile  CLC  the  stance  early  days  towards  new u n i o n ' s n e w s p a p e r ,  the  of  its  existence,  CLC.  As  stated  CAIMAW  in  the  did  first  not  adopt  edition  \" T h e A s s o c i a t i o n h a s n o t h a d any q u a r r e l  a  of  the  with  the  139 Canadian  Labour  question  of  Congress  CAIMAW's  or  other  affiliated  affiliation  to  the  unions\".  CLC  was  In  raised  fact,  the  the  new  at  140 union's  first  convention  CLC a f f i l i a t i o n was the  issue  towards  was  It  is  on t h e  indicates  not a plank  doubtful  an a f f i l i a t e ,  even i f  adheres  a  to  October,  defeated  raised  t h e CLC was  in  1965.  convention  that,  Although  f l o o r , the very f a c t  initially  at  least,  the  CLC c o u l d  have  accepted  s u c h an a p p l i c a t i o n had been made. of  motion  for that  hostility  i n CAIMAW's p l a t f o r m .  whether  principle  the  the  exclusive  CAIMAW  First,  jurisdiction  as  the  CLC  of  its  141 affiliates.  Although  jurisdictions  CAIMAW was o r g a n i z i n g i n f i e l d s  already  Molders  CAIMAW's  and  the  Steelworkers.  do o v e r l a p allocated  to  a  certain  extent,  to the M a c h i n i s t s ,  jurisdiction  would,  the  therefore,  \u000C- 75 -  have  been  unacceptable  certification regarded by t h e  as  CLC.  of  the  the  to  the  plants  r a i d i n g of  CLC.  Secondly,  making  up  Local  a CLC a f f i l i a t e ,  the  174  an  change  of  act  the  in  Molders  expressly  forbidden  the CLC's p o l i c i e s of r a i d i n g operated to prevent  d i s s i d e n t M o l d e r s f r o m r e p l a c i n g t h e i r u n i o n w i t h a n o t h e r CLC and f o r c e d them t o John  stay  Gugulyn,  on t h e in  his  a p p r o a c h e d an i n t e r n a t i o n a l them. fear  The of  international  achieve He  of  better  and  his  in  however,  itself  that  union  open  as  one o f  1964 w i t h was  to  was  union  unable  to of  viable  alternative  not  that  were  nationalism  union  union that  his  of  CAIMAW,  CAIMAW j o i n i n g  accept  the  raiding  than  motive  in  per s e ,  but  that  dissidents  provided rather  could provide  group  another  for CLC  - e v e n an i n t e r n a t i o n a l  from  the  speculation.  talks But  with  the  unnamed  presumably,  such  CAIMAW w i t h supporting the by  the  desire  the  than  an  to  Molders.  nationalists,  g o o d r e p r e s e n t a t i o n was  one.  CAIMAW m e m b e r s h i p w o u l d h a v e s u p p o r t e d s u c h  remain  to  affiliate, independent  leaders  a view  charges  representation  supporters  such, another  resulted  the  own  Gugulyn c o n s i d e r e d the merger o f  indicates  CAIMAW  and as  the  capacity  developing t h e i r  the  1 4 3  The f a c t  formation  path o f  union  international, leaving  affiliate.  was  142  In f a c t ,  union.  union  Whether the m a j o r i t y a move  if  international a proposal  anything will  would  t h e n a t i o n a l i s t s w i t h i n CAIMAW's r a n k s , a n x i o u s t o a c h i e v e  have  have  a of  had to  caused  Canadian  \u000C- 76 -  control  over  their  d i s s i d e n t s on t h e  own  issue.  an e v e n t d i d n o t t a k e  affairs,  to  part  company  with  the  union  B e c a u s e o f t h e C L C ' s p o l i c i e s on r a i d i n g ,  place.  The  u n i o n d i s s i d e n t s and t h e  such  nationalists  c o n t i n u e d t o s h a r e a common c a u s e .  The because was  of  to  dissident  restraints  members  inherent  k e e p them o u t s i d e  broke  with  their  own  the  Molders  the  in  Molders the  As  policies,  a  Local  system,  traditional  Union.  independent  of  had,  embarked  therefore,  on a p a t h  that  l a b o u r e s t a b l i s h m e n t when  they  result,  which  174  they  became  were  free  increasingly  to  develop  critical  of  144 American domination of the Canadian Canadian appeal CLC. union  had  policies  developed  that  it  CLC had p u b l i c l y vowed t o enough  was  independent course.  country,  faith  determined  and  to  destroy  confidence  fight  these  of  the  the  the  surge  f o r many C a n a d i a n s , a n d w e r e t h e c a u s e o f some d i s c o m f o r t f o r time  sweeping  the  had  the  was  In  policies  By  nationalism that  l a b o u r movement.  for  the  in  CAIMAW, t h e  new  itself  and  its  follow  an  right  To r e p o r t e r D u d l e y M a g n u s , t h e f a u l t  of a f f a i r s  lay with  the  situations  where w o r k e r s  C L C , and were  its  inability  to  d i s s a t i s f i e d with  to  for this  effectively their  incumbent  He w r o t e : The CLC was allow  a  another its  at  fault  change  in  for  members  leadership.  The  1956  merger  forbidden,  period.  so-called  recognized  technicalities  of  not CLC  p r o v i d i n g some means that  convention,  they  want  has  been  since  that  raiding  Thus CAIMAW m e n , r e j e c t e d the  labour  to  find  policy  movement  is  by  the  because  of  CLC c o n s t i t u t i o n w h i c h  deal  border  state with union.  \u000C- 77 -  on  the  arrogant,  own.  As  time  physical  and  themselves maintain  As outside  the  it  on  They  their  grew  established  itself  and  consolidated  \"legitmate  labour\",  the  CLC \" l e t  of  in  now b e l i e v e  barred  status  no  go  dissidents  strength.  with  to  holds 145  the  ranks  compelled  passed,  mental  and  CAIMAW  the  were  will  in  fight  to  quo.  the  its  position  lone  Winnipeg  146 union  run  on,  trying  applictions for a dramatic  Flyer  change It  to  policy.  clear  to  done t o  placate  of  Machinists  the  the Air  at  breath.  the  CLC  S.  had t o  head  could  be  resulted  be  perhaps union  Airport  by  this  maverick  union  stop  muttered  angrily  under  its  1 4 7  The p o l i c y o f t h e C L C , t h e r e f o r e , w o u l d now be t h e of  CAIMAW  and  justification CAIMAW  in  criticism directed its  the  given  raiding was  e x p a n s i o n was  Table  II).  The  return  CLC  its  this  CLC  affiliates.  policy  CAIMAW's  previously in  of  for  unfair.  towards  in  office  international  International  will  1969  Magnus:  U.  next\"  CAIMAW's  Aerospace  something  same  Winnipeg  \"When the  CLC t h a t \"What  But  and B r i s t o l  international  of  the  Canada.  raiding?\"  existed\".  Speculated  the  the  machinists  employed  it  Coach I n d u s t r i e s  in that  became  forget  plants could  members was In  the  to  CLC  fold.  \"unprincipled\"  fact,  objectives  the  destruction  it  in  unorganized plants  actions  appears  terms  of  no u n i o n  had p r e v i o u s l y  hardly  justify  its  objective  of  that  this  growth  were  and, generally  where  The  speaking,  existed of  (see  returning  \u000C- 78 -  these fold  CAIMAW in  members  the  first  that  were  dissatisfied  with  unions  change. the  to  the  place.  to  made  attacks  occurred  their  belong  f o l d when  Those  to  to  when  of  never  been  certifications in  approached  requests  union  had  workers  union,  such  the  they  on t h e  only  incumbent  CAIMAW's a t t i t u d e  right  CLC  was  their  that  in  of  the other  these  plants,  CAIMAW  seeking  \"individuals  choice  in  a  have  democratic  148 society\".  Although  support i n the  this  doesn't  the  the  first  for  dissidents? a  group  business unions  that  in  not  In  won't  wants  to  the  the be  rump  for  campaign  destroying  CAIMAW.  Defiance  affiliates  was,  doubt,  no  Furthermore,  b r o u g h t down on t h e the  public,  Winnipeg the  press  of an  during  heads  of  by  CLC,  it  found  and  District  and  many  have  the  CLC  CLC, the Labour  time  At  a  when  same  1969 d i d  policy  by  Manitoba  Canadian  have they  not  succeed  several  Foundry, Federation  the As  labour than  to  its  the  policy  of  Labour  criticism such,  in  Canadian  contributing  Bell  ranks of  the  sense  unless  affiliates.  its  them  the  Council  that  Besides,  in  in  at  always  that's  factor  dispute  Canadian  are  unions  CLC  \"legitimate\"  - CAIMAW.  in  in  facilities  recognize  movements  important  the  there  Canadian,  i n f l i c t e d more damage t o t h e target  the  fault  themselves  the  the  at  adequate  rebellion,  launched  was  congress  all  employers w o u l d n ' t 149 deserved them.  and  impress  it  democracy  workers  have  asked  admit  that  failure.  not  having  a  Why of  generally  congress  place  dissidents.  The  did  press.  ' Why  if  argument  it  of  the  perhaps it  n a t i o n a l i s m was  did on  to the  \u000C- 79 -  rise,  the  Canadian  policy  of  protection  organization  CAIMAW t h e  caused  sympathetic  of  international  embarrasment  s u p p o r t o f many  for  the  by  CLC  destroying  and  gained  and  they  the  became  a  legitimate  member  u n i o n movement.  c o m m i t t e d was  to break  start  out  on  Personally, labour\" they -  as  they  I  think  Mr. Stevens  isn't  which  The  their  own  i s what they  emergence  i l l u m i n a t e d weaknesses First,  simultaneously  the  of  if  had  allowed  as  a  Canadian  s h o u l d be  calls  i n the  it.  But  I  t h e y can 150  afford  to  to  group.  \"house also  of  think want  start  one,  did.  CAIMAW  on  the  industrial  relations  t h a t e x i s t e d i n the Canadian labour inconsistency  supporting  by  \"crime\" of daring  are e n t i t l e d t o choose whatever union they  even  for  They a r e \" u n p r i n c i p l e d \"  own  they  of  The \" c r i m e \" t h e y  committed the  their  union  away, which  t h e b i g u n i o n s o f t h e CLC o n l y because  a  Canadians.  They w e r e c e r t i f i e d by t h e M a n i t o b a L a b o u r B o a r d Canadian trade  itself.  unions  of  the  international  establishment  NDP's  unionism  scene  position and  in  Canadian  i n d e p e n d e n c e was made c l e a r when NDP members c h o s e t o e x p r e s s an o p i n i o n during NDP  CAIMAW c e r t i f i c a t i o n  tended  to  inconsistency itself  as  same t i m e  a  remain of  carefully  Manitoba's  political  campaigns.  party  refusing to a s s i s t  NDP  aloof  affiliates.  from  government  sympathetic  to  in  for  such  this  reason,  contests.  And  simultaneously  Canadian  CAIMAW, a l e g i t i m a t e  by t h e M a n i t o b a L a b o u r B o a r d , b r o u g h t i t CLC  No d o u b t  labour  trade  under a t t a c k  the the  depicting and  union  f r o m some  at  the  certified Canadian  \u000C- 80 -  Secondly, the  refusal  assistance  to  illuminated a  split  of  t h e C L C ' s p o l i c y o f t h e d e s t r u c t i o n o f CAIMAW l e d  the  MFL  CAIMAW  an  between  and  members  the  WDLC  on  strike  interunion s p l i t within international  to  provide  moral  Bell  Foundry.  at the  and C a n a d i a n  and  affiliates.  financial  This  C o n g r e s s and t h e  policy  Federation,  The  failure  t h e CLC t o a c c o m p l i s h t h e d e s t r u c t i o n o f CAIMAW was no d o u b t l a r g e l y to  the  refusal  Moreover,  of  Canadian  affiliates  These to  entrenched  adhere  t h e C L C ' s p o l i c y e a r n e d f o r CAIMAW t h e  an i n c r e a s i n g l y n a t i o n a l i s t i c p u b l i c a n d  tended  to  weaknesses  offset  the  position  within  difficulties of  the  t h e r e f o r e , would not only s u r v i v e  the  of due  policy.  s y m p a t h y and s u p p o r t  of  press.  Canadian  CAIMAW  international  to  to  faced  unions  - i t would  labour  grow.  due in  institutions  to  Canada.  the  firmly CAIMAW,  \u000C- 81 -  FOOTNOTES 1.  2.  Information obtained from Mr. A. P i t t , Association of Industrial Mechanical and p e r s o n a l i n t e r v i e w , V a n c o u v e r , B. C.  President, Canadian A l l i e d Workers, 1980,  Ibid.  3.  I n f o r m a t i o n o b t a i n e d f r o m M r . P. M c E v o y , R e g i o n a l V i c e P r e s i d e n t , C a n a d i a n A s s o c i a t i o n o f I n d u s t r i a l M e c h a n i c a l and A l l i e d W o r k e r s , p e r s o n a l i n t e r v i e w , V a n c o u v e r , B. C.  4.  Information obtained from i n t e r v i e w , V a n c o u v e r , B. C.  5.  Information obtained from i n t e r v i e w , V a n c o u v e r , B. C .  6.  Ibid.  7.  Ibid.  Mr. Mr.  A. P.  Pitt,  op. c i t . ,  personal  McEvoy,  op. c i t . ,  personal  8.  S. J a m i e s o n , Industrial Relations in Macmillan of Canada, 1975, pp.46-47.  9.  Ibid.,  Canada,  2nd e d . ,  Toronto,  p.47.  10.  J . Crispo, International Unionism, Canada L t d . , 1 9 6 7 , p . 2 7 7 .  11.  Ibid.,  p.82.  12.  Ibid.,  p.181.  13.  Jamieson,  14.  Ibid.,  15.  R. A d a m s , Relations,  16.  Information obtained from i n t e r v i e w , V a n c o u v e r , B. C.  17.  Ibid.  18.  Ibid.  19.  Ibid.  op. c i t . ,  Toronto,  McGraw-Hill  Co.  of  pp.57-58.  p.56. \" C a n a d a - U . S. Labor v o l . 15, no. 3, Oct. Mr.  Link Under 1976, p.303. P.  McEvoy,  Stress\", op. c i t . ,  Industrial personal  \u000C- 82 -  20.  M. T h o m p s o n , \" T h e Evolving Role of Canadians in International U n i o n s \" , paper presented to the 17th Annual C o n f e r e n c e , Canadian I n d u s t r i a l R e l a t i o n s A s s o c i a t i o n , June 1-3, 1980.  21.  Jamieson,  22.  Thompson, op.  23.  Information obtained from i n t e r v i e w , V a n c o u v e r , B. C.  24.  Ibid.  25.  Ibid.  op. c i t . ,  p.46.  cit.  26.  C r i s p o , op. c i t . ,  27.  Jamieson,  28.  D. B e r c u s o n , F o o l s L t d . , 1978, p.69.  29.  Ibid.,  30.  Information obtained from i n t e r v i e w , V a n c o u v e r , B. C .  31.  Ibid.  32.  Ibid.  33.  Ibid.  Mr.  P.  McEvoy,  Men,  Toronto,  op. c i t . ,  personal  p.321.  op. c i t . ,  p.20. and  Wise  McGraw-Hill  Ryerson  p.33. Mr.  P.  McEvoy,  op. c i t . ,  personal  34.  The t e r m \" o p e n s e a s o n \" r e f e r s t o t h a t p e r i o d o f t i m e d u r i n g l i f e o f a c o l l e c t i v e a g r e e m e n t when a p p l i c a t i o n may be made t o Labour Board f o r a change i n b a r g a i n i n g a g e n t .  35.  Information obtained from i n t e r v i e w , V a n c o u v e r , B. C .  36.  Winnipeg  37.  International M o l d e r s and A l l i e d W o r k e r s Union, C h a r g e s \" , A p r i l 8 , 1 9 6 4 , CAIMAW U n i o n F i l e s .  38.  International Molders and Allied Workers Union, S u s p e n s i o n \" , A p r i l 8 , 1 9 6 4 , CAIMAW U n i o n F i l e s .  39.  Winnipeg  Free P r e s s ,  c.  A p r i l 3 0 , 1 9 6 4 , CAIMAW U n i o n  40. '  Winnipeg  Free P r e s s ,  c.  May 2 5 , 1 9 6 4 , CAIMAW U n i o n  Files.  41.  Winnipeg  Free P r e s s ,  c.  Feb.  Files.  Free P r e s s ,  c.  Feb.  Mr.  P.  McEvoy,  op. c i t . ,  1 0 , 1 9 6 5 , CAIMAW U n i o n  1,  1 9 6 5 , CAIMAW U n i o n  the the  personal  Files. \"Statement \"Notice  Files.  of of  \u000C- 83 -  42.  Winnipeg  Free P r e s s ,  43.  Information in a letter f r o m W. A . J a n . 1 1 , 1 9 6 5 , CAIMAW U n i o n F i l e s .  44.  Winnipeg  Free P r e s s ,  c.  Feb.  c.  Feb.  45.  Ibid.  46.  Information obtained from i n t e r v i e w , V a n c o u v e r , B. C .  47.  Bulletin,  48.  Information obtained from i n t e r v i e w , V a n c o u v e r , B. C.  49.  Ibid.  50.  Ibid.  51.  Ibid.  52.  Ibid.  53.  Ibid.  54.  Ibid.  vol.  1, n o .  3,  1 9 6 5 , CAIMAW  1,  1, S e p t .  Lazzerini  1 9 6 5 , CAIMAW  Mr.  P.  McEvoy,  1 9 6 5 , p. Mr.  P.  Union  Union  Files. to  P.  McEvoy,  Files.  op. c i t . ,  personal  op. c i t . ,  personal  3.  McEvoy,  55.  C a n a d i a n A s s o c i a t i o n o f I n d u s t r i a l , M e c h a n i c a l and A l l i e d W o r k e r s , \"Minutes of General Executive Board M e e t i n g s \" , June 1 4 , 1964, CAIMAW U n i o n F i l e s .  56.  Ibid.,  May 2 9 , 1 9 6 5 , CAIMAW U n i o n  57.  Ibid.,  April  58.  Winnipeg  59.  Review,  60.  Winnipeg  61.  Ibid.,  62.  Winnipeg  Tribune,  63.  Winnipeg  Free P r e s s ,  64.  Ibid.,  65.  Ibid.  1 2 , 1 9 6 6 , CAIMAW  Free P r e s s , vol.  c.  c.  CAIMAW  Union  Union  3, no. 3, June 1967,  Free P r e s s , Feb.  Feb.  c.  Dec.  Files. Files.  Files. p.4.  1 6 , 1 9 6 8 , CAIMAW  1 6 , 1 9 6 9 , CAIMAW U n i o n c.  Jan. c.  Union  Files.  1 1 , 1 9 6 9 , CAIMAW U n i o n  Feb.  Files.  1 5 , 1 9 6 9 , CAIMAW U n i o n  2 8 , 1 9 6 9 , CAIMAW  Union  Files.  Files.  Files.  \u000C- 84 -  66.  Ibid.,  c.  May 1 0 , 1 9 6 9 , CAIMAW  67.  Ibid.,  c.  Feb.  68.  Ibid.,  c.  M a r c h 1 5 , 1 9 6 9 , CAIMAW U n i o n  69.  Ibid.,  c.  Feb.  70.  Ibid.  71.  Ibid.,  c.  May 6 ,  72.  Ibid.,  c.  May 2 6 , 1 9 6 9 , CAIMAW U n i o n  Files.  73.  Ibid.  74.  Ibid.,  c.  June 1,  Files.  75.  Winnipeg  76.  Ibid.  77.  Ibid.  78.  Ibid.  79.  Winnipeg  80.  Ibid.,  81.  Ibid.  c.  2 8 , 1 9 6 9 , CAIMAW  1 9 6 9 , CAIMAW U n i o n  Free P r e s s , 7,  July  c.  Files. Files.  Files.  1 7 , 1 9 6 9 , CAIMAW  Union  J u n e 2 0 , 1 9 6 9 , CAIMAW  1 9 6 9 , CAIMAW  July  9,  Union  1 9 6 9 , CAIMAW  83.  Ibid.,  84.  Winnipeg  85.  Ibid.,  c.  Oct.  86.  Ibid.,  c.  S e p t 2 5 , 1 9 6 9 , CAIMAW  Union  Files.  87.  Ibid.  88.  Ibid.,  c.  Oct.  1 4 , 1 9 6 9 , CAIMAW  Union  Files.  89.  Ibid.  90.  Ibid.,  c.  Oct.  3 0 , 1 9 6 9 , CAIMAW U n i o n  Files.  91.  Ibid.  1 0 , 1 9 6 9 , CAIMAW U n i o n  Free P r e s s , 1,  c.  March 1,  1 9 6 9 , CAIMAW  Files.  Union  Union  Files.  Files.  1 9 7 0 , CAIMAW U n i o n  Union  Files.  Files.  Winnipeg  Oct.  c.  Files.  82.  c.  Tribune,  Union  1 9 6 9 , CAIMAW U n i o n  c.  Files.  Union  2 3 , 1 9 6 9 , CAIMAW  Tribune,  July  Union  Files.  Files.  \u000C- 85 -  92.  I b i d . , c. Nov. 1 4 , 1 9 6 9 , 1 9 6 9 , CAIMAW U n i o n F i l e s .  93.  Ibid.,  94.  Winnipeg  95.  Information obtained from i n t e r v i e w , V a n c o u v e r , B. C.  96.  Winnipeg  97.  Ibid.,  98.  Winnipeg  Tribune,  99.  Winnipeg  Free P r e s s ,  c.  T r i b u n e , c.  Dec. 8 ,  1 9 6 9 , CAIMAW  1 0 , 1 9 6 9 , CAIMAW  100.  Ibid.  101.  Ibid.  102.  Ibid.  103. 104.  c.  c.  Winnipeg  Oct.  Union  1 5 , 1 9 6 9 , CAIMAW  T r i b u n e , c.  Free P r e s s , Oct.  CAIMAW  Oct.  c.  Union  Oct.  Mr.  Nov.  P.  Union  McEvoy,  Union  5,  c.  Oct.  30,  Files.  op. c i t . ,  1 6 , 1 9 6 9 , CAIMAW U n i o n  personal  Files.  Files.  2 9 , 1 9 6 9 , CAIMAW  Dec.  ibid.,  Files.  1 6 , 1 9 6 9 , CAIMAW  1 2 , 1 9 6 9 , CAIMAW c.  Files;  Union  1 9 6 9 , CAIMAW  Files.  Union  Union  Files.  Files.  Ibid.  105.  Winnipeg  Free P r e s s ,  c.  106.  Winnipeg  T r i b u n e , c.  Nov.  107.  I b i d . , c . N o v . 1 1 , 1 9 6 9 , CAIMAW U n i o n F i l e s . u n o r g a n i z e d p l a n t b e f o r e c e r t i f y i n g CAIMAW.  108.  Winnipeg  Free P r e s s ,  c.  Nov.  2 0 , 1 9 6 9 , CAIMAW  Oct.  1,  Union  1 9 6 9 , CAIMAW  109.  Ibid.  110.  Ibid.,  c.  Oct.  2,  111.  Ibid.,  c.  Nov.  2 1 , 1 9 6 9 , CAIMAW  Union  Files.  112.  Ibid.,  c.  Nov.  1 1 , 1 9 6 9 , CAIMAW  Union  Files.  113.  Information obtained from i n t e r v i e w , V a n c o u v e r , B. C.  P.  McEvoy,  114.  Ibid.  115.  Ibid.  116.  Ibid.  1 9 6 9 , CAIMAW  Union  Mr.  Union  Files.  Files,  Bell Union  Foundry  was  an  Files.  Files.  op. c i t . ,  personal  \u000C- 86 -  117.  Ibid.  118.  Ibid.  119.  Ibid.  120.  Ibid.  121.  Winnipeg  122.  Ibid.,  123.  Ibid.  124.  Ibid.  125.  Winnipeg  126.  Ibid.  127.  Ibid.  128.  129.  c.  Free P r e s s ,  c.  Nov.  1 9 , 1 9 6 9 , CAIMAW U n i o n  May 2 0 , 1 9 6 9 , CAIMAW U n i o n  Free P r e s s ,  c.  July  Files.  Files.  1 5 , 1 9 7 8 , CAIMAW U n i o n  Files.  Information obtained from Mr. J . Succamore, S e c r e t a r y Treasurer, C a n a d i a n A s s o c i a t i o n o f I n d u s t r i a l M e c h a n i c a l and A l l i e d W o r k e r s , p e r s o n a l i n t e r v i e w , V a n c o u v e r , B. C . Ibid.  130.  C a n a d i a n A s s o c i a t i o n o f I n d u s t r i a l , M e c h a n i c a l and A l l i e d C o n s t i t u t i o n , 1 9 7 8 , S t a n d i n g R e s o l u t i o n N o . 1.  131.  C a n a d i a n A s s o c i a t i o n o f I n d u s t r i a l , M e c h a n i c a l and A l l i e d W o r k e r s , \" 1 9 7 9 N a t i o n a l C o n v e n t i o n K i t \" , P o l i c y R e s o l u t i o n N o . 3 3 , CAIMAW N a t i o n a l C o n v e n t i o n , 1 9 7 9 , W i n n i p e g , M a n i t o b a , May 2 4 - 2 7 , 1 9 7 9 .  132.  Information obtained V a n c o u v e r , B. C.  133.  Information obtained from Mr. i n t e r v i e w , V a n c o u v e r , B. C.  134.  Winnipeg  Free P r e s s ,  from  c.  March  135.  Ibid.  136.  Information obtained from i n t e r v i e w , V a n c o u v e r , B. C .  137.  Ibid.  138.  Ibid.  139.  The B u l l e t i n ,  vol.  1,  no.  1,  CAIMAW Jess  member, Succamore,  personal op. c i t . ,  1 4 , 1 9 6 9 , CAIMAW U n i o n  Mr.  Sept.  P.  McEvoy,  1965,  p.4.  Workers,  interview, personal  Files.  op. c i t . ,  personal  \u000C- 87 -  140.  Ibid.,  vol.  1,  no. 2, A p r i l ,  141.  Canadian Congress of Labour,  142.  Ibid, Article  143.  Winnipeg  Free P r e s s ,  c.  C o n s t i t u t i o n , 1978, A r t i c l e  May 1 0 , 1 9 6 9 , CAIMAW U n i o n  Ibid.  145.  Ibid.  146.  Ibid.  147.  Ibid.  148.  Information obtained from i n t e r v i e w , V a n c o u v e r , B. C .  149.  Winnipeg  150.  Ibid.,  Free P r e s s , Nov.  p.2. 2(a).  IV(3).  144.  c.  1966,  c.  Mr.  P.  McEvoy,  op. c i t . ,  May 1 0 , 1 9 6 9 , CAIMAW U n i o n  1 1 , 1 9 6 9 , CAIMAW U n i o n  Files.  Files.  Files.  personal  \u000C- 88 -  Chapter  The V a n c o u v e r  IV  Outcasts  . . . t o a d v a n c e t h e m a t e r i a l w e l l - b e i n g and p r o s p e r i t y o f C a n a d i a n w o r k e r s , and t o b u i l d a C a n a d i a n u n i o n w h i c h w i l l r e t u r n t o t h e i d e a l s o f democracy and l i b e r t y upon w h i c h t h e l a b o u r movement was b u i l t . George  Brown  \u000C- 89 -  THE LENKURT DISPUTE  IBEW AND LOCAL 2 1 3  While Winnipeg, craft The  trouble  union,  source  which  the  Molders  was b r e w i n g  of that  Local all  to  members  .  2  Vancouver  of  a s B.  since Local  its  outright  f o r another  and f a c t o r y  known  i t s formation  for  \"the  its  (IBEW).  workers  militancy,  fighting  a significant  local in  manufacturing and  tradition  i n 1901 was a m a t t e r  contained  in  based  213, a large multiplant  membership,  213 a l s o  Workers  C. Hydro and e l e c t r o n i c been  revolt  American  Brotherhood o f E l e c t r i c a l  213 had a l w a y s  some  2 1 3 , IBEW,  facing  linemen, wiremen, e l e c t r i c i a n s  Local  1  was  t r o u b l e was IBEW L o c a l  such d i v e r s i f i e d o p e r a t i o n s  according  in  the International  represented  companies.  Union  of  of pride  Communist  to  party  3 c a u c u s , and t h e r e f o r e  Relations  had a s t r o n g l e f t w i n g t r a d i t i o n .  between  been s t r a i n e d f o r y e a r s . e x p e l l e d by i n t e r n a t i o n a l of  the local  communism. the  were  union  In 1 9 5 5 , Business officers  and t h e i n t e r n a t i o n a l  that  i n W a s h i n g t o n , a n d 23 l e a d i n g members  followed,  f o r opposing  four  the union's  a l l on c h a r g e s  members w e r e dues  six years,  the Ross,  removal  and f o u r t e e n y e a r s of  had been  believed  he  the appointed denied.  had  been  Ross  o f repeated  international  requests staff  was u n p o p u l a r w i t h  interfering  with  and  of  s u s p e n d e d by  structure.  was p l a c e d u n d e r t r u s t e e s h i p a n d d e n i e d m e m b e r s h i p m e e t i n g s of  had  M a n a g e r G e o r g e Gee h a d b e e n  s u s p e n d e d f o r up t o f i f t e e n y e a r s ,  In t h e y e a r s  international  the l o c a l  The  local  f o r a period  by t h e l o c a l  representative, the membership. undermining  for Jack They  contract  \u000C- 90 -  negotiations membership.  for  years,  and  making  Ross d i d , h o w e v e r ,  enjoy  \"deals\"  behind  the  backs  of  the  the f u l l  c o n f i d e n c e and s u p p o r t  of  5 William Local  Ladyman,  Toronto-based  213's complaints, therefore,  friction to  the  the  between  Canadian  fell  the  international  f o r e when t h e  international  vice-president  on d e a f e a r s .  u n i o n and L o c a l officers  In  of  February  213 was a g a i n  fired  the  IBEW.  local's  1966,  brought  assistant  business a g e n t , John M o r r i s o n . Morrison elected with  business  the  perceived caused  of  membership, as  Art  O'Keeffe.  but  his  unwarranted  as  justice\".  abstentia,  appointed  to  who  Ladyman  valuable  t h e p r o c e e d i n g s had n o t r e s u l t e d  Unrest members  was  telecommunications workers.  Lenkurt  committee  had  process shop  becoming  employed  workers  had  to  the the  as the  trial  had b e e n  employing  a  a  favourite  and  yet,  the  dismissal  \"flagrant  flounting  Morrison  been  evident a  adequate  their  conducted  among  and  the  the in that  local's  manufacturer 350  elected  leadership,  meeting  shop had  in  of  unionized steward  failed  s a t i s f a c t i o n , and t h a t union  at  7  approximately  that  was  union,  Worse  6  had  local's  headquarters  for  hearing.  Electric,  a  been  denied admittance,  particularly  attended  the  i n accomplishing the  in a f a i r  provide  local.  counsel  complained  by  international  acted  to the membership's not  Washington  and a s  Lenkurt  equipment  failed  grievances  steward  at  by by  never  tactics\"  that  evidence  position  had  within  court  his  He  international  O'Keeffe,  protested that  dismissal  resentment  \"kangaroo  Art  to  interference  f o l l o w e d by t h e  regarded  hearings,  been  agent,  considerable  procedures were  had  the  two  to  chief years.  \u000C- 91 -  Consequently,  in  were e l e c t e d steward, \"began  early  to  the  George  to deal  1966, a  shop  Brown. with  completely  steward It  was  new g r o u p  committee, a  more  the backlog of  of  representatives  including a  militant  group,  new  chief  who  shop  immediately  grievances\".  THE LENKURT WALKOUT  The  collective  expired  on  January  1966, but  to  March  provide  insisted another  1,  1966.  year.  unwilling  to  reached  in  the  the  rest  of  The  company  make  any  between  Negotiations  quickly  employees  that  agreement  an  Metal the  Lenkurt  for  impasse.  Shop w i t h contract  arrived  a  at  new The  in  contract  began  their  was  IBEW  unchanged,  meetings  in  willing  wage i n c r e a s e ,  extended,  negotiation  concessions  and  company  a small  be  Electric  but for  unprepared,  position,  and  began  women.  Their  g stockpiling,  probably  The  in a n t i c i p a t i o n of a  employees  wages w e r e a s  low  position  extending  of  m e m b e r s h i p was w e l l their  position  Therefore, Lenkurt  in  workers response  about  the  linemen\".'''  to  0  what  at  per  1966,  the  a  of  the  to  a  do  E v e n women who  a  situation. Lenkurt if  unchanged.  company's  union of  only  had  were m o s t l y  making u n a c c e p t a b l e  resulted  favour  such  plant  contract  negotiations  in  the  hour,  the  aware t h a t  voted  militancy  \"know  $1.51  February  union  would  if  as  working  strike.  I  never  an  meeting on  But  women,  company's  Furthermore,  s t o c k p i l i n g would  in  ban  the  impasse  all  telling  had before  strike.  two  hundred  -  a  typical  expressed  concern  two  by  overtime  O'Keeffe  the  meeting  hundred  spoken  undermine a  attended  and  the  at  hairy a  union  that  he  chested meeting  \u000C- 92 -  leapt  to  their  O'Keeffe's  feet  fears,  to  the  rebuke  him  Lenkurt  women  p r e p a r e d t o f i g h t f o r an i m p r o v e d  The employees, recording  company  for made  to  the  i n t e r r o g a t i n g them as  to  their  refusals  as  an  it  attitude.  clear  that  Despite they  were  contract.  responded  such  such  instances  overtime  ban  refusal  of  by  pressuring  the  t o work o v e r t i m e ,  and  absenteeism  in  their  files.  1  1  12 \"Many  of  the  meeting,  women w e r e  employees  were  reduced told  to  that  tears  if  they  w o u l d be p l a c e d on a p r e f e r r e d o v e r t i m e u n i o n on c o f f e e  or  over  it\".  agreed  list,  At  a  t o work  t h a t anyone  l u n c h b r e a k s w o u l d be f i r e d on t h e  department  overtime caught  spot,  they  talking  and t h a t  no  13 one n e e d e d t o b e l o n g t o t h e u n i o n t o w o r k a t The  situation  became  so  Lenkurt.  tense  that  union  representatives  14 George with  Brown  the  and  Tom C o n s t a b l e  company on A p r i l  company's  pressure  Lenkurt's  Vice-President  asked the  to  work  promise h i t  had  replaced  2 3 , 1 9 6 6 , t o demand t h a t  tactics.  overtime  (who  They  Mark until  managed  Swails a new  that  to  t h e shop f l o o r , t h e employees  Morrison)  met  a s t o p be p u t t o  the  extract  the  contract  John  a  employees  was  would  signed.  felt  that  promise  from  not  be  When news  of  the pressure  had  Unfortunately,  the  15 been  lifted  promise  and  had  president,  been  was  April  he  down t o  the  t e n s i o n was  made w i t h o u t  Charles  agreement 25,  the  made.  Hunter, When  immediately workers,' this  greatly  the  who  knowledge  was  Hunter  reinstated  reduced. or  attending returned the  information  a  to  overtime  created  consent  of  the  conference the  plant  when on  requirement.  c o n f u s i o n and  company the  Monday, Sifting  chaos.  To  \u000C- 93 -  many,  it  straw\".  represented  Winnipeg  the  add  to  attending guidance.  time.  Although B.  C.  the  Labour  conciliation been m e t ,  the  breach  of  faith  The apparently  in  Hunter  then  collective  company  sent  report  to  people  already  work  ignored the  u n i o n was  responded  that  was  and  it  was  their  to  next  had  the  \"last  company's  therefore  strike  a  legal  This  latest  immediately  requirement p o s i t i o n on  be r e i n s t a t e d .  injunctions  the  under until  had  not  27.  five  employees,  1  Charles  h o m e s , t e l l i n g them or  be  fired.  Therefore, company.  to  overtime,  striking workers. ^  shift  in  on hand  contract  firing  employees'  designated  all  position at  1 0 : 0 0 o ' c l o c k on A p r i l  the  were  e x p i r e d on M a r c h 1 ,  still  and w e r e d i s m i s s e d by t h e received  not  exhausted.  by  all  leadership  a legal  random f r o m among t h e  f i r e d would not  order,  for  the  the job at  telegrams on  been  to  not  agreement  Act  had  response  chosen at  IBEW  The  Relations  in  the  and w e r e  procedures  but  confusion,  a CLC c o n v e n t i o n ,  the workers walked o f f  applied  outright  1 6  To  provide  an  257  The  restraining  The  to  five  employees  company  then  picketing,  and 18  advertised  returned resolution  i n the paper to f i l l  the vacancies l e f t  This  was  the  situation  from  the  CLC  convention,  calling  for  all  to  which a  affiliates 19  if  civil  d i s o b e d i e n c e was  necessary.  Vancouver's  convention to  by t h e d i s m i s s a l s .  fight  which  court  labour had  leaders passed  injunctions,  a  even  \u000C- 94 -  THE LENKURT SELLOUT  On  May 3 ,  that  the  f i r m had r e c e i v e d more t h a n 1 , 3 0 0 j o b a p p l i c a t i o n s s i n c e a d v e r t i s i n g  for  workers  to  already  hired  until the  replace  the  seventy  May.26\"  he  Vancouver  and moral  Lenkurt  257  that  five  said.  for  new  the  Ben  had  the  announced  off  the  job.  \"We  and  interviews  will  C.  Federation  of  B.  Labour Council fired  Metcalfe  remained  employees  Meanwhile,  and D i s t r i c t  support  spokesman  (VDLC)  employees,  he and o t h e r u n i o n o f f i c i a l s w e r e m e e t i n g w i t h  the  continue  Labour  pledged f u l l  and O ' K e e f f e  have  financial  announced  company  in  and  an  that  effort  20 to get  the employees  Union unexpectedly,  reinstated.  officials  O'Keeffe  representatives  was  present,  did  meet  not  invited  Jack  Ross  with to  and  the  company  the  meeting.  Angus  on  May 9 ,  The  MacDonald,  two  but union  president  of  21 Local  213,  signed  employees  could  an  apply  agreement for  their  with  the  former  jobs,  discrimination  against  those  rehired  because  the  However,  all  seniority  would  walkout.  company  of be  and  whereby there  all  would  fired be  no  their  participation  in  lost,  and  it  was  u n s p e c i f i e d e x a c t l y how many o f t h e 257 e m p l o y e e s w o u l d be r e h i r e d . membership o f L o c a l  213 a n g r i l y  had  the  signed,  settlement.  and  C.  C.  Federation  refused  to  The  MacDonald  endorse  the  22  Instead, t h e B.  B.  r e p u d i a t e d the agreement which  left  on May 1 1 , 1 9 6 6 , a d e m o n s t r a t i o n o r g a n i z e d j o i n t l y  Federation,  Lenkurt plant  t h e VDLC and L o c a l  i n d e f i a n c e of the c o u r t  2 1 3 , IBEW, was h e l d o u t s i d e  by the  injunction prohibiting picketing.  \u000C- 95 -  The  support  was  no  given  doubt  aloud  Two  descended  the  intention  us.  If  Lenkurt  on t h e p l a n t . a  to  down have  and  mass  seven  coughing  from  and D i s t r i c t  another  being  Labour  the plant  next day, at l e a s t  plant.  picket in  brutality  CLC r e s o l u t i o n  picket  heard.  maybe  line  RCMP  to  read  overcame Paddy  Council,  - then  such  of  attempted fit  leaders  fight  carloads  Although a S h e r i f f  h i s words  i s t o shut we'll  labour  demonstrators  preventing  clashed  erupted  recent  by V a n c o u v e r ' s  told  Neale,  the  they'll  here  the  press  talk  tomorrow  to - a  \u201E23  The  area  the  injunction,  necessary  bigger one.  police  by  o f the Vancouver  \"Our  the  demonstration  hundred  court  demonstrators, secretary  this  influenced  injunctions. officers  to  The RCMP t o o k  i n a scene  lines the  three  in  hundred p i c k e t s  a tough  stand,  appeared  and d e m o n s t r a t o r s and  t h a t was d e s c r i b e d a s \" t h e w o r s t  several  years\".  confrontation.  A  i n Vancouver  Pushing,  kicking  and  official  charged  police  union  and i n t i m i d a t i o n , and p o l i c e  outside  arrested  s i x picketers  shoving with  and two  24 union l e a d e r s ,  c h a r g i n g them w i t h  Violence the  IBEW u n i o n  Lenkurt with  broke out again  hall.  An e x e c u t i v e  membership m e e t i n g ,  constitution  for  that  night  at a Local  m e e t i n g was h e l d  at which  a t e l e g r a m f r o m Ladyman w h i c h  of A r t O'Keeffe.  contempt o f c o u r t .  MacDonald  213 m e e t i n g  prior  presented  to a the  in  general  executive  o r d e r e d t h e s u s p e n s i o n and d i s m i s s a l  O ' K e e f f e h a d been c h a r g e d w i t h a b r e a c h o f t h e u n i o n ' s failing  to  honour  M a c D o n a l d , a n d Ladyman t o o k t h e a c t i o n  the  May 9  agreement  \"under the a u t h o r i t y  signed given  by  him by  25 the  IBEW's  international  office  i n Washington,  D. C . \"  \"In f a c t ,  Ross  \u000C- 96 -  and  MacDonald  had  Succamore.  \"Ross  to  of  get  rid  set  O'Keeffe  and O ' K e e f f e  O'Keeffe.\"  up  from  d i d not Paddy  the  get  Neale  beginning,\"  a l o n g , and R o s s agreed  with  said  used  this  Jess  Lenkurt  assessment,  27 a d d i n g \" M a c D o n a l d was a f t e r  But order,  a group o f  and r e a c t e d  burst i n t o the with  activists  angrily  in  job\".  the  and v i o l e n t l y  strike  had h e a r d o f  to O'Keeffe's  Ladyman's  dismissal.  room t o b r e a k up t h e e x e c u t i v e m e e t i n g , c h a r g e d  betrayal  suspension  O'Keeffe's  of  of  the  Lenkurt  O'Keeffe.  They  employees, punched  and  and  blamed  cursed  They  MacDonald  him  for  MacDonald,  the  bodily 28  ejected  him f r o m the h a l l ,  Meanwhile, convening i n the condemning  the  hall.  MacDonald  and p o s t e d guards t o p r e v e n t  general  meeting  of  Lenkurt  Hearing of these events, and  declaring  his  return.  employees  they passed  non-confidence  in  resolutions  his  leadership.  M a c D o n a l d was f o r b i d d e n t o a t t e n d a n y f u r t h e r m e e t i n g s o f t h e full  s u p p o r t was p l e d g e d f o r O ' K e e f f e .  instructing  MacDonald  to  sign  strike  The s t r i k e r s had n o t , a p p a r e n t l y , union's  $40,000  cheques. illegal  strike  Previously 29  strikes.  the It  local,  F i n a l l y , a r e s o l u t i o n was benefit  received  cheques  for  was  the  passed  strikers.  a n y s t r i k e pay f r o m t h e  fund  because  MacDonald  local  had p r o v i d e d s t r i k e  refused  to  benefits  appeared to the membership, t h e r e f o r e ,  and  local  sign  the  in cases  of  that  there  30 was  no  excuse  volunteers hall  all  and  padlock  members.  got  for  sleeping  night.  3 1  MacDonald's  the  bags  so  actions. that  they  As could  the occupy  meeting and  \"We w a n t t o make s u r e t h a t M a c D o n a l d d o e s n ' t place.  This  is  our  hall\"  said  one  of  ended,  guard sneak the  the back  union  \u000C- 97 -  Despite insisted union\". carry  that  32  the  resolutions  \"O'Keeffe  O'Keeffe,  was s t i l l  however,  out h i s union  passed  suspended  continued  duties.  by  \"I've  been  the  membership,  Ladyman  a n d h a s no s t a t u s  to  report  to  suspended,\"  his  in  the  office  he s a i d ,  and  \"but the 33  members d o n ' t seem t o c a r e a b o u t i t , s o I ' m n o t w o r r i e d e i t h e r . \" membership  meeting  support  O'Keeffe.  ruled  of  that  on May 1 5 , one  O'Keeffe  suspended,  When could  t h e membership  m i c r o p h o n e away f r o m h i m . accompanied file  by a n o t h e r  members.  chairman,  The  the  thousand  local's  not address roared  members  reaffirmed  vice-president,  the meeting  i t s disapproval  At a  Fred  because  their  Allison,  he had been  and f o r c i b l y  took  the  A l l i s o n a d j o u r n e d t h e m e e t i n g and w a l k e d o u t ,  executive  member,  membership  Frank  continued  passed a vote o f confidence  Hogan  the  and t e n rank  meeting  i n both O'Keeffe  under  a  and new  and M o r r i s o n and  34 c a l l e d f o r the dismissal of Jack  Ross.  On May 1 6 , a m e e t i n g was h e l d b e t w e e n B.  C.  Federation,  settlement committee  over  Ross  supported futile.  the  consisted  Association Jack  VDLC  (IWA), and  and  IBEW  issue of  Jack  John  of  the  S y d Thompson Moore,  Hiebert,  MacDonald.  committee  The  in  of  the  executive  discussion  an  dismissed  vice-president an  t h e company a n d a  with  attempt  workers.  The  International o f t h e B. member  company  committee) situation  is  a  hard-nosed  recognized a n d we j u s t  the about  outfit.  seriousness bent  over  Local  however,  We  (the  of  the  backwards  a  labour  Federation,  S y d Thompson r e p o r t e d :  The  reach  Woodworkers  C.  of  Lenkurt,  to  joint  to  213 who proved  \u000C- 98 -  find  a  solution,  inch. on  that  these  o f May 9 t o t h e s t r i k e r s .  the labour  terms  movement  achieve  a  because, by  fact,  efforts  with  officials.  MacDonald,  were  give  an  \"That  is  Donna  Pooghkay, had l i t t l e  door  Vancouver were  out 35  labour  futile  from  reps,  with  anywhere  striker,  choice.  tolerate  and i n t h e c o u r t s .  the  deals  getting  Lenkurt  never  The c o m p a n y ' s  international  back  why we w e r e n ' t a  of  We p o i n t e d  officials the  to  beginning  t h e company was b e i n g s u p p o r t e d i n i t s s t a n d  \"The  making  lines  t h e company  behind the scenes,  IBEW  really  the  settlement  would  b u t we g o t n o w h e r e .  t o f i g h t us on t h e p i c k e t  In  wouldn't  T h e company r e f u s e d p o i n t b l a n k t o c o m p r o m i s e  its offer  out  b u t t h e company  \"They  the  were  Ross,  Hunter\" with  said  him.\"  international  under  Ladyman  orders  Paddy  and  Neale.  According  to  representatives  from Washington  to  37 get  us b a c k  were  also  t o work  motivated  \"Ross  announced  thing,  because  troublemakers, didn't  or else.\"  want\"  by t h e i r  that it  maybe gave  and t h e said  But i t  own h i e r a r c h i a l  the company's  the  company  union  Paddy  appears  would  Neale.  an  be  that  t h e IBEW  attitudes  officers  and a m b i t i o n s .  p o s i t i o n was n o t s u c h opportunity  able  to  get  As f o r M a c D o n a l d ,  to  get  r i d of  a bad rid  of  people  it  \" h e was i n  cahoots  38 b e c a u s e he w a n t e d O ' K e e f f e ' s j o b \" . The settlement from  not  years  asked  o f t h e B.  f o r the f i r e d  William  recent  efforts  Ladyman  Lenkurt  in Toronto.  of getting  f o r help  C.  into  f r o m t h e B.  Federation workers  a n d VDLC t o w i n a  brought  \"The F e d e r a t i o n  things\"  he s a i d .  C. F e d e r a t i o n .  them  a  sharp  has had a  better rebuke  habit  \"The i n t e r n a t i o n a l We a r e q u i t e  in has  b i g enough  \u000C- 99 -  to  settle  concern while  this  was  ourselves.\"  to  avoid  g e t t i n g the  He s a i d  he u n d e r s t o o d t h e  entanglements  in  257 d i s m i s s e d L e n k u r t  the  IBEW's  employee  Federation's internal  main  problems,  back t o work.  \"But  we  39 are  able  to  do  it  better  secretary  o f VDLC r e p l i e d \"I  situation  is  out  than  they  wish Mr.  are\"  he  said.  Paddy  Neale,  Ladyman r e a l i z e d how d i f f i c u l t  the  i n t e r e s t e d e n o u g h t o come o u t  and  h e r e - I w i s h he was 40  look at  the  situation.\"  Meanwhile, Supreme and  Court f o r  for  a  the  an  Executive  Board  injunction giving  restraining  order  preventing  of  it  Local  213  asked  possession of O'Keeffe,  the  the  B.  union  Constable  C.  hall,  and  others  Both  orders  41 from t a k i n g p o s s e s s i o n of the were e v e n t u a l l y Pooghkay.  issued.  \"But  international.\"  the  first  Strike  work. the  courts  The  Committee  ruled  presented  it  was  that  our h a l l \"  it  said  Donna  to  the  belonged  Escariots  of  two  motions  to  the  r e p u d i a t i o n of the terms of the  s e c o n d m o t i o n was  A spokesman f o r  Judas  thought  on May 2 8 , a mass u n i o n m e e t i n g was h e l d a t w h i c h  m o t i o n was f o r t h e  sellout.  always  r e c o r d s and a s s e t s .  42  Finally, Lenkurt  \"We  local's  the  a reluctant  committee  the  labour  then  membership. settlement  recommendation told  movement,  the  and  the  to  The as  return  executive,  \"You  a to  are  someday,  you  will  be  walked  out  of  the  c o u l d n o t e x p e c t t o w i n any c o n c e s s i o n s  from  43 cleansed  from  it.\"  With  that,  the  committee  meeting. Knowing t h a t the  company,  the  they  workers  voted  to  return  to  work.  \"The  inevitable  \u000C- 100 -  results  of  betrayal  and  disorganization  had  been  accepted  by  the  of  the  44 strikers.\"  But  settlement.  The  they B.  also  C.  Federation  about the agreement e i t h e r . (the  strikers)  unanimously  \"I'm  and  repudiated  the  VDLC  the  were  terms  not  enthusiastic  d i s a p p o i n t e d \" s a i d Paddy N e a l e .  are g o i n g back f o r the  same o f f e r t h e y  rejected  \"They  some t i m e  45 ago.\"  Angus M a c D o n a l d ' s  had  been  not  ago.\" THE  mislead,  attitude,  they  would  however,  have  was  been  that  back  at  \"if work  the a  workers  long  time  4 6  AFTERMATH  In  fact,  at  least  76  of  the  257  striking  employees  were  47 rejected  for  reemployment  by  the  company.  r e t u r n e d t o work w i t h a l o s s o f a l l defeat  for  combined  the  membership  forces  Furthermore,  of  the  the  entire  of  newly  was  213,  the  elected  w e r e r e f u s e d r e e m p l o y m e n t by t h e  who  seniority rights.  Local  courts,  Those  It  were  was a c r u s h i n g  who  had  company  and  their  Lenkurt  shop  steward  c o m p a n y , a s was  any  been  fighting own  t o Doug C o l l i n s o f t h e C B C , a L e n k u r t w o r k e r Most o f  the  union (the  IBEW)  eliminated.  representatives  of  the  p a i d t o r e p r e s e n t f o r some t i m e  seems  there  the  part  of  was  management  deliberate to  force  the with  interests  those they are evident  In a  stated:  company management and a g a i n s t  provocation  a walkout  union.  L e n k u r t w o r k e r who  L e n k u r t w o r k e r s have been w o r k i n g hand i n g l o v e the  the  committee  i n a p o s i t i o n to c h a l l e n g e the union l e a d e r s h i p of MacDonald.  m i l i t a n c y w i t h i n t h e p l a n t had b e e n e f f e c t i v e l y  rehired  so  of It on  they  Union letter  \u000C- 101 -  could the  use the s i t u a t i o n genuine  with  shop  an  agent  international gangsters but  time  the  ex c h i e f  had c o m p l e t e d t h e i r  that  the  this  request.  Local that  the  a n d VDLC a s k e d  IBEW  They  none o f t h o s e would  O'Keeffe,  be  nominated  eligible  to  under  its of  own  Local  these  brand  213,  actions  of the i n d i v i d u a l s  by t h e c o u r t s .  postpone  imposed.  and  a one y e a r s u s p e n s i o n .  in as  John  the  local's  business Kapalka,  years. until  as  The after  charged f o r fearing refused  elections  in  The r e s u l t was  during the  Lenkurt  elections.  manager,  was  presidential  Art  given  a  hopeful,  Les McDonald, nominated t o the p o s i t i o n  p r e s i d e n t , was s u s p e n d e d f o r t h i r t y y e a r s , elected  of  laying  IBEW  the impending  had been  run  reelection  suspension,  been  that  his job  who h a d o p p o s e d t h e i n t e r n a t i o n a l  for  at  f r o m one t o t h i r t y  be u s e d  the suspensions  received  already  leave  no o n e  brought  IBEW t o d e l a y  could  year  had  steward.  given  members  sentencing  fifteen  of vice  then  ranging  d i d , however,  after  surprises  steward  t h e May 11 a n d May 12 d e m o n s t r a t i o n s ,  proceedings  213 u n t i l  dispute  in  shop  union.  rebellious  participation  nothing outright  the c h i e f  h a s been  bear  and i m p o s i n g s u s p e n s i o n s  the courts  It  deal  and t h e  t o be on s i c k  union  C. F e d e r a t i o n  be  are  single  to  now e m p l o y e d a r e e v e n more 48  o f a company  on  who  including  international  to  to  management  Every  steward  The w o r k e r s  now h a d  executive  happened  shop  to get r i d of  himself  Lenkurt  of the s t r i k e . )  control  The  their  the  union  they  shown  and d i c t a t o r s .  the  the  B.  of  one e x c e p t i o n  back.  charges  has  o n e was r e j e c t e d ,  (The  discipline  stewards  MacDonald  but  a s an e x c u s e  representative  a n d G e o r g e B r o w n , who  from  the  manufacturing  \u000C- 102 -  section  by  Constable  acclamation,  was  removed  received  from  his  a  fifteen  position  as  year  suspension.  assistant  business  Tom  manager  49 and s u s p e n d e d f o r local  Executive The  to  the  three years.  Board had, t h e r e f o r e ,  Lenkurt  strikers  d i s c i p l i n e of  occurred d u r i n g the l a i d charges  O p p o s i t i o n to W i l l i a m  the  against  and t h e i r  courts  dispute. thirty  been e f f e c t i v e l y  for  Ladyman  subjected  two d a y s o f d e m o n s t r a t i o n s  Provincial  Attorney  the  removed.  s u p p o r t e r s were a l s o  the  and  General  people f o r contempt o f c o u r t ,  that  Robert  Bonner  and t h e  courts  d e a l t w i t h them h a r s h l y .  I n p a r t i c u l a r , f o u r l a b o u r l e a d e r s , Tom C l a r k ,  Paddy  Neale,  and  terms  of  clear  that  Jeff  four  Power  to  six  defiance  Art  months. of  O'Keeffe  The  court  were  government  injunctions  sentenced and  and  the  to  jail  courts  militant  made  for it  demonstrations  50 would  not  be  tolerated  in  British  Columbia.  p o l i c e b r u t a l i t y and p r o v o c a t i o n , h o w e v e r , Perhaps that  it  into  sharp  international  hierarchy  membership  by  i m p o s i n g an  resentment  among t h e  taken  place  between  in  focus  Canada  local's the  fact,  imposing  leaders \"stooges\" they  in  the  dictates  Washington.  and  \"puppets\"  were dependent  for  to  overrule  or  the  Ladyman, of the  the  Although  that  was  and w i l l i n g n e s s o f  the  Lenkurt  the a  the  and  wishes  fact  which  overt the  of  the  created  struggle  Ross  and  international's of  of  the  American  MacDonald  were  American  leaders  their  had  international's  the Canadian o f f i c e r s were,  philosophy  furtherance  of  strike  settlement,  membership  C a n a d i a n o f f i c e r s , some members f e l t  the  ability  members.  local's  of  the  inadequate  charges  were i g n o r e d .  t h e most s i g n i f i c a n t e f f e c t  had b r o u g h t  Labour's  hierarchial  in  union  seen  as  on whom  ambitions.  \u000C- 103 -  \"Ladyman w o u l d n e v e r  h a v e d a r e d do w h a t he d i d u n l e s s  he knew he had  the  51 approval  of  Lenkurt within  officers  dispute, the  influence Canadian  the  Washington\",  therefore,  local,  in  in  the  and  had  to  union,  given  a  an  said  rise  Jess  to  nationalistic  influence  that  Succamore.  both  union  resentment  was  seen  as  a  simple  dissidents  of  American  even  co-opting  officers. The  Lenkurt  over  s t r i k e , which  working  broader entire  conditions,  and more v i t a l working  results  the  has  and  fact  affairs,  as  become  the  of  and  S.  of  obtain office them  for  changed rise  Canadian  from the  support. only  if  it  -  to  S.  The  we by  who  working into any to  it  the  people  sharp  focus  settlement American  the  of  stops  short  The L o c a l  business  from the over  international  membership  electrical all  labour.  It  is  -  S.  is  the has  the  union  but merely to  end  to  its  postpone  part  of  Orders  precedence  fight the  the  membership  regular meetings.  The  and  an  MUST c o n d u c t  one w h i c h c o n c e r n s a  brought  putting  s h o u l d NEVER t a k e  but  Canadian  domination,  of  Executive  decisions  workers  to  according  i n s t r u c t i o n s as d e c i d e d a t  give  of union a f f a i r s  U.  crisis  be S.  returning  not end t h e  decision  union's  which  on  U.  strike  of  and  hold  belongs  issue  who  will that  Lenkurt  the  and d e p e n d  situation  the  control  members w i l l the  The  the  conditions  breaking  rightfully  over  bureaucrats  officials  d o m i n a t i o n and r e t u r n i n g c o n t r o l those  over  is effected with  present  change  the  crisis  domination  labour  U.  much  to  The  particularly  o r g a n i z e d l a b o u r movement w h i c h cooperation  concern  nation.  U.  dispute  something  - an e v e n t o f  class  from  Canadian  began  of  and  general  The  the  affects fight  \u000C- 104 -  f o r an i n d e p e n d e n t C a n a d i a n t r a d e the  independence of the  u n i o n movement  and  nation.  THE CANADIAN ELECTRICAL WORKERS UNION  THE FORMATION OF CEW  The  Lenkurt  had l o s t t h e i r b a t t l e company, Blame  and  for  they  bitterness  was  lost  their  defeats  was  widespread  powerful  management against  union  and  the wishes  defeated  courts,  Local  which,  had  proved  of the membership.  with on  feeling that  on  all  fronts.  They  had l o s t t h e i r b a t t l e w i t h  battle placed  hierarchy  the  been  throughout  members w e r e d i s i l l u s i o n e d , the  had  i n the c o u r t s , they  had  these  strikers  the  the  international union  213.  Many  of  the  could not win  combined  with  could  Others,  union.  hierarchy,  they j u s t  it  the  the  impose  however,  and  Lenkurt against  forces  its  of  dictates  emerged f r o m  the  d i s p u t e a n g e r e d by a s e n s e o f i n j u s t i c e and more d e t e r m i n e d t h a n e v e r  to  53 continue the  fight.  Among t h o s e were George  Brown,  union a c t i v i s t dollars  by  at  trials  the  shop  plant.  courts  and  for  both were  workers  determined  to  steward  at  and J e s s  Lenkurt  B o t h men w e r e g i v e n their refused  continue  fines  participation reemployment  by  of  the  fight  Succamore, one  five  year  IBEW f o r f i f t e e n y e a r s , suspension.  Feeling  in  the  Lenkurt  the  company.  In from  a n d J e s s S u c c a m o r e was g i v e n  that  the  s u s p e n s i o n s were  a  hundred  t h a t w e r e c o n d u c t e d i n a b s t e n t i a , G e o r g e Brown was s u s p e n d e d  membership i n the twenty  chief  the  demonstrations,  Lenkurt  a  unjust,  \u000C- 105 -  however,  they  announced  were  the  not going  suspensions  to accept at  because  a  them'meekly.  membership  When F r e d  meeting  and  Allison  asked  he was no l o n g e r a member i n g o o d  Jess  Succamore  to leave  standing,  Succamore  r o s e t o h i s f e e t a n d t o l d h i m \" Y o u a r e g o i n g t o h a v e t o p u t me 54  out,  and I  roared  don't  its  intention,  t h i n k y o u a r e man e n o u g h t o do i t . \"  approval  t h e r e f o r e , was t o a c h i e v e A meeting  was  ended  in  disarray.  attendance C.  were  o f t h e suspended  Federation  Charlie Stewart. their  belief  addressed  by  a n d two o t h e r  The  IBEW members  Ray H a y n e s ,  Federation  and t h e i r  Hall.  supporters  The s i x t y  acting  the j u s t i c e  of  their  representatives,  cause,  people  president  and t h e i r  of  the  L e n Guy a n d  They e x p r e s s e d t h e i r sympathy f o r t h e L e n k u r t  in  initial  change from w i t h i n t h e s y s t e m .  h e l d t h e f o l l o w i n g week i n t h e B o i l e r m a k e r s  in B.  and t h e m e e t i n g  The m e m b e r s h i p  workers,  disappointment  55 that  they  meeting  c o u l d n o t h a v e done more t o h e l p .  were  Federation's  touched  by  the  representatives.  group  left,  Les McDonald,  IBEW,  leapt  to his feet  sincere So  and t o l d  statements  much  sentenced  The p e o p l e a t t e n d i n g t h e  so  of  that  to a t h i r t y  the audience  sympathy  after year  from  Haynes  the  and h i s  s u s p e n s i o n by t h e  \"What we n e e d  is  a new  56 Canadian which for  Electrical  he c a l l e d  Canadians,  dictatorial  Workers U n i o n \" .  f o r the formation of a t r u l y a union  hierarchial  based  \"Les  perhaps  McDonald d i d n ' t  principles  hundred gas w o r k e r s  union  and f r e e  i n attendance  to j o i n ,  in  r u n by a n d of the  The m e e t i n g e r u p t e d  Tom C o n s t a b l e t o l d t h o s e  s u r e he c o u l d g e t f i v e  agreed t h a t  on d e m o c r a t i c  Canadian  s t r u c t u r e o f t h e IBEW.  enthusiasm f o r the idea. was  He t h e n g a v e a r o u s i n g s p e e c h  with  t h a t he  and George  Brown  t h e t i m e was r i p e f o r t h e f o r m a t i o n o f s u c h a u n i o n . really  mean i t \" s a i d J e s s  Succamore.  \" H e was j u s t  \u000C- 106 -  carried  away  with  the  emotions  of  the  moment.  speech s e t i n t o motion a t r a i n o f thought t h a t  At  a meeting  h e l d a few days  new u n i o n , L e s M c D o n a l d a n n o u n c e d t h a t felt  that  t h e s o l u t i o n was t o s t a y  from w i t h i n .  Nevertheless,  , , t 3 /  his  c o u l d n o t be s t o p p e d .  later  to discuss  the idea  he had c h a n g e d h i s m i n d .  of a  He now  i n t h e IBEW t o t r y t o e f f e c t  change  The f o r m a t i o n o f a new u n i o n w o u l d s i m p l y be \" i d e a l i s t i c \" co  he  told  George  the meeting. Brown  and J e s s  But  several  Succamore,  people  at  had r e e v a l u a t e d  the meeting, their  initial  including decision  t o t r y t o c h a n g e t h e IBEW f r o m w i t h i n .  This  reevaluation  was b a s e d  on two p r i n c i p l e s .  First,  they  had b e e n s u s p e n d e d f r o m t h e IBEW, a n d t h e r e f o r e w e r e n o t i n a n y p o s i t i o n 59 t o f i g h t f o r change from w i t h i n . o f t h e IBEW w e r e s u c h t h a t anyone  Secondly,  i t was f e l t  that  the practices  i t was a l m o s t  and p o l i c i e s  impossible f o r  to succeed i n c h a l l e n g i n g the e s t a b l i s h e d h i e r a r c h y ,  even i f  they  were i n good s t a n d i n g w i t h t h e u n i o n . \"At  union  meetings,  questions  d o e s n ' t want t o answer Or,  looking  tactics time as  until  at  the  they  go a l o n g  are j u s t  clock,  They  the  will  use  membership t o g e t anywhere  it  is  order.  delaying  the meeting  c a n a n d do c h a n g e  so t h a t  leadership  ruled out of  they  can adjourn  has r u n o u t .  they  that  because  the rules  impossible  f o r the 60  i n opposing them.\"  These c o n c e r n s a p p e a r t o have been j u s t i f i e d , f o r t h e C a n a d i a n Autonomy  Council,  a  group  of  IBEW members  in  Eastern  Canada  who w e r e  \u000C- 107 -  also  attempting  to achieve  same  conclusion.  In  a  change  letter  from w i t h i n  to  t h e IBEW, h a d come t o t h e  International  President  Freeman  they  complained:  We  have  that  been  told  that  t h e IBEW  no d i c t a t o r s h i p w i l l  made  aware  of and a  there  the  is  meeting  before  members  Statements  made  compromise  a  minutes  or  business  slipping  manager  faith  Agreements before  out with A l l these  been  signed  the membership.  achieving Board to  change  after  bill  Succamore,  from w i t h i n  We h a v e  suspension  knew t h e r e \"There  reimposed.  t h e IBEW  believed  that  was  with  6 1  indication came  when  five  by W i l l i a m  i s n o t h i n g y o u c a n do i n t h a t  change  brought  saddled  of the f u t i l i t y  the l o c a l ' s  to  Executive  to five years,  only  Ladyman  and t h e twenty  five  union\" union.\"  i n the Lenkurt  impossible  of  years  \" B y t h e t i m e we f i n i s h e d  Some o f t h e a c t i v i s t s  We  democracy.  being  been  manner.  was n o t h i n g we c o u l d do i n t h a t  still  odd a u d i b l e  a n d a l l o p p o s i t i o n t o them i s  the f i n a l  decision overruled  o r may  out of the  the  without  reduced h i s suspension from twenty  have t h e i r  year  Jess  are l e f t  a  them.  t h i n g s we know o f .  s u p p r e s s e d i n a most a r r o g a n t  For  predjudicial  i n y o u and what you c a l l  have  debts, b i l l  through  or question  only  A  discussion,  quickly  understand  business  meeting.  stifle  bills  and  Y e t we a r e  every  agent  may be  word b e i n g p a s s e d . have l o s t  of  at  which  mumbled  democratic  be t o l e r a t e d .  dictatorship  president  is  achieve  f i g h t i n g t h e m , we  said  Donna  Pooghkay.  ft 7  dispute,  t h e r e f o r e , now  from w i t h i n  the  IBEW,  \u000C- 108 -  both  because  expelled  those  from the  the  IBEW  lie  in  in  Les  union.  who  system,  supressing  prepared  and  because  opposition.  McDonald's  Accordingly,  found the  were  original  be  known a s  was  elected  the as  president,  the  Donna  first  Pooghkay  the  for  its  them,  the  Union  president, the  been  practices  a  people The  of  seemed  new  (CEW).  George  had  now  of  officers.  Workers  became  and  answer  formation  first  change  policies  1966, seventeen  Electrical  union's  fight  - the  o n November 6 ,  Canadian  of To  idea  new u n i o n , a n d t o e l e c t  to  to  Canadian  gathered  to  u n i o n was  to  George  Brown s e r v e d  secretary-treasurer  Angus  as  and  vice Jess  ft 3  Succamore  was e l e c t e d  to the  Executive  Board.  P O L I C I E S AND PRACTICES OF CEW The CEW was and  file.  All  the  president.  founded to  officers  were  to  provide be  a u n i o n c o n t r o l l e d by t h e  elected,  from  the  shop  T h e r e w e r e t o be no a p p o i n t e d o f f i c i a l s .  controlled  the  use  of  the  officers.  No a g r e e m e n t  local  funds  and  enjoyed  the  stewards  The  to  recall  c o u l d be s i g n e d w i t h o u t m e m b e r s h i p a p p r o v a l , the  so d e c i d e d .  Furthermore,  to  ensure  that  the  did  not  lose  touch with  interests  of the  rank  and f i l e ,  pay  for  any  in order  the  officer  could not  majority  exceed  of  the  the  local  union's  top  job  to  membership  right  no member c o u l d be d i s c i p l i n e d u n l e s s  full-time  rank  and  members  officials  the rate  highest earned  64  by  the  membership.  CEW,  concerns  of  dissidents  who  dictates  of a union hierarchy  over  had  occurred  union  The  during  the  Lenkurt  therefore, resented the wishes dispute,  addressed  both  the  itself  imposition  to  the  of  the  of the membership, such and  the  supression  of  as the  \u000C- 109 -  membership's  attempts  ooccurred within  It truly had  the  achieve  change  a  goal  of  c o n s t i t u t i o n was change  Canadian Canadian  \"made  it  The  Americanization of  union,  such  as  had  IBEW.  u n i o n movement  in  Canada  CEW  the  is  Canadian  for  Canadian  of  and o n l y  anti-American  labour  but,  labour.  movement.  Canadian we  We  do  are  a  formation, The  was f r e e o f f o r e i g n d o m i n a t i o n .  by C a n a d i a n s  not  the development  and w h i c h , f r o m i t s  self-determination  CEW was t o be a C a n a d i a n u n i o n t h a t  can  within  was a l s o t o be a u n i o n w h i c h a d v o c a t e d  independent  the  to  Its  workers  oppose  mature  the  enough  65 to  run  our  own  unions  without  i n f l u e n c e d by b o t h s o c i e t y ' s Canada,  and a l s o  Lenkurt  dispute,  platform.  It  nationalists by  by t h e  CEW  therefore who had as  was  nationalistic founded  addressed their  goal  on  itself the  of American resentment  a  to  No  doubt  influence  s p a r k e d by  decidedly  in the  nationalistic  the  concerns  of  control  of  Canadian  institutions  Canadian  fears  that  Canadians. The CEW s h a r e d W a l t e r G o r d o n ' s  ownership o f Canadian political  through the  over  the  unions  payment  United  unions  i n d u s t r i e s posed a t h r e a t  independence.  international  in  interference\".  growing resentment  wave o f  the  foreign  in  of  States, Canada.  as  However, a  factor  Canadian  also  that  offices  to  growing  American  t o Canadian economic saw  the  contributed  u n i o n dues  international 6 6  it  the  the that  to  existence  and of  this  problem  international  offices  exerted  undue  control  \u000C- 110 -  The legitimate national based  CEW  goal  self on  between  in  its  right,  \"We  were  partners.  domination of Canadian  have  based  aware  unions  foreign  on  the  that  not  they  domination  as  a  principle  of  internationalism  is  simple  true  sovereign  did  Rather,  nations,\"  represent  were  seen  this  to  this  province  controlled  like  as  being  to  say  Canadian the  of  unions  that  of  it  B.  who  to  C ,  refer  shouldn't  It  is  fight  for  flags  and  leaders  of  workers  in  to  is  controlled Canadian  in  the by  only  a  unions  and  of  every  is  worker  in  So we own  world  trade who  Canadians  want will  be  their  own  done  as  leaders  shortcomings their  head  c o n s t i t u t i o n does not a l l o w  There One and  were, was grass  then,  to  two  provide  roots  rank  by  saying  office  planks  type and  in American  unions nothing  and  their  it.  major a  68  just  is  o t h e r f o r e i g n c o n t r o l l e d p e o p l e w o u l d , and t h e y certain  Canadian  say, flag?  Canadian  the  country.  union's certainly  want t h e i r the  and  any  can  democracy  halls  that  things  would  unions,  Canada t o d a y .  foreign  We  International  union  knowledge  not long t o l e r a t e  policies.  Canadian  on  in  flag\".  as  . covering  American  Canadian  obligation  Canadian workers  common  unionist  the  the  t o be p r o u d o f  why  in  is  American  constitutions nothing  \"wrapped  worker  use  Jess  relationship  represent  C a n a d i a n u n i o n s o r t h o s e t h a t w i s h t o be i n unions  said  labour.  in  American  from  between  International  equal  freedom  own  relationship  6 7  We  saw  respect.  a  Succamore.  also  of  file  in  the  unionism control.  platform that The  was other  of  CEW's  based  on  was  to  \u000C- Ill -  provide  a vehicle  influence  or  for  domination  n a t i o n a l i s m were the  The independent developing  their  to  from  own  United  of  the  Workers  union.  unionism independent  upon w h i c h  officers  Electrical  practice  the  two p i l l a r s  founding  United  Although i t  Canadians  But  the  CEW  UE  was  p r o v i d e d f o r Canadian autonomy,  as  an  and  built.  considered  (UE)  any  Democracy  CEW was  had  Union  the  States.  of  an  joining  alternative  international  the founders  the  o f the  to  union. CEW  felt  69 that  \" w h a t had b e e n g i v e n  UE  did  not,  therefore,  nationalists. the  Also,  Communist  officers  of  political the  the  party.  the  of  of  the  a favour fully  UE was  This  CEW.  beliefs  wishes  as  the  no  UE.  union  meet  the  was  doubt  was  viewed  simply  Others  be t a k e n  goals  a union that  influence  Some  could also  did  of  being  with  bill\".  7  For  both these  reasons,  the  \"UE  didn't  the  to  many  radical  anxious  subordinated  by  by  to  avoid  political  international  seem t o q u i t e  union  fit  the  0  The and f i l e  CEW,  control  on t h e  other  and C a n a d i a n  hand, through  to j o i n  goals.  of  Indeed,  to  many  members  the  unsatisfactory  unionism  and  Canadian  interrelated.  To  the  unsatisfactory  international  them,  unions  philosophies  was  and  its  twin  p o l i c i e s of  nationalism, provided a vehicle  d i s s i d e n t s and C a n a d i a n n a t i o n a l i s t s  union  influenced  share  as  The  Canadian  suspicion  not  i d e o l o g y as t h e y w e r e t o h a v i n g them s u b o r d i n a t e d t o officers.  the  strongly  were p r o b a b l y  membership  away\".  a direct  practices  CEW,  in pursuit of the  self-assertion  result on  forces  of  Canadian  two  could  representation the  for  union common  issues be  of  seen  as  provided  by  imposition of  workers,  rank  American  particularly  the  \u000C- 112 -  power rank  vested and  partisan party  in  file.  really of  the  of  the  as  to  a  the  The  could,  CEW  who,  hierarchy  like  to  reactionary  CEW c o u l d accommodate nationalists  who  the  rejected  \"no  political the  the  group,  saw-  Waffle the  transference  membership, and  not  the  muster  and  an  obstacle  aloof  from  group w i t h o u t  did  of  therefore,  remaining  this  wishes  formation,  supported  force  By  the  opinion that  socialism,  socialism.  and  its  being of  true  union  from  of  opposed to  partisan  alienating  share  strong  the  those  left  wing  and  file  support  from  beliefs.  By and  adhering  to  Canadian  dissidents, the  Canadian  views  of  New L e f t  for  their  own r e a s o n s ,  and o p p o s i t i o n t o  the  basic  nationalism,  the  Executive  7 1  overruling  CEW,  socialists,  route  true  dissidents  control  Left  unions  achievement  political  job\".  from the  international  union  New  as  u n i o n power  politics,  a  and t h e the  involvement,  does  the  nationalism  union  Furthermore,  political  support  of  union o f f i c e r s  philosophies  therefore,  nationalists  and  the  shared  the  CEW\",  who  The t h r e e of  \"There  rank  drew  socialists  common g o a l s  unions.  of  CEW  and t h e W a f f l e g r o u p .  international  Board o f the  twin  rank  adhered groups,  and f i l e  to each  control  were seven  p e o p l e on  the  \"and each  had t h e i r  own  s a i d J e s s Succamore 72  reasons  f o r supporting the union's  philosophy\".  ORGANIZATION EFFORTS When certifications, viability  to  the  the and  CEW  was  therefore  organization.  founded,  it  no  dues  The  initial  was  base  a  to  activity  union provide of  the  with  no  financial union  was  \u000C- 113 -  restricted it  set  with  forth  financial  its  views  existence  organization their  the p u b l i c a t i o n o f a newspaper,  discipline  was that  in  the  strictly  guarded.  in  nationalism.  who, at  necessary by  the  time,  union's  In  i n the  maintained  employment. IBEW.  which  Such  t h e IBEW c o u l d b r i n g t o b e a r on t h o s e who h e l d s u c h  dual  t h o s e who f o l l o w e d t h e p r a c t i c e necessary  union  was  d i d so a t  f o r t h e CEW t o g i v e a  secret  that  view  dual the  their  forbidden  The  o f membership  t h e same  for  in  of  It was, therefore,  membership  IBEW,  and  by t h e p u r c h a s e  and wiremen  membership ( s u s p e n s i o n ) , risk.  democracy  was s u s t a i n e d  by l i n e m e n  membership  membership  of  the L i v e w i r e ,  assurances  would  be  great that  carefully  7 3  In electrical  spite  of  workers  the  joined  risks  involved,  enough  the union to maintain  electricians  its financial  and  viability  74 and  ensure  its  survival.  In  t h e CEW, a c o n s t r u c t i o n w o r k e r To m e , i t  explaining  his position  of  democracy,  right  wrote:  i s a matter  of simple  t o f o r m o u r own p o l i c y t h r o u g h a d e m o c r a t i c constitution, Canadian  let  in  but a  It  us  not  the  suffer  the  leadership contrary,  don't  workers tide  is  right  that  get  them.  i n Canada of  not  a  must  illusion fight  large  Canadian  subject be  that  by a to  be  established. and f i l e ,  our  f o r these  percentage  present rights:  of  these  l e a v e no s t o n e u n t u r n e d t o s e e But  there  is  a r e on t h e move,  resentment  a  chosen  o u t by t h e r a n k  will  the  American lackeys w i l l we  any d i r e c t i o n  d u t y m u s t be c a r r i e d  so-called on  go  membership.  questioned, This  to  support  against  no  doubt  that  and t h e growing  dictatorship  from  for  \u000C- 114 -  Washington growing until  through  irresistible.  o u r needs  effect,  terms  of  t o many  a vehicle  to  the  i n Canadian  international  We w i l l  achievement  responsiveness  important that  and t h e  no u n i o n  Barry Sharbo,  \"his  union's  organizational  prime  Local  They  collective lengthy, during  strike  Phillips  coping  employees  satisfied sympathetic  union  and  file  Canadian  representation  that  i n the 1960's.  of  were It  in  becoming  was a  exist  vehicle  policy  long  without  a  B o a r d member o f t h e CEW s a i d will  be t o  plants\".  seek  new members  76  whose at a  114 e m p l o y e e s  Phillips  were  represented  were d i s s a t i s f i e d w i t h  difficult  employer,  The s u p p o r t f o r t h c o m i n g f r o m t h e seen  to  on s t r i k e managed  activities,  certified  f o r CEW was won n o t a t a n u n o r g a n i z e d  with  was  went  The l o c a l  for  and  s i g n e d p r i o r t o 1967 h a d been a c h i e v e d  strikes.  strikes  and s i m i l a r  Cables,  The e m p l o y e e s  were  bitter  pay.  better  Executive  certification  agreements  these  Phillips  sale  first  2 1 3 , IBEW.  IBEW.  of  among u n o r g a n i z e d e l e c t r i c a l  but at  get the 75  rank  could  to represent.  plant,  be  is  f o r the expression  society  unit  The  never  stooges  unions c o u l d n o t , o r too o f t e n would n o t , p r o v i d e .  However,  immediately  Canadian  union f o r Canadians.  t h e CEW p r o v i d e d  self-assertion  own  and g r i e v a n c e s  ear o f a Canadian  In  our  be in  money  strike  initially  through  two after  international  inadequate.  1962, they  to raise  a n d some  grossly  the  the  only  by  When received  the no  a Christmas  tree  p a y was d i s t r i b u t e d .  But  no money a t a l l was f o r t h c o m i n g f r o m t h e i n t e r n a t i o n a l , b e c a u s e  t h e IBEW  \u000C- 115 -  constitution  p r o h i b i t e d the depletion of the i n t e r n a t i o n a l ' s  below two m i l l i o n time.  This  7 7  Phillips  d o l l a r s , and  position  workers,  financial  created  that  a  who, d u r i n g  difficulties.  agreement  t h e f u n d was down t o t h a t  ended  great  the  deal  five  month  Dissatisfaction  the s t r i k e  of  provided  was  strike level  resentment strike,  at the  among  faced  increased  them w i t h  only  fund  a  the  serious  when  the  three  cent  78 increase  over the p r e s t r i k e  offer.  As members o f L o c a l influenced local that  by  the  strained  and t h e i n t e r n a t i o n a l  2 1 3 IBEW, t h e P h i l l i p s e m p l o y e e s w e r e a l s o relationship  for years.  had o c c u r r e d w i t h i n t h e l o c a l  that  had e x i s t e d  Furthermore,  between  the major  the  upheaval  d u r i n g t h e Lenkurt d i s p u t e caused the 79  Phillips  employees  to consider drastic  J e s s Succamore Lenkurt. the  had worked a t P h i l l i p s b e f o r e b e i n g employed by  He knew o f t h e d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n o f t h e P h i l l i p s  IBEW, a n d he h a d c o n t a c t s  January  1967, campaigning  nationalism. workers  change.  Both i s s u e s  control  over  within on  its  the plant. two  r e c e i v e d equal  their  own u n i o n  with  CEW l a u n c h e d a r a i d  platforms  emphasis.  affairs  employees  of  democracy  in and  The CEW p r o m i s e d t h e  and urged  them  to  \"vote  80 Canadian\" provided of  as  literature,  that  a  own \" C a n a d i a n  centennial  project\".  f o r t h e CEW d u r i n g t h e c a m p a i g n b y t h e P u l p  Canada  national  their  (PPWC). making  The appeals  self-determination. Canadian  breakaway  PPWC to  provided  the P h i l l i p s The PPWC s e r v e d  union  could  and Paper  speakers workers  Support  and  Workers  distributed  on t h e grounds  as an example o f t h e  survive  and  was  indeed  grow,  of fact an  \u000C- 116 -  example  that  In a l e t t e r  no d o u b t  proved  invaluable  for  the  unknown, u n t e s t e d  t o t h e P h i l l i p s e m p l o y e e s , G o r d i e Wickham o f t h e  Fellow  Canadians:  member Harmac like  to  say  Canadian  Local you  are  U.  workers  as of  the  by  S.  President  Canadian  doing  workers  undemocratic paper  I  a  have  taking  also  the  Paperworkers,  great  controlled  of  a  done.  At  Pulp  being  and  organized  comprises and  is  11  for  the  is  the  IBEW,  213 up u n t i l  splitting  the  manufacturing segment  became  supposedly  in  just every  to  stand  against  as  we  Harmac,  now,  local  had  reacted into  segment  of 258.  order  union, since  ago,  the  province  of  the  now B.  C.  majority  at  Phillips,  the  greater  more  Canadian  workers  unresponsive  to  to  example.  which  Local  have  which,  bigger  the  we  years  The  union for 81  Canada  all  in  three  in  day.  Canadian  of  over  unions  inspiration  follow your  Local  Workers  local  growing  is  The  Paper  850 would  gone f r o m s t r e n g t h t o s t r e n g t h a l o n g w i t h o u r the  PPWC w r o t e :  service  unions,  to  been to  the  three  Local  separate  213  The  s i g n up c a m p a i g n  became  move was  provide  \"a  locals. Local  greater  degree  unrest  in  at  Phillips  by  The  264,  undertaken  the  by of  electronic  while  Coming s o s o o n a f t e r will  reasons,  be will  dictatorship.\" innuendoes,  I  those raise  the  \"Lenkurt a f f a i r \" ,  who, the  However,  for cry  their of  own  Hydro  Ladyman,  autonomy  for  I am s u r e personal  \"International  regardless  the  William  membership\".  there  CEW.  of  h a v e made my d e c i s i o n b a s e d s o l e l y  any on  the  \u000C- 117 -  the  continuing  confronting field  our  Since  District  problems  I  Local  industry.  At  in  Union 2 1 3 ,  status  new L o c a l  Unions.  Ladyman's the  unrest  unrest  that  was  made  likely  that  he was  disparity  in  membership membership Local  213,  complaints  of  for  was  for  the  fact  the  two  were  the  skilled  the  bargained  the  tradesmen  unrest  that  union the the  workers  in  difference  create  undertaken  Phillips.  It  is  stemmed f r o m  the  and  groups.  union,  and  manufacturing  workers  between  two  the  Class A Class  manufacturing.  the  in  section,  membership, two  in  the  the  manufacturing at  for  of  was  campaign  of  is  existing  local  industrial  wage  the  interests  the  and  membership  split  CEW  our  situation  agree to  classes  supported  of  reluctantly  the  and  realistic  our  within  First  towards  the  be  countering the  that  tradesmen  that  by  with  best  be  strength  apparent  the  the  branches  as  is  existed  maintaining  wages  was  to  that  greater  where  it  of  efforts  must  that  I must 82  obvious  in  we  serve  decision  to  for  time,  and w h e r e  quo d o e s n o t  my  to  manufacturing  President  various  same  fact  s a i d membership,  practice  the  the  the  discontented  IBEW  Unions  appear  the  directed  within  Local  in  becoming V i c e  stability  acknowledge  response  members  have  amalgamating  which  in  B In  their  classes  was  83 unfair. isolate  By the  splitting  manufacturing  wage c o m p a r i s o n s b e t w e e n of  support  the  for  the  local  workers  into  three  from the  segments,  tradesmen,  Ladyman  thereby  reducing  t h e two g r o u p s and r e m o v i n g an i m p o r t a n t  manufacturing  workers  in  their  could  complaints.  source The  \u000C- 118 -  manufacturing  workers  would  then  course  of  not  be . a s  likely  campaign  at  to  challenge  the  status quo.  During  the  questioned whether agent  the Canadian  for bargaining.  scratch  with  Also,  the  Phillips,  u n i o n was an a p p r o p r i a t e  pointing out that  no c e r t i f i c a t i o n s ,  the  and l e g i t i m a t e  t h e CEW was s t a r t i n g  no a f f i l i a t i o n s  IBEW  and v e r y  little  from  money,  84 it was  questioned  i t s strength  countered  by  as a u n i o n .  red b a i t i n g ,  CEW's p l a t f o r m o f  and by  the proposition  nationalism  that  \"Canadian or  nationalism  i s a smoke  screen  thrown  As f o r t h e i s s u e o f d e m o c r a c y ,  up by t h i s  t h e IBEW c o n t e n d e d t h a t  o p p o r t u n i t y f o r t h e membership t o have i n p u t Within  t h e IBEW y o u h a v e e v e r y  discuss has  and r e l a t e  not  been  democratic carefully resolve etc.,  local  let's  agree.  accomplished of  guarded  each  and  trade  union  the  by and  every  place  to  unify  hear  problems  has o r The  member rectify  is and  conditions,  meetings.  of  to  Let a l l  manufacturing  and  a l l the membership.  majority  By F e b r u a r y ,  the  means  local.  p o l i c i e s , work  ample  affairs.  feel  your  i s a t y o u r u n i t and g e n e r a l  the  The  conceivable  group\".  i t provided  i n t o union  w h a t y o u a s members  right  your  disenchanted  of  the  Phillips  employees,  however,  d i d not  1 9 6 7 , t h e CEW h a d s i g n e d up e n o u g h w o r k e r s  to the Labour R e l a t i o n s  Board  for certification.  the  application  by s u b j e c t i n g  CEW t o a v e r y  all  i t s records  a n d b o o k s on t h r e e  different  to apply  The b o a r d r e s p o n d e d t o  close  scrutiny,  occasions.  inspecting  Unable  to  find  \u000C- 119 -  any  irregularities,  place  the board ordered  on May 2 6 , 1 9 6 7 .  a representation  The 3 i month  delay  between  t h e v o t e p r e s e n t e d d i f f i c u l t i e s f o r t h e CEW. the  benefit  rebuild, retaining delays, a  of  the  incumbent  while  the  raiding  its  support  the P h i l l i p s  slim majority,  union  and t h e  employees  union\".  IBEW stay  with  responded  as  membership  job opportunities  Cards.  Stay  employees  to  impetus voted  of  with  are  Local  refuse  time  with  its  always work t o to  the  regroup  campaign.  certification,  and  difficulty  57 t o 50 i n f a v o u r  of  Despite  the  o f t h e CEW. described  By  as \" a  be u s e d t o b a s e t h e e x p a n s i o n o f t h e g r o u p  t o t h e CEW v i c t o r y  s i g n i n g Honorary Withdrawal their  faced  took  87  the international  maintain  is  it  which  t h e a p p l i c a t i o n and  Such d e l a y s  giving  CEW h a d won i t s f i r s t  major breakthrough which w i l l as a n a t i o n a l  union,  vote,  to  union  by u r g i n g  regardless  Cards, they  t h e employees  of the vote  p o i n t e d o u t , t h e employees  i n IBEW a n d \" a l l a d v a n t a g e s available 264.\" join  to  holders  The  8 8  the  results.  IBEW  CEW,  and  of  also  urged  not  By could  o f t h e IBEW  Honorary  to  to  such  Withdrawal  the  sign  Phillips  their  dues  89 check-off. threat  to  This  campaign,  t h e new u n i o n ,  effectiveness  as  a  failed,  was a b l e  to consolidate  Alberta  were  Membership  the P h i l l i p s  late  unrest  at  its  agent.  financial  supported  i t s position at i t s f i r s t Phillips  experiencing this  IBEW  local  have  Fortunately  employees  1967, the  also  s u c c e s s f u l , would  undermining  bargaining  campaign  By  if  Cables  viability for  the  serious and i t s  CEW,  the  t h e CEW, a n d t h e CEW certified  employees  dissatisfaction stemmed  posed a  with  plant. in  Sentinel, the  from a p e r c e i v e d  IBEW. lack  of  \u000C- 120 -  communication w i t h their  the  international,  international  lack  of s e r v i c e ,  representative,  A.  J.  and a b e l i e f  Metcalfe  that  undermined  90 negotiations time  they  through  secret  J^the membersjever  meetings  with  saw M e t c a l f e  the  was  employer.  to  see  \"The  h i m come  only  into  town,  91 see the  b o s s and l e a v e town To  Alberta  add  plant  to  were  The  base  the  minimum wage  $1.40 they  starting  an  hour.  had  this  at  was  been  the  a  by  the  the  with  beginning  contract  \"bullied  92  unrest,  dissatisfied  legislated It  representative.  general  very rate  again.\" Phillips  their  of  the  which  into  the  and  at  the  year  at  by  plant  contract  the  was  was  only  committee  felt  their was  in  agreement.  expiry,  negotiating  signing\"  Dissatisfaction  collective  three  province,  employees  international  so  great  that  the  93 employees  w e r e c o n t e m p l a t i n g an i l l e g a l  The breaking that  with  there  their  was  IBEW,  an  these CEW  agent  The in  a  1968, and  CEW on t h e  spot.  Phillips  provided  an  example  34 o f By  of  the  February  their  in  three  workers  gaining  left  106 o f t h e  wrote on  the  the  in  meeting  110 e m p l o y e e s  the  their  new  open  result season,  plant.  meeting  to  to  As a  Alberta  by  employees redress  agreement.  organization at  however,  Alberta  information  at  present  had,  Alberta  weeks  campaign an  the for  collective  only  called  6,  to  requesting  and w i t h  CEW  Cables  available  employees  certification the  all  method  Vancouver,  and a c o p y  launched  employees,  of  Phillips  communications,  January 28,  employees  alternate  employees  bargaining  the  the  grievances.  Phillips  of  Vancouver  walkout.  for  On the  joined  the  had j o i n e d  the  \u000C- 121 -  CEW,  and  Local  2  CEW  applied  to  the  Alberta  Labour  Board  for  94 certification  f o r the  Despite Phillips  the  plant  Local  had  been  2  referendum  vote  constitution.  Because February, bylaws. an  agent  on n a r r o w  of  the  the  time  original  the  board  membership  CEW  board  denied  grounds. at  a  the  by  officers  founding  the  Alberta  certification  Because the  the  required  among  meeting,  of the  had  not  had, a c c o r d i n g to the b o a r d , v i o l a t e d  its  own  the membership d e c i d e d t o s t i p u l a t e A p r i l  did  for not  officers  holding interfere  were  that  The b o a r d r u l e d t h a t , for  for  constitution  ruled  appropriate  1968 t h e  acclamation  month  that  support  technical  by  The l o c a l  as  a  the  on A p r i l 2 ,  Furthermore,  bylaws  officers,  overwhelming  elected  been c o n d u c t e d .  their  the  employees,  vote at  unit.  regular with  elected  the  local  due t o  bargaining.  at  annual  contract the  had  election  violated  its  \"It  was  a  in own  t h e s e v i o l a t i o n s , t h e CEW was 95  of  negotiations.  founding meeting  also  in  not  ( decision  scandalous  96 b a s e d on t h e f l i m s i e s t o f t e c h n i c a l i t i e s \" s a i d J e s s  In Sentinel employees CEW,  April  plant at  by  the  the  application b o a r d on t h e  signed  board to  request. for  IBEW r e s p o n d e d t o  cancelling plant  and a s k e d t h e  refused  1968, the  On  a  membership petition  reconsider June 2 7 ,  certification  legitimate  all  at  1968,  the  grounds t h a t  its  was  insurrection  meetings.  indicating  their  Local It  2  CEW  was  untimely.  i n t o keep t h e  pot b o i l i n g \"  said  Succamore.  The a  just  the 100  support  dismissed \"We  at  May,  made  97 application  In  April 9 decision.  plant. it  the  Succamore.  of  board second  by  the  put  the  \u000C- 122 -  The  CEW s t r o n g l y  certification  vote,  protested  and argued  that  the  board's  the board's  refusal  decision  to  grant  amounted  a  to a 98  denial  of  the  Condemnation Phillips the  of  the  Employees  IBEW  unfair,  employees'  as  board's  international  to  the  union  decision  was  also  i n Vancouver,  bargaining  unjust,  right  agent  and amounted,  in  Phillips  their  appears  the  democratic  rights  dues  dollar.  that  local  this as  your  since these  idea  h a s n o t been last  was  favouritism  for  Canadian  and f a i r  unions t o f i g h t 99  to  on  January 8,  h a d no o b j e c t i o n s previous the union,  the  in  Labour  continue.  society?  to the  Is  As l o n g  country,  I am  establishment  f o r our r i g h t s ,  t o make  fora l l .  for certification  from  s u c h a s IBEW.  Yet  circumstances  a l l my t i m e  takes  an IBEW m e e t i n g  February.  of a just  to devote  Finally,  international  employees  except f o r the  I am a w o r k e r a n d a c i t i z e n o f t h i s  them e q u a l  withdrew  of  a r e and a l w a y s  the b i g i n t e r n a t i o n a l s  There  allows  prepared  the  the  working  each and e v e r y one o f us  Board  vote  and  will  be d e n i e d , u n t i l  country  The IBEW i s a d e a d i s s u e a t S e n t i n e l ,  a  to  in this  a stand against  board  Alberta  opinion,  from  the maintenance  c o n d i t i o n s of workers  of  choice.  forthcoming  who p o i n t e d o u t t h a t f o r the  their  u n i o n s by t h e b o a r d .  It  manner  of  1 9 6 9 , CEW  of the Sentinel regarding  year.  contest,  A  applied  workers.  the t e c h n i c a l i t i e s  certification  handing  its  vote  in  Yet t h i s that was  jurisdiction  the United Steelworkers  an  o f America  identical time,  the  had p r e v e n t e d ordered.  over  to  IBEW another  (USWA), who w e r e  \u000C- 123 -  accordingly majority  placed  for  the  certification.  The fought  on  on  the  CEW,  and t h e  certification  the  issues  personalities the  base In  and  thirteen  had  the  result  new C a n a d i a n  of  battle  at  of  the  u n i o n was  democracy  the  and  Phillips  vote  was  granted  from  the  month  long  campaign  and  clouds  physically  CEW o f f i c e r s  plant  nationalism.  our case based e n t i r e l y  free  financially  fact,  The  a  solid  its  second  1 0 0  opportunity to present  But  ballot.  of  on t h e  so  drained  went p e r s o n a l l y  \"It  Lenkurt\"  waged  far  the  deep  in Alberta  issues, said  1 0 1  the  first  free  from  Succamore.  from  its  Vancouver  and  its  officers.  CEW  into  was  was  debt  to  sustain  the  102 drive.  The  committed appeal  to  CEW  their  to workers  faced a serious CEW support  the  cause.  It  outside  the  financial  was  donated  country.  obviously  able  by  Captains  Body  Workers Union CEW  at  this  not  able  to  of  the  all  was  also  confines  survive  of  the  Council  PPWC,  gave f i n a n c i a l  have been the  the  in Brantford,  independent  from  Columbia.  organizations  Local  make  to  Council  But  the  could it  now  things  easy  a very  important  strain  placed  on  across  and  encouragement themselves, the  factor  in  CEW, the  the  Unions,  Falconbridge  Mine M i l l  for  the  financial  Canadian  and t h e  and m o r a l  financially  modest  of  Ontario  598 o f  support  to  recover  British  deeply  philosophy  labour  enough  to  whose  independent  donate  the  union  personally  due  Struggling  to  of  were  crisis  time.  appears  a  who  the  crucial  support CEW  to  locals  Canadian T e x t i l e  officers  crisis.  various  Several  had  Smelter to  they but  the were  their  ability  organization  by  of the  \u000C- 124 -  certification  campaign  at  Sentinel.  \"It  was a h e l l  of  a  fight\"  said  103 Jess Succamore.  The seeking  B u t i t was t h e b i r t h o f o u r u n i o n . \"  CEW d i d n o t , h o w e v e r ,  certifications  at  went t h r o u g h t h e y e l l o w such  plants,  union  launched  division  by  certification  a margin  bargaining  Company  of  ten votes  rights  i n t h e same  year.  plants.  campaigns  at  and a t for  o f these  eight.  lists  of  efforts,  Cascades  Electronics,  The u n i o n  of  officers  an  cable  f o r t h e one hundred employees  goal  Friden,  the  unorganized  television  vote conducted a t Friden  to  CEW  book t o c o m p i l e  As a r e s u l t  components  a certification  of i t s original  electrical  o f Canada,  of  sight  of the telephone  handbilled.  manufacturer  CEW l o s t  unorganized  pages  they  of Singer  unorganized The  which  lose  an  systems.  on J u n e 1 2 , 1 9 6 8 ,  d i d , however, a t Cascades  win the  Electronics  104  ATTACKS ON CEW C E R T I F I C A T I O N S  In campaign  1968, at  the  t o t r y t o w i n back  Vancouver.  CEW was t h u s  its  to satisfy  ability  seemed  to  received  prefer  first  legal  the c e r t i f i c a t i o n  faced with the workers  the representation  f r o m t h e IBEW,  opportunity,  because  its first that  it  IBEW  f o r the P h i l l i p s crucial  test  represented.  provided  launched  by CEW t o  t h e IBEW was u n a b l e  plant  a in  i n measuring The  that  to sign  employees they  had  up e n o u g h  105 employees  to apply  In Alberta,  t o the board f o r c e r t i f i c a t i o n .  1969, immediately  t h e CEW f a c e d  another  following full  scale  its  certification  r a i d at the P h i l l i p s  victory  in  Vancouver  \u000C- 125 -  plant.  The r a i d  success  in  their  jurisdiction  argued,  sign-up  and p h y s i c a l  personnel,  of  their  departments  small  IBEW they  b u t , meeting again  It  was  size,  obvious,  monetary  the i n t e r e s t s  In employees union,  practice. the  CEW  an  p o o r CEW.  and  was  a  they  and  Steelworkers  resources,  A small  strong  had e x p e r i e n c e  and  certainly  were  trained  in  a  much  t h a n was t h e  o r g a n i z a t i o n such as  could only f a l l  had  found  argument.  with  that  a  But  large  theory  prey t o  the  Phillips  financially  did  did  not.  Yet  the  Phillips  on t h e i r own d u r i n g t h e 1962 s t r i k e .  powerful  employer,  regarded  the  size,  not  secure  always  match  T h e IBEW may h a v e h a d a t w o m i l l i o n d o l l a r s t r i k e f u n d , w h i c h  financially a large,  this  had a l r e a d y IBEW,  their  1 0 6  theory,  the  little  over  o f the workers  t h e CEW was w e a k , t h e y m a i n t a i n e d , a n d t h e r e f o r e company d o m i n a t i o n .  turned  on a p l a t f o r m o f u n i o n  and e x p e r i e n c e ,  and f i n a n c i a l l y  with  who c o n t i n u e d t h e r a i d .  resources.  because  service  the  campaigned  p o s i t i o n t o advance  isolated,  by  campaign,  Steelworkers  that  stronger  launched  to the Steelworkers,  The financial  was  organization that  yet  the contract  as p o o r .  financially  nothing to l o s e .  Therefore,  insecure,  many  been  The IBEW may h a v e  been  despite  on t h e e m p l o y e e s '  the f a c t  the  that  employees  b e h a l f was  t h e CEW was s m a l l  felt  that  they  had  1 0 7  On M a r c h 1 8 , 1 9 6 9 , t h e S t e e l w o r k e r s certification  had  c o u l d e x e r t c o n s i d e r a b l e p r e s s u r e on  negotiated  of  employees  before  the Labour R e l a t i o n s  placed  Board,  an a p p l i c a t i o n f o r  claiming that  they had  \u000C- 126 -  as  members  Phillips that  63  of  the  120  were c o n v i n c e d ,  number  of  employees  however,  employees,  and  at  that  were  the  they  plant.  had  The  signed  \"confidently  workers  up n o w h e r e  predicting  at near  that  the  108 board  would  that But  the  throw  out  the  application\".  Steelworkers  had  applied  on A p r i l  24,  applications  had  application, vote  was  one  month  passed,  after the  for  the  board  an  on May 1 5 ,  the  CEW  incomplete  deadline  for  simply  and o r d e r e d a c e r t i f i c a t i o n  conducted  Also,  bargaining  making  amended  92 o f  the  out  unit.  certification  the  v o t e be h e l d a t  1969, with  pointed  Steelworkers  the  plant.  Phillips  The  employees  109 voting  f o r t h e CEW, As  bargaining  the  and 23 v o t i n g f o r CEW  agent,  struggled  therefore,  it  the  to  Steelworkers.  establish  found  itself  combined f o r c e s  o f two p o w e r f u l  international  Steelworkers.  But  that  s a t i s f i e d with  the  union plant.  had  appears  representation  established  These the  early  stage  for  mark  significantly  continues  it  a  certification  development  to the  secure  the  present  of  an  history day.  the  itself under  trade  Phillips  p r o v i d e d by t h e position battles intense of  for with  interunion both  a  attack  unions,  CEW,  viable  from  IBEW and  employees  itself the  as  were  and t h a t at  the  organizations,  the well  the  new  Phillips  Steelworkers rivalry  the  that and  set was  the to  which  \u000C- 127 -  CEW's PLACE  IN THE ESTABLISHED STRUCTURE  CEW AND THE CLC  The  formation  confrontation with with  the sole  Federation  hall  with  the  t h e C L C , B.  exception  appear  dissidents.  of  to  IBEW.  action that  they were t a k i n g .  B.  C.'s  really Jess  C. F e d e r a t i o n  Although  labour taken  Neale.  there  seriously. 1 1 1  seen  of  for  t h e B. C . the  IBEW  that  acting  of that  president  he d i d n o t b l a m e  was t h a t  u n i o n , who  o f t h e B. C. them f o r t h e  of Lenkurt,  we h a d a r i g h t  \"the general to beef\".  In  was s y m p a t h y  within  f o r t h e CEW o f f i c e r s  t h e ,CEW,  initially  at  attitude  was v e r y  condescending\"  \"Their  hardly  knew  they  least,  existed\"  was n o t  agreed  said Paddy  1 1 2  first  o f t h e l a b o u r e s t a b l i s h m e n t c h a n g e d when CEW won  certification  as a union  and t h e r e f o r e workers  affiliates,  at i t s  \"We r e a l l y  This attitude its  hostile  t h e p r e s e n c e o f CEW r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s  establishment,  Succamore.  sympathies  In t h e a f t e r m a t h  t h e VDLC e v e n t o l e r a t e d 1 1 0  members  a  o f t h e CEW was r u n o f f i n t h e IWA  Ray H a y n e s ,  t h e CEW o f f i c e r s  o f t h e B.  meetings.  some  k n o w l e d g e o f some o f t h e o f f i c e r s  told  by  o r any o f t h e i r  fact,  certain  constitution  Federation,  fact,  In  had  chose t o l o o k t h e o t h e r way.  reaction  not accompanied  C. F e d e r a t i o n  have  The f i r s t  the f u l l  of  CEW was  from  certification  that  at  Phillips  Cable.  c o u l d be a d i v i s i v e  Suddenly,  force,  t h e CEW  undermining  the  became unity  t h e s t r e n g t h o f t h e l a b o u r movement a s a w h o l e b y r e m o v i n g the battle  CLC at  fold. Phillips  Consequently, Cable,  the  Vancouver  CLC in  joined  the  January 1968,  \u000C- 128 -  urging  Phillips  In a l e t t e r  employees  to return  t o t h e CLC by s u p p o r t i n g t h e IBEW.  s e n t t o a l l P h i l l i p s e m p l o y e e s , t h e CLC s t a t e d :  The li  Canadian million  workers  invitation already  to  done  all  Congress,  in  Canada  eligible  so,  recognized Local  Labour  to  264,  IBEW.  extend  employees  return  Canadian  to  labour  Fragmentation,  employees  involved  but to  labour  movement.  Strong,  unions  are b u i l t  on u n i t y  sincere  ranks  movement by  of  the  through  breaking  up  isolated groups,  i s done by t h e CEW, i s n o t o n l y  the  a  who have n o t  the  r e c o g n i z e d u n i o n s and f o r m i n g s m a l l as  representing  a disservice  the whole  militant  Canadian  and  not d i s u n i t y  to  effective  a n d by a l l  members p l a y i n g t h e i r p a r t  i n t a k i n g an i n t e r e s t a n d  by  in  actively  union. Labour help of  participating  Only  unions  Congress,  Labour  IBEW, L o c a l Local and  as  from  and Labour  f u t u r e , you w i l l Canadian  affiliated  such  and a s s i s t a n c e  all  the  affairs to  IBEW,  the  In  their  Canadian  can depend  the Congress,  Councils.  of  on  Federations  the  very  near  have t h e o p p o r t u n i t y t o r e e s t a b l i s h  264 as y o u r b a r g a i n i n g a g e n t .  Labour  Congress,  urge  you  We i n t h e to  support  2 6 4 now a n d r e j o i n t h e r a n k s o f t h e r e c o g n i z e d legitimate  labour  movement, 113  so t h a t  we may go  f o r w a r d s t r o n g and u n i t e d .  The  B.  C.  employees  Federation not  continuing their  to  also  cause  entered  the  fragmentation  s u p p o r t o f CEW. ' ' 1  1  4  campaign, of  the  urging  the  Phillips  labour  movement  by  \u000C- 129 -  According determinative not  t o t h e B.  factor  be t h e q u e s t i o n  determination, that  C. F e d e r a t i o n  f o r t h e employees o f whether  democracy  i s o l a t e d breakaway  and rank  trade  u n i o n movement a s a w h o l e .  In  a  and o n l y  workers  served  Canadian  by t h e CEW w e r e  reply  to  choice  and f i l e  provided  control,  to  self  fragment  important  t h e CLC t h a t  issues  was s i g n e d  the  the i n t e r e s t s  and t h e r e f o r e  determination  should  Canadian  but rather  the  weaken  self fact of the  and t h e t y p e o f u n i o n i s m  f o r the P h i l l i p s  by 79 P h i l l i p s  employees.  employees,  the  asked the Congress:  Are  y o u aware  Employees Local the  of  changed  the  reasons  their  union?  why P h i l l i p s  all  conventions  new b y l a w s  Article says (when  V,  of  Section  \" H e may remove not  in  i n the U.S.A.? IBEW  2 referring  Canadian,  Have y o u  264? to  For  Business  of  any agreement)  o u r laws and r u l e s  to  shall  work  under  his authority.  such,  read  example, Manager  his direction  He c a n remove 115  f o r not  Stewards  be a p p o i n t e d ( w h e r e n e e d e d ) by t h e B u s i n e s s They  that  a n y member f r o m a n y s h o p o r j o b  violation  complying with  Local  Cables  A r e y o u aware  2 6 4 a n d 2 1 3 IBEW who a r e s u p p o s e d l y  hold  The  o f unions  u n i o n s w e r e t o o weak t o s e r v e  members,  provided  in their  o r n o t t h e IBEW  their  However,  and t h e C L C , t h e r e f o r e ,  a n d be any  shall  Manager. subject  steward,  as  a t any t i m e \" .  CLC a n d t h e  B.  C.  i s s u e s t h a t were r e a l l y  Federation  had n o t , t h e r e f o r e ,  important to the P h i l l i p s  addressed  employees.  the  \u000C- 130 -  There concerns  about  existence Phillips with  c a n be  of  t h e CEW w e r e  employees  the  CLC.  t h e CEW c o u l d  workers  i n the e l e c t r i c a l  g r a n t e d t o IBEW. other  union  organizing  CLC.  at  act\" of For  for this  demanded  lay  \"Why i s to  know.  1 1 6  granted  which  admission  prevented  to  CEW f r o m  stemmed f r o m t w o p o l i c i e s o f t h e the intention  a j u r i s d i c t i o n that  on  Phillips  raiding,  both  formation to operate  By  by t h e  to the CLC,  supporters.  been  The f a c t o r s  formed w i t h  field,  infringe  the workers  1 1 7  have  caused  reply  the f a u l t  CLC?\"  Federation's  of organizing  t h e CLC h a d a l r e a d y  Due t o t h e C L C ' s p o l i c y o f e x c l u s i v e j u r i s d i c t i o n , \" n o  could  \"cannobilistic the  of the  never  bodies.  t h e CEW h a d b e e n  in their  out that  and  movement  t h e employees  t h e r e c o g n i z e d l a b o u r movement  First,  CLC's  t h e CEW o r t h e i r  by t h e C L C ? \"  CLC o r i t s a f f i l i a t e d  joining  But  to point  t o be a n a f f i l i a t e  fact,  the  of the labour  and n o t w i t h  \"What d o e s i t t a k e  that  justified.  were q u i c k  CEW n o t r e c o g n i z e d  In  doubt  the fragmentation  the Congress,  the  little  these  this  jurisdiction\".  Cables,  Secondly,  by  t h e CEW h a d c o m m i t t e d  the  an a c t t h a t -was s t r i c t l y  reasons,  the  CEW was  destined  o u t s i d e the mainstream o f Canadian  t h e same  token,  the decision  f o r b i d d e n by from  its  labour.  of the P h i l l i p s  employees  to  l e a v e t h e IBEW made i t e x t r e m e l y d i f f i c u l t f o r them t o r e m a i n w i t h i n t h e CLC  fold,  because  jurisdiction employees  the  do n o t e a s i l y  could  CLC's  have  not replace  had t o  regarding  accommodate a c h a n g e  s u c h an a c t w o u l d make t h e i r first  policies  decertify  t h e IBEW w i t h  their  in unions.  any o t h e r  new u n i o n g u i l t y existing  raiding  union  The P h i l l i p s  CLC a f f i l i a t e ,  of raiding. union,  and  \"They  and then  for  would  approach  \u000C- 131 -  another  union\"  however, the  said  was t h a t  interim.  policies  Paddy  Neale.  i t would  Even  leave  then,  The p r o b l e m  i i 0  them w i t h o u t  they  could  with  this  any union  still  run  protection  afoul  of  o f j u r i s d i c t i o n i n t h e i r c h o i c e o f a new u n i o n .  do o v e r l a p  to a certain  extent\"  said  Paddy  another  union  Neale.  approach,  the  in  CLC's  \"Jurisdictions  \"But i t  could  cause  119 problems are,  in  then,  change  precluding significant  i n unions w i t h i n  difficulties the CLC.  from  in  accepting  keeping  \"That  them.\"  employees  There  who demand  i s why t h e T e a m s t e r s  pick  a  up a  120 lot of people\". they  are  not  Because the Teamsters subject  to  these  e m p l o y e e s who s e e k a c h a n g e For Phillips  all  \"legitimate\" bargaining  agent.  price  they  the of  that  would  trade  union  CEW, was i t s e l f  purposes, have  that  t h e CEW o r  resulted  unacceptable  stem  to  pay to  accepting  the  to  IBEW,  to pay.  the  a  group  the  this  of  from  Phillips the  merits  that  the  within  the  IBEW  as  their  was a p p a r e n t l y  The u n i o n  a  of their  choice,  The a r g u m e n t t h a t  support  t h e l a b o u r movement, at  price  remain  retain  t o the CLC.  i t s members  d i d not  in  therefore,  was  with  not prepared  t h e CEW d i v i d e d a n d w e a k e n e d  impress  had  movement  Dissatisfied  were  restrictions  in unions.  practical  employees  are not a f f i l i a t e d to the CLC,  therefore,  Cable. or  p h i l o s o p h y o f t h e CEW, b u t f r o m r i g i d i t i e s i n h e r e n t  The  lack  of  d i d not  fragmentation them  in  the  i n t h e CLC s y s t e m .  \u000C- 132 -  CEW AND PROVINCIAL LABOUR BOARDS  The  CEW's  Relations  Boards  seriously  question  experiences  had,  by  fair  and  misgivings  arose  from the  on a n y case,  blantantly but  on  a  The  incredibly  the  new  was  ordered,  the  b o a r d was past  CEW  to  they  and  officers  treatment  from  of  Alberta the  new u n i o n  independent the  Labour  union  boards.  labour representatives  to was  Their  were  largely  u n i o n s , and w e r e b a s e d n o t so much of  justice  to  be  in  any  emerging  one  from  particular  a  series  of  events.  instances  Vancouver scrutiny  occurred  Phillips  Cables  undertaken  books not  C.  other  seemed  these  records,  B.  any  miscarriage that  undertaken  and  once  by  papers,  but  the  when plant  the  B.  with  impression  actively  seek  some i r r e g u l a r i t y .  Also,  dealing  with  the  PPWC  and  the  were  certain  that  if  some  small  1967.  fact  before  that  in  applied  the  for  Noting  Labour  the  times  left  CEW in  C.  and  three  was  decisions  Union,  the  close  unions  scrutiny  of  or  that  insignificant  at  the  fact  obvious  first  certification  CEW  international  pattern  singularly quite  the  impartial  drawn f r o m t h e r a n k s o f  the  1970, caused the  whether  receiving  with  Board that  a  this  vote  stance  n o t i n g the  Canadian  of  was  of  the  board's  Ironworkers  technicality  had  been  121 discovered,  a  representation  vote  would  have  been  denied.  pointed to the d e c i s i o n of the A l b e r t a Labour R e l a t i o n s a c e r t i f i c a t i o n vote to the workers of  a  technicality  without  merit  at  being  the  Sentinel  used  to  deny  that  in  its  Board  plant  as  The  CEW  in  denying  an  example  certification  to  a  122 Canadian  union.  Steelworker's  They  application  also for  noted  certification  at  the  dealings  with  Phillips  plant  the in  \u000C- 133 -  1969, the to stand board  B.  C.  i n t h e way  on  this  position  CEW was t h a t  that  the  rigidities  over  the  they  B o a r d had n o t a l l o w e d a t e c h n i c a l  of ordering a vote.  matter  that  prescedence  similar  Labour R e l a t i o n s  CEW  and  exercise  It  objected  if  a  of  Canadian  not  to,  the  for  technicalities democratic  had s e r i o u s d o u b t s t h a t  decision  was  union  leniency  the  CEW  should  rights.  error of  the  took  the  never  take  What b o t h e r e d  the  t h e b o a r d w o u l d have r e a c h e d a  had  made  the  same  mistake  in  a  123 certification  application.  The disquiet  Steelworker s  within  the  They were c e r t a i n 30 o f t h e the  application  1  CEW  that  about  the  the  created  justice  Steelworker s  administered  required for  a c e r t i f i c a t i o n vote.  When t h e  2 3 , they wondered i f  assessment  that  violation Relations  of  the  Act.  The boards vote  in at  their Phillips  Steelworkers  membership  also  and  a  requirement  complained  dealings Cables,  application  vote  with  the  about  had  delays  Canadian  Vancouver,  difficulties  The  d r a g g e d on f o r  had  board.  t h e maximum, lacked  vote  their  been  stipulated  in  results original  called the  been  certification  thirteen  of  The  was  held  3i  filed.  Yet  the  the  battle  months b e f o r e  forthcoming  union.  i n 1969 c u l m i n a t e d i n a v o t e w i t h i n  consuming  corrected.  correct,  the  for  in  Labour  124  CEW  certification  time  been  by  the Steelworkers  w e r e t a b u l a t e d , CEW 9 2 , S t e e l w o r k e r s had  reason  had s i g n e d u p , a t  1  120 e m p l o y e e s , and w e r e c o n v i n c e d t h a t  majority  another  the  certification  months  after  the  two m o n t h s , d e s p i t e  the  application  Phillips  the A l b e r t a  challenge  the  by  erroneous at  from  Cables  Board  in  to  be  Alberta  ordered a  vote.  \u000C- 134 -  Of  particular  the  concern  incumbent  support,  to  union,  while  the  the  allowing raiding  m a i n t a i n i n g t h e momentum o f that  the  boards  certification  operated  CEW.  All  days.  Yet  the  union  is  to  the  as  It  same  it  did  such  regroup  faced  campaign.  at  that  delays  and  with  speed  the  in  in  favour  rebuild  its  problem  of  to the  CEW  d i d not appear  processing  processing  CEW  was  concerned  about  o c c u r r i n g i n c o r r e s p o n d e n c e between  correspondence  from  consistantly,  letters  o f f i c e r s very l i t t l e the  Steelworker s  the  company r e c e i v e d  the  Steelworker's mailing  the  board  to  the  time to respond.  a p p l i c a t i o n was  1  board's  time  fact  that  its  of  the  125  Finally, consistantly  the  it  its  applications,  international.  CEW was  theirs\".  be  C.  were  B o a r d and  answered  the  within  ten  allowing  its  F o r e x a m p l e , n o t i c e t o t h e CEW  received  dated  April 29,  t h e B.  that  CEW w e r e d e l a y e d ,  by t h e  N o t i f i c a t i o n of  application, machine  must  delays  the  April 24, 1969  and  CEW  \"seven  board's  1 9 6 9 , was received  days  of  after  amendment  to  dated  by  the  the  CEW  on  by  1 9 ft  April  30.  They had o n l y f o u r days t o r e s p o n d t o t h i s  The by  themselves,  contended,  was  CEW  readily  did  not  that  admitted seem  they  that  significant.  seemed  to  d i s c r i m i n a t i o n by t h e b o a r d s a g a i n s t CEW  admitted,  that  \"justice  incidents, the  boards.  represent must  be  proof  rooted  they were j u s t i f i e d 127  Most  of  these  each  of in in  represent  of  serious  these  What a  was  allegation.  confidence\",  they  pattern  They d i d n o t ,  and t h a t  c o u l d be  taken  important,  However  losing confidence  incidents  incidents,  consistant  Canadian u n i o n s .  this  issue.  in  they  because the  regarded  of  the  argued these  decisions as  of  of  resulting  \u000C- 135 -  from  the  justice, imply  obvious or  that  as  always  However,  CEW w o u l d b e n e f i t  in  the  system.  the c o n c l u s i o n t h a t attitude  of  accidents.  the  difficulties  difficulty  This  CEW's  lack  of  to  view  often  was  i t was n o t t h e  o f d i s c r i m i n a t i o n by t h e  The  as  administering  not  them  as  it  the  in  absolutely  equal  that  would  light  would s u f f e r  case,  leading  from the  such  CEW  to  laws o f p r o b a b i l i t y o p e r a t i n g , but  an  boards.  confidence  in  the  justice  meted o u t  by  the  b o a r d s was s h a r e d by many i n d e p e n d e n t C a n a d i a n l a b o u r o r g a n i z a t i o n s , a n d c a n be  i d e n t i f i e d as  Canadian the  a characteristic  Ironworkers  boards,  as  of  such g r o u p s .  expressed s i m i l a r complaints in t h e i r dealings  did  the  independent  CAIMAW  group  Canadian Workers F e d e r a t i o n a l s o supported t h i s to  George  vote  at  Brown r e g a r d i n g t h e Sentinel,  The PPWC a n d  the  Alberta  Federation's  Board's  in  denial  secretary-  with  Winnipeg.  contention. of  a  treasurer  In a  the  The letter  certification Frank  Izzard  wrote:  The  board's  decision  \"establishment\" understands once  association especially  composition.  the is  favour  of  the  d o e s n o t come as a s u r p r i s e when one  its  again,  in  a  by t h e  notice right  that that  But the must  it  does  right be  serve, of  free  fought  for,  C a n a d i a n w o r k e r who w i s h e s 128  to  rid  h i m s e l f of the do-nothing i n t e r n a t i o n a l .  The towards Canadian  a  conclusion  more  that  sympathetic  breakaways  because  Labour  treatment labour  Boards of  could  be  international  representatives  expected unions  to  lean  than  were t y p i c a l l y  of  drawn  \u000C- 136 -  from  the  ranks  of  representatives  of  expressed t h e i r  opinion that  their  the the  certification  Steelworker  staff  international  unions  international the  attempt  was  unions.  When CEW  Steelworkers  at  Phillips  representative,  even ' s h a r e d  by  some  representatives  d i d not stand a chance  Cables,  Archie  in  MacDonald,  r e p l i e d \"We've got people i n the  a  right  129 places. doubt,  It  pays  referring  to  have  to  Pen  reps  Baskin,  U n i o n and a member o f t h e B. The to  call  unions the  for to  the  lack  second  governments treatment  to for  C.  of  labour  annual  adopt all  this  unions  the  area  board.\"  MacDonald  supervisor  Labour R e l a t i o n s  confidence  appointment  provincial  CEW's  boards\".  CEW's  on  of  in  the  In  convention  in  practice when  in  they  the  Steelworkers  of  decisions  independent  led  r e s o l u t i o n , passed  1968,  called  make  it to  \"ensure  on  at  provincial  fair  representations  it  Canadian  a policy  order  no  Board.  boards'  representatives  boards.  for  was,  and  equal  before  the  Winnipeg  had  independent  of  1 3 0  CEW AND CAIMAW  Until  1970, the  CEW  in  been e s t a b l i s h e d and had d e v e l o p e d each groups  other.  Yet  had  been  they  shared  operating  international  craft  unions,  unsatisfactory  representation.  in  unions to properly represent  \"They  seem t o  attitude  common  industrial  unions \"I  and  CAIMAW  in  i n a manner c o m p l e t e l y  certain  craft  have t h e  Vancouver  which  were  characteristics. plants  Both  represented  regarded  as  by  providing  sometimes wonder about the a b i l i t y i n d u s t r i a l workers\"  that  the  s a i d Paddy  s k i l l e d craftsmen  are  all  of  Neale. that  \u000C- 137 -  count  and  to  hell  dissatisfied them,  and  arose,  with  were  officers  over  or  the  respond  to  leaders  redress  only  when  the  resentment  of  the  attempts  that  to rebel  against  both  set  rank  and  the  file  both  change  in  provide  because  vehicle  and  and  were  of the  a  the  United  for  the  a  major  which  rigidities  i n the  expression  which  could not. of  the  was  to  by  union  American made  their  attempts  unions.  succeed  to  It  in  a  was these  joined  forces  way.  in  many  political  stance,  and  they  unorganized.  the  exercise of  both  of  to achieve  unions  could  Both unions  Canadian  increasingly  of  the  by  self  not  assertion  important  provide  a  provided  unions, headquartered  could also  philosophy  power  organizations.  affiliated  CLC s y t s t e m .  Democracy, of  CLC  international  socialist  United  by  union d i s s i d e n t s  Both unions  the  hierarchies  for  becoming  dictates  similar  of  expression  union  were  principles  a vehicle  that  own  of  intensified  not  formed  rejection  nationalistic  States,  they  in  were  allowed  these  nationalists  o r g a n i z i n g the  the the  a vehicle  could  nonpartisan  of  was  from w i t h i n  Canadian  vehicle  determination society,  and  union  originally  they  unions  officers the  groups  dictates  exerted  groups  that  their the  membership  that  goal  provided  unions,  for  self  Canadian  the  officials  of  quo and go t h e i r  adopted  control  Both o r g a n i z a t i o n s  a  status  organizations  themselves  refusal  control  both  Because  union  dissatisfactions  dissidents  of  from  Both  apparent  union  They  appointed  workers.  became  The  the  of  making  membership.  arise, by  particular,  imposition  the  wishes  to t h e i r  it  to  In  1 0 1  decision  the  of  created  Canadian  gain  of  of  perceived  the  rest.\"  degree  wishes  unrest  on  respects.  the  the  nationalistic  the  resentful  were  States,  with  a  New L e f t  in in  vehicle and  the  \u000C- 138 -  Waffle group, in that union  hierarchy  challenged  the  and  they placed  Although labour  joining raiding. their unions  of  to  on  Labour  of  survived  because  of  and  i n Canada,  o r g a n i z a t i o n adopted a h o s t i l e  file,  its  both  were  stance  destined  the  the  CAIMAW,  it  support  the  established Yet  they  inherent subjected  found  among  of  the  CEW  faced  through  difficulties  of  unions  other  Winnipeg  Steelworkers  f o u n d among C a n a d i a n  it  their  and  position  both  the  IBEW  certifications  Boards.  support  that  to  from  ranks because o f r i g i d i t i e s  destroying  to  and  unions  Both o r g a n i z a t i o n s found themselves  Relations  because  rank  the  reactionary.  eliminate  due  survived  the  unions  Both o r g a n i z a t i o n s complained t h a t  development  of  r e c o g n i z e d l a b o u r e s t a b l i s h m e n t , t h e CLC i n  policy  forces  hands  international  outside of  from the a  the  establishment\",  i n t h e CLC s y s t e m i t s e l f .  announcing  in  g r o u p as  neither  formation to operate  to attacks  it  dominance o f  w e r e r e g a r d e d by t h i s  \"recognized  s u p p o r t e d n a t i o n a l i s m , removed power f r o m  in  international  survived.  CAIMAW  CLC a f f i l i a t e s , Canadian  CEW  independent  unions.  There were, based the  CAIMAW and  Molders  group  Union,  whose  Winnipeg  the  however,  certain  Vancouver  based  the  attitudes  experience  of  local to One  which  Big  challenge  The b a t t l e  had i n v o l v e d a d i r e c t  the  American  CEW. had  Union,  t o the dominance o f  international  The  given  international  signifiant  and  differences  a  between  leaders birth  unions  were  union  which  international  c o n f r o n t a t i o n between leaders  in  to  the  of  Local  CAIMAW, coloured had  Cincinnatti.  174  of  were  a  by  presented  unions the  Winnipeg  the a  in  Canada.  local  leaders  In  effect,  the  \u000C- 139 -  local on  h a d won t h a t  battle,  a comparatively  making  up  brought  the  into  established  strong  local.  and f o r t h a t base  The  sharp Canadian  the  labour  In Vancouver  contrast,  were,  the  local  membership  next e l e c t i o n s , their  leaders  factor  in  existence  of  the  remained,  supported the i n t e r n a t i o n a l  during  the a b i l i t y  of  -  a  namely  leaders  a  plants  labour  division  of  international  these  that  the  of  on t h e  split  leaders  Local  trade  union during the Lenkurt  routed  the fact  o f the seventeen  CAIMAW  founded  scene  within  the  between  the  unions a f f i l i a t e d with the CLC.  many  and  seven  of  movement  Canadian and t h e i n t e r n a t i o n a l  CAIMAW had been  - namely  emergence  focus  reason,  213  IBEW  unionists,  dispute.  from t h e i r  in and  Although  positions  i n the  t h e membership d i d n o t have t h e s u p p o r t o f  Lenkurt the  dispute  was  international  no d o u b t  to  regain  a  significant  control  of  the  local.  The that  international's  the founders  certifications had  been  Lenkurt Nor  were  Local  o f t h e CEW w e r e  from t h i s  decimated.  plant  because  there  There they  after  were  over  the  not able  IBEW l o c a l .  dissidents  213 i t s e l f  victory  t o base  The L e n k u r t  no r e a l  union  had been r e f u s e d left  in  membership  their  of  activists  f o r example, left  the  its trials  and  T h e f o u n d e r s o f CEW, u n l i k e CAIMAW i n W i n n i p e g ,  much  broken  and t h e i r  away f r o m  IBEW a s t h e y  new u n i o n was f o r c e d t o s t a r t  h a d been  from s c r a t c h .  the  within  suspensions. actively  in  by t h e c o m p a n y .  leadership  had c o m p l e t e d  meant  new u n i o n on  workers,  reemployment  positions  the international  local  had n o t s o  expelled  from i t ,  Due t o t h e i r  more  \u000C- 140 -  insecure  start,  the  CEW  was  not  as  successful  as  CAIMAW  in  obtaining  certifications.  CAIMAW i n W i n n i p e g was b a s e d p r i m a r i l y on a s i n g l e p r i n c i p l e to  provide  a  different  internationals, Although  CEW  platform  of  Canadian  union  or  strengthened  movement  CAIMAW.  the  an of  differences leaders.  for  a  Canada  Canadian  resentful Canadian because  of  a  the  like  CAIMAW,  the  CLC, the  membership critical and t h e national obvious of  genuine  by  United  file  was  1967,  like of  States,  in  group  development Canada.  in  and  of  CAIMAW  split, their  namely Canadian  society, of  becoming  Canadian  were  strong  ties desire  increasingly  affairs.  u n i o n s , on t h e o t h e r h a n d ,  continental ism,  split  international  Canadian  were  over  which  a  While  and  desirability  and  doubt labour  were e x p e r i e n c i n g a s t r o n g  domination  international  no  have.  intraunion  many the  a  the  actively  independent  CAIMAW,  membership  assertion,  belief  CEW  Canadian  and  for  influence  of  the  an  control.  foreign more  other  most  additional  was  split  illuminated  the  CEW  1970, d i d not  between  on  form of  that  illuminated  by  determination  in  rank  S.  self  with  contacts  reassessment  U.  built  establishment  CEW  self  was  f r o m any  contacts  provided  and r a n k and f i l e  nationalism  PPWC,  union  it  that  therefore,  The  interunion  leadership of  to  national  outset,  isolated until  between  The  undergoing between  CEW,  on  freedom  union's  as  trade  illuminated  and  than  remained b a s i c a l l y  the  based  the  such  The  unionism  platform,  From  by  organizations  affiliates  this  nationalism,  nationalistic  of  a u n i o n i s m b a s e d on d e m o c r a c y  shared  control.  within  type  -  unswerving  The  possibly  loyalty  to  \u000C- 141 -  their  unions,  security  and  sometimes  their  doubt  ambitions,  did  took  not  because  share  suppressed them.  place  Canadian  between  leaders.  \"puppets\"  hierarchy,  an  these  of  the  the  factor  unionism  in  Canada  had  and  up w i t h  born or  brought  even  seriously  f o r example, despite Lenkurt  and  youth.  from  the  taken  had  do  on t h e  an  the  of  One  they  involve  Rather,  the  membership  and  it  appeared  pervaded  level  the  to W i l l i a m  that union  Ladyman  of  understand  the  Big  be of  at  of  \"The  necessity  Art  the  hands  to the  in  never  O'Keeffe,  of  the  Winnipeg had  up  international  in come  also  had  the new  in  had  Paddy  in  that  IBEW  movement  unionism.  problem i s for  had  international.  union  background  of  unions  b o r n and b r o u g h t  therefore  international  unions.  else.  CAIMAW  individual's  international  trade  and  Canadian  background  and  loyalty  British  the  unions,  at  had been  Union,  to  the  to  anything  his  hand,  founders  an  s t r u g g l e between  he r e c e i v e d  in  alternative  international  not  other  active  importance  towards  simply  had  leaders  considered  treatment  Similarly,  with  the  the  been  tradition  experience  and f i l e ,  international  dispute, maintained  Brown and S u c c a m o r e ,  their  rank  appears  Many C a n a d i a n  Britain,  d i s p u t e d i d not  nationalistic  i n f l u e n c i n g the  unionists.  d u r i n g the  Indeed,  i n Washington.  local  Canadian trade  experienced  hierarchical  sentiments.  international the  own  level.  international  been  their  The L e n k u r t  To many o f  An a d d i t i o n a l  stressed  of  increasingly  f r o m Angus M a c D o n a l d a t  national  and  also  c o n f r o n t a t i o n w i t h American leaders  Canadian  the  no  actively  a direct battle  and  Neale  attitude Canadians  unions\"  he  132 said.  Jess  t h i s was b e c a u s e  Succamore  agreed  new C a n a d i a n s  that  they  did  saw t h e e x i s t e n c e  not. of  But  in  his  international  view, unions  \u000C- 142 -  not  as  true  Canadian their  international  labour.  home  \"They  country  bodies,  know  being  but  that  as  the  dominated  American  possibility  by  some  unions of  foreign  dominating  trade  unions  in  country  would  be  133 a b s o l u t e l y u n t h i n k a b l e . \" he s a i d . had they  been  reared  accepted  permitted  with  international  unquestioningly  in  any  other  been  exposed  to  a  an  u n i o n i s m who  lacked  state  of  affairs  The  fact  that  country.  f o u n d e d CAIMAW i n W i n n i p e g had  To h i m , i t was t r a d e u n i o n i s t s who  and t h e  leaders  alternative  to  that  that both  obstacles that was  1 9 7 0 , b o t h CAIMAW and CEW  would  never  the  international  hoped  quite  to  become.  isolated,  and  CAIMAW, found  broadly  itself  there  based  unable  Vancouver  of  no  their  away.  realized that  a  be that  u n i o n i s m was  p r e v e n t i n g them f r o m e x p a n d i n g i n t o t h e n a t i o n a l  they  that  leaders  reassessment  u n i o n s , and t o t h e i r d e c i s i o n t o b r e a k  By  in  f o u n d e d CEW i n  doubt a f a c t o r which c o n t r i b u t e d to t h e i r c r i t i c a l international  vision,  to  were  serious  organizations  industrial expand  union,  beyond  the  134 Winnipeg with had  area  other  of  independent  succeeded  basically  because  in  a  lack  Canadian  expanding  of  labour  beyond  a union f o r e l e c t r i c a l  resources.  The  CEW  organizations.  British  Columbia.  had  contacts  Furthermore, However,  it  it  was  workers w i t h a narrow j u r i s d i c t i o n ,  and  135 therefore  a  restricted  organizations and  grow.  In  that  membership  changes  1970,  the  base.  It  w o u l d h a v e t o be made two  unions  s o l u t i o n to t h e i r problems through  came  merger.  became if  together  evident  to  they were t o to  find  a  both  expand mutual  \u000C- 143 -  FOOTNOTES 1.  J . Cameron, V. Reimer and C. W a l k e r , \"Lenkurt Strike\", U n p u b l i s h e d M a n u s c r i p t , B C I T , M a y , 1 9 7 1 , CAIMAW U n i o n F i l e s .  2.  Members o f IBEW L o c a l 2 1 3 Who Want U n i o n n o . 1 , J u l y 7 , 1 9 6 6 , CAIMAW U n i o n F i l e s .  3.  Information o b t a i n e d from M r . J . Succamore, S e c r e t a r y T r e a s u r e r , Canadian A s s o c i a t i o n o f I n d u s t r i a l M e c h a n i c a l and A l l i e d W o r k e r s , p e r s o n a l i n t e r v i e w , V a n c o u v e r , B. C .  4.  Members o f IBEW L o c a l  5.  Democracy,  2 1 3 Who Want U n i o n D e m o c r a c y ,  Bulletin,  op. c i t .  Ibid.  6.  J.  Cameron e t a l . , o p . c i t .  7.  Information in a letter from A. O'Keeffe F e b r u a r y 8 , 1 9 6 6 , CAIMAW U n i o n F i l e s .  8.  J.  to  W.  Ladyman,  Cameron e t a l . , o p . c i t .  9.  Ibid.  10.  Ibid.  11.  I n f o r m a t i o n i n a t r a n s c r i p t o f an i n t e r v i e w J . C a m e r o n , May 9 , 1 9 6 1 , CAIMAW U n i o n F i l e s .  12.  Information obtained i n t e r v i e w , Vancouver,  13.  D. P o o g h k a y ,  14.  Tom C o n s t a b l e l a t e r  15.  D. P o o g h k a y , o p . c i t .  16.  Information in a t r a n s c r i p t Manager, Lenkurt E l e c t r i c , Union F i l e s .  17.  D. P o o g h k a y ,  18.  Vancouver  19.  J.  20.  Vancouver  from B. C .  Mr. J .  o f Donna  Succamore,  Pooghkay  op. c i t . ,  by  personal  op. c i t . s e r v e d as Mayor o f B u r n a b y ,  C. 1977-1980.  o f an i n t e r v i e w o f W. L i t t l e , Plant by C. W a l k e r , May 1 6 , 1 9 7 1 , CAIMAW  op. c i t .  Sun, April  B.  2 9 , 1966, p.2.  Cameron e t a l . , o p . c i t . S u n , May 3 , 1 9 6 6 , p . 4 5 .  \u000C- 144 -  21.  T h i s i s n o t t h e Angus MacDonald t h a t Relations Board.  22.  V a n c o u v e r S u n , May 1 1 , 1 9 6 6 , p . l .  23.  Ibid.  24.  V a n c o u v e r S u n , May 1 2 , 1 9 6 6 , p . l .  25.  V a n c o u v e r S u n , May 1 6 , 1 9 6 6 , p . 3 .  26.  Information obtained from i n t e r v i e w , V a n c o u v e r , B. C .  27.  I n f o r m a t i o n o b t a i n e d f r o m M r . P. D i s t r i c t Labour C o u n c i l , personal  28.  V a n c o u v e r S u n , May 1 3 , 1 9 6 6 , p . l .  29.  Information obtained from i n t e r v i e w , V a n c o u v e r , B. C.  30.  V a n c o u v e r S u n , May 1 3 , 1 9 6 6 , p . l .  31.  Ibid.  32.  V a n c o u v e r S u n , May 1 6 , 1 9 6 6 , p . 3 .  33.  V a n c o u v e r S u n , May 1 3 , 1 9 6 6 , p . l .  34.  V a n c o u v e r S u n , May 1 6 , 1 9 6 6 , p . 3 .  35.  V a n c o u v e r S u n , May 1 8 , 1 9 6 6 , p . 2 0 .  36.  Information obtained from i n t e r v i e w , V a n c o u v e r , B. C .  37.  D.  38.  Information obtained from i n t e r v i e w , V a n c o u v e r , B. C.  39.  V a n c o u v e r S u n , May 1 6 , 1 9 6 6 , p . 3 .  40.  Ibid.  41.  V a n c o u v e r S u n , May 2 5 , 1 9 6 6 , p . 3 .  42.  D.  43.  Blacklisted Lenkurt CAIMAW U n i o n F i l e s .  Pooghkay,  op.  Pooghkay, op.  Mr. J .  served  Succamore,  on  the  B.  op. c i t . ,  C.  Labour  personal  N e a l e , S e c r e t a r y , Vancouver i n t e r v i e w , V a n c o u v e r , B. C.  Mr. J .  Succamore,  op. c i t . ,  and  personal  Mr.  P.  Neale,  op. c i t . ,  personal  Mr.  P.  Neale,  op. c i t . ,  personal  cit.  cit. Workers,  \"The  Lenkurt  Sellout\",  undated,  \u000C- 145 -  44.  J.  Cameron e t a l . , o p . c i t .  45.  Vancouver  46.  Ibid.  S u n , May 3 0 , 1 9 6 6 , p . l .  47.  I n f o r m a t i o n i n a n anonymous CAIMAW U n i o n F i l e s .  48.  Ibid.  letter  t o D. C o l l i n s ,  June 1 4 ,1 9 6 6 ,  49.  Members o f L o c a l 2 1 3 IBEW, \" V o t e O u t E x e c u t i v e 1 9 6 6 , CAIMAW U n i o n F i l e s .  Dictatorship\",  50.  J.  51.  Information obtained i n t e r v i e w , Vancouver,  52.  P r o g r e s s i v e W o r k e r ' s Movement, Trade Union C o m m i t t e e , Strike - U. S . D o m i n a t i o n o r C a n a d i a n I n d e p e n d e n c e ? \" , CAIMAW U n i o n F i l e s .  53.  D. P o o g h k a y , o p . c i t .  54.  Information obtained i n t e r v i e w , Vancouver,  55.  Ibid.  56.  Ibid.  57.  Ibid.  58.  Ibid.  59.  Ibid.  60.  Ibid.  July  Cameron e t a l . , o p . c i t . from B. C .  from B. C .  Mr. J .  Mr. J .  Succamore,  Succamore,  op. c i t . ,  op. c i t . ,  personal  \"Lenkurt undated,  personal  61.  Information in a letter f r o m t h e C a n a d i a n Autonomy Council, Members o f IBEW t o G. F r e e m a n , u n d a t e d , CAIMAW U n i o n F i l e s .  62.  D. P o o g h k a y ,  63.  Information obtained i n t e r v i e w , Vancouver,  64.  Canadian E l e c t r i c a l CAIMAW U n i o n F i l e s .  65.  Ibid.  op. c i t . from B. C . Workers  Mr. J . Union,  Succamore,  op. c i t . ,  personal  \"Election  Bulletin,\"  undated,  \u000C- 146 -  66.  CEW L i v e w i r e ,  67.  Information obtained i n t e r v i e w , Vancouver,  68.  CEW L i v e w i r e ,  69.  Information obtained i n t e r v i e w , Vancouver,  70.  Ibid.  71.  Ibid.  72.  Ibid.  73.  CEW L i v e w i r e ,  vol  1,  issue 2, A p r i l from Mr. B. C.  op. c i t . ,  Mr. J .  Files.  Succamore,  op. c i t . ,  personal  Succamore,  op. c i t . ,  personal  Succamore,  op. c i t . ,  personal  p.4.  74.  Ibid.  75.  Ibid.,  76.  Vancouver  77.  Information obtained i n t e r v i e w , Vancouver,  78.  Ibid..  79.  V a n c o u v e r S u n , May 2 7 , 1 9 6 7 , p . 1 5 .  80.  Canadian E l e c t r i c a l  81.  CAIMAW U n i o n  p.4.  from B. C.  op. c i t . ,  J.  1967, p . 2 ,  p.2. S u n , May 2 7 , 1 9 6 7 , p . 1 5 . from B. C.  Mr. J .  Workers U n i o n , \" E l e c t i o n  B u l l e t i n \" , op.  cit.  Ibid.  82.  Information in a letter from L o c a l 213 i n t h e M a n u f a c t u r i n g Union F i l e s .  83.  Information obtained i n t e r v i e w , Vancouver,  84.  International Brotherhood of E l e c t r i c a l Workers, L o c a l 2 6 4 , \" u n d a t e d , CAIMAW U n i o n F i l e s .  85.  Information i n a l e t t e r from J . K i n n a i r d to A l l M a n u f a c t u r i n g , F e b . 3 , 1 9 6 7 , CAIMAW U n i o n F i l e s .  from B. C .  W. Ladyman to All Members of Industry, F e b . 2 8 , 1 9 6 7 , CAIMAW  Mr. J .  86.  Ibid.  87.  V a n c o u v e r S u n , May 2 7 , 1 9 6 7 , p . 1 5 .  Succamore,  op. c i t . ,  personal  \"Bulletin  No.  2,  IBEW Members  in  \u000C- 147 -  88.  International op. c i t .  89.  Ibid.  Brotherhood of E l e c t r i c a l  90.  Sparker,  M a r c h , 1 9 6 8 , p.  91.  Information obtained i n t e r v i e w , Vancouver,  92.  Ibid. op.  Workers,  2 , CAIMAW U n i o n  \"Bulletin  No.  2,\"  Files.  from B. C.  Mr. J .  Succamore,  op. c i t . ,  personal  from B. C .  Mr. J .  Succamore,  op. c i t . ,  personal  93.  Sparker,  cit.  94.  Information obtained i n t e r v i e w , Vancouver,  95.  CEW, \" P r o v i n c i a l L a b o u r B o a r d s a r e U n f a i r t o I n d e p e n d e n t C a n a d i a n U n i o n s \" , Open c o r r e s p o n d e n c e t o a l l M L A s , J u n e 2 6 , 1 9 6 9 , CAIMAW Union F i l e s .  96.  Information obtained i n t e r v i e w , Vancouver,  97.  Ibid.  from B. C.  98.  CEW, \" P r o v i n c i a l L a b o u r Unions,\" op. c i t .  99.  Ibid.  100.  Information obtained i n t e r v i e w , Vancouver,  101.  Ibid.  102.  Ibid.  103.  Ibid.  104.  Ibid.  105.  Ibid.  Mr. J .  Boards  from B. C.  Mr.  are  J.  Succamore,  Unfair  to  United Steelworkers of America, u n d a t e d , CAIMAW U n i o n F i l e s .  \"What  107.  Information obtained i n t e r v i e w , Vancouver,  Succamore,  108.  CEW, \" P r o v i n c i a l L a b o u r B o a r d s U n i o n s \" , op. c i t .  Mr. J . are  personal  Independent  Canadian  op. c i t . ,  personal  Company  Union?\",  op. c i t . ,  personal  Independent  Canadian  Succamore,  106.  from B. C .  op. c i t . ,  Unfair  is  to  a  \u000C- 148 -  109.  Ibid.  110.  Information obtained i n t e r v i e w , Vancouver,  111.  Ibid.  112.  Information obtained from i n t e r v i e w , V a n c o u v e r , B. C.  113.  Information i n a l e t t e r from the Canadian Labour Congress to A l l E m p l o y e e s o f P h i l l i p s C a b l e s , J a n . 1 7 , 1 9 6 8 , CAIMAW U n i o n F i l e s .  114.  I n f o r m a t i o n i n a l e t t e r f r o m B. C. F e d e r a t i o n o f L a b o u r t o A l l E m p l o y e e s o f P h i l l i p s C a b l e s , J a n . 2 6 , 1 9 6 8 , CAIMAW U n i o n F i l e s .  115.  Information i n a l e t t e r from P h i l l i p s J a n 2 2 , 1 9 6 8 , CAIMAW U n i o n F i l e s .  116.  Ibid.  117.  Information obtained from i n t e r v i e w , V a n c o u v e r , B. C.  118.  Ibid.  119.  Ibid.  120.  Ibid.  from B. C.  121.  CEW \" P r o v i n c i a l L a b o u r U n i o n s \" , op. c i t .  122.  Ibid.  123.  Ibid.  124.  Ibid.  125.  Ibid.  126.  Ibid.  127.  Ibid.  128.  Ibid.  129.  Information obtained i n t e r v i e w , Vancouver,  130.  CEW P o l i c y  Mr. J .  Boards  from B. C .  Mr.  Succamore,  P.  Neale,  P.  Neale,  are  Unfair  to  Succamore,  personal  op. c i t . ,  Employees  Mr.  Mr. J .  op. c i t . ,  to  personal  T.  Gooderham,  op. c i t . ,  personal  Independent  Canadian  op. c i t . ,  personal  R e s o l u t i o n , 2 n d C o n v e n t i o n , 1 9 6 8 , CAIMAW U n i o n  Files.  \u000C- 149 -  131.  Information obtained from i n t e r v i e w , V a n c o u v e r , B. C.  132.  Ibid.  133.  Information obtained i n t e r v i e w , Vancouver,  134.  I n f o r m a t i o n o b t a i n e d f r o m M r . P. M c E v o y , R e g i o n a l V i c e - P r e s i d e n t , C a n a d i a n A s s o c i a t i o n o f I n d u s t r i a l , M e c h a n i c a l and A l l i e d W o r k e r s , p e r s o n a l i n t e r v i e w , V a n c o u v e r , B. C.  135.  Information obtained i n t e r v i e w , Vancouver,  from B. C.  from B. C.  Mr.  Mr.  J.  Mr. J .  P.  Neale,  Succamore,  Succamore,  op. c i t . ,  op. c i t . ,  op. c i t . ,  personal  personal  personal  \u000C- 150 -  Chapter V  The New CAIMAW  Goodnight Mr. Gompers, wherever you  Kent  are  Rowley  \u000C- 151 -  THE BREAKAWAYS J O I N FORCES  A QUESTION OF PHILOSOPHY  Since of  developing  to  expand  its  into  beyond  that  a  of  the  interest  based breakaway  The o f f i c e r s o f t h e CEW, restrictive  to  difficulties Alberta,  to  the  two  the  due  in  full  a  to  the  merger.  The  CEW  self-determination  its  through  philosophy  officials  in  of  their  they  could  range  was,  deeply  for  Canadian  rank  and  rank  p o s i t i o n s of  file  and  the  his  to  drive  facing at  the  would  that  its  labour  and  the  of  control, in  the  of  the  the  of  union.  In  1  proved  in 'of  fraternal  interest  between  Significant lead  t h e m on  a  ideology.  philosophy  exercise  CEW  CEW.  prospects  dual  decisions.  the  plant  were t o  to  influence  and  Phillips  overrated.  committed  file  Feeling  financial  exchange  community  unions  control  of  the  serious  welcome  from the  reality,  two  officers  this  aware o f  organization  the  goal  resources  solution  became  i s s u e s t h a t were r o o t e d i n b a s i c  was  the  t h e i r narrow j u r i s d i c t i o n  apparent in  the  A  McEvoy  u n i o n , and  that  the  e x i s t e d between  c o l l i s i o n course over  democracy  But  itself  lacked  own.  between  organizational  that  it  set  CEW p u b l i c a t i o n , The S p a r k e r .  existed  of  CAIMAW  form  its  1969, Pat  r e a l i z i n g that  organizations  differences  in  on  u n i o n , he c o n t a c t e d  growth  informed  cooperation ties  when,  However,  area  CEW t h r o u g h t h e of  1 9 6 4 , CAIMAW h a d  union.  Winnipeg  itself  community  Vancouver  in  a national the  problem presented existence  formation  In had  of  union  keeping no  of  with  appointed  keeping with  its  \u000C- 152 -  philosophy  of  i n C a n a d a by  nationalism,  the  CEW  the  time  of  the  p h i l o s o p h i e s had emerged w i t h i n stood f o r the  strongly any  same p r i n c i p l e s  represented  basically  by  embraced rejected  cause,  but  membership  John  the by  with  the  the  unionism  decision  making  CAIMAW.  of rank  CEW.  his  best  and  the membership t o f u r t h e r  members  look  after  should  Executive  Board  constitution the  Gugulyn  the  were  was  all  delegated  administration  to  of  organization,  said  Gugulyn the  -  union.  a  did  he  The  concept  not  pursue  interests  CEW,  of  adhered  namely  that  accomplished  the to  \"His  Succamore.  by  being  Gugulyn  attitude \"We  believed  a  union  p r o f e s s i o n a l , working  interests. Jess  CEW.  unionism,  making  of the  the  to  provision  - namely  membership  His  appointed rank  these  contrary  union.  an  elected  Gugulyn,  the  you'\"  run  director  efficiently  their  McEvoy,  the  the  experienced  by P a t  on was  believed that  he  3  John  for  a competent  distinct  as  CEW,  unlike  most  of  should.\"  unions  control  furthering  decision  behalf  I will  of  to  the  the  of  two  represented  business the  to  And,  in  that  hands  of  energies  approach  One,  CAIMAW's  Unlike  placed  me and  control  discussions,  and f i l e  Gugulyn,  employer.  was  merger  principles  limited  business  'pay  - the  Canadians.  By  other,  had a c a u s e  and  officers union  spirit  and  control  power stemmed f r o m h i s  official. file  members,  authority  between intent  General  and  CAIMAW's  responsibility  conventions. of  - occupied ability  and  The  this a  constitutional  pivotal  to s t r o n g l y  However,  position influence  in the  \u000CTable III OPPOSING IDEOLOGIES GUGULYN Business  CEW  Unionism  Rank &amp; F i l e  Control  Objectives  Objectives: L i m i t e d to s h o r t term economic g a i n . No c a u s e . N a t i o n a l i s m u s e d as a s e l l i n g f e a t u r e t o b u i l d m e m b e r s h i p and strengthen organization. Lack of e n t h u s i a s m f o r CCU due t o l i m i t e d return.  Decision Making  Decisions best vested with t r a i n e d p r o f e s s i o n a l s due t o g r e a t e r e x p e r i e n c e and e x p e r t i s e .  Decisions vested with membership - d e m o c r a c y .  Information  P r o v i s i o n of i n f o r m a t i o n not necess a r y because d e c i s i o n s v e s t e d w i t h trained professional. Control over information allows professional to r e t a i n control over d e c i s i o n s .  Provision of information essential in order to a l l o w m e m b e r s h i p t o make informed d e c i s i o n s .  Staff Salaries  Large s a l a r i e s f o r s t a f f necessary i n o r d e r to r e c r u i t e x p e r t i s e in professionals. No c a u s e t h a t can a t t r a c t competent s t a f f .  Large s t a f f s a l a r i e s d i s c o u r a g e d so t h a t s t a f f do n o t l o s e t o u c h w i t h t h e r a n k and f i l e they serve.  Central Control  *\u2022  C e n t r a l i z e d control necessary to achieve c o n t r o l over d e c i s i o n s by c o m p e t e n t t r a i n e d p r o f e s sional .  Objectives: Cause - B u i l d i n g o f a sovereign Canadian l a b o u r movement t h r o u g h s u p p o r t o f t h e CCU.  L o c a l autonomy n e c e s s a r y t o a c h i e v e membership control over d e c i s i o n making.  * I s s u e adds o v e r t o n e s  of regionalism to  N a t i o n a l ism  ideological  question.  Large s t a f f s a l a r i e s not necess a r y because competent s t a f f r e c r u i t e d by c o m m i t m e n t t o cause. Large s a l a r i e s avoided to discourage s t a f f motivation o f economic o p p o r t u n i s m .  \u000C- 154 -  elected  General  information expertise.  Executive  they  4  received  Board, and  both  through  through  the  Gugulyn would always c l a i m t h a t hand.  Yet  He made  everything  sure  the  board only  w a n t e d them t o g e t . his  to  d e c i s i o n making.  of  the  and  to  was But the  in  last  p e r s o n who  it  ran  ideological a  CEW  of  had  to  meet  Gugulyn i n Vancouver  interest with  to  the  and  5  unionism  CAIMAW,  both  approach ideology of  belief  which  that  an a p p o i n t e d  the  official  control.  were  themselves  unaware  Gold,  of  these  and G u g u l y n .  d i d e x i s t between  Allan  his  for  held  power was  for  he  strongly  of  the  got.  information  business  intent  such  however,  between  his  of  hired  Gugulyn  d e c i s i o n s , a n d on t h e  should wield  differences  agreed  the  a  and t h e y w o u l d r e f e r  constitutional  officers,  s t r o n g community o f  they  got  contrary  o v e r whom t h e m e m b e r s h i p had l i t t l e  The  he was j u s t wanted,  keeping with  c e n t e r e d on m e m b e r s h i p c o n t r o l very  they  t h e i r d e c i s i o n making r e s p o n s i b i l i t y to him.  influence  CEW,  respect  control  The b o a r d w o u l d a l w a y s w a i t  o p i n i o n on e v e r y t h i n g ,  defer  Gugulyn's  Gugulyn  his  the  president  i n May 1969 t o d i s c u s s t h e  underlying  Believing  that  two o r g a n i z a t i o n s ,  of  CAIMAW  merger.  and  John  6  THE MERGER  At concern  about  the the  meeting  with  structure  of  Gold  and  CAIMAW.  Gugulyn,  CEW  officers  CAIMAW had been  set  expressed up  in  1964  \u000C- 155 -  to consist of a National  unions).  As  t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n had grown and d e v e l o p e d , e a c h n e w l y  c e r t i f i e d plant  had  merely  distinction  the  been  made  National  defined. also  and  elected for  of  intent  rank  the  and  of  the  file  secretary-treasurer Board,  by  as  Unit  CEW  consisting  of  to  They  the  CAIMAW  two  between  fuzzy  CAIMAW's  and  all  chairman  and  six  as  a  the  president,  vice-presidents  and  be  provided and  full  a  General  members.  National  o f f i c e r s w e r e f o r b i d d e n t o h o l d two p o s i t i o n s i n t h e u n i o n , a f a c t prohibited  the  officers  constitution  well  was  of  vice-presidents as  ill  officers  approved  provision that  officers, a  (local  therefore,  given  president, national  The  officers.  But  7  1.  1 was,  constitutional  members. of  Unit  authority  criticism  offices  Executive  Subordinate  constitutional  subject  spirit  of  u n i o n and S u b o r d i n a t e  The  a  part  u n i o n and s u b o r d i n a t e u n i t s  which  secretary-treasurer  from  o  sitting of of  on t h e  effort the  General  Executive  Board.  and t o o many c h i e f s \" . union  Executive  between  Board,  Real  membership  leaving  the  other  The r e s u l t was authority  conventions officers with  a  for  the  lay  with  very  \"duplication  administration the  little  General  influence.  The p r e s i d e n t o f t h e u n i o n d i d n o t e v e n h a v e t h e c o n s t i t u t i o n a l attend  General  attend  the  voice  nor  meetings vote.  John deficiencies superior  Executive  order  meetings.  to  The  record  the  with  the  secretary-treasurer  minutes,  but  he had  to  could neither  1 0  Gugulyn existed  in  organizational  w e r e due t o t h e f a c t of  in  Board  right  that  agreed the  constitution,  structure.  He  CEW  officers  and  that  explained  that  that  the the  CEW  these had  a  deficiencies  CAIMAW had b e e n e s t a b l i s h e d w i t h a g r o u n d s w e l l  s u p p o r t , and had had t o c r e a t e  its  organization in a hurry.  The  CEW,  \u000C- 156 -  on  the  other  mustered i t s lay  the  that  next  Vancouver  a  would  that  it  have  first  in  opportunity  CAIMAW's  convention,  Gugulyn  an  to  then  and m e t h o d i c a l l y assured  address  that  the  and  constitutional  assurance  and  CEW  correct  structure satisfied  at the  group. ''' 1  forces  for  organization  structure.  ample  there  that  were  more  problematic  stemmed  from  the  G u g u l y n and t h e  s u p p o r t i n g the merger w i t h  move  its  more t i m e t o c a r e f u l l y  good  existed  membership  e x i s t e d between for  for  they  However, meeting,  established  support, leaving  difficulties  the  had  framework  officers the  hand,  expanding  the  forces  philosophical  Vancouver  union.  CEW was b e c a u s e  in  the  other  work  at  the  differences  Gugulyn's  the  union  at  \"he  sole  saw i t  provinces,  as  that reason  as a good costs  were  12 prohibiting  CAIMAW  from  moving  out  of  Manitoba  at  that  time\".  To 13  Gugulyn, was  the  m e r g e r was  anxious t h e r e f o r e ,  them t h a t was w e l l  n o t h i n g more t h a n a b u s i n e s s to  \"sell\"  the  CEW o f f i c e r s  proposition.  on t h e  idea.  He  He  told  CAIMAW e n j o y e d a m e m b e r s h i p o f a p p r o x i m a t e l y two t h o u s a n d , able to provide f i n a n c i a l  assistance for organizational  and  drives,  14 strikes  and l e g a l  union's  membership  advice. and  But  its  he was o v e r s t a t i n g t h e t r u e  financial  strength.  \"He  lied  size of  like  hell  his to  15 us\",  said  Succamore. The  as  more  than  officers a  of  simple  movement  played  an  as  important  a  CEW  business  s t r e n g t h e n i n g not o n l y of labour  the  their  whole.  part  in  on t h e  other  hand, viewed  deal.  They  had  as  the  their  goal  own u n i o n , b u t  the  Principle  their  nationalist  \"That  is  their  and  decision.  independent  why  merger  the  the  Canadian cause stupid  \u000C- 157 -  part  of the  lies  G u g u l y n t o l d us i s  that  if  he had t o l d us t h e t r u t h ,  in  the  it  16 w o u l d n ' t have m a t t e r e d t o  Differences results  of  the  ideologies. rank  and  us.\"  also  merger,  differences  As a v e h i c l e  file,  autonomy.  So  the  identity.  so  stipulated  f o r merger  that  name,  the  of  remain  bylaws  in  office,  that  autonomy,  and t h a t  the  continuing  their  than  membership  control  rather  retain  its  merger  as  were of  CEW  CEW  Locals  CEW  local  merger the  were not  discussions.  CEW,  and  unions r e t a i n  even  its  takeover  The u n d e r l y i n g d i f f e r e n c e s officers  known  to  the  CAIMAW a g r e e d  t h e members o f  the  opposing  the  both unions  a g r e e m e n t was s i g n e d on December 1 ,  that  encourage control  the  identity  that  CEW  policy  favour  CEW  was  CEW  by  all  approved  finances  by  Although  1 7  rather  centralized  and  to the  as  an  G u g u l y n and  the  18  group  the  local  viewing  CAIMAW,  i n i d e o l o g y between Vancouver  of  expecting  was  by  officers  to p r o f e s s i o n a l  Gugulyn  union.  1969.  it  dues.  the  with  conditions  c o l l e c t i o n of  him t o  local  its  their  led  the  o r even  their  a  of  merger  of  identity,  to  a  the  in e f f e c t ,  While  of  principle  1 and 2 r e t a i n  foster  autonomy.  the  in  c o n d i t i o n s , h i s adherence  effective  of  from  CEW's a u t o n o m y ,  remain  a b s o r p t i o n o f t h e CEW i n t o t h e W i n n i p e g  CEW  the  included  locals  CAIMAW  and  held  flowed  determined  d e c i s i o n m a k i n g no d o u b t  autonomy an  they  responsibility for  than  again  committed to  the  local  Gugulyn agreed to these  that  in a f o r f e i t  Consequently,  that  deeply  that  result  expectations  f o r v e s t i n g d e c i s i o n making a u t h o r i t y w i t h  CEW was  much  CAIMAW w o u l d n o t  existed  at  the  conditions  the merger,  time  of  stipulated and t h e  the by  merger  \u000C- 158 -  THE CCU  Meanwhile,  other  independent  c o u n t r y were moving t o j o i n centre  for  largely many  independent  from  years  movement.  Kent  effort  as  United  Fishermen  Mill  the  Prior  unions.  Rowley,  for  forces  a  in  development  to the  1960's,  initiative  of  an  Rowley  Workers,  unions  for  who  across  had  this been  independent  the  labour  move  came  fighting  Canadian  for  labour  had s e e n h i s m a i n s u p p o r t i n the  United  and A l l i e d W o r k e r s and t h e  Smelter  unions  e s t a b l i s h m e n t o f a new  unionist  c o m i n g f r o m s u c h u n i o n s as  and  the  The  trade  Canadian  whose  Electrical  Workers,  International  leadership  this the  Union of  tended  to  Mine  have  roots  19 i n the  \"Left  alleged  to  of the T h i r t i e s have  that  had  them  independent  been  resulted  attempted  to  members  in  their  unions.  draw  and F o r t i e s \" . of  Communist  Party  e x p u l s i o n from the At  these  the  Many o f t h e s e  a  conference  unions  together  in in  CCL,  of  new  Canada,  in  were  a  effectively  Hamilton a  leaders  fact  making  1953,  Rowley  independent  labour  20 centre.  The a t t e m p t , During  sweeping the  the  scene.  CEW, Union  of  in  a new  unions  in  type  the of  wave  in  established  1967, in  founded  the  Ontario  in Toronto  of Canada, founded i n Montreal  of  independent  i n c l u d e d CAIMAW,  Vancouver  Engineers,  failed.  1960's,  country,  Canada,  Operating  the  These  founded  however,  nationalism u n i o n was  founded  in  Bricklayers in in  1965, the 1960, the  that  was  appearing  Winnipeg Masons  in  on  1964,  Independent  Canadian United Oil  Union  of  Workers  i n 1967 a n d t h e P u l p a n d P a p e r W o r k e r s  of  21 Canada,  established  mostly  breakaway  in  British  unions,  and  Columbia had  in  been  1962.  These  founded  as  a  unions result  were of  \u000C- 159 -  dissatisfaction  with  their  parent  international  incorporated nationalism into their exerted States  on  international  unions  were  pattern.  p h i l o s o p h y , and r e s e n t e d  operating  scattered  All  these  grave  difficulty,  found  corrupt  cases  but  workers  had  from American  and  lack of control own  position  over t h e i r  They  made  from  within  through  lengthy  These attention, In  his  the  Canada  new  by  leaders  the  control  their  United  1967 he a r r i v e d  the  PPWC,  visit,  officers  and of  CEW  the  now  to  CEW  to  the  Jess  the  their of  their  companies.  the  They  the  problems eventually  centre  country  Succamore  a  the  and  Kent  Rowley's  contact  Fisherman's  George  Greatly  strong  of  to e s t a b l i s h  t o speak a t  meeting.  formed  they  the d r a i n  the  rectify  with  whom  resented  a  out.  i n Vancouver  officers  away,  and t h e e r o s i o n o f  became  across  attended  All  internationals. 22  unions  comprised  broken  concessions  had t o g e t  and he t r a v e l l e d  they  own a f f a i r s ,  attempts  their  concluded they  of  in  \"parents\"  oppressive.  t h e i r d u e s money s o u t h w a r d ,  Through  Their  headquarters.  These  them.  union.  Brown  impressed  commitment  to  Hall. learned  by  the  with  Rowley, goal  of  23 establishing  an  receptive  the  to  Convention join  in  in  independent proposal  Branford,  building  a  Canadian  made that  united  by  \"we and  labour  Rowley appeal  at to  completely  centre. the  They  1967  labour  Canadian  across  independent  totally  f r e e o f any  foreign  domination\".  the  very  Textile land  Canadian 24  u n i o n movement,  were  to  trade  \u000C- 160 -  In o r d e r t o f u r t h e r t h e was  called  Engineers,  for  July  the  Bricklayers  International Workers  of  Mine M i l l Canada  commitment CEW.  1968  to  Sudbury. Masons  The  Canadian  Independent  Union  Union,  attended the  Brown d r o v e  the  cause  conference.  In  Canadian  unionism,  of  from Vancouver  to  a meeting  of  Local  and S m e l t e r W o r k e r s U n i o n and t h e  further  George  in  i d e a o f a new l a b o u r c e n t r e ,  Operating 598  P u l p and  keeping  represent  of  so  his  the Paper  with  too  its  did  union,  the  camping 25  o u t a l o n g t h e way CAIMAW, s t i l l  because  meeting  resulted  t h e new l a b o u r c e n t r e , in  attended was  the  Mine  the  meeting  already  possibility Sudbury  of  Hall  on  merger. at  to  the  meeting  in  in  limited financial  d i d not a  call  Sudbury  behalf  in  stop  representative the  union's  resources.  attend. for  a  founding  convention  t o be named t h e C o u n c i l o f C a n a d i a n U n i o n s  Mill  engaged  to  attended  his  isolated in Winnipeg,  The  held  of  of  serious  in  CEW.  But  Succamore and  founding  July  discussions  Therefore, Winnipeg  the  in  this  with  appeal  on b e h a l f  by  Jess  CAIMAW  of  his  to  a  result,  John  send  with  CEW the  journey  CAIMAW  CAIMAW, b u t  the  about  to As  (CCU),  Succamore  time,  interrupted  convention.  Sudbury  1969.  of  to a  Gugulyn observer  26 status  only.  council's  first  vice-president, and Jess  Kent  The  delegates  elected  president.  Harry  John  Meiorin  became  was  elected  to  Rowley  Succamore  was  elected  Cooper the  the as  the  b u i l d i n g a new i n d e p e n d e n t  occupied  a  leadership  only  position the  position  Mine M i l l  elected Canada  of  as  as  the  first  vice-president  secretary-treasurer.  council's  developed  in  of  was  central  The  also  had n o t  Scranton  vice-president. p r i n c i p l e of  CEW  Roy  first  a strong  western  commitment  to  Canadian -labour c e n t r e ,  but  the  its  new  centre  from  \u000C- 161 -  formation.  CAIMAW  dedication  to  illustration  of  new c e n t r e was for  Canadian  lacked  both  the  building  of  the  difference  in  these  characteristics.  this  new  centre  i d e o l o g y between  was  yet  CAIMAW,  operating  under  fact, another  CEW a n d CAIMAW.  i n k e e p i n g w i t h t h e c a u s e o f t h e CEW - s e l f labour.  In  the  b u s i n e s s u n i o n i s m approach o f Gugulyn, l a c k e d such a  The  determination  influence  of  the  cause.  THE STRUGGLE BETWEEN COMPETING IDEOLOGIES  THE 1970 NATIONAL  With  CONVENTION  the  signing of  the  merger  went out o f e x i s t e n c e .  Initially,  General  of  Executive  however,  that  Board  this  their  problem,  and  the  agreement,  the  CEW  officially  CEW had no r e p r e s e n t a t i o n  new u n i o n , their  CAIMAW.  concerns  They were  about  the  on  the  assured,  structure  of  27 CAIMAW,  c o u l d be a d d r e s s e d a t  On  May 2 ,  p r o v i d i n g the new  union.  1970,  o l d CEW w i t h Vancouver  and  Gerald  delegate.  Cotton.  . These  a  regular  its  Local  Mack a n d G e r r y G r i e v e .  the forthcoming union c o n v e n t i o n .  1  ex-CEW  was  first  opportunity to  sent  three  Blairmore George  convention  Local  Brown  delegates  also were,  held have  delegates,  in  Winnipeg,  input  John  into  Nixon,  2 was r e p r e s e n t e d by A g n e s attended however,  the  convention  greatly  its John  Raber as  a  outnumbered  by  28 the o r i g i n a l  CAIMAW g r o u p , who among t h e m h a d t h i r t y - f i v e  Many delegates,  resolutions  resolutions  that  were were  placed  on  basically  the  floor  designed  by to  delegates.  the make  Vancouver the  union  \u000C- 162 -  more  democratic  position  of  themselves  and  the  that  constitute  give  influence to  proposing  to  in  the  the  union.  structure  the  six  of  members  a minimum number  Vancouver  of  and  In  Blairmore  particular,  CAIMAW's  General  provided  for  in  members,  and  that  sections  they  addressed  Executive  the  Board,  constitution  one member  a  should  be  elected  29 \"by  and  from each  proposed  that  the  subordinate  unit,  offices  \"up  of  local  to  or  four  region\".  regional  Further,  they  vice-presidents\"  be  30 added t o t h e  At the  Vancouver  with  stiff  that  a  the  was  convention,  group.  clique the  But  officers  influence  i n the  \"trying  had  came  union. to  seize  Pat  union.  McEvoy  openly  i n John G u g u l y n , the  It  Griffin  CAIMAW's  who was  component o f t h e  opposition.  small  clique  executive  was t h e n t h a t developed Steel  from But  plant.  the  plant,  complete  The  of this  it  with  resolutions  source  disproportionate giving  control\"  himself  Brown became f u l l y  CAIMAW. A  centre  Vancouver  George  within  this  associated  an  met  aware  of  this  number  of  overwhelming  c l i q u e was J o h n G u g u l y n ,  and who was  \"afraid  that  his  31 power was b e i n g e r o d e d by t h e  The keeping  with  trained advocated autonomy. greater  centralized his  by  the  Also, influence  power  clique  of  basic  ideological  power  philosophy  professional.  Vancouver  exercised  of  But  vesting it  ex-CEW o f f i c e r s no d o u b t , in  the  Griffin  the union  Steel  difference.  resolutions\".  by G u g u l y n w a s ,  decision  undermined that  relied  attempts and added  of  their  making  the on t h e the  authority  principle  Vancouver  of  course,  membership  opposition  overtones  of  to  regionalism  in  a  control of  group the  in  local to  win  Winnipeg to  this  \u000C- 163 -  Determined  to  check  the  power  exerted  by  Gugulyn  within  the  u n i o n , G e o r g e Brown n o m i n a t e d J e s s S u c c a m o r e  to the p o s i t i o n of  National  2nd  Succamore  devoting  vice-president,  most o f not  his  hold  Brown  energies  office  in  nominated  to the  in  the  the  a  fact  that  C C U , had p r o m i s e d h i s  union,  Succamore  representative necessary  despite  and  so  did  that  position  the  of  he c o u l d f i n d t o a r g u e a g a i n s t in attendance.  resounding that  I  majority.  hadn't  Succamore. afraid  to  anything.  now  family  attend  Vancouver  that  the  group \"if  he  convention.  would  a  would  have  fight  a  became  .. 32 .  n o m i n a t i o n , l o o k i n g f o r any  1  not  even  influence  Gugulyn opposed Succamore s  was  not  was  Despite \"What  agreed  it,  to  i n c l u d i n g p o i n t i n g out t h a t  his  efforts,  Gugulyn  accept  Succamore  overlooked  the  position  in they  was  his  reason  Succamore  elected  by a  consternation  elected  me t o \"  is  said  \" G e o r g e Brown was a f r a i d t o come t o my h o u s e f o r two m o n t h s , f a c e my w i f e . 33  It  Succamore's  was  the  only  time  I  ever  saw h i m a f r a i d  e l e c t i o n t o t h e p o s i t i o n o f 2nd  of  vice-president  34 of  the  u n i o n was  a \"resounding setback  an i m p o r t a n t l e v e r Gugulyn proposals d i d win  for  successful, change  some c o n c e s s i o n s .  was  Board  meetings  right  to 35  was  struggle for  structural  union  Board.  i n the  given  \"a  the  voice  Due t o  minimum  of  changes  but one  for  Gugulyn\"  however,  their  But  to  getting  the  Vancouver  attend  and e a c h  representative\" the  in  p r o p o s a l s , the  right  no v o t e ,  which  , and p r o v e d t o  be  power.  defeated.  constitutional  with  Other  for  B.  C.  on  B.  General was  General  group were  C.  delegates  president of  province the  the  the  Executive given  the  Executive  responsible  was  \u000C- 164 -  the  affiliation  to  recall  stance  the  officers,  of  authority  of  the  and  union.  given  They  shall  election  of  who  a member  or  belief  due  to  of  resolutions  u p h o l d i n g human  able \"We  CAIMAW  proved any  decline  person be  group  who  than  the  membership  included  in  the  beliefs  or  Board:  to  to  the  \"discrimination\",  constitution  Executive  right  of  political  a  or  or  reject  the  candidate  for  communist  support  or  the  who  principle  democratic  the  privately  held  form  of  political  o f f i c e r s were d e l e t e d  f r o m B.  C.  rights.\"  delegates.  despite those  the  \"It  from the  was  simply  constitution, a question  of  37  the  from  some c o n c e s s i o n s  had shown f o r  the  right  union's  outnumbered  to win  in  member o r  to  Therefore, greatly  CCU, the  3 6  references of the  any  other  government.  affiliations  old  the  is  the  change  The  have  is  such  a  to the General  nomination  All  union with  first  fact  the  old  and e x e r t time  that  that  the  CEW, some  the  Manitoba B.  influence  Winnipeg  C.  delegates  delegates  within  were  the  union.  c o u l d v o t e on t h e  issues  38 involved,  and  regionalism  not was  as not,  c o n c e s s i o n s won by t h e the  convention  the  influence 39  support.  a  said  therefore, B.  realizing of  clique\"  C. that  Gugulyn,  Succamore.  unsurmountable.  group were seen in they  The  resolving would  problem  However,  the  a s m a r g i n a l , and t h e y the  first  ideological have  to  left  problem build  of  of  their  \u000C- 165 -  THE FIGHT IS  ON  After and  the  Vancouver  became  more  control  to  of  the  and  convention, officers  more  worsened  apparent,  i n c l u d e the  B.  opinion erupted over  the  C.  the  and  relationship as  their  as  section  the  John  differences  Gugulyn  of  between  attempted  union.  in to  ideology  expand  One s u c h  p o s i t i o n h e l d by G e o r g e  Brown i n t h e  representative  union  the  B.  P a t McEvoy that  he  C.  and  in  accordance  with  merger  held the corresponding p o s i t i o n f o r Manitoba.  s h o u l d be  however,  Alberta  elected  insisted that  to  the  his  p o s i t i o n by t h e  j o b was  not  an e l e c t e d  union. for  the  agreement.  Brown  membership. one.  his  difference  Brown had been a p p o i n t e d t o t h e p o s i t i o n o f s t a f f in  Gugulyn  insisted Gugulyn,  \"He w a n t e d  the  40 r i g h t to a p p o i n t \" .  Despite Gugulyn's  o b j e c t i o n s , a referendum vote  t h e m e m b e r s h i p was c o n d u c t e d and Brown was e l e c t e d t o t h e principle  i n v o l v e d was  that  the  Vancouver  t h e d e c i s i o n o f who w o u l d s e r v e a s  staff  position.  The  o f f i c e r s were d e t e r m i n e d  that  representative  w o u l d be  vested  i n t h e m e m b e r s h i p , and n o t an a p p o i n t e d o f f i c i a l .  G u g u l y n , on t h e  hand,  trained,  felt  it  should  be  vested  in  of  him,  a  other  experienced  professional. Gugulyn then attempted to m a i n t a i n the the General the  Executive  Vancouver  sheets,  to  Gugulyn  would  B o a r d by c o n t r o l l i n g t h e  office.  First,  he  instituted  influence  information received a  system  be f i l l e d o u t by b o t h Brown and McEvoy then  reports,  which  Secondly,  he  he  refused  compile would to  these  daily  present  to  allow  either  reports the  he e x e r t e d on  of  daily  from  report  and f o r w a r d e d  to  into  own  monthly  Executive  Board.  General  Brown o r McEvoy  his  to  attend  him.  General  \u000C- 166 -  Executive  Board  meetings.  these meetings. group  at  the  But  Prior  after  attend,  the  merger,  McEvoy  had  attended  openly a s s o c i a t i n g himself with the  convention,  he  was  r e a s o n g i v e n by G u g u l y n f o r t h i s to  to  so t o o d i d George  excluded  from  them  c h a n g e was t h a t  Brown,  and t h e  if  by  Gugulyn.  McEvoy  costs  of  Vancouver The  had t h e  right  b r i n g i n g Brown  to 41  Winnipeg But  to  this  the  really him,  for B.  C.  setting 42  officers,  up a  and w h i c h  Board,  purpose precluded h i s  becoming  Gugulyn,  Executive  Board,  Vancouver  and  of  the  Winnipeg.  they wanted out  that  to  they  feed  to  and A l  Pitt,  Instead  daily  the  submit a d e t a i l e d  channeled  the  General  that  was  through Executive  adequate  between  insisted  report.  to  General  existed  reports  two w e e k l y  receiving  Gugulyn  chairman of the  problem  not  that  complained d i r e c t l y  communications of  meetings.  control.  Brown and S u c c a m o r e  were  these  apparent  i n f l u e n c e and  p r e s i d e n t of the u n i o n ,  at  i n f o r m a t i o n was  selectively  thereby maintaining his  Allan Gold,  pointed  was  system where a l l  he c o u l d t h e n  Bypassing  Gugulyn,  it  attendance  on  They  information  by  also about  43 events of  in Winnipeg.  the  General  At  Executive  a meeting Board  held  ruled  on J u n e 2 0 ,  that  the  1970, the  staff  should  members  report  to  attempted  to  44 G u g u l y n , now m a n a g e r o f s t a f f , circumvent  the  \u2022 control  weekly.  Brown,  exercised  by  therefore,  Gugulyn  over  information  by  45 submitting resulted  a weekly  report,  already  in  compiled  form.  This  in a vigorous p r o t e s t from Gugulyn. First, any  may  of  Executive  I  the  suggest  that  discussion  Board  if  you  which  meeting,  by  wish  took all  to place  means  challenge at  the  do  so.  practice  \u000C- 167 -  However,  it  continue  t o make r e p o r t s  the  i s my u n d e r s t a n d i n g t h a t  same d a i l y  is  that  the  reports  sheets  in the  as  the  staff  same f a s h i o n and  before.  What w o u l d  a week  and  that  I  would  apparently  the  General  you before  The and  The  ruling  problem of taken  it  are  that  responsibility  is  facts  that  requesting t h a t the  described  read  same  to  the  Board.  You  h a v e come t o t h e c o n c l u s i o n t h a t y o u  do my w o r k  reports  Executive  these  compile  and d i s t r i b u t e c o p i e s o f t h e c o m p i l e d r e p o r t s of  are  of  I  to  r e p o r t s be s e n t i n  as  will  i n more d e t a i l  if  . .46  for  will  have w r i t t e n  compiling  k e p t on f i l e  I  on  change  s t a f f w o u l d be r e q u e s t e d t o s u b m i t  once  members  would  undertake same  the  The  Executive  they w i s h !  the daily  Board  Your f i l e  to  so  far  empty!  of  the  board,  the  reports.  therefore, Worse y e t ,  upon h i m s e l f t o  interpret  had  alleviate  the  G u g u l y n , an a p p o i n t e d o f f i c i a l ,  had  the  done  minutes  nothing  of  to  the General  Executive 47  Board m e e t i n g , a p r a c t i c e which i n f u r i a t e d the Vancouver  Another union  was  the  source  issue  of  of  friction  the  union's  accordance w i t h the merger agreement, to  the  CCU.  But  while  fledgling council, of  the  by  the  the  commitment  to  the  sections CCU.  Executive  officers,  for  it.  example,  the in  affiliate  supported  Board, under the about  of  CAIMAW,  had made t h e d e c i s i o n t o  than e n t h u s i a s t i c  Vancouver  two  o f f i c e r s wholeheartedly  CAIMAW's G e n e r a l  John G u g u l y n , were l e s s  prodded  ex-CEW  between  officers.  the  influence  They  had t o  be  to  select  a 48  representative Also,  at  this  of the early  union to  stage  of  sit  the  on t h e  council's  Executive  Board  development,  of  the  the  CCU.  CCU was  not  \u000C- 168 -  equipped  to  bear  conventions.  Jess  vice-president, bear  the  of  costs  of  Succamore  and  costs  i n Winnipeg. of the  the  the  \"We a p p r e c i a t e it  was  Vancouver  Succamore's  union - but  bringing the  i s very  this  own  officers  council's  officers  attendance that  its  asked  at  an  to  first  the  western  National  i m p e n d i n g CCU  union  this  stage  to  convention  i s a h e a v y s t r a i n on t h e  important at  its  i n the  finances  development  49 of  the  council  Board, that  at the  we s u p p o r t  their  meeting  local  unions  it\",  they  wrote.  But  on J u n e 2 0 , 1970 r e f u s e d would  be  responsible  the the  for  General  Executive  request,  and  the  costs  of  fact  that  one  ruled  sending  50 their  delegates  to  the  members, Succamore, Indeed, downplay  the  officers  a  business  This  itself  of  appointed at  odds  the  the  of  did  was  the  not  and  the  The  union  a council  between  the  principles  of  Rowley  Kent had  benefit  to  strengthened of  the  unionism  union  of  CEW  of  This  philosophy  in  like the 51  council.\"  day  the  of and  CCU and  that  fact  cause,  rank of  the and power  Gugulyn.  Gugulyn  night\"  said he  as and the CCU  file by  therefore,  John  why  in  Gugulyn,  itself,  John  to  Vancouver  that  exercise  that's  was  difference  regarding  of  its  ignored.  from support of  CCU was  opportunism  were  fact  the  the  the  nationalist  by  of  Winnipeg  which  be d e r i v e d  restriction  friends  of the  CEW's  C C U , was  in  support.  the  philosophy  difference  significance  to  share  philosophy  business  the  National  council,  no d o u b t  basic  officials.  knew we  the  themselves  the  \"Gugulyn  of  economic  unions,  with  The  CCU no d o u b t stemmed f r o m t h e  little  attitude  shared  control  stance  unionist,  could foresee CCU.  the  committed  towards  conventions.  occupied a l e a d i n g p o s i t i o n i n the  significance  had  attitude  CCU  and  \"The the  Succamore. played  down  \u000C- 169 -  The National  resentment  union  in  ex-CEW  officers  First,  the  the  believed  of  the  Winnipeg  General  by-laws  of  adopted  to  be  Executive  Local  1-B.  Vancouver  in  policies  violation  Board  C ,  officers  decided  but  to  and of  practices  the  not  refer  increased  to  merger  as  the  that  the  agreement.  immediately  them  to  approve  Gugulyn  for  any  52 recommended c h a n g e s . decision  s e c t i o n of the union regarded  n o t o n l y as a v i o l a t i o n o f t h e m e r g e r a g r e e m e n t ,  infringement had been  The V a n c o u v e r  on  local  autonomy.  s a c r i f i c e d to  To  make  matters  an a p p o i n t e d o f f i c i a l ,  this  b u t a l s o as  worse,  a further  that  an  autonomy  infringement  on  53 the sovereignty  o f r a n k and f i l e  Secondly, Board  ruled  that  the  control.  June 2 0 ,  \"part-time  1970 m e e t i n g  organizers  of  shall  the  be  General  hired  Executive  only  when  the 54  s i t u a t i o n warrants  it  and a f t e r  This  decision  meant  that  hire  part-time  organizers for  consultation with  George his  Brown  could  the  staff  get  the  not  d i s t r i c t without  the  manager\". financing  approval  of  to  John  G u g u l y n , and G u g u l y n f o l l o w e d a p o l i c y : (a)  that  I  can  decide  on  the  necessity  of  such  hi r i n g s ; (b)  that  o r g a n i z a t i o n a l w o r k m u s t be w e l l  b e f o r e added s t a f f (c)  that the  in  any  necessity  amounts o f In for  adherence part-time  with  event,  this  of  money.  policy,  o r g a n i z e r s which  underway  is forthcoming; I  can  such 55  justify  hirings  Gugulyn  the  Board  even  for  small  d i d , on o c c a s i o n ,  Brown f e l t  was c o n s i d e r e d by t h e V a n c o u v e r o f f i c e r s  to  were n e c e s s a r y .  refuse This  t o be a v i o l a t i o n o f t h e  ,  to  pay  refusal merger  \u000C- 170 -  agreement and  i n w h i c h CAIMAW u n d e r t o o k t o p r o v i d e a s s i s t a n c e  it  placed  , \u2022 making  power.  in  the  even  Vancouver  General  administration membership.  the of  an a p p o i n t e d  officers Board,  union,  June  the  became  decisions  the  The  set  of  Executive  violating  example,  hands  official  e v e n more  decision  56  The that  the  in organizing,  effective  under of  of  date of  the  when  the  the  General union's  of  discovered  Gugulyn,  delegates  overruling  the  they  influence  convention  thereby  meeting  outraged  in  decisions  Executive  was their  of  Board,  a f f i l i a t i o n with  the  the for CCU  57 as  July  1,  rejected  a  effective  1970.  Yet  resolution date  of  the  giving  delegates  to  the  the  affiliation  board  to  the  the  1970  right  council,  convention  had  determine  the  to  and  had  called  for  58 affiliation therefore,  to was  take  effect  s e e n by t h e  immediately. Vancouver  The  officers  ruling  as  by  a complete  the  board,  negation  of  59 the  authority Even  decision  taken  of convention more  appointment  with  full  union.  6 0  taken  by  infuriating  by t h e  their  of  John Gugulyn over  and  appointment  delegates  to  and t h e the  J u n e 20 m e e t i n g  authority This  delegates  to  the  to  of the  Vancouver the  position  No. 2 8 :  Organizing  and  of  for  another  1970 c o n v e n t i o n .  Resolution  General  responsibility  represented  CAIMAW, had p u t f o r w a r d t o t h e  membership. officers  was  Executive  Board  manager the  violation  Allan  Gold,  staff of  Servicing.  of  Staff  a)  He  shall  be  Director  of  responsible  in  staff, of  the  decisions  president  delegates:  Duties  of  the  for  \u000C- 171 -  for  directing  Association. Executive  The  to  the  He  will  direct  the  policies  of  the  the  staff  of these  had  Board  membership  b o a r d meant further  section they  not  of  were  in  to  union.  The  delivered the  financial  vice-president.  the  temporary  organizer  to  any  service  Board  the  for  following  and  informing  by  the  delegates,  circumvented of  an  of  this  staff.  he s h o u l d n o t the  He  had  have.  official  -  democracy  and  rank  simply  very  powers  r u l i n g by  the  of  also  Gugulyn.  of  and f i l e  philosophy  General  d e c i s i o n , but  philosophy  1  the  This  and  Gugulyn s  the  d e c i s i o n by  convention  appointed  but  the  Both  Vancouver  control.  vesting  But  decision  professional.  by  unable  of  hire  this  of  principles  u n i o n was the  to  at  Both  the Also,  obtain  statements the  even v i o l a t i n g  secretary-treasurer  proceedings.  meetings,  running  the  delegates  was  the  to  with  requests,  to  adequately  manager  keeping  National  convention  to  namely  to the  approval  any  Executive 61  of  policies.  union,  report  the  responsible  in effect,  power  making i n a t r a i n e d  The  be  an o v e r r i d i n g  anethema the  to  had d e c i d e d  in  servicing  right  defeated  title  only  slide  were  been  had now,  that  issues  or  shall  and  with  have  He  Gugulyn's  a  shall  organize  changing the  He  membership.  resolution  Executive  organizing  Board  organizers. area  all  union, of  that  1970 c o n v e n t i o n Jess  minutes  of  the  despite actions  was  even  General  important  the  constitution  fact  were  of  supposed  had b e e n o m i t t e d  Succamore,  o r any o t h e r  these  the  in  after  that  to  from  Board  relating  he  violation  be  repeated  Executive  papers  the  to  was  2nd  of  the  \u000C- 172 -  constitution,  and  membership. held  therefore  They  philosophy  in  were a l s o  of  full  violation  contrary  disclosure  to  of  the  to  because  suspect  Gugulyn  that  the  had been  financial  less  than  the  decisions  Vancouver  information  o r d e r t o a c c o m p l i s h membership s o v e r e i g n t y began  of  of  officers'  to  the  truthful  was  about  They  being  the  deeply  membership  in d e c i s i o n making.  information  the  in now  withheld  financial  status  CO  o f the union at  In  Both  of  as the  Succamore union,  were f r u s t r a t e d  However, neither  the  a  record  resolutions  the  passed  at  lack  by  of  papers  efforts  General  hampered  because  and d o c u m e n t s  2nd  fulfill  his  Winnipeg.  the  task  Executive  was  delegates, His  as  from  assigned  requests,  the  to  information  been the  convention.  a w h o l e was  responsibilities  his  of  had  repeated  seating  his  that  example,  despite the  important  found  constitution  of  a d m i n i s t r a t i o n as of  for  new  Succamore,  he  discussions.  assumed  by a c o m p l e t e  vice-presidents,  proofreading  any  time o f the merger  fact,  vice-president duties  the  able  Board. acquire  a  copy  input  into  the  union  he was  not  provided  with  related  nor  to  of  to the  of  the  running of  the  63 union.  The  therefore,  was b e i n g To  National  union's  add  union  obligations  influence  to  payment  to in  the of  of  Gugulyn  over  union  decision  making,  maintained. the  frustration  Winnipeg Vancouver their  was  not  office.  share  of  of  the  the  properly There  Vancouver meeting  were d e l a y s  telephone  bills  officers, its in  the  and r e n t ,  the  financial National and  the  were,  no  64 petty  cash  f u n d was  not  d o u b t , minor annoyances  kept  adequately  replenished.  These  w h i c h , under o t h e r c i r c u m s t a n c e s , would not  have  \u000C- 173 -  been v e r y s i g n i f i c a n t . were  seeing  self  determination  emphasis  their  on  interest  c o m i n g a t a t i m e when t h e V a n c o u v e r  deeply  held  for  Canadian  professional  Gugulyn  was  of  labour  rank  being  making  and  financial a  file  undermined  officers  control by  sovereignty  annoyances were not taken  these  drawing  philosophy  decision  i n the CCU, these  Worse y e t , that  But  Gugulyn s 1  and  lack  from  the  union  of  lightly.  d i f f i c u l t i e s were coming a t  salary  and  which  the  a  time  Vancouver  65 officers  s u s p e c t e d t o be e x o r b i t a n t .  perspective, without  an  competent CEW's  a  large  salary  attractive  staff.  basic  was  no d o u b t j u s t i f i e d on t h e  salary,  However,  philosophy.  a  large To  From G u g u l y n s b u s i n e s s  union salaries  them,  rank  recruit CEW's not  and  file  they  competent s t a f f  nationalist  provide.  The  cause  served. because - an  Vancouver  were  such  e c o n o m i c o p p o r t u n i s m by u n i o n s t a f f , the  cannot  attract another  practices  Large  salaries  were  they were a t t r a c t e d  enticement  officers  that  were  grounds and  that  recruit  anethma  merely  and c a u s e d t h e m t o  unionist  to  resulted  l o s e touch  not  Gugulyn's at  necessary  philosophy  the  salary  in with  by d e d i c a t i o n t o  outraged  the  to the did  drawn  f r o m t h e u n i o n by G u g u l y n . Finally, time,  of  CAIMAW,  the in  the  Vancouver  existence  effect  part-time  for  the  full-time  for  and  in  officers  of  a contract  early  1970,  union  in  at  a  salary  drawing  a  full  of  aware,  employment  which of  became  salary  between  Gugulyn  $375  per  from  for  had  the  Gugulyn  agreed  month, w h i l e the  first  Liberal  to  and work  working Party  in  66 Manitoba. held  by  This the  contract  Vancouver  was  a violation  officers.  First,  of it  many was  principles seen  as  strongly economic  \u000C- 174 -  o p p o r t u n i s m by the  union's  c o n s t i t u t i o n which  involvement although  a union o f f i c i a l .  by  the  approved  concealed  from  by  the  were a p p a l l e d \" to  union.  forbade  General  Vancouver  it  any  Thirdly,  the  said Jess  Secondly,  represented  sort  the  of  officers  Succamore,  partisan  existence  Executive and  of  Board,  the  a breach  union  and he d e l i v e r e d  political  the had  of  contract, been  kept  membership.  a vigorous  \"We  protest  Winnipeg.  This  contract  is  a  concepts  of  has  concealed  been  Until  trade  recently,  Vice-President how  could  complete  union  it  negation  of  principles.  This  from  the  of  has  been  members  the  Union.  anyone  who  professes  union.  from  Brothers, to  be  my  contract  our  concealed  of  all  me  as  honestly, an  honest  t r a d e - u n i o n i s t t a k e $375 a m o n t h f r o m t h e u n i o n when at  the  same  period  Foundry  were  pounding the  THE \"COMMIES\" FROM THE  The union They  that would  adhered respected  to, and  officers  believed  fight in  for  a  in,  our  picket  the in  now  union  line,  decided  a union  union  which  upheld,  of  in  at  Bell  sub  zero  COAST  Vancouver  they  members  controlled  in which  the  decisions  of  which  to  fight by  for  the  the  rank  c o n s t i t u t i o n was convention  i n f o r m a t i o n was  fully  Succamore  vice-president  brought to bear  in  the  full  this  battle.  power  of  his  He demanded h i s  and  rigorously  disclosed  were to  the  curtailed.  office right  of  file.  delegates  m e m b e r s h i p , and i n w h i c h t h e power o f a p p o i n t e d o f f i c i a l s was Jess  type  as to  2nd access  \u000C- 175 -  to  information  c o n s t i t u t i o n be  I  am  be  respected,  and  the  2nd  vice-president.  and  information  I  Executive  Board.  necessary  information.  Constitution abused  at  nerve  to  the  Succamore  no  right  to  democratic  accused by  the  date  organization  the  to  time  of  the  decisions General the  that  our  misinterpreted  and  I  any  charge  yet  international  we  the  have  unions  members.  General  overriding  full  of  and  the  to  all  receiving  Further,  the  t i m i n g of the  set  not  i n f o r m a t i o n from t h e i r  also  entitled  Chairman of the  violated,  present  authority  on t h e  am  being  charge  concealing  delegates  is  I  am  pertaining  of t h i s A s s o c i a t i o n from the  its  violations  corrected.  reports  overstepped  union's  with  CO  Executive decision  Board  of  the  u n i o n ' s a f f i l i a t i o n to the of . J u l y voice  1\"  of  he  the  wrote.  the  of  convention  CCU.  \"Surely,  membership  as  having  \"You  had  in  any  expressed  at  69 convention  is  The  the  General  manager o f s t a f f appointment delegates, a n d was  highest  was  Executive  namely membership  Board's  appointment  a l s o came u n d e r a t t a c k . in  violation  represented  contrary  authority.\"  to  the  of  an undue s l i d e spirit  control.  7 0  the  of  John  Succamore p o i n t e d out t h a t decision  of  the  i n power t o an a p p o i n t e d  and i n t e n t  Gugulyn  of the  union's  as the  convention official,  constitution  -  \u000C- 176 -  Jess Local  1 (B.  by t h e  Succamore  C.)  the  Vancouver  unanimously  then  full  details  office with  endorsed  reported  by  of  directly  the  the  difficulties  Winnipeg.  the  to  In  general  his  being  report,  meeting  membership  of  of  experienced  delivered Local  1  to  (B.  and C ) ,  Succamore c o n c l u d e d :  I  can a s s u r e you t h a t  as  long  as  you  principles  of  information WHO  RUNS  members  and  local  UNION?  the  fight  full  members.  for  One  final  think  it  officers  along  with  I  will  be  passed  resolution  main  of  should  be  the  fighting  in  their  rallied battle  accusing  having  for  that  to  with  the  support  an  position  Winnipeg.  National  displayed  the  They  office  \"obvious  and  reluctance  them  to  and 2.  in  foster  They a l s o  the  General  r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s \" of honouring the merger agreement,  assistance,  all  question.  their  honour  only  the  disclosure  I  membership  officers  Board of  and  to  union  7 1  Vancouver  Executive  our  Board.  position.  a  to  support t h i s  prepared  democrary  THIS  Executive  The  are  I will  full  local  their  autonomy  directed  the  obligations and  approve  National  to the  union to  the  unanimously the to  General carry  and  by-laws  out  directing  provide  provide  of  financial of  the  Locals  1  membership 72  with  full  i n f o r m a t i o n of the  finances  The m e m b e r s h i p t h e n e l e c t e d of  grievances  statement,  the  to  be  presented  committee t  first  to  the  and s t a f f  expenses  a committee General  complained  t o d r a w up a  Executive  about  of the  Board.  finances.  They  union.  statement In  this  pointed  \u000C- 177 -  out  that  petty for  although  cash fund f o r  Winnipeg  contrary of  the  to  GEB m e e t i n g  the  in July  had d e c i d e d  office,  it  Vancouver  reimburse  Vancouver's  t o the above m o t i o n o f the  the  constitution  required  to  carry  They  also  gives out  the  his  was  to maintain  taking over  expenditures.  GEB\"  they  secretary-treasurer  responsibility.  months  action  \"Article  all  Why  two  \"This  complained.  a $50  the  isn't  is 3(c)  authority  he  doing  his  73 job?\"  complained that  merger  negotiations  to  office  and  receive  being  later  followed  refunded  to was  pay  that  $25 by t h e  the a  the  National  a l t h o u g h CAIMAW had a g r e e d d u r i n g $50  per  $25  refund  local  had  office,  month from to  rent the  pay  \"usually  on  local,  the  well  the  full  after  the  Vancouver  the  practice  $50  and  was  of  the  the  1st  74 month when t h e were  not  help  when  rent  is  adequately we  typewriter  They  forthcoming  read  and  due\".  that  we  the  have  also  from the  National to  use  charged  that  National  office the  office  office.  has  just  supplies  \"It  doesn't  purchased  personal  a  new  machine  of  our  pointed  out  that  75 representative,\" under  the  organizing was  terms  they of  costs,  the  merger  Further,  agreement,  an u n d e r t a k i n g w h i c h  being adequately We  complained.  would  prepared  to  to  know  honour  agreement  and  items?  this  problems,  CAIMAW h a d u n d e r t a k e n  the  B.  C.  to  bear  g r o u p d i d n o t now  feel  honoured. like  If  they  then  its  if  National  obligations  cooperate is  the  with  B.  under C.  please  along with f r i v o l o u s . . 76 meetings.  tell  us,  resolutions  and  the  on  not p o s s i b l e because not  union the  of  is  merger above  financial  just  kid  duly adopted at  us GEB  \u000C- 178 -  The (B.  C.)  causes  was  committee  this  local's  by-laws,  acquire  the  the  and  names  the  its  t h r o u g h an list  complaint the  to  method  procedure  release, informal  Winnipeg  executive.  This  the  the  of of  then  without incident  local  of  the  the  in  in  a member o f  the  knowledge  of  r e p r e s e n t e d , the  The  approving  the  had  membership.  used  to  Instead  of  local's  secretary  the  local's  membership  the  local, the  the  address  who t h e n s e n t  local  membership  committee c h a r g e d , \"a  local\".  1  office.  office  had a c q u i r e d  to  Local  the  ask  office  d i s r e g a r d f o r t h e autonomy o f t h i s  GEB  National  local's  turn  autonomy o f  National  the  requesting  National  request  delay  that  and a d d r e s s e s  formal  the  r e s p e c t e d by t h e  were  i n f o r m a t i o n , who w o u l d  approve  charged that  not being adequately  for  following  then  for to  list the or  blatant  7 7  The a b o v e m e t h o d o f a c q u i r i n g i n f o r m a t i o n m u s t s t o p . If  one c a n g e t m a t e r i a l  by  this  and  method,  allow  jealous to  of  remind  to  our  Union  Local  to  N.O.  that  secretary.  The between  the  running of  of  this  union,  the  over.  We  a  major  the  through  and V a n c o u v e r ,  \"We  request  very like us  National then  do.  we  local  7 8  c o m m u n i c a t i o n be  informed of a l l  their  now  for  the  and t h a t  recognize the that  are  b o o k s and f i n a n c e s  demanded t h a t  be k e p t p r o p e r l y  right  reason  Should  be made  local  and w o u l d  w h a t he i s e l e c t e d t o  office  and  quit  union.  local  further  union.  well  autonomy  is  request  That's  National  the  the  committee  2nd v i c e - p r e s i d e n t ,  our  take  that  a Canadian  want a l o o k a t request  t h e n we may a s  Winnipeg the  belonging  and i n f o r m a t i o n f r o m a  Jess  Succamore,  factors  importance of  constitutional  improved as  influencing the  officers  authority  be  \u000C- 179 -  respected.\"'\"  In  in  pointing  the  union,  contrast,  unconstitutional, exorbitant  they  out  p r o t e s t e d the  that  appeared t o . b e  (suspected  to  be  i n f l u e n c e i n the union.  he  had  p o s i t i o n o f John  been  given  receiving a salary  $225 p e r w e e k ) ,  powers  Gugulyn  that  were  t h a t was r e g a r d e d  and was  exerting  as  excessive  \" J o h n G u g u l y n h a s no a u t h o r i t y t o i n t e r p r e t  GEB 80  minutes.  He  Finally,  the  has  so w i t h  committee  representation report  done  of  reference  expressed  Griffin  Steel  To  say  is  to  B.  concern  in  the  that put  there  it  is  C.  some  mildly.  organizing.\"  the of  disproportiate  the  dissatisfaction  Our c o n c e r n  union.  Their  The 1  (B.  grievances General  endorsed C ) ,  Local  from t h e i r  Executive  union.  B.  C.  Winnipeg  section leaders  researched  the  of  1 had  Jess  membership elected  of that  held  union.  the  background  of  C.  DEMOCRACY  communication  in Bristol  BEFORE  they  Succamore  to  the  membership  of  and  the  statement  of  resolutions,  in Winnipeg  launching his  the  more  committee were a l l  Board meeting  J o h n G u g u l y n had b e e n  with  B.  8 1  report  the  is  in  AMONG THE MEMBERS IN WINNIPEG AND  AND A L B E R T A .  came i n t o o u r  the  and  about  leadership  w i t h o u r b r o t h e r s and s i s t e r s  But  reports  concluded:  a n d COMMUNICATIONS  Local  to  ex-CEW George  placed before  began  Brown  in  trying  officers and  were  his to  battle  the  education  Amalgamated  for  Engineers.  shop  stewards  Further,  given  by  the  Communists.  He  discovered  Gugulyn claimed  his to  with  convince  that,  before  e m i g r a t i n g t o C a n a d a , Brown h a d t r a v e l l e d t o C o m m u n i s t c o u n t r i e s a s of  next  on S e p t e m b e r 2 6 , 1 9 7 0 .  own c a m p a i g n  He  the  British  union,  have documents  part the from  \u000C- 180 -  the  RCMP,  proving  that  both  Brown  Communist P a r t y .  No o n e e l s e  of  the  this  the  campaign,  Coast\".  trying  to  take  suspicion motives Gugulyn.  in of  the  minds  Brown  and  the  responsive C).  that  office, later  were dubbed t h e  the  the in  members  of  d o c u m e n t s , b u t as a  Commies  succeeded of  degree  of  in  from  the  their  result from  Coast  were  considerable  executives  launching  the  \"Commies  creating  Winnipeg  $25  a  many  the  of  complaints  of  by t h e  cash  Board  grievances  of  the  fund without  amount  as  to  battle  the  typewriter  National for  be  the  the  against  B.  C.  board).  t h e r e f o r e , were met.  oo  of  for  full  Gugulyn  the  an  to  for  of  the  the  local  share  the  cost  the  head  office  All  the  financial  (but  of  demands  subject of  Local  the  Vancouver at  buying the  to hire organizers without  from  ruled  bills,  union  that  1  were  replenish  the  and  be  Local  finances  by  office,  by  his  to  board, which  audit  $50 r e n t  in  action  them  about  authority  would  w o u l d have t h e a u t h o r i t y  permission  the  reimbursed  office  before  section  waiting the  by  immediate  placed  have  pay  to  took  26 m e e t i n g  would  would  achieved  Vancouver  September  office  this  that  the  success  Executive  National  requesting by  many  General  petty  representative  later  union  secretary-treasurer  date,  leasing  that  Succamore  the  resolved  the  the  to The  Vancouver that  of  saw t h e s e  were  82  campaign,  readily  the  Succamore  officers  charges  over  Despite  (B.  ever  Vancouver  Gugulyn's  and  to 1  a or  staff first  approval (B.  C ) ,  \u000C- 180 -  the  RCMP,  proving  that  both  Brown  Communist P a r t y .  No one e l s e  of  the  this  the  campaign,  Coast\".  trying  to  take  suspicion motives Gugulyn.  in of  the  minds  Brown  and  the  responsive C ) .  readily  office, later  of  many  were  the  Succamore  the in  members  of  d o c u m e n t s , b u t as a dubbed t h e  Commies  succeeded of  of  Executive  many  the  of  complaints by t h e  cash  National $25  a  requesting by  degree  General  petty  of  in  from  the  their  result from  Coast  were  considerable  executives  launching  the  \"Commies  creating  Winnipeg  the  as  to  battle  for  be  the  against  the  B.  would C.  board).  t h e r e f o r e , were met.  oo  of  for  full  Gugulyn  the  an  them  to  Local  of  for  the  the  local  share  the  cost  the  head  office  All  the  financial  (but  demands  of  subject of  were ruled  Local  the  Vancouver  union  that  1  bills,  at  buying the  to h i r e organizers without  from  be  replenish  the  and  by  finances  by  office,  his  to  board, which  audit  $50 r e n t  in  action  about  authority  reimbursed  office  before  section  waiting the  by  immediate  placed  have t h e  w o u l d have t h e a u t h o r i t y  permission the  without  National  took  26 m e e t i n g  would  to  achieved  Vancouver  w o u l d pay  amount  typewriter  Board  grievances  of  fund  the  success  September  office  this  that  representative  later  that  union  secretary-treasurer  date,  leasing  the  resolved  the  the  to The  Vancouver that  saw t h e s e  were  82  campaign,  that  the  Succamore  officers  charges  over  Despite  (B.  ever  Vancouver  Gugulyn's  and  to 1  a or  staff first  approval (B.  C ) ,  \u000C- 181 -  The (B.  C.)  about the  ruled that the  board  about  information  of  of  the  the  for  autonomy.  and d e f e n d e d  their  action  position follow  however,  the  further  violation  formal  sensitivity  Yet  the  \u2022  u  General  to the  salary  request\" for  officers  complaints of the  pertaining of  1  the  officers by  be  of  their  1  on  the  (B.  office question  prepared  to  to C.)  a not  as  a  claimed  and  defence  Local  C.)  could  pragmatism  of the  been  interpreted  careful  National  seemed  members  were  the  have  i n f o r m a t i o n , they  Despite  demanded  (B.  could  s i m p l y one  rights.  Clearly,  Local  used  to  1  meeting  in acquiring  appears its  the  The c o m p l a i n t  office  that  Local  not  of  as  their  scrupulously in  requesting  did  not  understand  of  local  autonomy.  respect  the  local's  84  The the  procedure  of  Winnipeg  of  in  of  First,  be a p p r o v e d .  needed  being  Winnipeg  information.  the  wishes.  the  as  complaints  autonomy.  however,  method They  the  National  board,  informal  local  intended  C.)  lists,  the  of  any  1 (B.  membership  to  local  t h e m e t h o d s u s e d by t h e  how  violation  responsive  of Local  confusion  understand  also  violation of their  the by-laws  local  source  was  and and  records  Executive B.  running of  expenses  that and  C.  \"the  be  also  proved  to  be  responsive  s e c t i o n about the w i t h h o l d i n g of the  union.  The m e e t i n g  provided  demands  convention  Board  of  to  Local  1  (B.  Vice-President  minutes,  names  ruled  information that  C.)  \"a  upon  (Succamore)  and  to  financial  of  copy their B.  report  C. be  85 complied w i t h \" . copy  of  with  the  all  The W i n n i p e g  decisions  officers  made by t h e  constitutional  a l s o agreed  General  requirement.  Executive  The  fact  that 86  done b e f o r e ,  they  c l a i m e d , was due t o an  oversight.  t o send Succamore Board this  in had  a  accordance not  been  \u000C- 182 -  On t h e the  General  matter  Executive  satisfaction  of  the  of  rather  Board B.  C.  narrow,  attempted section  to  of  specific resolve  the  under the Local to  merger  appears the  C.)  that  demanding  agreement  as  the d i f f e r e n c e  question  office  was  was  d i d not  more  oppose  local  When  it  autonomy,  the  local  for  National  quantitative  than  autonomy  d e g r e e o f a u t o n o m y demanded by B.  in  to  the  came t o  the  t h e b o a r d , no d o u b t  pointed  and t h e  qualitative.  principle.  and  provide  office  still  differently.  example,  an u n d e r t a k i n g by CAIMAW t o between  therefore,  grievances  s t r o n g i n f l u e n c e o f John G u g u l y n , responded q u i t e  1 (B.  the  the  union.  broader q u e s t i o n o f union p h i l o s o p h y , however,  problems,  The  Rather,  it.  It  local  on  National  it  was  the  C . t h a t was s e e n a s e x c e s s i v e , a n d was 87  not  going to  doubt  that  autonomy  be g r a n t e d  the  decision  desired  maintaining his  by  effect,  C.  National by  the  served  office.  board  the  the  B.  C.  can  be  rejecting  the  degree  of  Gugulyn  in  of  the  John  little  union.  section  was  demanding  be r i g o r o u s l y h o n o u r e d , t h e W i n n i p e g  after the  while  in  There  interests  p o s i t i o n o f power w i t h i n t h e  Merger Agreement  have  taken  B.  Furthermore,  position that,  by t h e  officers  that  the  took  the  1970 c o n v e n t i o n , t h e M e r g e r A g r e e m e n t c e a s e d  union's  constitution  now b e i n g  the  governing  to  document  88 of  the  local  relationship. autonomy  organizing of  John  process.  This  and  the  assistance  Gugulyn  in  to  p o l i c y was  question B.  C ,  maintaining  of  a p p l i e d to both the CAIMAW's  applications control  over  obligation  that the  question  served union  the  to  of  provide interests  decision  making  \u000C- 183 -  Your  statement  best  for  cannot  that  organization  be  acceeded  responsibility  in  to.  to  the  and  in  the  long  as  they  work Staff  with  Board.  or  local  has  in  a  between  best  elected  for  the  of  the  for  that  i s always prepared of  any  cannot  usurp  the  refused  to  local  to  union  however  allow  functions  or any  of  the  8 9  Similarly,  the  complaints  about  First,  denied that  different  Board We  to  Board  is  is  Alberta  interests  are  members  Representative.  person  they  the  best  what  and  Executive  d e c i d e what  Your E x e c u t i v e  closely  area  membership  organization purpose.  determine  own  The  They w i l l  so  Area  its  conventions. members  of  Western  the  board  power  acquiece  relationships  that  to  existed  a problem e x i s t e d i n terms  certified  plants  on  the  Local in  of the  union's  1 (B. the  C.)'s union.  representation  executive,  and  the  90 disproportionate the  position  power  held  by  w o u l d be no c h a n g e s Under  exerted and  the  by  Griffin.  authority  f o r t h c o m i n g on t h i s  the  constitution,  we  given  on  to  servicing  organizational  through, of  the  person  as w e l l union.  to  it  was  We  have  supervise arrived  responsibilities progressive  John  the  that  Board the  work  decided,  such  at of  increases  by the to  that  activities  As f o r t h e the job all  Gugulyn.  salary Board and staff  have  is we and  carried activities require report  of such line  a to  person  considering in  a  necessary  a s many o t h e r d a y - t o - d a y  t h e B o a r d on s u c h . -  to  they  question.  responsibility and  ensure  Secondly,  the with  representatives  defended There  \u000C- 184 -  as  experience 91 union's positions.  Finally,  they  the  gain  Board  vigorously  through  denied  the  service  in  the  charge  that  Gugulyn  was  92 exerting granted  undue to  B.  influence  C ,  in  therefore,  the  union.  John  Gugulyn  h i s p o w e r i n t h e f a c e o f t h e B.  C.  Despite was  the  concessions  successful  in  retaining  campaign.  The c o n c e s s i o n s g r a n t e d by t h e GEB m e e t i n g o f S e p t e m b e r not  succeed  Although  in  the  General  given access comply w i t h the  GEB  bringing  to the the  continued his  I  know  of  the  no 2nd  appointed GEB  I  other  union,  that  of  the  Succamore  report  financial official  will  union.  would  office did  nor the minutes  Succamore,  and  of  Local  recording  secretary,  National  office  the  passed  resolution  with  has  Peter  demanding  denied  full  be not of  therefore,  American, information  to  knowledge have  financial  1 (B.  GEB's  is  or  p o s i t i o n of the union.  now f i g h t  minutes  meeting  Canadian  Vice-President  local's  a  ruled  N e i t h e r the f i n a n c i a l  o f f i c e r s and l o c a l s o f t h e  a general  sections  were f o r t h c o m i n g from W i n n i p e g .  matters.  At  had  two  i n f o r m a t i o n he d e m a n d e d , t h e N a t i o n a l  on t h e p r e s e n t  of  Board  the  protests.  where an  between  Executive  ruling.  meetings  peace  26 d i d  these  disclosure  statements 93  to  the  union.  C ) ,  the  Cameron, to  directive \"that  full  of  Yet  on  Brothers  membership  instructed  the  demand c o m p l i a n c e o f  the  behalf Al  Pitt  of  the and  local,  and  Smilinsky  be  \u000C- 185 -  reprimanded  for  failure  to  comply w i t h  the  GEB  directive  and t h a t  this  from Winnipeg  only  94 be e n t e r e d  i n the  The succeeded  record\".  information that  in  adding  fuel  s e c t i o n s of the union. convention, fact  had n o t  notification violation  of  of  been  these the  the  did receive  fire  in  the  battle  between  The i n f o r m a t i o n d i s c l o s e d t h a t  two v a c a n c i e s  which  to  Succamore  had e x i s t e d on t h e revealed  to  vacancies  Locals  to  constitution,  the  but  General  also  two  p r i o r to the Executive  1 and 2 CEW. two  the  1970  Board,  The a b s e n c e  locals  was  not  only  \"denied  our  members  a of a an  95 opportunity of  the  to  have  constitution  members o f t h a t plant  -  Succamore by  Steel  was  brought  -  in  spite  GEB\".  to  light  Executive of  A further  the  was  that  violation  three  of  discovered Gugulyn  that  was  the  salary  equivalent \"I  to  have e v e r y  i n f o r m a t i o n \" he w a r n e d  the  and  fact  that  expenses  the  being  $15,000 a y e a r ,  i n t e n t i o n of  Winnipeg  the  Board were from the  Further,  drawn  an  from  amount  \"I  will  the  that  l e t t i n g o u r members  office.  same  constitution  r e p r e s e n t a t i o n on t h e b o a r d f r o m any p l a n t t o t w o .  f e l t was e x c e s s i v e . this  that  on t h e  preconvention General  Griffin  l i m i t e d the  union  representation  go on  he  know  record  96 as s a y i n g t h a t  the top rates  to s t a f f  Nor d i d Succamore powers power  and  authority  vested  in  that  Gugulyn's  made  by  Executive  the  an  to  appointed  the  explanation of  Gugulyn. official,  exorbitant.\"  delegates.  was,  he  The  pointed  and  he  \"the  to  GEB  about  object  to  the the  maintained  his  position  a v i o l a t i o n of  the  decision  justification  out,  the  He c o n t i n u e d  r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s represented  1970  Board  given  accept  are  very  given  by  reasoning  the  General  expressed  at  \u000C- 186 -  the  convention  was  defeated  by  at  the  supporters  convention  of  the  because  it  resolution.  was  And t h a t  advocated  by  position  others  that  the  97 elected officers  There step  that  a n d B. by  was  C.  run the union at a l l  would to  mark  sections  registered  be  no  the  of  letter  further  climax  the  union,  that  times  he  .  concessions  of  the  struggle  the Winnipeg  had  been  from  Winnipeg.  between  office  suspended  the  a  Winnipeg  notified from  In  Succamore  the  union  for  98 nonpayment o f u n i o n d u e s . t w e l v e months than  I  did,  that  they  In  in advance.  \"I  if  that  is  felt  that  they  fact,  felt  that  possible,\" had  to  Succamore  he  the  had p a i d h i s  dues  u n i o n n e e d e d t h e money more  remarked.  get  union  rid  of  \"Really,  me.  it  George  was  Brown  just could  99 foresee  that  protested  he  the  was  suspension  Board,  p o i n t i n g out ... . . , 100 unconstitutional. However, from  Winnipeg  membership Succamore  going  of  on Local  and  that  this  their  Cameron  wrote:  Al the  1 (B.  of  C.) Peter the  of  was  membership  that  the  National Brother  1970  the both  reaffirmed  firmly  Cameron,  and  their  suspension action  the  consider  Succamore  chairman  suspension  stood  When to  next.\"  Pitt,  December 8 ,  outrage  be  immediately  General  heard  office  at  was  Succamore  the  the  recording the  general  apparently suspended,  behind  secretary,  National  meeting  determined there  was  and  received  decision.  unanimously  to  Executive  undemocratic  p r o t e s t was t o no a v a i l , a n d a t e l e g r a m  instructed  express  to  to  The Jess to  office.  \u000C- 187 -  quite  an e m o t i o n a l  Succamore  was t o t a l ,  the National of  taking  local  visit motion  to  Succamore  in  inform  not  demanded at  Winnipeg  and d e c l a r e s  bear  that  the  Brother  the c r i t i c i s m s  repetition  letter.  Allan  earliest  that  that  for  of  f o r t h e i r a c t i o n and t h e methods  do  Vancouver  Support  a n d some o f  p o l i t e form o f a  membership  them  office it,  relatively  The  situation.  \"the  a full  in  the  1 0 1  Gold  and A l P i t t  possible  local  time,  to  and passed  membership  examination of Local  arrange  supports 1 records  a  Jess shows  102 J e s s Succamore  t o be a member i n g o o d s t a n d i n g w i t h L o c a l  Cameron a l s o w a r n e d t h e N a t i o n a l With  all  the  suspension, sight  of  reports  the from  forthcoming.  I  requesting  financial  report  that  be s e n t  suspension  for  the  this a  copy  to myself  m e m b e r s h i p by r e g i s t e r e d m a i l  of  Succamore  principles  of  to those  an a c t i o n  democracy  Succamore's has  requested  office  take  Brown a d d e d h i s own p r o t e s t s  the  the  National  May  Brother  membership  that  formally  local  George  the  over  the  fact  C.)\".  office:  concern  however,  1 (B.  which  upon  which  not  lost  financial  have  not  been  opportunity of  the  on b e h a l f  of  CAIMAW of the 103  immediately.  o f the membership, showed this  \"an  utter  Canadian  calling contempt  union,  is  104 founded\". National  The  support  o f f i c e was t o t a l  for  Succamore  w i t h i n t h e B.  and  the  condemnation  C. s e c t i o n o f t h e u n i o n .  of  the  \u000C- 188 -  The  suspension  National  officers  president  of  action\"  the  criticism  my  Pitt  behind  Movement,  are  but over  also  CAIMAW, damage  and was  whole.  urged done  the  to  Al  they Pitt  local  appear  the  suggested did  presented Grieve,  in  than  1  heads  union.  members  Democratic  of  Fred  won  the  Mull i n ,  headquarter  still  the  is  Union  wisdom  jurisdiction  eyes  any  are  Canadian  questioning  their  concern  National  of  to  an  committing  American  the  cause  about  office for  to  pressure  rescind  their  with  so,  National  next General that and  themselves local  Local  i n Vancouver  informed the  board  Local  hard  this  comply  to address and  the  union  acts would  the  to  the  internal  resolve  difficulties  their  independent  problems  union  of  before  movement  as  a  1 0 6  no move  did  the  on  ^  expressed  Despite made  1 0  down  s u s p e n s i o n a \" h i g h handed  now  worse  consider\".  CCU  that  are  outside  the  their  organization  brought  that:  observation,  handing  The  the  wholeheartedly  which  also  from  PPWC, c a l l e d  and w a r n e d A l  \"in  action  the a  decision 1  (B.  the  National  on S u c c a m o r e ' s  C.)'s  office  that  Executive  board  make  demand  \"Pop\"  they  that  were  of  officers,  they  suspension.  Nor  Allan  Gold  and  Therefore,  the  sending  a  delegation  B o a r d m e e t i n g on J a n u a r y 1 6 , 1 9 7 1 ,  arrangements four  the meeting.  president,  on  t o answer to the membership.  delegation at  placed  officers  to  from  The d e l e g a t i o n  Jacobs,  receive  financial  Local  them. 1  (B.  The C.)  consisted of  Gerry  secretary,  Peter  \u000C- 189 -  Cameron,  recording  secretary  J e s s S u c c a m o r e was Aerospace,  who  also  had  in attendance,  been  alerted  p r o b l e m s t o be p l a c e d b e f o r e and u n c o n s t i t u t i o n a l to t h i s  expense.\"  The members  the the  plant  board.  after  in  dealing  The  Succamore's  General  board.  board,  he  with  that  (uphold Succamore's did  exposed the down  from  and not  to  claimed.  so  the  This  had  fully all  facts\"  they  that  discovered  Board,  the  serious  the  serious  of the  local  discharged  on  the  then  went  the  bargaining  had  he w o u l d  his  was  on  the  c a s t i n g the d e c i d i n g  what  he  had  Svenson, only  discharge proved  the  a Gugulyn  ensure  that  meeting.  supporter,  obligations  be  too  the  before  the  matter  for  the  remained membership  other  of  It  was  vote.  defeat.  come  to  do  board.  departure to  step  suspended, as  he  had who  \"Maybe we w e r e m i s l e d - maybe we d i d n ' t h a v e a l l  the  1 0 8  much  to  his  from  to  had r e f u s e d  Succamore  his  But  at  b o a r d - members  decided.  to  to  left  now a  resign  prepared to admit  achieved  the  unit  obligation  presently  voted  of  suspension would s t a n d .  Pitt,  Svenson  one  Svenson,  issues  it,  that  Cec  argued t h a t  current  Svenson  triumphantly  board  supported Gugulyn.  Bristol  of  because  officers  from  s u s p e n s i o n ) , he c o u l d now s t a n d down f r o m t h e  that  fully  was  d e l e g a t i o n was n o t y e t  since  and  fact  section  e v e n a member o f Svenson  with  The V a n c o u v e r  Svenson  C.  quickly  suspension, ruling that  suggested  representative.  a delegation  \"It  Executive  a t i e d v o t e , with the chairman, Al  They  B.  of Winnipeg  not  he w o r k e d .  only  membership  district  a s was  the  delegation  therefore  in which  board  by  Brown,  1 0 7  Vancouver  a n d was  the  operation  s i t t i n g on t h e  foreman,  and G e o r g e  \u000C- 190 -  The  Vancouver  delegation  i n j u s t i c e of Succamore's and  strain  Succamore  we  have  warned  suspension.  gone  the  then  through  board.  \"We  to  \"We  made  speeches  on  d i d n ' t go t h r o u g h t h e  ,set  will  rousing  up  a  rotten  destroy  it  struggle  Canadian  rather  the  union\"  than  see  it  d e l e g a t i o n , made  up  109 tarnished.\" of  Bill  They  Behma,  haven't  got  to  board.  \"You  Mike  do!\"  to  feel  Svenson's  action  supported  Kostanski  correct  this  by  and  the  Bristol  Jim  Gibbons.  is  a vote\",  injustice  \"The Jim  time  the  it  to  the  should and  the  appeals  of  reconsider  the  two  its  decision.  presentations  s u s p e n s i o n was  suspension  position  as  2nd  beginning to t i p  thing  Gibbons  of  delegations,  the  In  told  was  again  put  overturned.  vice-president  of  i n f a v o u r o f t h e B.  Succamore's  to  first  act  a vote  of  Succamore  the C.  union.  the  the  was  section of-the  upon r e i n s t a t e m e n t  to  Gugulyn's  The m a t t e r board,  and  reinstated  The  1 1 1  board  balance  secretary-treasurer,  for  failure  to  of  this  to  his  was  now  union.  was  to  rise  and  call  on t h e b o a r d t o s u s p e n d A l l a n G o l d , p r e s i d e n t o f t h e a s s o c i a t i o n , a n d Smilinski,  I the  response  delegations,  i n f l u e n c e o v e r some o f t h e b o a r d members b e g a n t o w e a k e n . Succamore's  only  1 1 0  Listening began  were  uphold the  Ed  constitution.  112 \"That  really  vote.  The  c a u s e d an u p r o a r . \"  board  d i d , however,  The m o t i o n a g a i n ask  for  Gold's  resulted  in a  resignation.  He  tied  refused 113  to give  it.  The two s e c t i o n s o f t h e u n i o n w e r e l o c k e d i n  Eventually, reality  was  the  the  solution  meeting that  decided  Brown  and  on  a  stalemate.  compromise,  Succamore  wanted  which  all  in  along.  \u000C- 191 -  This  compromise  rewrite from  the  each  was  local  sure  Kostanski  calling  c o n s t i t u t i o n of would  representatives making  the  Mike  that  of  be  the on  Bristol  special It  national  was  decided  resolutions  and  Jim  convention  would act  a  union.  the  Kostanski  the  of  as  be  that  committee,  Gibbons  would  convention  would  set  up  one  in  the  Bristol  charge  fairly,  ombudsman b e t w e e n  member  that  be  to  and  of  Mike  two f a c t i o n s  of  responsibility  of  114 the union u n t i l  The maintaining the  convention.  Bristol  the  convention  peace between convened.  and t h e  members o f  Gibbons  wrote:  We  representatives  the  would  significant  fact  else  we to  first  out  about  that  to  think  go w i t h  a  Board,  GEB  them,  S.  far  to  b r i n g out  this  apart  in  the  would  ask  one  everybody  personal  attacks  increase  the  the  in as  bitter  convention  we  one  very  We  as  into  this  much will  we  been  In  the  r e a c h e d them a t  process  of  operation.  be  to  have  union? let  feelings,  what  responded  is  as  have  No m a t t e r  they  concerned  problems i n a r a t i o n a l  Jess  Kostanski  meeting.  controlled  trying  democracy  Mike  time  would  What we a r e perfect  both  admittance  p l a c e we w o u l d h a v e n e v e r union  this  demands.  How  U.  to  sections  t o e x p r e s s o u r v i e w s and of  pressure.  and V a n c o u v e r  at  get  comply w i t h  may  democratic able  point  able  the  delivered  Executive  We w e r e a b l e  executive  Winnipeg  a letter  to  were  meeting. the  In  General  like  observers  the  accepted  to  possible so t h a t able  to  us  all.  not  tear  building  Therefore, refrain so  as  a we  from not  to  when we go  to  work  and more a m i c a b l e  out  manner.  our 115  until  Succamore and  Jim  \u000C- 192 -  THE  1971  CONVENTION  The  B.  constitution provide  for  C.  that the  would true  and p r e p a r e d w e l l following not  in  officers But  the  behind  of  been  the  Consequently, against  the  Gugulyn  and  and  due  said  Succamore.  never  that  Gugulyn  said  was a q u e s t i o n o f  The  by  doing  wrote  so,  to  had  that  didn't  this  for  set  do h i s  their  isolate  by t h e  a  it  over that  best  for  strong had  constitution  and  the  elected  Gugulyn  Winnipeg all  \"We  Board. who  lay  officers.  out  offensive  didn't  thing.  the  a  Executive  an  and  planned  him.  but  the  a  It  was  personal  there than  Vancouver  position within  want  And  membership.  I  a  have  But  it  has  lose  officers,  was  to  issues,  objective  mind,  they  a n d members o f t h e u n i o n , e x p l a i n i n g  their  With  the  therefore,  u n i o n on t h e  Gugulyn.  this  in  support.  been  u n i o n who w e r e ,  rather  the  for  union  They  against  strategy.  wasn't  the  had q u i t e  General  decided  faulty  p o s i t i o n and a p p e a l i n g f o r t h e i r  feel  influence  \"It  t o many o f t h e o f f i c e r s  We  doubt  fight  ideology.\"  strategy  b u i l d up s u p p o r t  the  a  in  decisions,  particularly  his  still  violated  delegates'  to  control.  no e v i d e n c e  had  no  power  file  Gugulyn  officers  be  bloodbath\"  and  was  who  to  Vancouver would  centralized  rank  there  officers  actions,  u n i o n were determined  objective.  Gugulyn  union,  Vancouver these  of  convention  the  the  disseminate  this  union,  officially  of  practice  for  the  circumvented  section  and  control  a  small  are, of  group  prepared it.  It  controlling to  is  smash up  to  it the  and  \u000C- 193 -  rest  o f us t o show t h a t  and g e t  this  imperative union, the  that  the  membership  officers  and  they  Convention,  main p o i n t  c a n be  union running properly that  appointed  Canadians  carry  Constitution  and GEB  away f r o m t h e A m e r i c a n u n i o n s  for.  delegates  schools  teaching  them  from Local  for  their  1 (B.  C.)  and  not  decisions  1  of  meetings.  Our broke  7  were c h o s e n ,  delegates,  constitutional  the  i s w h a t we 1  is  elected,  the  That  conducted  Local  out  it  control  be  Autonomy.  The  is  must  We f e e l  must  should  responsible  explaining  convention  and t h e  the  local  issues  procedure.  and  Succamore  118 devoted  all  his  energies  to  the  project.  Finally,  r e s o l u t i o n s w e l l , p r e p a r e d and t h e i r d e l e g a t e s to  fight,  the  the  special  B.  C.  section  of  the  union  c o n v e n t i o n , o p e n e d on May 2 ,  Al  Pitt,  by  this  time,  well  with  s c h o o l e d and  arrived  in  Winnipeg  their  prepared to  attend  1971.  felt  that  an  overhauling  of  the  119 c o n s t i t u t i o n was the Vancouver Together,  section  Succamore  position. from  a good t h i n g ,  But  Gugulyn's  convention  to  there  order  McEvoy  was  still  Allan  for  two  Succamore's.  \"mistakes  support of built  up  Gold, hours,  for  Pat  McEvoy  that  was  reports  by t h e  He was  successful  g e t t i n g v o t e d down by t h e  goals.  for be  their  overcome  calling  ultra  vires  t h e m e e t i n g , and e v e n t r i e d officers, in  including,  none  of  120 however,  to  delayed  it  And  in their  support  opposition  example,  arguing  to c h a i r  had been m a d e \" .  delegate  considerable  He r e f u s e d  the d e l i v e r i n g of  especially,  the  and  camp.  s h o u l d be c a n c e l l e d . prevent  enjoyed  because  convention  floor.  these  or  the and to  perhaps  attempts,  \u000C- 194 -  Eventually, meeting,  and  it  Gugulyn  was  called  and  to  Brown  order.  were The  asked  to  campaign  co-chair  of  the  Vancouver  s e c t i o n was a r e s o u n d i n g s u c c e s s , w i t h t h e c o n v e n t i o n d e l e g a t e s all  the  resolutions  put  forward  by B.  C.  The  result  of  the  the  adopting  convention, 121  therefore,  was m a s s i v e  The union.  The  most  important  General  Executive  Board,  had  preside  existed over  the  i n the  would as  have  the  board.  now  the  in  the  referred  the  structure. National  structure  to  president,  eliminating  old  Every  made w e r e  Board,  members,  under  c o n s t i t u t i o n o f CAIMAW.  changes  Executive  secretary-treasurer that  changes  as  the  of  the  National  vice-president duplication  Indeed,  the  and  of  effort  president  would  o f f i c e r w o u l d be e l e c t e d .  Each 122  local  union  had  the  right  to  one  Under the o l d c o n s t i t u t i o n , t h e or  GEB  members  was  Because  Subordinate  plants,  this  leadership accident change  had of  of  to  on  U n i t #1  given  the  the  placed  it  union.  way  limiting  the  the  plant, a  one  to  effect  had  representation  rather  multiplant  right  This  union  only  National  officer.  l i m i t on t h e number o f N a t i o n a l  was  the  and  local  excessive had  developed by  than  local  the  officers  local  comprised  union. of  representation  really since  union  been its  due  many  in  the  to  the  inception.  rather  than  by  The plant  123 was  made  the  power  to  this  relationships  had d e v e l o p e d the  correct  situation. in  in Winnipeg,  It  was  a significant  CAIMAW, e l i m i n a t i n g t h e  centre  of  a n d d i s t r i b u t i n g p o w e r more e v e n l y  change power  in that  throughout  union. Changes  union  by  were  providing  for  also the  made  in  offices  the of  regional regional  representation vice-presidents.  of  the They  \u000C- 195 -  would  be e l e c t e d  Executive  officers  with  broad  Vice-Presidents  organizing They  the  the  organizers  Executive  National  previously  of  held  an by  Union  John  to  Furthermore,  responsibility  for  the  National  encouraging regional  power.  The  spirit  and  It  is  the  National to  policy officers  ensure  discourage  The  that the  Previously,  delegates  per  plant,  kept adding newly  the  approval  of  the  representatives  n o r m a l l y work under 124  as  broad  manager region  of  of  the  such  was,  the  union  change  and l i m i t i n g  was  even  as  that  therefore, now  i n t e r m s o f o r g a n i z i n g and  this  the  powers  staff  of  self-determination  of  areas  representatives  paid  position with  had  servicing, centralized  adopted  into  the  convention.  the  National  represent  all  democracy  is  union  had  been  no m a t t e r  what  its  c e r t i f i e d plants  of  see  of  to Subordinate  union  and 125  to  power.  at  elected size.  that  the  practiced  representation  delegates  to  areas  formation of centres  system of delegate  changed.  All  each  intent  r e s o l u t i o n s passed at  elected  for  Vice-President.  own a f f a i r s  thereby  responsible  hire  with  shall  Gugulyn  eliminated.  be  their to  Board.  appointed  its  in  right  d i r e c t i o n of a Regional  existence  shall  servicing  have  temporary  National of  and  shall  and  policy  reporting  Board.  Regional  The  powers,  conventions on  As  the  the  Unit  basis  union  #1,  was  also  of  two  grew  and  so t h e  number  \u000C- 196 -  of  delegates  reached  the  at  conventions  from  Subordinate  until  it  than  all  s i t u a t i o n was c o r r e c t e d by c h a n g i n g  the  s t a g e where \" S u b o r d i n a t e  U n i t #1  grew,  U n i t #1 had more d e l e g a t e s  126 other  locals  system  to  combined.\"  one  of  This  representation  by  population,  with  no  more  than  ten  for  the  127 delegates  a l l o w e d from each  fostering  The  new  and  encouragement  now had t h e including meetings.  financial  also  of  local  right  reports  incorporated  to  a  autonomy.  provision  The  local  i n f o r m a t i o n from the  and m i n u t e s  of  the  unions  National  National  also union,  Executive  Board  128  1971  constitutional exercise  of  establish  power  the a  convention,  changes,  representation,  was  constitution  constitutional  The  It  local.  by  changes an  prevent  convention  that  appointed  the  principles  therefore,  of  were  of  rank  file  and  as  designed  official,  formation  hailed  resulted  \"the  to  provide  centres  of  control  most  in  significant  eliminate better  power,  and  exciting  the  regional  and  local  firmly  autonomy.  and  interesting  1 29 c o n v e n t i o n e v e r s i n c e CAIMAW's i n c e p t i o n i n 1 9 6 4 \" . had i n c o r p o r a t e d The positions key  in  into  union the  position\",  its  c o n s t i t u t i o n the  also  union  underwent  changed  explained  a  hands  Jess  p h i l o s o p h i e s of the  change during  Succamore,  Basically,  in  philosophy  the  \"is  CAIMAW  old  as  CEW.  the  1971 c o n v e n t i o n .  who  controls  the  key \"The  money.  130 Residual the  power  Winnipeg  elected  to  the  goes group  where was  the  cheque  anxious  p o s i t i o n of  that  book one  goes.\" of  secretary-treasurer.  their The  For  that  reason,  representatives Vancouver  be  officers  \u000C- 197 -  were a n x i o u s t h a t local  was  Bristol  a \"dedicated  allowed  only  one  trade  National  get  the  Pat  McEvoy,  p o s i t i o n of McEvoy  vice-president, Winnipeg  was  group  quickly  elected  knew w h a t  and  had  Winnipeg. was  John  132  that  for  The  the  cooperation  the  the  position  west  then  position  of  before  the  had  \"It  shocked the Winnipeg  as  regional  of  to  hold  the  to the  job,  group\"  said  3 1  George and  the  J e s s S u c c a m o r e was e l e c t e d  a p o s i t i o n he has h e l d e v e r s i n c e . Succamore.'''  then wanted t o see  nominated  happened.  position of secretary-treasurer.  the  with  Behma  Each  from  But  accepted  position.  Bill  Winnipeg  vice-president.  was  hold the  officer.  p l a n t was e l e c t e d as p r e s i d e n t .  west  west,  unionist\"  Brown was Gugulyn  elected  was  elected  as  vice-president  regional  for  the  vice-president  for  What G u g u l y n d i d n o t r e a l i z e when he a c c e p t e d t h e  McEvoy,  as  vice-president,  now  outranked  him,  and  position had  full  133 access  to  information.  \"That  was  the  end o f  the  blood-letting\".  was a l s o t h e e n d o f t h e p h i l o s o p h y o f b u s i n e s s u n i o n i s m w i t h i n In battle  against  CAIMAW,  a  Vancouver unionism  the  the  that the  could two  control  battle  of  emergence  philosophy officers  endangered and f i l e  fact,  that  waged be  the of  was  this  business  unionism  in  by  because  the  Gugulyn's  upon w h i c h  and n a t i o n a l i s m .  o f f i c e r s was  spearheaded  battle  identified  principles  a  Vancouver  they  John  had b u i l t  CAIMAW.  basically  philosophy Gugulyn.  traits  policies  It  of and  the  a in  The  business practices  CEW  -  rank  \u000C- 198 -  First,  Gugulyn's  adherence  o f d e c i s i o n m a k i n g meant t h a t i n the that to  hands o f a t r a i n e d  s u c h an i n d i v i d u a l  best  and  and m o s t  the  influence  i n the  a  professional.  could rely  unionism  d e c i s i o n m a k i n g s h o u l d be  And i t  c a n be l o g i c a l l y  the  Gugulyn  interests  was  of  reluctant  the  to  power,  argued  experience  organization  relinquish  d e c i s i o n making p r o c e s s , p r o b a b l y  out of a d e s i r e f o r personal  philosophy  on e x p e r t i s e , t r a i n i n g a n d  advance  Hence,  union's  business  he b e l i e v e d t h a t  efficiently  membership.  to  not  his  entirely  but because o f a genuine b e l i e f  that  t h i s was b e s t f o r t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n and t h e m e m b e r s h i p .  The membership  ex-CEW  control  making  was  making  is  the  is  control.  Such  to  Gugulyn,  control  and  control  not  Rather,  he  hands  of  not  To  a  rather  this  efficiency  the  extent  trained  than  belief.  To of  decision  that  decision  professional,  Even w o r s e ,  elected,  then  them,  if  that  decision  it  of  therefore,  the  union.  can  be  When t h e  seen  as  elected  trained making little  undermining General  is  the  Executive  and d e f e r r e d much o f t h e i r d e c i s i o n m a k i n g r e s p o n s i b i l i t y when  elected  did  the  practice,  by  pursue saw  they  the  overruled  membership,  the  the  decisions  resultant  of  convention  undermining of  rank  p r o v e d t o be i n t o l e r a b l e t o t h e ex-CEW o f f i c e r s .  Secondly, he  and  consideration.  appointed  a  referred  and f i l e  share  i n t h e h a n d s o f someone o v e r whom t h e m e m b e r s h i p has  and f i l e  delegates  in  not  organization  paramount  is  influence  Board  the  did  removed f r o m t h e r a n k and f i l e .  professional  rank  of  placed  necessarily  officers  Gugulyn's any  the  cause  adherence or  objective  dedicate of  the  to  business  his union  u n i o n i s m meant  energies as  to  being  social limited  that  change. to  the  \u000C- 199 -  achievement  of  short-term  relationship  with  employers.  pursued w i t h energy the Winnipeg the  he  is  gains,  national  trade as  council no  of  well.  By  a  be  moral  to  ex-CEW  furthering  for  but a l s o  to  They  rejected  had  the  international  union's  limited  joining union  was  financial  founding meeting of the  CAIMAW t o  provide  moral  of the  as  against  have  cause  of  but time  of  enhancing  building of  to  a  Canadian it  was a  a  purpose  of  desire  ability  for  that  strength  Efforts  such  fledgling  a commodity  its  in  a  nationalism  rising  the  But  short-term  interest  support  CCU.  of  the  had l i t t l e  Gugulyn.  to  to  sold  of  the  further  found  h o w e v e r , ' c o u l d n o t be s e e n t o  an  bring  benefit.  the  of  other  the  labour  enough. to  Also,  and f i n a n c i a l  hand,  were  membership w i t h  because  resources CCU.  to  of  therefore  Canadian  not  their  i n the economic w e l f a r e  membership.  on  UE  appears  achievement  the  a  and  labour centre,  liberation  he  in  by  financial  thus  interests  that  n a t i o n a l i s m was  the  officers,  members  respected  the  CEW's  At  size  of  the  levied  Gugulyn,  Canadian the  to  such  increased,  the  not  and  principle.  objectives  sovereign  is  and t h e r e f o r e  unions  it,  goal  interest  the  such immediate o r g a n i z a t i o n a l  only  the  than  could  The  an  of  purpose  selling  independent  of  share  a  for  H i s e x p e r t i s e was w e l l  objectives  not  self-assertion,  economic  any  did  outcast  rather  organization the  his  donation  served  pragmatism Canadian  he  small  doubt  was  a c r i t i c i s m that  u n i o n movement,  the  gains  and d e d i c a t i o n .  restricted  economic  issues  This  o f f i c e r s , and a l a c k  membership  because  economic  to  after  their  from American them,  They send  dedicated  had  a  Canadian spent  support to  the  employer,  domination. autonomy  some  representative  the merger,  not  they  of to  in  their attend  pressured  new c o u n c i l .  Like  \u000C- 200 -  Gugulyn,  they  investment  was  sovereign  no d o u b t a w a r e t h a t  nonexistent.  Canadian  Canadian his  were  labour  objectives  undermining  labour  centre to  the  But  a  economic  for  a  The  crucial  gains,  immediate  had  movement.  was  struggle  they  the  part  cause  - the  building  of  of  that  therefore,  Canadian  return  such  an  b u i l d i n g of an  By  could  self-determination  a  independent  cause.  Gugulyn  of  limiting  be  in  seen  the  as  labour  movement.  The  1971  convention  ex-CEW o f f i c e r s on t h e s e Gugulyn. be  It  pursued  centres  of  limitation  of  union  autonomy,  victory  direction was  undue  the  in  for  to  as  terms  by  of  ideology  of  the  appointed  local  dedicate  philosophy  of  f o r the p h i l o s o p h y of  short-term  to the p r i n c i p l e s of well  the  rejection  influence  objectives  as  sovereign Canadian  The  It  the  CAIMAW w o u l d a d h e r e local  the  CAIMAW.  power,  a  i s s u e s , and a d e f e a t  established by  was  economic  to  the  John would  development  gains.  and  Rather,  control  building  struggles  of  CAIMAW  during  1970 w e r e  not  only  i n r e g i o n a l i s m , a f a c t o r which pervades  aspects  and w h i c h  Canadian  national  delegates  dealt  constitutional resolved the  society  i n s t i t u t i o n , can with  the  structure  issue.  \"\"There  ignore.  question, of  the  no C a n a d i a n  and  union,  time\",  At  the  through appear  h a v e been no i n s t a n c e s  134 union since that  a  l a b o u r movement t h r o u g h s u p p o r t o f t h e C C U .  internal  Canadian  and  of  rooted i n i d e o l o g y , but a l s o of  of  officials,  r a n k and f i l e  itself  that  the  said  Succamore.  union,  or  any  other  1971 c o n v e n t i o n , changes to of  have  made  all  to  the the  successfully  regionalism in  our  \u000C- 201 -  In  dealing with  1971 c o n v e n t i o n the  present  r e g a r d e d as  set  day. the date  the To  the  problems  of  basic  format  that  many  of the  of  the  b i r t h of  ideology is  CAIMAW CAIMAW.  and  followed officers, 1 3 5  regionalism, by  the  the  union  to  May 2 ,  1971  is  \u000C- 202 -  FOOTNOTES 1.  I n f o r m a t i o n o b t a i n e d f r o m M r . P. M c E v o y , R e g i o n a l Vice-President, C a n a d i a n A s s o c i a t i o n o f I n d u s t r i a l M e c h a n i c a l and A l l i e d W o r k e r s , p e r s o n a l i n t e r v i e w , V a n c o u v e r , B. C .  2.  Information obtained from Mr. J . Succamore, Canadian A s s o c i a t i o n of I n d u s t r i a l Mechanical V a n c o u v e r , B. C.  3.  Ibid.  Secretary-Treasurer, and A l l i e d W o r k e r s ,  4.  I n f o r m a t i o n o b t a i n e d f r o m M r . P. C a m e r o n , R e g i o n a l V i c e - P r e s i d e n t , C a n a d i a n A s s o c i a t i o n o f I n d u s t r i a l M e c h a n i c a l and A l l i e d W o r k e r s , p e r s o n a l i n t e r v i e w , V a n c o u v e r , B. C .  5.  Information obtained i n t e r v i e w , Vancouver,  6.  Ibid.  7.  Ibid.  from Mr. J . B. C .  Succamore,  op. c i t . ,  personal  8.  Canadian A s s o c i a t i o n of I n d u s t r i a l , Mechanical C o n s t i t u t i o n , 1968, A r t i c l e 8 ( g ) .  and A l l i e d  Workers,  9.  Information obtained i n t e r v i e w , Vancouver,  from Mr. J . B. C .  Succamore,  op. c i t . ,  personal  10.  Canadian A s s o c i a t i o n of I n d u s t r i a l C o n s t i t u t i o n , 1968, A r t i c l e 8 ( a ) .  Mechanical  and A l l i e d  Workers,  11.  Information obtained i n t e r v i e w , Vancouver,  Succamore,  op. c i t . ,  personal  12.  Information i n a l e t t e r from 1 9 8 0 , CAIMAW U n i o n F i l e s .  13.  D. C a y l e y , Files.  14.  O f f i c e r s o f CEW, \" S t a t e m e n t C o n c e r n i n g A c c o u n t o f M e r g e r M e e t i n g \" , J a n . 3 , 1 9 7 0 , CAIMAW U n i o n F i l e s .  15.  Information obtained i n t e r v i e w , Vancouver,  16.  Ibid.  17.  \" C o n c e r n i n g a M e r g e r o f t h e CEWU w i t h t h e C a n a d i a n A s s o c i a t i o n I n d u s t r i a l M e c h a n i c a l a n d A l l i e d W o r k e r s \" , CEW N e w s l e t t e r , O c t . 1 9 6 9 , CAIMAW U n i o n F i l e s .  \"Draft  from Mr. B. C.  for  J. P.  McEvoy  This Magazine\",  from Mr. J . B. C.  to  D.  1980,  Succamore,  Cayley, p.8,  March 2 4 ,  CAIMAW  op. c i t . ,  Union  personal  of 2,  \u000C- 203 -  18.  Winnipeg  Free P r e s s ,  19.  R. S a l u t i n , p.119.  20.  Ibid.  21.  Ibid.  22.  Ibid.  23.  Information obtained i n t e r v i e w , Vancouver,  from Mr. B. C.  24.  R.  p.120.  25.  Ibid.  26.  Information obtained i n t e r v i e w , Vancouver,  27.  Ibid.  Salutin,  Nov.  2 1 , 1969, p . 3 ,  The O r g a n i z e r ,  op. c i t . ,  28.  L i s t of Files.  Seating  29.  Resolutions  30.  Ibid.  31.  Information obtained i n t e r v i e w , Vancouver,  32.  Ibid.  33.  Ibid.  34.  Ibid.  for  of  Toronto,  from Mr. B. C .  Delegates  CAIMAW U n i o n  James  Lorimer  &amp; Co.,  1980,  J.  Succamore,  op. c i t . ,  personal  J.  Succamore,  op. c i t . ,  personal  for  1970  Convention,  1970 C o n v e n t i o n , CAIMAW U n i o n  from Mr. B. C.  Files.  CAIMAW  Union  Files.  J.  Succamore,  op. c i t . ,  personal  35.  Canadian A s s o c i a t i o n of I n d u s t r i a l C o n s t i t u t i o n , 1970, A r t i c l e 8.  Mechanical  and A l l i e d  Workers,  36.  Canadian A s s o c i a t i o n of I n d u s t r i a l C o n s t i t u t i o n , 1968, A r t i c l e 8 ( g ) .  Mechanical  and A l l i e d  Workers,  37.  Information obtained i n t e r v i e w , Vancouver,  Succamore,  op. c i t . ,  personal  38.  Ibid.  39.  Ibid.  40.  Ibid.  from Mr. B. C.  J.  \u000C- 204 -  41.  Information in a l e t t e r CAIMAW U n i o n F i l e s .  from J .  G u g u l y n t o G. B r o w n , J u n e 4 , 1 9 7 0 ,  42.  Information obtained i n t e r v i e w , Vancouver,  43.  I n f o r m a t i o n i n a l e t t e r f r o m G. Brown a n d J . S u c c a m o r e and A . P i t t , May 2 7 , 1 9 7 0 , CAIMAW U n i o n F i l e s .  44.  General E x e c u t i v e Board o f the Canadian A s s o c i a t i o n o f I n d u s t r i a l Mechanical and A l l i e d W o r k e r s , \"Minutes o f M e e t i n g \" , June 2 0 , 1 9 7 0 , CAIMAW U n i o n F i l e s .  45.  Information obtained i n t e r v i e w , Vancouver,  46.  Information i n a l e t t e r from 1 9 7 0 , CAIMAW U n i o n F i l e s .  47.  Information obtained i n t e r v i e w , Vancouver,  48.  Ibid.  from Mr. J . B. C .  from Mr. J . B. C . J.  from Mr. J . B. C.  Succamore,  Succamore,  Gugulyn  to  Succamore,  op. c i t . ,  personal  t o ' A . Gold  op. c i t . ,  G. B r o w n ,  personal  Sept. 18,  op. c i t . ,  personal  49.  I n f o r m a t i o n i n a l e t t e r f r o m G. Brown a n d J . S u c c a m o r e and A . P i t t , May 2 7 , 1 9 7 0 , CAIMAW U n i o n F i l e s .  50.  General E x e c u t i v e Board o f the Canadian A s s o c i a t i o n o f I n d u s t r i a l Mechanical and A l l i e d W o r k e r s , \" M i n u t e s o f M e e t i n g \" , June 2 0 , 1 9 7 0 , CAIMAW U n i o n F i l e s .  51.  Information obtained i n t e r v i e w , Vancouver,  52.  General E x e c u t i v e Board o f the Canadian A s s o c i a t i o n o f I n d u s t r i a l Mechanical and A l l i e d W o r k e r s , \" M i n u t e s o f M e e t i n g \" , June 2 0 , 1 9 7 0 , CAIMAW U n i o n F i l e s .  53.  Information obtained i n t e r v i e w , Vancouver,  54.  General E x e c u t i v e Board o f the Canadian A s s o c i a t i o n o f I n d u s t r i a l Mechanical and A l l i e d W o r k e r s , \" M i n u t e s o f M e e t i n g \" , June 2 0 , 1 9 7 0 , CAIMAW U n i o n F i l e s .  55.  I n f o r m a t i o n i n a l e t t e r from 1 9 7 0 , CAIMAW U n i o n F i l e s .  56.  Information obtained i n t e r v i e w , Vancouver,  from Mr. J . B. C.  from Mr. J . B. C.  J.  from Mr. J . B. C.  Succamore,  Succamore,  Gugulyn  to  Succamore,  to A.  op. c i t . ,  op. c i t . ,  G. B r o w n , op. c i t . ,  Gold  personal  personal  Sept. 18, personal  \u000C- 205 -  57.  General E x e c u t i v e Board o f the Canadian A s s o c i a t i o n o f I n d u s t r i a l Mechanical and A l l i e d W o r k e r s , \"Minutes o f M e e t i n g \" , June 2 0 , 1970.  58.  Information i n a l e t t e r from 1 9 7 0 , CAIMAW U n i o n F i l e s .  59.  Ibid.  J.  Succamore  to  A. P i t t ,  Nov. 2 1 ,  60.  General E x e c u t i v e Board o f the Canadian A s s o c i a t i o n o f I n d u s t r i a l Mechanical and A l l i e d W o r k e r s , \"Minutes o f M e e t i n g \" , June 2 0 , 1970.  61.  R e s o l u t i o n s f o r 1970 C o n v e n t i o n , CAIMAW U n i o n  62.  Information obtained i n t e r v i e w , Vancouver,  63.  Ibid.  64.  Ibid.  from Mr. J . B. C.  Files. op. c i t . ,  personal  65.  Ibid.  66.  Information in a letter from J . Succamore t o CAIMAW E x e c u t i v e B o a r d , S e p t . 2 1 , 1 9 7 0 , CAIMAW U n i o n F i l e s .  General  67.  Ibid.  68.  Information i n a l e t t e r from 1 9 7 0 , CAIMAW U n i o n F i l e s .  69.  Ibid.  70.  Information in a letter from J . Succamore t o CAIMAW E x e c u t i v e B o a r d , S e p t . 2 1 , 1 9 7 0 , CAIMAW U n i o n F i l e s .  71.  J . Succamore, \"Report to S e p t . 9 , 1 9 7 0 , CAIMAW U n i o n  72.  Motion o f General Union F i l e s .  73.  CAIMAW L o c a l 1 ( B . Union F i l e s .  74.  Ibid.  75.  Ibid.  76.  Ibid.  77.  Ibid.  Meeting, C ) ,  J.  Succamore,  Succamore  Local 1 Files. Local  \"Statement  1  (B. CEW,  to  C.)  A. P i t t ,  General  Sept.  of Grievances\",  9,  Nov. 2 1 ,  General Meeting\",  1970,  CAIMAW  u n d a t e d , CAIMAW  \u000C- 206 -  78.  Ibid.  79.  Ibid.  80.  Ibid.  81.  Ibid.  82.  D.  Cayley, op. c i t . ,  p.3.  83.  General E x e c u t i v e Board of the Canadian A s s o c i a t i o n of I n d u s t r i a l M e c h a n i c a l and A l l i e d W o r k e r s , \" M i n u t e s o f M e e t i n g \" , S e p t . 2 6 , 1 9 7 0 , CAIMAW U n i o n F i l e s .  84.  Information in a l e t t e r from A. Gold t o ( B . C ) , O c t . 2 , 1 9 7 0 , CAIMAW U n i o n F i l e s .  85.  General E x e c u t i v e Board o f the Canadian A s s o c i a t i o n of I n d u s t r i a l M e c h a n i c a l and A l l i e d W o r k e r s , \" M i n u t e s o f M e e t i n g \" , S e p t . 2 6 , 1 9 7 0 , CAIMAW U n i o n F i l e s .  86.  Information in a 1970 CAIMAW U n i o n  87.  Information in a letter from S e c r e t a r y - T r e a s u r e r , CAIMAW L o c a l 1 ( B . Union F i l e s .  88.  Ibid.  89.  Ibid.  90.  Ibid.  91.  Ibid.  92.  Ibid.  93.  Information i n a l e t t e r from 1 9 7 0 , CAIMAW U n i o n F i l e s .  94.  Information in a l e t t e r CAIMAW U n i o n F i l e s .  95.  Information i n a l e t t e r from 1 9 7 0 , CAIMAW U n i o n F i l e s .  96.  Ibid.  97.  Ibid.  letter Files.  from  f r o m P.  A.  J.  Pitt  to  All  J.  Succamore,  A. P i t t C ) , Oct.  Succamore  Cameron t o A . J.  Members  Succamore  to  Al  Pitt, to  A.  to 6,  Local  Oct.  1  13,  J . Jacobs, 1 9 7 0 , CAIMAW  Pitt,  Oct.  23,  Nov. 2 1 , 1 9 7 0 , Pitt,  Nov. 2 1 ,  \u000C- 207 -  98.  Information in a l e t t e r and S e c r e t a r y - T r e a s u r e r Union F i l e s .  99.  Information obtained from Mr. J . i n t e r v i e w , V a n c o u v e r , B. C .  100.  Information  in  a  f r o m CAIMAW A u d i t i n g C o m m i t t e e , P r e s i d e n t t o J . S u c c a m o r e , N o v . 3 0 , 1 9 7 0 , CAIMAW  letter  1 9 7 0 , CAIMAW U n i o n  from  J.  Succamore, Succamore  op. c i t . , to  A.  Pitt,  personal Dec.  Files.  101.  Information in a l e t t e r CAIMAW U n i o n F i l e s .  102.  Ibid.  103.  Ibid.  104.  Information in a l e t t e r CAIMAW U n i o n F i l e s .  f r o m G.  105.  Information in a l e t t e r CAIMAW U n i o n F i l e s .  f r o m F.  106.  I n f o r m a t i o n i n a l e t t e r f r o m F. CCU, t o A. G o l d , Dec. 2 1 , 1970.  107.  Information i n a l e t t e r f r o m J . S u c c a m o r e t o L. S t e w a r d , V i c e - P r e s i d e n t , CAIMAW, J a n . 3 1 , 1 9 7 1 , CAIMAW U n i o n F i l e s .  108.  Information obtained i n t e r v i e w , Vancouver,  109.  Ibid.  110.  Ibid.  111.  Ibid.  112.  Ibid.  113.  Information  in  a  1 9 7 1 , CAIMAW U n i o n  6,  f r o m P.  Cameron t o A . G o l d ,  Brown  14, 1970,  A.  Pitt,  Dec. 2 1 , 1970,  M u l l i n to A.  Pitt,  Dec. 3 0 , 1970,  Jamieson,  from Mr. J . B. C.  letter  to  Dec.  from J .  Western  Succamore,  Succamore  to  Vice-President,  op. c i t . ,  L.  Steward,  1st  personal  Jan  31,  Files.  114.  Ibid.  115.  Information in a letter f r o m M. K o s t a n s k i and J . G i b b o n s to J . S u c c a m o r e and a l l members o f t h e G E B , F e b . 9 , 1 9 7 1 , CAIMAW Union F i l e s .  116.  Information obtained from Mr. J . i n t e r v i e w , V a n c o u v e r , B. C .  Succamore,  op. c i t . ,  personal  \u000C- 208 -  117.  Information in a l e t t e r from J . 1 9 7 1 , CAIMAW U n i o n F i l e s .  Succamore  118.  Information obtained from Mr. J . i n t e r v i e w , V a n c o u v e r , B. C.  119.  Ibid.  120.  Ibid.  121.  Ibid.  122.  to  L.  Steward,  Jan  31,  Succamore,  op. c i t . ,  personal  Canadian A s s o c i a t i o n of I n d u s t r i a l C o n s t i t u t i o n , 1971, A r t i c l e s 7, 8.  Mechanical  and A l l i e d  Workers,  123.  Information obtained from Mr. J . i n t e r v i e w , V a n c o u v e r , B. C.  Succamore,  op. c i t . ,  personal  124.  Canadian A s s o c i a t i o n of I n d u s t r i a l C o n s t i t u t i o n , 1971, A r t i c l e s 7, 8.  Mechanical  and A l l i e d  Workers,  125.  C a n a d i a n A s s o c i a t i o n o f I n d u s t r i a l M e c h a n i c a l and A l l i e d C o n s t i t u t i o n , 1 9 7 1 , S t a n d i n g R e s o l u t i o n No. 2.  Workers,  126.  CAIMAW R e v i e w , S e p t .  127.  Canadian A s s o c i a t i o n of I n d u s t r i a l C o n s t i t u t i o n , 1 9 7 1 , A r t i c l e 6.  128.  CAIMAW R e v i e w , o p .  129.  Ibid.  130.  Information o b t a i n e d from Mr. J . i n t e r v i e w , V a n c o u v e r , B. C.  131.  Ibid.  132.  Ibid.  133.  Ibid.  134.  Ibid.  135.  Ibid.  1971, p.4. Mechanical  and A l l i e d  Workers,  Succamore,  op. c i t . ,  personal  cit.  \u000C- 209 -  Chapter  CAIMAW In  VI  the Mining  We c o u l d r e s i s t a n y t h i n g  Industry  - except  Jess  temptation  Succamore  \u000C- 210 -  CAIMAW'S MINING C E R T I F I C A T I O N S  CAIMAW ENTERS THE MINES  The internal  years  difficulties  Canadian union. merger  with  achieve auto But  began,  the  but  group  enabled  in  such  dramatic  which  by  the  Robert  smelter  Laxer  traditions  as  of  and  rapid  of  CAIMAW's  growth  in  B.  C.  industries building  to  as  for  the  by  the  seek  and  foundries,  (see  controversial  Table  aspect  i n t o the mines o f B r i t i s h  to  at  union  truck  most  lead  enough, not w i t h i n  i n the Alcan  resolution  diverse  and  and  were  the  CAIMAW  into  the  CAIMAW o r e v e n t h e Kitimat.  a category  \"not understanding the necessity  described Canada  progress  CAIMAW's e n t r y  events  1971  the broader j u r i s d i c t i o n achieved  p l a n t w e r e new C a n a d i a n s , as  the  of  fabricating  most  e x p a n s i o n was  itself,  Neale  particular,  metal  ironically  the  were y e a r s  Winnipeg  servicing, perhaps  followed  certifications  The  at  In  the  many  union's  that  \"European strong  Many o f  of  B.  C.  mines  industry  1,800  workers  o f w o r k e r d e s c r i b e d by  for  international  immigrants  national  who  unions  the  Columbia.  mining  the  IV).  Paddy  unions\"'''  had in  and  brought their  to  home  2 countries\". southward of  their  resulted  the  Smelter  of  that  Steelworkers  service  and  the  drain  of  their  i n a growing d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n w i t h i n  bargaining  dissatisfaction of  Lack  agent,  the  United  led ultimately with  their  own  to  Steelworkers rebellion  union,  the  and A l l i e d W o r k e r s ( C A S A W ) , c e r t i f i e d  the  dues  dollar  Kitimat  local  of America  and t o Canadian  in October  the  (USWA), a replacement  Association 1972.  3  of  \u000C- 211 -  Table CAIMAW B. Date  C.  IV  Certifications  Employer  1967-1981  Pre  Certification  of  No Emp  Jun  67  Phillips  Cables  IBEW  312  Jul  71  Cascades  Electronics  Uncertified  100  Jul  71  Freightliner  Int  Machinists  160  Jul  71  Canadian  Int  Machinists  350  Jan  72  Montgomery  Mar 72  G&amp;F  May 72  Cannon  Jul  72  Macro  Jul  72  Capital  Jul  72  Freuhauf  Canada  Kenworth Elevator  Installations Machine Kennametal Wire  Cloth  Trailers  Aug 72  Freightliner  Jan  73  Fogg  Jan  73  Inter.  Jan  73  Phillips  Feb  73  Bethlehem  Feb  73  Inland  Feb  73  Hydraulic  Office  Motors Harvester Office Copper  Kenworth  M a r 73  Int  A p r 73  No Sag  Aug 73  Mainland  Sep  73  Arrow  Sep  73  Wrights  Sep  73  Thompson  Services  Harvester  (Coqu)  Spring Foundry  Transfer  Uncertified  15  Uncertified  4  Int  Machinists  25  Int  Molders  30  Int  Machinists  30  Int  Machinists  21  Uncertified  32  Int  Machinists  55  Int  Machinists  66  Uncertified Op Eng &amp; Rock &amp; Tunnel Workers  20 300  Int  Machinists  50  Int  Machinists  11  Uncertified  10  Am.  45  Upholsters  Steelworkers  70  Int  25  Machinists  Alu-Steel  Uncertified  35  Machine  Uncertified  15  \u000C- 212 -  Sep  73  Bell  Jan  74  Lincoln  Copper  Steelworkers  Steel  Int  Ironworkers  170 35  O i l Atomic &amp; Chemical Workers  110  Steelworkers  200  Uncertified  100  Ind.  Uncertified  13  Lens &amp;  Shutter  Uncertified  30  May 74  Endako  Mines  Steelworkers  Jul  Bethlehem  Mar 74  Shellburn  A p r 74  Noranda Metal  A p r 74  Anaconda  A p r 74  McGill  A p r 74  74  Dec 74  Venture  May 75  Quadra  May 75  Nye's  Sep  A-l  75  Refin. Ind  Electronics  Office  Welding Manufacturing  Foundry  Steel  Uncertified  30  Uncertified  8  Uncertified  150  Uncertified  8  Steelworkers  Nov 75  Associated  Nov  75  W e s t e r n Canada  Dec  75  Gibraltar  Jul  75  Stanguard  Jan  76  Heal  Jul  76  Ocean  Foundry  400  Molders  50  Steelworkers  300  Mines  Steelworkers  400  Electronics  Uncertified  20  Uncertified  9  Steel  Electronics Foundry  Int  100  Int  Molders  12  Aug 76  Similkameen  Steelworkers  280  Mar 77  Esco  Uncertified  250  Jul  77  Metalex  Jan  78  Pacific  Jun  78  Northridge  Jan  78  Aug 78  Foundry  Int Dodge  Molders  20  Uncertified  19  Uncertified  30  Ai rco  Am.  35  Tonecraft  Uncertified  Chrysler  Sheetmetal  25  \u000C- 213 -  Jan  79  Schlage  Lock  Int  Machinists  May 79  Western  Mines  Steelworkers  M a r 80  Aeroquip  Jan  80  McLean &amp;  Jul  80  Starforms  200 220  Uncertified Powell  Int  5  Molders  25  Uncertified  35  Uncertified  35  Oct 80  Circuit  Dec 80  Canadian  Car  Int  Jan  81  Reliable  Guard  Uncertified  8  Feb  81  Arrow  Uncertified  10  Teamsters  55  Feb 81  Graphics  (Abbotsford)  Canadian B a t t e r y  Data as o f May,  230  1981.  4 3 % o f CAIMAW's c e r t i f i c a t i o n s uncertified plants. Source:  Machinists  i n B.  V a r i o u s i s s u e s o f t h e CAIMAW A p r i l , 1981.  C. w e r e a c h i e v e d Review  at  dated J u l y ,  previously 1971  to  \u000C- 214 -  The independent served  as  certification  union  an  at  battle  Kitimat  important  and  subsequent  victory effects.  had  two  significant  to  the  four  example  thousand  of  events  in  Steelworkers (CWU),  by  and  against  Kitimat, forming  the  the  w i t h the strong  it  Cominco w o r k e r s  at  of  the  met w i t h 1  these  CCU,  had  the  been  leaders  move  rebelled  Canadian  court  against  Workers  campaign.  towards  The  Canadian  on the  Union  rebellion  unionism  was  4  independent  established  of  CAIMAW.  the  Kitimat  CAIMAW o f f i c e r s  contacts,  sign-up  certification  had c o n t a c t s w i t h  PPWC, t h e  Steelworker s of  Kitimat  the  Spurred  established  a  network  C a n a d i a n movement. the  of  Because  Steelworkers  P u l p and P a p e r s W o r k e r s o f C a n a d a (PPWC) i n 1 9 7 1 , a  relationship  Badior,  the  also  had o r i g i n a l l y a t t e m p t e d t o r e p l a c e  Independent  PPWC a l s o  union,  a  industry.  relationships within  the K i t i m a t workers  the  and  C. m i n i n g  workers  own  started  Steelworkers  Secondly,  Cominco  their  immediately  e n t e r i n g t h e B.  strong  the  new  First,  T r a i l - K i m b e r l e y - S a l m o , a l s o r e p r e s e n t e d by t h e S t e e l w o r k e r s . by  the  on c h a r g e s  of  two  r e b e l l i o n , Klaus to  promoting dual  support, advice  the  groups.  Through Fred M u l l i n ,  on t h e i r way  CAIMAW, t o g e t h e r w i t h  provided crucial  between  the  president  Herre  stand t r i a l  and  As a  PPWC and K e n t  Rowly  to  Tony  before  unionism.  and e n c o u r a g e m e n t  But  the  result of  the  CASAW i n  its  5 certification strong  ties  policy  of  striving  battle  with  the  the  independent  between involvement  and  Steelworkers.  support  to  This  unions, any  but  group  not only also of  t o e s t a b l i s h an i n d e p e n d e n t C a n a d i a n u n i o n .  in a l e t t e r  of thanks  t o CAIMAW:  established  crystallized  workers  who  Wrote Klaus  a  were Herre  \u000C- 215 -  One  aspect  that  which  Canadian  concerted  has  emerged  unions  effort  unionists will  have  on  all  discovered  the  prepare  above  part  t h e way  all  the  w h o l e l a b o u r movement i n C a n a d a w i l l of  the  come  people  to  of  realize  Canada.  that  it  is  support  take  people  Inspired  the  Kitimat  by  of  unity.  success  the  hands have build  peculiar  only  work  by  together;  Kitimat  clearly  6  and  the  Trail  battle,  the Bethlehem Mine i n A s h c r o f t , d i s s a t i s f i e d w i t h  assessed with  and l a c k  against  the  named  the  all\",  said  of  their  influence  bargaining  In  7  Highland  Valley  Succamore.  300 w o r k e r s  at  workers  the  the  established  Miners  Union.  \"They  just  mine  signed  of  their \"They  printed up.  service  own a f f a i r s ,  decided  Operating  up It  the own  had  ran  union,  was  everything  Kitimat  no  cards.  was  Engineers  i n c l u d e d , \"Money  business agent  pattern  the  the  the  Complaints  and t h e  keeping with  Bethlehem  in their agent,  Workers U n i o n .  no m e m b e r s h i p v o t e ,  from V a n c o u v e r \" .  the  the  must  to  as  gained  and  s p i r i t of  Rock a n d T u n n e l  workers,  for  can  this  action  and the  We  demonstrates  they were r e c e i v i n g to  not  as your  at  is  Independence,  sound,  Canadian  unionists  individual empires. may  a  day when  small  interdependence  workers  mission  is  only  be i n t h e  Canadian  their  that  of  for  others,  and  Trail  which  they  organization  But  about  a terrific  at  100  of  response  to  o  join  nothing.\"  The Union during  in  Trail  the  Bethlehem for  Kitimat  workers  then  guidance,  and  struggle  went  contacted  the into  network  the of  operation.  Canadian  contacts The  Workers  solidified  CWU  put  the  \u000C- 216 -  Bethlehem  miners  in  contacted  CAIMAW.  touch  with  Fred  Mull in  of  the  PPWC,  who  On November 1 1 , 1 9 7 2 , F r e d M u l l i n and J e s s S u c c a m o r e to  Ashcroft  policy form  to  meet w i t h  the  Bethlehem  workers.  o f p r o v i d i n g any p o s s i b l e a s s i s t a n c e a  Canadian  union,  miners t h e i r a s s i s t a n c e  Succamore  and  In  i n terms of t e c h n i c a l  turn  travelled  keeping with  t o any w o r k e r s  Mull in  in  promised  their  attempting the  to  Bethlehem  and o r g a n i z a t i o n a l  advice,  q and t h e i r f i n a n c i a l  To Bethlehem after  prepared  Fred  workers  due  and m o r a l  Mull i n ,  the  most  to  was  to  take  consideration,  to  lend  support.  Succamore. all-out to  any  Rowley  \"He  battle  had  were  within war  the with  strong  base.  as  the  CAIMAW  \"the  biggest  traditional the  battle \"The  officers evil  Steelworkers  as  was,\"  the of  movement resulting  f o r which they f e l t trouble  of  were  said  move  were  towards industry  to  an  union  fleet\" the  and in  of  and  the  not  that  view  anywhere,  Succamore,  \"we  due Kent  American that  a  NDP\".  the  powerful They  1 1  \"redbaiting,  they would f i r s t  said  inevitable  a p p r e h e n s i o n was  influence  labour  lead  international  \"dreadnaught  officers  their  the  workers,  Brown was w o r r i e d \" ,  This  the  Bethlehem  in  s u c h a move w o u l d  towards  for  i n t o the mining  \"George  0  action  CAIMAW  assistance  Steelworkers.\"'''  sympathy  described  and a t e r r i f i c a  of  Rather,  Steelworkers  foresaw  the  although  had i n m i n d .  of  The  i t s e l f to venture  aware t h a t  with  feelings  unionism.  force  was  course  CAIMAW.  But  possible  C a n a d i a n u n i o n i s m , f o r CAIMAW was n o t e x a c t l y w h a t t h e y  join  agreed.  them e v e r y  sensible  purges\"  have t o  build  could  resist  \u000C- 217 -  anything seized,  but  temptation.\" ' 1  Feeling  1  CAIMAW g r a n t e d a c h a r t e r  In Ashcroft, Canadian  spite  a  the  fact  of  the  majority  union. 13  themselves.\" February  of  s i g n u p was  CAIMAW  applied  the  opportunity  had  to  t o B e t h l e h e m C o p p e r - CAIMAW L o c a l  that  CAIMAW  Bethlehem  \"The  2 9 , 1973, the workers  that  had  workers  done e n t i r e l y for  only  by t h e  164 t o  at  8.  meetings  quickly  certification  voted  two  be  joined  at the  Bethlehem  workers  the  and  102 t o c e r t i f y  mine, the  on  Canadian  14 union  as  their  certification  bargaining  in British  agent.  CAIMAW  had  its  first  mining  Columbia.  THE MINES GO CAIMAW  The e v e n t s the  province  Typical  who  were  complaints  were l a c k  of  i n A s h c r o f t d i d n o t go u n n o t i c e d by o t h e r m i n e r s  of  service,  dissatisfied these  miners  a drain of  with  their  against  union  their  in  representation.  international  unions  t h e i r d u e s money t o t h e U n i t e d  States,  15 and l a c k o f  responsiveness to the membership.  Almost Bethlehem, Granisle  the  immediately employees  contacted  at  CAIMAW,  after the  the  Noranda  requesting  CAIMAW -  owned  a charter  signed  a collective  the  property.  its  two y e a r  agreement  The a g r e e m e n t life.  and t h e w o r k e r s  \"It  with  just  1 6  the  Copper  May  1 9 7 3 , CAIMAW  mine  Canadian  of  at  union. and  people working  provided f o r only a ten cent  In  at  had been c e r t i f i e d  a handful  looked s u s p i c i o u s l y l i k e  rebelled.\"  Bell  in  The m i n e had o p e n e d i n 1 9 7 1 , and t h e S t e e l w o r k e r s  certification  increase  a sweetheart Local  10 was  at  over  agreement formally  \u000C- 218 -  established at  the mine.  Within  a few days o f t h e s t a r t  o f open  season,  17 70 p e r c e n t o f t h e B e l l  Despite certification intervened certain  w o r k e r s had j o i n e d t h e C a n a d i a n  the  speedy  success  of  the  union.  signup  campaign,  c a m p a i g n i t s e l f was d r a w n o u t o v e r t h r e e m o n t h s .  in  the  application  by  p e o p l e who w e r e c o v e r e d  Steelworkers  had  never  raising by  the  bargained,  the  technical  be  added  The USWA  objection  c e r t i f i c a t i o n , but  should  the  that  f o r whom  to  the  the  list  of  position,  and  18 voters. the  The L a b o u r R e l a t i o n s  ballots  counted.  of  a  Board p a r t l y  certification  Instead,  a  second  vote  vote  held  was  accepted t h i s in  August  conducted  1973  in  were  never  September  1973,  19 resulting  i n an o v e r w h e l m i n g 101 t o 32 v i c t o r y The CAIMAW c a m p a i g n a t  of workers at  the nearby  certification  campaign  approached  Bethlehem  for  also  CAIMAW.  attracted  the  Lornex mine i n t h e H i g h l a n d V a l l e y . at  Bethlehem,  CAIMAW s u p p o r t e r s  \"to  ask  some  of  us when t h e  the hell  attention During  Lornex  the  miners  we w e r e g o i n g  to  20 organize  them\".  Lornex  workers  workers  with  favourably  Shortly pursued  a formal  received  CAIMAW l a u n c h e d  a  after  this  request  by  the  CAIMAW  interest to  join  membership  signup campaign  at  was  by  certified  approaching  CAIMAW L o c a l and the  8.  executive  at the The  at  USWA c e r t i f i e d  Bethlehem, Bethlehem request  was  Bethlehem,  and  Lornex mine  in  November 1 9 7 3 . Meanwhile, were s t i l l replace  the  in a state  the of  Steelworkers  Cominco w o r k e r s rebellion with  at  against  their  own  Trail, the  Kimberley  USWA.  Canadian  Their Workers  and  Salmo  attempt Union  to had  \u000C- 219 -  f a i l e d when t h e B.  C.  i n 1972 o n t e c h n i c a l the  mistake  formally meeting  of  it  which ballots  the  union.  The  was  not  agent  were  the  i n the  Secondly,  at  created  election  appropriate that  who  Canadian  into  threat  the  had  union,  union's  considerable  the  that  who out  \"it  is  before  organizational confusion),  Canadian Workers The  had to  union  two  who w e r e n o t members  bargaining.  set  Canadian  the  officers  non-members  argued  the  ruled that  deliberately and  of  for  vote  one o f t h e CWU o r g a n i z e r s had made  workers  board, therefore,  convinced  Steelworkers  other  bomb  Board denied a c e r t i f i c a t i o n  First,  himself. a  people cast  an  grounds.  enrolling  joining (in  Labour R e l a t i o n s  Canadian  voted  disrupt a  principle  Union  unionists  were  the  of  in  fact  formation of  law  of  that  a 21  criminal  should  never  be  The a r g u m e n t was t o no With workers  press  CAIMAW's to  try  this  time  by  that  they  to  benefit  from  his  illegal  acts\".  avail.  decided  property,  allowed  entry  into  again  to  joining  the  mining  dislodge  CAIMAW.  were j o i n i n g u s \"  industry,  the  the  Steelworkers  \"They  just  s a i d Succamore.  Cominco at  announced  \"We  got the  their to  the  news  over  22 the were  radio.\"  Charters  formed  properties.  to The  j o i n CAIMAW w i t h CAIMAW There this 1964  were  granted,  represent  the  Cominco w o r k e r s ,  and  CAIMAW  workers  at  especially  Locals  the  14,  different  in T r a i l ,  rapidly  l i t t l e prompting. isn't is  no  trying visible  comparatively CAIMAW  the c o u n t r y ' s  is  but  its  initial new  riding  winning effort  union a  that  huge  hands  on  the  was  part  of  formed  in  Canadianistic  currently experiencing.  down.  With  wave  Canadian  15  and 16 Cominco  began  to  \u000C- 220 -  R o g e r s , CAIMAW d i d n ' t h a n d b i l l  anyone o r c a n v a s ;  the  a p p r o a c h was made t o CAIMAW a n d t h e a s s o c i a t i o n went  to  work  majority  industry at  fact  lost  in  Trail:  signing  up  of  with  the  issue  of  members,  while  Steel  h e l p l e s s , knee-deep  However,  CAIMAW's  to  suffer  fell at  that  30  the  of  Lornex at  The  result  However,  was  held  of  a few  in  up  days  was  after  a  have  stand  in  the  signup  been  solid close  campaign  of  to  the  the  460  by  the  the  Operating  win  back  in  a  victory of  mining  influenced  culminated  a  the  majority  an a t t e m p t  the  the  campaign,  challenge  vote  and  victory  First,  signing  Bethlehem  being  \"wave\".  of  may  is  officials 23  certification  the  overwhelming  charter  i n the  flush  failure  certification  Bethlehem. it  This  a  setbacks.  short  a raid  This  initial major  cards  the  launched  local.  two  mine.  during  an  The same t e c h n i q u e  virtually  Lornex  Engineers  applying  of signatures.  applied  was  employees  by  then  vote  for  open  their at  CAIMAW.  season  at  Lornex.  Secondly, properties properties  of  certification  Trail-Kimberley-Salmo  were  certification,  CAIMAW's  a  represented structure  protect  it  against  defense,  preventing  raids the  by  resulted the  established by  the  campaign in  by  the  the  failure.  Steelworkers old  Steelworkers.  Steelworkers  at  Mine It  was  in Mill an  Cominco  The  three  a  joint  Union  to  effective  from o b t a i n i n g c e r t i f i c a t i o n  until  24 the  Mine-Mi 11-Steel  also  proved  raid  by  merger.  effective  CAIMAW.  \"We  for had a  But the lot  the  structure  Steelworkers of  support  in at  of j o i n t preventing  Trail,  but  certification a not  successful enough  at  \u000C- 221 -  Kimberley\",  s a i d Succamore.  \"What had b e e n b u i l t a s a f o r t r e s s became a  ..25 prison.\"  Nevertheless, mining  industry.  the miners Copper the  at  to  In  the  news  an  Canadian union.  in  Frustrated  by b o t h t h e  a majority  of  was  only  still  circulating  two w e e k s  left  in  in  open  leaving  the  by w h a t t h e y  company a n d t h e  Steelworkers felt  and  Bell  joining  t o be a p o o r  union in n e g o t i a t i n g a  the  season,  owned E n d a k o M i n e c o n t a c t e d t h e m i n e r s a t  interest  and d e l a y s  the  CAIMAW  1974 and w i t h  Placer  express  of  contract reopener,  f o u r h u n d r e d E n d a k o w o r k e r s j o i n e d CAIMAW w i t h i n  five  days o f the s t a r t o f the s i g n u p campaign.  The clumsy.  Steelworker's  First,  it  response  removed  c o m m i t t e e who had s i g n e d w i t h settlement  with  the  company  five  to  members  CAIMAW. for  the  a  of  Next,  wage  rebellion the it  at  Endako  elected  was  bargaining  s i g n e d a memorandum o f  reopener  on  May 1 8 ,  1974  and  26 \"agreed  to  recommend  ratification  vote  its  was  close,  a g a i n s t and 25 s p o i l e d . votes  in favour,  terms  unreservedly  resulting  in  to 125  its  members\".  votes  in  The  favour,  A r e c o u n t c o n d u c t e d by a l o c a l j u d g e showed 137  133 a g a i n s t a n d 13  spoiled.  CAIMAW h a d a l r e a d y a p p l i e d f o r c e r t i f i c a t i o n o f t h e u n i t . Steelworkers  filed  an  objection,  alleging  s i g n i n g o f t h e May 18 a g r e e m e n t meant t h a t that  date,  sensing  making  the  CAIMAW  the  Steelworkers  among o t h e r  Endako  reversed  things  a c o n t r a c t was  application  d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n among t h e  reopener,  139  untimely.  miners  their  with  position.  that  i n f o r c e as Then,  the  terms They  The the of  perhaps of  the  suddenly  \u000C- 222 -  contended  that  no  recommended t h a t Endako  miners  binding  the  to  collective  agreement  support  agreement  be r e j e c t e d  the  had  been  i n a new v o t e ,  Steelworkers  because  concluded,  and u r g e d  they  could  the  get  a  27 better  bargain  than  J u n e 1974 r e s u l t e d Local  sister  i n a narrow  local  certification  season,  requesting campaign  a  a  certification  CAIMAW v i c t o r y  battle  On O c t o b e r 6 , petition  charter  was  Steelworkers Endako  A  of  148 t o  in  launched, had  rebellion  was  at  Endako  the  and  negotiated which  1974 and w i t h  sent  to  CAIMAW  Canadian  a contract the  held  in  1 4 3 , and CAIMAW  spilled  only by  made  at  into  its  and r e p r e s e n t e d three  weeks l e f t  by in  Gibraltar  workers  A  successful  signup  for  certification.  Gibraltar  Gibraltar  over  the  union.  application  provided  vote  Endako.  a t G i b r a l t a r m i n e s , a l s o owned by P l a c e r  Steelworkers.  open  CAIMAW.  17 won t h e b a r g a i n i n g r i g h t s f o r The  the  could  shortly  workers  with  The  before  the  essentially 28  the  same  which  rates  no d o u b t  negotiated  in  the  controversial  contributed  to  the  same  Endako  In a d d i t i o n , t h e G i b r a l t a r w o r k e r s c o m p l a i n e d t h a t out of touch w i t h  the  the  r a n k and f i l e ,  unimportant  to  issues that  t h e members f e l t w e r e  reopener,  d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n by  the  and  workers.  the Steelworkers  t a k i n g s t a n d s on i s s u e s t h a t  m e m b e r s h i p , and m a k i n g c o n c e s s i o n s t o  the  were  seemed  company  on  29  The CAIMAW's  Steelworkers  application  for  s i g n e d up i n t o t h e N a t i o n a l since  only  a  local  union  important.  again  raised  certification. union rather can  make  a  technical  Gibraltar than Local  application  objection  workers  had  been  18, they argued,  under  the  B.  C.  to  and  Labour  \u000C- 223 -  Code,  the  vote  s h o u l d be  declared  invalid.  allow t h i s t e c h n i c a l i t y to prevent a vote,  \"CAIMAW  as  industrial doubt  a life  that  signed aware  in  the  cards of  union  employees  nature  w h i c h they were  a  British  between  the  is  well-known Columbia.  at  Local 31  the  board refused  We  Gibraltar and  fact  of  have  no  Mines  who  O c t o b e r 30  were  18 as  an  organization  joining.\"  A t the time o f the c e r t i f i c a t i o n campaign a t G i b r a l t a r , was  engaged i n  wages the  a strike  philosophy,  CAIMAW  through  payment  to  the  strike  refused the  at  and c o n d i t i o n s t h a t Placer/Steelworker  pay.  to  Endako  that or  of  only  either,  and  Gibraltar  workers  that  the  of  retain  still  were  the  workers  part  of  in its  u n i o n membership duty  at  published  CAIMAW  provided for  As  picket  supporters  miners  for  on t h o s e  t h o s e who  Steelworkers  Endako  to win  agreement.  performance  Steelworker  do  an a t t e m p t  improvement  memorandum  dues  Strong  in  w e r e an  insists of  to  declaring:  October 6 of  But  J U  are  the  entitled  Endako  leaflets  starving  mine  telling  because  CAIMAW  32 could not support a s t r i k e .  It  was  a strategy  that  i n i t i a l l y worked f o r  CAIMAW's c e r t i f i c a t i o n c h a l l e n g e was to  225.  But  ineffective.  it  was  CAIMAW  a  strategy  complained  narrowly  that, to  the  in  fact,  the  Steelworkers  workers s t i l l  had  had t h e i r l a s t  printed  defeated  the  Labour  \" g r o s s d i s t o r t i o n s \" p r i n t e d by t h e S t e e l w o r k e r s their  the  long  Steelworkers.  by a v o t e  run,  Relations  was  of  to  Board  prove of  during the campaign.  allegations  when  pay c h e q u e s due f r o m t h e c o m p a n y .  the  219  the In  Endako  Although  \u000C- 224 -  the  board  refused  to  propaganda l i t e r a t u r e that  interfere  our  that than  charges  judgement,  any  usual  Moreover,  it in  made  view  other  at  their of  loss  of  Gibraltar. votes  It  had r e t a i n e d credibility.  easily  no  quality  of  a  suffered  lengthy  currency  of  campaigns  time  these  even  on t h e  stating  more  strike.  in fact  the  such  evidence  apparent  at  of  fact.  credible  been  fact  in  families  leaflets the  the  d i d go on r e c o r d as  t h e r e was no b a s i s  representation  Steelworkers a  their  have  important to put t h a t  The  was  discomfort  that  statements In  or  must  Steelworkers  it  l a c k e d any b a s i s  there  employees  the  policing  during a campaign,  the S t e e l w o r k e r ' s  In  in  to  the  for  the  they  were  charges  now, 33  in  it  is  record.  the  Gibraltar  local,  The  following  year,  won a c e r t i f i c a t i o n  vote  but they CAIMAW  in  had done was  December  back  1975 by  so at 238  to 111.  In  1976 t h e m i n e r s a t  CAIMAW.  They  strike  against  picketing at  had come Bell  surprisingly, CAIMAW's  members  to  group  of  with  when  the  the  Steel  CAIMAW  Bell  during the  miners  cross  picket them.  Brenda  CAIMAW and s t a r t e d  leaders  conducted  lines T h i s was  miners  who  signing cards.  and the got 34  refused  ordered last in  touch  to  their  straw  contacted  1976  mine.  honour a  contact  Copper,  the Brenda  Not  into  t h e N o r a n d a owned B r e n d a m i n e s  for with  CAIMAW  secondary  \u000C- 225 -  But  preoccupation  Copper  resulted  Brenda  petition.  with  in  the  delays  1976 by  CAIMAW  the  Canadian  When CAIMAW o f f i c e r s  R o g e r C r o w t h e r d i d f i n a l l y meet w i t h t h r e e weeks l e f t over  one  miners  Despite  CAIMAW w i t h i n  s h o r t of the m a j o r i t y  The  company  union  the  Gibraltar  in  the  P e t e r Cameron, J e s s Succamore  and  the Brenda w o r k e r s , t h e r e were t o be s i g n e d up  these  d i f f i c u l t i e s , 166 o f  three  week  required for a  period.  But  a p p l i c a t i o n b e i n g made and t h u s we w e r e s h o r t o f  the  total  unit  just  applied for.  we had s i g n e d two more w o r k e r s 35 break.  The w o r k e r s  a t t h e S i m i l k a m e e n mine a t  CAIMAW.  bargaining  agent  Their d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n with  was  the previous y e a r , over  the  had  handbilled  by  offer.  for  the  on  It  was,  an  return  two  P r i n c e t o n were the  the Steelworkers  unsuccessful  in f a c t ,  Steelworkers  their  was  It  to  two  during  next  as  their  the  mine  c e n t s an  hour  strike  a s t r i k e w h i c h won t h e m i n e r s o n l y f i v e  pre-strike  that,  heightened  Brenda  Ironically  up b u t t h e y q u i t .  was a t o u g h  to contact  spread  the  this  only  vote.  had h i r e d 27 s t u d e n t s the  Bell  to  our  of  and  responding  p r i o r to  majority  Gibraltar  at  i n open s e a s o n , a n d a w o r k f o r c e  hundred m i l e s .  joined  strikes  at  Similkameen workers  CAIMAW's  Similkameen,  second  began  who  raid  the  at  CAIMAW  oc  campaign. charter  CAIMAW g r a n t e d  on May 1 7 ,  Relations  1976,  the  and  Similkameen workers  three  Board f o r c e r t i f i c a t i o n .  weeks In  later  their  applied  request to  the  \"one o f t h e s h o r t e s t and  for  a  Labour quietest  37 campaigns  on  CAIMAW L o c a l  record,\" 22.  the  result  was  a  130 t o  118 v o t e  victory  for  \u000C- 226 -  In  October  dissatisfied with agent, were  the  also  level  1978,  the  the  service  Operating  union's  at  the  Utah  they were r e c e i v i n g  Engineers,  d i s s a t i s f i e d with  and t h e i r  miners  a  poor  requested \"lack  record  of  mine  financial  lists  for  and  a vote,  Employers  Council  data  showed  that  at  a  i n the b a r g a i n i n g u n i t .  However,  application,  company  of  Canadian  union  certification But  the  LRB  two  members  vote. did  produced a  \"No  allow  short  one  us  list of  withdraw  the  our  it  the  had t h e  very  They local  With  352  required Seniority  maximum,  there  when CAIMAW f i l e d  706 e m p l o y e e s , majority  c o u l d f i n d where  to  at  certification.  w e r e 655 w o r k e r s the  bargaining  and s a f e t y \" .  and made a p p l i c a t i o n f o r  Hardy,  f r o m CAIMAW.  control  o f t h e w o r k e r s a s m e m b e r s , CAIMAW was c o n v i n c e d t h a t majority  Port  from t h e i r  a charter  on h e a l t h  at  these  leaving  required  extra  application,  its  for  people  because  the a  were. it  was  39 clear  t h a t we had e v e r y  The w o r k e r s provided charter.  by  the  In  r e a s o n t o b e l i e v e we had a  at  Western M i n e s , d i s s a t i s f i e d w i t h  Steelworkers,  particular,  majority.\"  they  approached complained  CAIMAW that  in  the  May 1979  \"Steel  staff  servicing seeking reps  a  were  40 often unavailable  when t h e y w e r e r e a l l y  the  Steelworkers  the  Western Mines workers  had  its  mine.  first,  not  and  to  to  remove voted  date  needed.\"  themselves 111 t o  only,  from  67 i n  Despite warnings the  favour  certification  in  \"House of a B.  of  CAIMAW. C.  by  Labour\", CAIMAW  underground  \u000C- 227 Table V R e p r e s e n t a t i o n Votes Date  in  Raiding Union  Mine  B. C . M i n e s 1973 - 1981 Incumbent Union  Vote R e s u l t s CAIMAW I N T L 1  Feb 1973  Bethlehem  CAIMAW  Op.  Eng  164  102  Sep  Bell  CAIMAW  Steelworkers  101  32  CAIMAW  176  82  147  143  98  56  1973  Copper  Feb 1974  Bethlehem  Op.  Jun  Endako  CAIMAW  Steelworkers  Sep 1974  Bell  Steelworkers  CAIMAW  Nov 1974  Gibraltar  CAIMAW  Steelworkers  219  225  Jul  Endako  Steelworkers  CAIMAW  261  129  Dec 1975  Gibraltar  CAIMAW  Steelworkers  238  111  Jul  1976  S i mi 1kameen  CAIMAW  Steelworkers  130  118  Jun  1977  Simi1kameen  Steelworkers  CAIMAW  157  78  O c t 1977  Endako  Steelworkers  CAIMAW  210  171  May 1978  Bethlehem  Steelworkers  CAIMAW  139  100  May 1979  Western Mines  CAIMAW  Steelworkers  111  67  Dec 1979  Granisle/Bel1  210  293  Jun  Simi1kameen  Steelworkers  CAIMAW  121  100  May 1980  Endako  Steelworkers  CAIMAW  254  157  Jun  1980  Afton  CAIMAW  Steelworkers  93  151  Feb  1981  Babine  CAIMAW  Steel  226  253  Jun  1981  Similkameen  Steelworkers  CAIMAW  152  91  1974  1975  1979  Copper  Div  Eng  Merger of  Properties  Note:  T h i s d o c u m e n t a t i o n d o e s n o t i n c l u d e t h e numerous c e r t i f i c a t i o n c h a l l e n g e s t h a t have t a k e n p l a c e i n t h e mines b u t w h i c h have n o t culminated in a vote.  Source:  Various  i s s u e s o f t h e CAIMAW R e v i e w ,  1973-1981.  \u000C- 228 In  December  1 9 7 9 , CAIMAW  early mining c e r t i f i c a t i o n s , Bell This  event  workers, Indeed, Bell  was  not  due  to  any  change  or  in October of  Copper,  but  certification.  decision  represented and  the  showed  by  officials in  the  of  won  their  to  support  views  the  loss  of  for  the  was  up  of  members  the  the  Steelworkers,  had  more  employees  certification  vote  for  the  joint  Steelworker  vote  by  bargaining  the  with  293  to  units. than  \"Local  10\"  for  Granby Copper.  Granisle,  new m e r g e d  property  Accordingly,  210.  said  raid  Copper,  But  many  10 w e r e q u i c k l y e l e c t e d t o e x e c u t i v e  local.  Bell  Bell  USWA.  to  its  union.  apply  neighbouring Bell  two  lay  the  purchase of the  the  still  by  had a t t e m p t e d t o  enough  due t o  one o f  Steelworkers.  CAIMAW  merge  allegiance  as  international  Steelworkers  sign  event  to  o f CAIMAW L o c a l  new  of  N o r a n d a , owner  the  their  Steelworkers  the  made  the  loss  in  failed  mine by  results that  had  was  any  a major  C o p p e r , went back t o the  that year,  Rather,  owned G r a n i s l e The  to  suffered  Peter  of  the the  positions  Cameron,  \"is  our  41 local  on  workers  ice\".  In  a  letter  at  Bell  to  the  CAIMAW  Mining  Council,  Copper have d e c i d e d t o  maintain  wrote: The w o r k e r s CAIMAW,  Local  integration  10. of  the  proceeds,  the  abundantly  clear  We  joined  certified property  with was  we  are  is  our  Bell  to  in  1973 except  Steel. in  We  the  w o r k e r s r e s p e c t and s u p p o r t .  Granisle at  and for  the  become  properties.  fact  still  be  that  our  Granisle  forward union  the  workforce  would the  as  will  both  larger  look  CAIMAW, 42  that,  CAIMAW  workers  CAIMAW  back  of  all  merged w i t h by  belief  and  advantages  CAIMAW  represented when  It  to  mine,  the  that  day Bell  the  Bell  \u000C- 229 -  In approached certified  June  1980,  CAIMAW while  the  workers  requesting  there  were  a  only  at  the  charter. a  Afton  The  handful  of  mine  in  Kamloops  Steelworkers  workers  at  had  the  been  property, 43  a n d had s i g n e d w h a t many f e l t A l t h o u g h CAIMAW  succeeded  mine,  the  it  lost  complained  to  t o be an  i n s i g n i n g up a m a j o r i t y  certification  the  inferior collective  Labour  vote  Relations  by  Board  officials Afton  votes  that  its  management for  justified  and d i f f i c u l t y  board  upheld.  industry has  again.  Peter  pointing  the  reopener  by  campaign by  claiming  trades  However,  subsequent  developments  the  Cameron that  time  wrote  such of  people,  L o r n e x 1980 a g r e e m e n t  caused A f t o n  to  be  to  Afton  CAIMAW had  been  Steelworker  the  reopener,  Mine must  that  But  it  was  a p o s i t i o n which  in  wage  and t h e  compelled to  considerations  the  s u c h a s n o n c o m p e t i t i v e wage  attracting  not  out  its  in  s u c h as  reopener  at  151.  i n Vancouver  \"compelling business reasons\",  rates  than  to  at  and t h e company i n t h e m i d s t o f t h e c e r t i f i c a t i o n b a t t l e .  necessary  the  of the workers  93  f r u s t r a t e d by a s u r p r i s e r e o p e n e r n e g o t i a t e d  agreement.  reopen  even  their Mike  more  and s u g g e s t e d t h a t  in  Gibraltar/Endako  Manager, be  settlements  the  contract  Lipkevich,  pressing  \" A f t o n wage  now rates  44 be  increased  now,  rather  than w a i t i n g  for  the  next  open  season\".  No  r e s p o n s e was f o r t h c o m i n g . FACTORS  INFLUENCING THE TURN TO CAIMAW BY B.  Although the growth  in  B.  membership,  C ,  by  and  1980,  mines  miners CAIMAW  i n d u s t r y of the p r o v i n c e . in  the  B.  C.  mines  have n o t  raise  been t h e  represent had  C . MINERS  become  only a  major 30%  major  source of  union  of  CAIMAW's in  the  CAIMAW's c e r t i f i c a t i o n a t t e m p t s a n d several  questions  of  interest  CAIMAW's  to  B.  C.  mining  victories  observers  of  \u000C- 230 -  the  industrial  mining why  relations  certifications  d i d the miners  system  fall  i n B.  to C.  in  B.  CAIMAW,  open p i t  C.  mines.  while  First,  others  mines t u r n  did  to  why  did  not?  Secondly,  CAIMAW,  while  i n underground m i n e s , w i t h the e x c e p t i o n of Western M i n e s , d i d  At  least  t o be c l e a r .  First,  dissatisfaction union. in  The  the  of  the  answers  to  these  the  representation union that  questions  \"Each  p r o v i d e d by t h e i r  has  been t h e  Steelworkers.  Peter  Warn on,  involved a  real  In  story.  everyone  at  the  local  level  international  loser  e x p l a i n i n g the  exodus  director  Someone  is  widespread  CAIMAW  With the s i z e of our o r g a n i z a t i o n , i t  that  appear  to  research  local  those  not?  C. m i n e r s t u r n e d t o CAIMAW b e c a u s e o f  CAIMAW,  said,  ensure  in  c o u r s e , the  to  f o u l e d up.  always  B.  with  is,  mines  Steelworkers level  issues  international  the mines  of  two  some  is  at  for the  the local  impossible to  doing h i s job the  way  45 it  s h o u l d be d o n e . \"  this  contention.  1980,  CAIMAW  The e v i d e n c e ,  Rather  has  posed  certifications  at  exception  Granisle.  of  representing throughout  the  the  it  every  is  a  however,  evident  serious  major  open  in  industry.  B.  The  between  threat pit  Discontent  mines,  that  does not appear t o  C.  mine  in  with has,  turn  to  to  the years  1973 and  international the  the  unions'  province, with  international  therefore, CAIMAW  support  has  been been  the  unions  widespread in  a  manner  r e s e m b l i n g t h e d o m i n o e f f e c t , w i t h t h e e x p e r i e n c e s o f one m i n e  affecting  others.  certified  CAIMAW  In and  qualitative.  this  regard,  those  that  did  the  difference  not  appears  As an e x p l a n a t i o n o f  certifications,  a  member  of  in  to  the  be  mines  quantitative  CAIMAW's s u c c e s s  mining  that  management  in said  rather  achieving \"Steel  than  mining as  an  46 organization B.  C.  just  Federation  fell of  down  Labour  on  the  agreed.  job.\" \"Steel  A had  representative a  terrible  of  the  structure,  \u000C- 231 -  with  their  many.  I  listen.\"  barn  bosses  warned  them  when  everything.  they  Some  were they  good,  but  just  wouldn't  lost  Kitimat,  but  high  national  aspirations  not  4 7  Secondly, society, their  running  the  own  at  appeal  house  a time  to  was,  be  it  of  members  of  a  agreed  on  all  is  Canadian  union  sides,  an  in  and  Canadian  masters  effective  in  argument  48 for  CAIMAW.  A g a i n , because  international  union  province,  difference  argument  the  between  CAIMAW has  certifications  miners  in in  the  posed a  in  most  appeal  mines  that  over  time,  is  apparent,  a fact  which  CAIMAW's c e r t i f i c a t i o n their  mining  losses  however,  the  successes.  by  these  First,  \"It  two  than  the  in  to  in  the  independence  CAIMAW and  rather  threat  mines  those  that  qualitative.  factors  have  had an i n f l u e n c e on t h e  reorganization  by t h e c r e a t i o n o f D i s t r i c t 3 .  pit  national  certified  that  no d o u b t has  open  of  d i d n o t may be c o n s i d e r e d t o be q u a n t i t a t i v e It  significant  Steelworkers  changed  pattern  of  responded  to  1 9 7 6 , s p l i t t i n g up D i s t r i c t 6  made d i s t r i c t d e c i s i o n m a k i n g  appear  49 more  accessible\"  said  Peter  Cameron.  \"Sometimes  we  learn,\"  said  the  50 representative Steelworker 1980 was  of  the  campaign  of a higher  campaign  in  portraying  1974  B.  C.  Federation  literature calibre which  than  that  destroyed  CAIMAW members as  the  at  Labour. the  Also,  Afton  USWA  credibility. on s t r i k e ,  the  campaign  d i s t r i b u t e d during the  starving while  now c a m p a i g n on a p l a t f o r m o f  of  distributed  Gibraltar  Instead  the  in  of  Steelworkers  i m p o r t a n c e o f membership i n the  House  51 of  Labour.  perhaps east,  given  Secondly, way  and a move  in  B.  towards  the C.  to  desire  for  a mood o f  separation.  In  Canadian  self-assertion  Western a l i e n a t i o n the  1 9 6 0 ' s and  towards  1970's,  has the  CAIMAW  \u000C- 232 -  provided the  a vehicle  1 9 8 0 ' s , even  it  philosophically, Western  pattern  of  CAIMAW  towards  almost  success,  different external  the  not  the  provide  societal  effort the  these  of  Canadian  a vehicle,  move  nationalism.  either  towards  at  But  in  ideologically  or  Western  alienation  nothing  succeeds  of  operating  anywhere like  at  in  and  workers  mines c o u l d ,  have  progress  challenges than  success.  were  in  of  at  other  taking  labour  Hence  the  B u t by t h e  going  to  leave  however, employer  is  impossible  interference  at  to Utah  measure. and A f t o n  in  domino e f f e c t  Also,  how  influenced  role  the  other  the  much the  of  it  is that  turn that  have  of  such  mines,  in  at  terms  same t o k e n , a b e l i e f  influenced  crucial  at  In  the  CAIMAW  How much s u c h a f a c t o r  1974.  the  other mines,  d u r i n g the  campaign  in  Lornex workers  of  drive,  properties.  could  on t h e  the  place  CAIMAW  significant effect  less  success  is  taking  relations  and  properties.  certification  at  with  however,  be a  CAIMAW's  place  1  timing  analyze,  challenges  1970 s,  less  therefore,  to  the  early  with  different  CAIMAW's  decade,  The  influenced  time  in  certified  the  Mines.  succeeded at  the  of  CAIMAW,  more d i f f i c u l t  t h e m i n i n g i n d u s t r y t o CAIMAW. Bethlehem  by  Western  certification  strikes  truer  is  Mines  course  expended  manifest  during the  irresistable.  could  but which  certification  no  be  perhaps  At f i r s t ,  different  which  responses,  perhaps  to  are  During the  o r n o t CAIMAW  and CAIMAW of  seemed  exception  factor  mines,  employer  factors  successes.  had  attempts  forces  role  in  CAIMAW  i n whether  A  mines,  expression  by t h e m s e l v e s .  with  certification  as  for  changes  and more  factor  does  certification  move  more  the  separation.  The  the  for  had  of the a  certification Lornex the  CAIMAW  miners,  suspected drive  may  \u000C- 233 -  never  be  absent, drive  known.  All  that  can  namely a t B e t h l e h e m ,  succeeded.  similarly  conclusive  said  is  that  Similkameen, Bell  The e f f e c t  defies  be  where  such  and G i b r a l t a r , t h e  o f an o n g o i n g CAIMAW s t r i k e analysis.  Peter  factors  i n the  CAIMAW  industry  Cameron m a i n t a i n s  i s e x t r e m e l y d i f f i c u l t t o o r g a n i z e a p r o p e r t y when y o u a r e  were  that  i n the  \"it  middle  52 of  a major  that  this  union,  the  was  in  much  that of  the  engaged  in  or  of  industry\".  had  the  at  concluded  at  strikes  of  this  little  as a  doubt  defendant It  was  U t a h and B r e n d a , properties,  at  Endako,  a for  CAIMAW  Gibraltar  c o n c l u s i o n o f CAIMAW  CAIMAW c a m p a i g n s  impact  be  issue.  these  the e x i s t e n c e or recent  The  can  this  Afton,  campaigns  successful  or Similkameen.  around  successful  recently But  There  the S t e e l w o r k e r s ,  campaign  certification  d i d not d e t e r  Gibraltar  in that  their  respectively.  strikes  same  no d o u b t p r o v e d  time  and B e l l  the  f a c t o r has an e f f e c t ,  centre  strategy at  strike  factor  at  Western  therefore,  Mines, remains  inconclusive. Another influence policy  in  which  CAIMAW's s u c c e s s e s  adopted  involved.  factor  by  On t h e  the  some or  different  one  hand,  hard  for  have  speculated  failures  is  management  \"difficult\"  the of  have  industrial  the  employers  to  as  an  relations  mining  such  had  properties Noranda  and  53 Placer  make  successes,  it  thereby  different  union.  paternalistic  an  encouraging On  the  incumbent the  other  mining operation  union  workers hand,  such as  to  it  to  achieve  change  has  allegiance  been  B e t h l e h e m makes  negotiating  argued it  to  a  that  difficult  a for 54  an incumbent u n i o n t o f i n d a c a u s e , This which  theory to  perhaps  does  muster it  not its  explain  how  support.  If  c o u l d promote  its  and t h e r e b y a  maintain  challenger  the  nationalist  could  challenger cause  in  is  its  find  support. a  CAIMAW,  cause  on  however,  such a s i t u a t i o n .  At  \u000C- 234 -  first  glance  obtaining these  therefore,  it  certifications  two  extremes,  certification  at  at  seem t h a t  Bethlehem  and  Bell  on  failed  the  Noranda  CAIMAW  could best  m i n e s whose management  supported  Gibraltar at  would  by  the  fact  and S i m i l k a m e e n  the  other.  owned  But  Brenda  to  CAIMAW  has  that  on t h e  CAIMAW  mine,  adhered  a  succeed  in  either  of  achieved  one h a n d , and  Endako,  certification  difficult  attempts  employer,  and  at  55 Lornex,  described  as  an e a s y  employer.  Indeed,  i n CAIMAW d e m o n s t r a t e d by t h e G r a n i s l e w o r k e r s that  Granby  \"was  a  good e m p l o y e r ,  which  is  the  the  lack  of  interest  a t t r i b u t e d to the  employees  fact  associated  with  56 their  bargaining  that  CAIMAW  agent,  has  now  the  Steelworkers\".  been  the  incumbent  p r o p e r t i e s of d i f f i c u l t employers companies the  Operating  mining it.  (Bethlehem  Engineers  property  Yet  same way  the  and  that,  that  they  affected  for  these  t h e r e f o r e , must a l s o There  the  knit  can  mines o f  exception  explain  this  certified  of  be  the  with  than even  years  repeated there  CAIMAW,  in  mining  paternalistic raids  by  not  been  has  has  stressed  chosen  both  to  one leave  CAIMAW as an i n c u m b e n t u n i o n i n  The  doubt  that  rather  Mines. is  Despite  international  province,  phenomenon  for  and  be  u n i o n s when t h e y  significance  of  the  held  this  the  factor,  inconclusive.  little  Western  degree,  the  also  union  Steelworkers,  properties.  remain  group o f workers  considerable  the  same f o r c e s m u s t a f f e c t  certifications  open p i t  once  must  ( P l a c e r and Noranda)  Similkameen). and  It  that  One  than  miners,  their  the  theory  underground  open p i t for  CAIMAW's  own  support  lies  in  the  underground mines, advanced  miners  are  relying  safety.  by  a  a  As  a  miner  much  on e a c h  with  closer  other  result,  to  to  a  union  57 rivalry even  is  not  Western  likely  Mines  to  fell  flourish into  this  in  an  underground  pattern.  The  mine.  drive  for  In CAIMAW  fact, was  \u000C- 235 -  initiated  and  carried  electricians.  The  by  the  workers  who  surface  crew  showed  the  in  most  the  mill  and  reluctance  the  to  change  successful  CAIMAW  underground mines.  There  58 u n i o n s w e r e t h o s e who w o r k e d u n d e r g r o u n d .  It campaign can  be  will  at  doubt  miners  at  by  pit  A miner  mines.  worked.  But  certified  could  that  fact  seen  open  the  mines  move  there  leaving  a  with  manner.  CAIMAW, One  can  this the  a turn  is  mine  Now  therefore,  are  was  could,  which  that  he  probably  - particularly  in  isolating  if  the  Mines  isolated  underground  the Steelworkers  open  therefore,  Western  the  mine  subsequently  no l o n g e r  that  pit  turnover  underground,  underground mines  the high degree o f d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n w i t h  open  process  mines at go  one  employee  certified  rarely  CAIMAW  in  This  a high  phenomenon.  to  the  CAIMAW  open p i t  speculate,  now e x p e r i e n c e  to  CAIMAW  miners  from  impact  mining operations. that  pit  what  have on o t h e r  CAIMAW w o r d t o o t h e r  underground  this  the  be  will  other  accelerated  spread the  to  Western Mines  little  affected  remain  the  in  mines  factors  and h i g h  is  of  degree  of nationalism return.  Lastly, CAIMAW b e c a u s e that  it  can  be  speculated  CAIMAW b e s t t y p i f i e s  dominated the mining i n d u s t r y  that  the  B.  the t r a d i t i o n a l from the  early  C.  miners  aspects 1900's  turned  of  in  to  militancy  the  form  of  the Western Federation  o f M i n e r s , and t h e i r s u c c e s s o r , t h e  International  Union  that  of  Mine  Mill  Workers.  the  same  aspects  represents  CAIMAW of  officers  \"principled  agree  unionism\"  and  CAIMAW \"social  59 unionism\"  as  mining leaders  the  old  Mine  Mill  Union  stemmed f r o m a M i n e M i l l  example, a leader  did.  Further,  background.  i n the Bethlehem m i n e r s '  certain  CAIMAW  Roger C r o w t h e r ,  move t o CAIMAW,  is  the son  for of  \u000C- 236 -  a  staunch  organizer existed  Mine in  between  mines,  Mine M i l l  Merle  u u  referred  to  and t h e  the  other  hand,  the  are  First,  Steelworkers, most  stronghold  of  is  of Mine  The  successes  Mill,  open  pit  by  miner  is  underground miner. the  new b r e e d o f m i n e r .  now  (in  ask  the  an  open  fellows  pit  was  63  Communist  party.  political  partisan  open  pit  a  entirely  \"I  that  had  am an  old  way.\"  differences  was e s s e n t i a l l y on  the  other  a  Secondly,  mines,  and  official  craft  hand,  union.  different  totally  different If  mine  union  from  different  not  like  CAIMAW in  the  stressed  the  certified  by  they  the  skills  conditions.  I were t o walk  He  out  is  here  CAIMAW)  and  wouldn't  know  ft9  that  on  involvement.  saying,  CAIMAW  saying:  about.  CAIMAW,  rivalry  important  A mining  about Mine M i l l ,  w h a t I was t a l k i n g  Mill  in  He has  and works under t o t a l l y  Mine  certain  CAIMAW,  underground.  difference  by  another  goes back a l o n g  a b r o a d l y based i n d u s t r i a l  its  importance of t h i s  Thirdly,  interunion  Mine M i l l  o r g a n i z i n g underground miners.  had  Rodocker,  Steelworkers  there  CAIMAW and M i n e M i l l .  union,  has  supporter.  man m y s e l f , a n d my h a t r e d o f S t e e l  On  the  the  between  Mine M i l l  Mill  the  tended other  to  be  hand,  dominated  remains  And a l t h o u g h M i n e M i l l  by  aloof  leaders  the from  such  as  64 Harvey tend to said,  Murphy were reject  the  therefore,  supporters traditional is  that  p h i l o s o p h y o f Mine M i l l , for  Mine M i l l  of  the  Communist p a r t y , 65  communist p a r t y  CAIMAW  shares  and t h a t c e r t a i n  h a v e s u p p o r t e d CAIMAW.  line.  some,  but  CAIMAW All not  leaders  that all  i n d i v i d u a l s who h a d a  can of  be the  sympathy  \u000C- 237 -  Inconclusive clear.  First,  support  for  as  whether  the  foregoing analysis  certified  CAIMAW e x i s t s  with  CAIMAW  i n m o s t open p i t  the  same c a n be s a i d o f t h e S t e e l w o r k e r s .  in  the  mines  confirm  support  among  B.  C.  the  that  a  Steelworkers high  industry, mine. CAIMAW,  clear  that  (see  in of  the  both  \"When y o u  have  30 p e r c e n t  work  supporters  uncommitted, the  that  both t h e i r  a  in  in  spite  structure  of  result  the  a  the  unions  This  that  Steel, is  is is  enjoy  significant  are  has  and  the  conducted  been  between by  characteristic  the  rest  raids.\"  Steelworkers  to western  h a v e c e r t i f i e d CAIMAW e l e c t  to  alienation keep t h e m .  the  CAIMAW  the  fact  of  incumbent union  30 p e r c e n t  But  considerable  aggravated a  are  province.  result  f o r an  repeated  that  things  the in  committed  transitory Secondly, have  a to  and it  improved  and t h e i r p r o p a g a n d a , and i n s p i t e o f t h e f a c t  n a t i o n a l i s m may be g i v i n g way miners that  fact  in  The  labour  force of  not,  certification battles  industry.  turnover  two  C e r t i f i c a t i o n votes  Table V).  and c o n s t a n t  or  mines  m a k i n g o r g a n i z i n g an o n g o i n g t a s k  reasonably is  degree  fact  miners  occurrence of frequent and  the  may b e ,  and s e p a r a t i o n ,  that the  \u000C- 238 -  CAIMAW'S PERFORMANCE IN THE MINES  THE CAIMAW MINING  The found  mines  themselves  philosophy  of  incorporated therefore,  COUNCIL  that  with  their  were g i v e n  However, results  from  different  a  democracy, into  necessary,  therefore,  together.  In  were of  CAIMAW  as  different file  over  their  apparent at  kind  own  bargaining  of  and  The  union.  local  workers  CAIMAW's  autonomy at  each  the  find  mine,  operating  geographically  some  way  of  by  under large  binding  CAIMAW M i n i n g C o u n c i l unity  for  Bethlehem,  Similkameen  the  Bell,  Western  set  for  was  CAIMAW  Endako  and  were mine,  decentralization  distances,  and  Mines,  the  a means  locals.  Gibraltar. they  It  was  organization  f o r m e d as mining  that  slightly  p r o b l e m f o r t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n as a w h o l e . to  agent  affairs.  that  each  their  control  locals.  separated  organizational  certification  and  mining  and  1977, the  mines  rank  was  c o u l d pose a s t r u c t u r a l  founding  and  autonomy  conditions  achieving  new  control  it  local  certified  too  of The  With  the  joined  the  Mining Council.  The ideas  of  Mining  common i n t e r e s t  and c o o p e r a t i o n an  aid  Council  to  of  the  bargaining  to mining l o c a l s  members  with  such  information issues  as  in  committees,  a s wage s p r e a d f o r d i f f e r e n t exchanging  on  itself  the  researching  problems.  staff  and  Today,  \"exchanging coordination  it  operates  and d i s c u s s i n g s u c h  job c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s  organizing,  of  and e s t a b l i s h i n g  bargaining\".  contract  goal  at It  different also  training  within  issues  mines,  concerns the  as  and  itself mining  \u000C- 239 -  sector well  of  as  the  union,  publishing  membership w i t h  and t h e the  health  CAIMAW  and s a f e t y  Miner,  a  concerns  newspaper  i n f o r m a t i o n on i n d u s t r i a l  of m i n e r s ,  which  relations  0 0  provides  issues  i n the  as the  mining  industry.  The c o u n c i l m e e t s home t o w n o f t h e v a r i o u s general  four times a year.  locals  on a r o t a t i n g b a s i s  m e m b e r s h i p an o p p o r t u n i t y  f u n d e d by a one d o l l a r p e r c a p i t a  Each m i n i n g rank  and  file  who  has  local the  may a l s o  s e n d an a l t e r n a t e  may  vote.  not  Board  members  for  the  is  to observe  of  mines  the  and  to  one  a vote  delegate, from  held in  the  in order to give  the  the c o u n c i l  are  at work.  t a x p e r month f r o m member  entitled  power  Observers  Meetings  at  delegate  council  who may s p e a k host  the  local,  mining  staff  is  locals.  elected  by  meetings.  on a n y  the  It  Locals  issue  National  the  but  who  Executive  representatives  also  69 have  voice  democracy  but  no  and r a n k  from i n d i v i d u a l  vote.  In  and f i l e  keeping  control,  it  with is  m i n i n g l o c a l s who c o n t r o l  o f b r o a d u n i o n p o l i c y and d i r e c t i o n as s e t  CAIMAW's  elected  general  rank  policy  and f i l e  members  union d e c i s i o n making i n by t h e M i n i n g  of  terms  Council.  A DIFFERENT STYLE OF BARGAINING  Although bargaining CAIMAW  committees  represented  committee assisted  the  elected  at  on  mine by  by a N a t i o n a l  appearances  CAIMAW  least,  Mining  global site  the  are  Council  issues,  actual  carried  workers  at  out their  union r e p r e s e n t a t i v e . bargaining  by  operates  CAIMAW  7 0  is  as  an  aid  negotiationsby  the  local  individual In  this  carried  at  each  bargaining properties,  respect, out  to  in  a  to  all  manner  \u000C- 240 -  identical  to  represent. the  two  that  in  achieving  differences that  First,  the  n e g o t i a t i o n s , where the  company  settlement. process. staff  the  Between  his  in  the  agreement  sometimes  mines  in  the  spokesman f o r  beforehand,  two  of  the  the  experience the  the  meets  them,  mines  (with  negotiations leaders  decision  for  with  they  the with  are  the  one-to-one  part  making  with out  chief  in  this  with  the Lori  by  saying  spokesman  He a d d e d ,  7 1  have b e e n  going.  a  Developments,  Steelworkers  going.\"  get  issues.  committee.  Steelworkers)  really  differ  hammer  Placer  the  they  privately  they  bargaining  u n i o n meets  settled  before  places  Relations  map o u t w h e r e  I've  u n i o n demands w i t h  than  Industrial  negotiating  contracts  that  m e t h o d s u s e d by  practice  representative  effect,  rather  of  company and t h e y  out  a collective  union s t a f f  practice,  Chief  chief  the  in  i n v o l v e two i n t e r r e l a t e d b u t s e p a r a t e  negotiator.  This  described  of  Steelworkers  The e l e c t e d b a r g a i n i n g c o m m i t t e e d o e s n o t t a k e  Fairfield,  the  the  Steelworkers  representative  \"The  by  Despite t h i s apparent s i m i l a r i t y , the actual  unions  greatly,  followed  We  go  for  \"Most worked  over  and w h a t w e ' r e p r e p a r e d t o g i v e  the  them and  72 we  work  it  out.\"  In  contrast,  CAIMAW  never  bargaining.  The e l e c t e d b a r g a i n i n g c o m m i t t e e i s  meeting with  the  full  company,  r a n k and f i l e  in  control.  keeping with  the  \" W i t h CAIMAW,  engages fully  in  involved in  union's general  everything  one-to-one  is  every  policy  on t h e  of  record\"  73 said Lori you  Fairfield.  individually.\"  that times.  everything 75  7 4  must  \"You j u s t As  stated  be  done  can't in  the  get  CAIMAW  CAIMAW  above-board  and  leaders  News: on  t o meet  \"CAIMAW the'  record  with  believes at  all  \u000C- 241 -  Lori by  arguing  Fairfield  that  defended  the  \"communications  Steelworker s  style  1  are  of  bargaining  much  more  accommodating  when  you  argues  that  difficult  problems  are  76 have  one-to-one  more  easily  resolved  flexibility private  in  But  made  cannot  in  He  this  discussions  manner,  away  at  it.  the  bargaining  You  can't  be r e s o l v e d  constraints a strike  as  inherent  rather  at  the  it  in  of bargaining.  \"collective  bargaining  parties  bargaining  once you  back.\"  that  bargaining table, settlement  table.  the  to  the  an  a  available you  issues  r e s t r i c t e d to  he a r g u e s ,  is  more \"In  difficult  are  the  impasse  and  l i k e l y outcome o f  the  The c o n c l u s i o n he d r a w s ,  (confined  enjoy  h a v e made an o f f e r , Because  7 7  negotiations  than a peaceful  CAIMAW s t y l e  the  the  s o r t s of p o s s i b l e avenues  table,  take  easily  because  from  m e e t i n g , you can e x p l o r e a l l  to you. have  bargaining\".  therefore,  negotiating  table  is  that  where  all 78  members This  of  does  the not  negotiating really  many c o l l e c t i v e without  resort  negotiations Mr. of  agreements to  bargaining  the  be  are  the  present)  case,  since  industry without  bargaining  involved  (see  resolving  requires table  negotiators  more than  expertise the  do n o t  by  style have  doesn't  resort  Many  that  negotiators  followed  available  the  of  and  these  issues.  What  t h e CAIMAW  style  on  by  achieved  to s t r i k e ,  VI).  difficult is  work\".  CAIMAW has  Table  o b s e r v a t i o n s may m e a n , h o w e v e r ,  bargaining  because  to  i n the  one-to-one  presumably  Fairfield's  the  appear  committees  both  sides  of  the  Steelworkers,  \"more  accommodating\"  m e t h o d o f n e g o t i a t i n g p r o v i d e d by o n e - t o - o n e b a r g a i n i n g .  with  the  Secondly,  the Steelworker  blessing,  or  indeed  the  leaders  knowledge,  committee o r the membership.  Rather,  when t h e  at  parties  arrive  back  do n o t meet w i t h t h e  the  of  the  elected  such meetings are bargaining  table,  company  bargaining  kept s e c r e t , the  union  and  leader  \u000C- 242 -  and  the  company  committee, their  put  on  an  act  p r e t e n d i n g to argue  individual  for  the  issues  meetings.  This  benefit  that  they  practice,  of  the  bargaining  had a l r e a d y  in  effect,  resolved  in  represents  a  m a n i p u l a t i o n o f t h e m e m b e r s h i p and t h e e l e c t e d b a r g a i n i n g c o m m i t t e e . describing you  can  the  meetings,  have y o u r  Fairfield  COLA c l a u s e '  said,  and t h e  \"Many  times we've  union w i l l  say  said  'Don't  In  'good,  offer  it.  Then, meeting w i t h the n e g o t i a t i n g committee at  the  79 We'll  demand i t \"  bargaining gives gave  in  table, to  in,  I  Manager  1  an  the  company,  issue  they  pretended  sign  the  to  after  have  be  so  a great  already mad  agreement\"  I  deal  conceded  couldn't  said  of  privately.  speak  Fairfield,  argument,  and  finally \"When  let  the  recalling  one  we  Mine such  80 incident.  E v e n t h o u g h t h e e l e c t e d b a r g a i n i n g c o m m i t t e e may a g r e e t o a  collective their that  agreement  agreement a  i m p l i e s the  collective  CAIMAW p o i n t s  arrived  at  by  such  tactics,  same d e g r e e o f  agreement  arrived  at  it  is  unlikely  commitment t o t h e  in  the  CAIMAW  that  settlement  style  would.  As  out:  Steel's  practices  are  depriving  collective  bargaining.  bargaining  is  to  give  control  over  the  Instead,  Steel  is  After the  its  members o f  all,  the  workers  decisions  purpose  themselves  that  affect  collaborating with 81  real of  more them.  management  to  m a n i p u l a t e t h e i r own m e m b e r s h i p .  A  difference  CAIMAW and t h e conduct  of  in  the  international  industrial  style  unions  relations  in  of is the  union also B.  decision  manifest  C.  mines.  in  making the  Here  between  day-to-day too,  CAIMAW  82 \"operates deal  with  under the p r i n c i p l e o f democracy\". the  business  agent.  Here,  with  \" N o r m a l l y you would CAIMAW,  everything  is  just done  \u000Cwith  elected  themselves  committees.\"  organized  frustrating. with do  \"With  in  the  a  243  -  To  the  management  bureaucratic  a business  CAIMAW's d e m o c r a c y , anything,  0 , 3  -  agent,  of  a  structure,  he  could  say  does  it'.  It  is  this  'yes'  no one c a n make a d e c i s i o n .  membership  mining  can  or  They  harder  company, prove  'no'.  say to  But  'we  get  don't things  i A \u00BB84 resolved.  CAIMAW's therefore,  on t h e  the p o s i t i v e decisions their  style  of  negative  side  s i d e , however,  once  they  are  bargaining does  not  and  day-to-day  expedite  decision  conduct, making.  On  t h e m e m b e r s h i p i s p r o b a b l y more c o m m i t t e d  made,  because  they  have  fully  to  participated  in  been d e s c r i b e d  by  formation.  S T R I K E S AND BARGAINED SETTLEMENTS  CAIMAW's e n t r y some as  \"disasterous,  political has  reasons,  vigourously  CAIMAW  strike  they  stoppages not  in  do b e t t e r  CAIMAW's  each  CAIMAW the  B.  C.  unreasonable  has  and to  these engaged  mines. union  o n e - u p m a n s h i p by CAIMAW on t h e  than  strike  happen\".  of  has  i n n o t h i n g but s t r i k e s j u s t  we h a v e more p o w e r  that  mining industry  \"irresponsible\"  Examining  were  can  s i t u a t i o n s when t h e y  question  the  resulting  attacked  officers  affiliation,  into  But  the  record  the  demands  in that  strikes  charges in  internationals.\"  claiming  avert 86  in  some  lengthy  international  an  of  the  attempt  USWA  of  control  there and  for  calling  \"because  these  unions.  85  mines,  a n d more  turn,  causes in  so t h a t ,  can bitter  our over  be  no work  work  stoppages  at  political  \u000C- 244 -  First,  among  bargaining  rights  bargaining  rights  These  are  for for  companies  traditionally  its  mining  Noranda's the  \"paid  wage  Bell  Placer  whom t h e  Copper,  owned  Labour  rates  certifications,  mines,  Relations  which  are  CAIMAW  and  still  Gibraltar  Board  noted  markedly  held  the  holds  the  and in  below  Endako.  1976 such  have other 87  mining Not  companies  as  Bethlehem,  surprisingly, therefore,  that  effort  have,  it  has  to  gain  against wages  or  Bell  that  but because the p r e - s t r i k e o f f e r ,  in Bell  workers  falling far  behind.  in  if  Similkameen  primarily  have t a k e n  Copper  benefits  Granisle,  been  l e n g t h y and b i t t e r CAIMAW s t r i k e s A strike  an  Lornex,  at  these  et  al\".  properties  place.  1976 was  precipitated  international  unions  a c c e p t e d , w o u l d have  not did  in not  resulted  \u000C- 245 -  Table CAIMAW's Date  Bethlehem  1973  Negotiated Settlement  Bell  1974 1975  Source:  Endako  C . M i n e s , 1973 - 1981  Gibraltar  Similkameen  Western  STRIKE 10 w e e k s  STRIKE 29 weeks 6  STRIKE weeks  STRIKE 18 weeks STRIKE 18 d a y s  Negotiated Settlement Negotiated Settlement  1980 1981  Copper  i n B.  Negotiated Settlement  1978  1979  and S e t t l e m e n t s  Negotiated Settlement  1976 1977  Strikes  VI  Negotiated Re-opener  LOCK-OUT STRIKE 34 w e e k s STRIKE 36 weeks Negotiated Re-opener  Negotiated Re-opener Various  Negotiated Settlement  i s s u e s o f t h e CAIMAW R e v i e w ,  Negotiated Settlement Negotiated Re-opener Negotiated Re-opener 1973 - 1981  Negotiated Settlement  \u000C- 246 -  Noranda  was  offering  wage  labourers such the  to  an  lowest  by  language,  rates  in  B.  mines\".  C.  a  partly  CAIMAW members  at  1978 w h i c h  have  less  the  by  language  protections  Gibraltar  would  Bell 88  to  than  nonecomonic modest  was  force  and  strike  was  issues.  fact now  The  would  enjoyed  in  the  relative  earning  wage  in  most  other  union  provide  only  Endako  resisted  to  left  the  the  of  have  in  refinements  force  contract  initially  improvements which  the  \"would  in  right  precipitated  of  that  paid  sought c e r t a i n  language  Workers  1976  the  Gibraltar  dilute  of  in  spectrum  Gibraltar  already  Acceptance  wage o f f e r  those  of  for  C.  dilute  the  by  from 3.6% Copper  Gibraltar  agreements.  and i n f a c t  which  at  most  negotiations  ranged  made  i n B.  of  of  tradesmen.  pre-strike  bottom are  Craigmont own  a  relatively  effort  for  would  enough  contract those  which  attempt  precipitated sought  increases  strike  by  the  Curiously  farce  paid miners  Gibraltar's and  a  10.4%  offer  Similarly, partly  making  or that  of  its  the  existing  the  Endako  agreement.  The  Gibraltar  dispute offer  offer  contained  and  an  the  attempt  in  1978  same to  that  resulted  deficiencies  dilute  the  in  - namely  contract  another an  extremely  language,  clause  and t h e g r i e v a n c e  procedure  provisions.  labour  low  particularly 91  training  bitter  wage the  \u000C- 247 -  Nor overzealous beyond  the  of  Steelworkers,  by  of  Placer's the  contract.  CAIMAW  end  of  negotiations  that  terms  campaign,  an  successes  that  were  of  had b e e n  should c o n s t i t u t e the  substance  not  Steelworkers  in  for  should  the  be  record  that  because  pursuit  by  shows  its  Indeed,  violence  considerably  far  a traditional  leaders  far to  a  basis  even  the  recommending  on  of  with a  new  a three  month  picket  lines  the  at  of  the  new  Endako  has b e e n f o r CAIMAW t o e n g a g e demands  behind,  be  the  but  in  charge  i r r e s p o n s i b l e does  an  union response.  contract in  the  Referring  noted:  language  industry  and/or  attempt  that not  r e s o r t t o s t r i k e when f a c e d w i t h a  dilutes  Board  took  was a c h i e v e d  unreasonable  i n f e r i o r to others  Labour R e l a t i o n s  settlement  p o i n t and a s e t t l e m e n t  falling  the  It  the p a t t e r n  of  from  the  employees  punctuated  members  be j u s t i f i e d .  the  by  memorandum  settlement  the  its  are  the  the  Secondly,  that  Rather,  provided  CAIMAW  and somewhat h i g h e r r a t e s . 92 mine.  offer  have  the  negotiating  that  the  t u r n t o CAIMAW,  b e f o r e CAIMAW made i t s  strike  achieve unions.  Steelworkers,  would  precipitated  Canex P l a c e r was d e t e r m i n e d t h a t  strike,  prevent  to  1975  rejected.  contract  strikes,  in  determination  This  the  strike  international  i n the workers'  new  s h o u l d be  part by  signed with  major f a c t o r of  Endako  achieved  because  settlement  the  need on t h e  those  failed  was  in to  CAIMAW's appear  to  pre-strike  provides  wages  c a n be c o n s i d e r e d t o  to the G i b r a l t a r s t r i k e  be  i n 1976  \u000C- 248 -  In  this  what  strike  it  it  (CAIMAW)  believes  is  the  is  seeking  proper  to  establish  relationship  of  the  terms o f employment a t G i b r a l t a r t o t h o s e e n j o y e d members o f a s i s t e r CAIMAW l o c a l light and  of  this  Endako)  existence point of  Indeed, work  stoppage  historical  at  the  kind  the  Endako  reference  company's  at  in  rather  t h a n go on s t r i k e , t h e  which  at  could  perhaps  The  the  company's  cancel  time  was  offer  to  this  the expired c o l l e c t i v e  an e x t e n s i o n c l a u s e .  the  For  the to  until  make  reasons  time,  But  to  copper,  the  company offer.  unilaterally  a g r e e m e n t , w h i c h had been k e p t i n f o r c e  Even under t h e s e  \" O f c o u r s e we know i t  keep  members  working  \"That's  why  circumstances,  the  w o u l d be i n t o l e r a b l e  without  a  collective  to  of  generous  was  to  stated  union.  price  a more  however,  resort  of continuing  the  that  in  the  strategy  At  to  strategy,  to s t r i k e . their  restraint  unacceptable  persuaded  in  strike.  1978.  improved.  now  understandable 93  extreme  union chose  low,  easily  response  was  the  Gibraltar  terms  an  expired contract  very  be more  is  Gibraltar  final  the  mine  In  (between  contract  of  the  terms o f  of  example  above,  work under the  record  Endako  f o r the G i b r a l t a r  a dramatic  occurred  at  by  union  for  any  agreement\"  by  refused union  to  said  Lori  In  fact,  94 Fairfield.  we d i d  it.  But  nothing  happened.\"  the union d i d take a s t r i k e v o t e ,  n o t so much t o a c h i e v e  as  old  to  enforce  the  terms  of  the  circumstances,  the  union  refused  to  one.  \"In  spite  be p r o v o k e d  of  a new the  contract, difficult  into a strike\"  reported  95 the  CAIMAW M i n e r .  lock-out  notice,  and  members w h e r e a g a i n  On  May 2 3 ,  on  May 26  on t h e  picket  1978, closed line.  therefore, the  gate  \"The  the at  the  company  served  mine.  CAIMAW  b a t t l e f i e l d wasn't  chosen  \u000C- 249 -  by t h e e m p l o y e e s o r t h e i r u n i o n .  The e m p l o y e r f o r c e d t h e e m p l o y e e s  onto  96 t h e p i c k e t l i n e when c o p p e r was 66&lt;\u00A3 a p o u n d  Finally, provide  them  control  strike  with  by  have  taken  place  when  certified  Placer by  both  the  CAIMAW  the  evidence.  at  into  the  i m p r o v e m e n t on t h e  and  rates  that  lengthy  Steelworker  the  simply  for  noted  Placer.  m a i n t a i n i n g one  seems  to  be  similarly  lengthy  their  But  the  hardly  Board  in  case  of  Steelworkers,  be  power.  said  Indeed,  had n e g o t i a t e d a t  ten  have  Placer  Mines  renewals legal  at  a  a  six  total  1976  was  been  time  when  stoppages  Excluding  a  of  have  strikes.  one  which week  an  Endako,  frequent  and  lengthy  not  had a l r e a d y  strike position.  have been work  been  and  p r i o r to 1976, f o u r r e s u l t e d in the  occasions  lower  inherited  Gibraltar,  after  have  the  Gibraltar  setting  been  a  new  dispute  was  pattern,  but  e s t a b l i s h e d at  the  properties.  There  to  1976 w e r e  only  strikes  Placer  that  the  and b i t t e r  to  that  CAIMAW  that  power  Steelworkers On  n e g o t i a t e d w i t h the Steelworkers  characteristic  the  can  the  affiliations  and  the Steelworkers  strikes.  board  in  their  strikes  Developments.  Gibraltar,  by  that  occur,  CAIMAW's m o s t  Steelworkers  had b e e n a c h i e v e d  The  they  Labour R e l a t i o n s  and t h i s  strikes.  avert  submission with  n o t e d by t h e  from  to  Placer  Endako  contention  power when  against  Placer  rates  Steelworkers  situations  unsupported  frightened  the  (Canadian).\"  12  occasions  bargaining the  unions  Of t h e s e  for  strike  at  be  12 o c c a s i o n s , short,  produced Craigmont  which  contract  would  Nor were t h e s e quickly  in  in  a  there sharp  agreement. in  1968,  Placer  \u000C- 250 -  there  have been  months  to  seven  four-month  the  shutdown  half  at  the 97  Noranda appear  in  It  to  were  not  that  mine  was  weeks.  But  this  for  were  in  that,  I  excess  that,  a strike  the s t r i k e began, Similkameen  rates  The  Gibraltar  true  Brenda  three  months.  two  current  mine  fits  be i n t i m i d a t e d by t h e  is  recent years,  owned  ranging from  pattern.  affiliations.  Placer  strikes  a  Nor does  approximately  for  and  into that  Noranda  after  major  squarely  Steelworker's against  five  of  guarantee  in  unlike  settled  relatively  was  to  settled with the  union  you  CAIMAW's  1979 by t h e  due  that  the  strikes at  quickly -  in  that  shortly  CAIMAW w i t h o u t a at  would  the  Steelworkers  fact  demands  they  power o f  Brenda. still  be  strike \"If  it  on  the  98 street\"  s a i d a Brenda  representative.  Conversely, being  inherently  neither  weak b e c a u s e  Steelworkers.  \"For  George A t k i n s ,  Industrial  when  I  their  found  of  out  a small  lacks  union,  only  I  thought  had  mining the  CAIMAW  Relations  they  performance,  it  these  see  CAIMAW  as  s i z e and a f f i l i a t i o n s o f has made a l o t  thousand  would  have  \"I  members. to  be  the  of waves\"  Manager a t G i b r a l t a r .  seven  they  companies  was  amazed  Judging  seven  said  from  times  that  99 size.\" industry\"  \"I  think  agreed a Brenda CAIMAW's  not, the  therefore, power  CAIMAW  and  has  definitely  representative.'''  l o n g and b i t t e r  appear  to  have  affiliations  of  d i s p u t e s which the Steelworkers  been the  themselves  in  the  mining  fact  that  in  the  0 0  struggles due  proved  to  the  Steelworkers,  c o u l d have a v o i d e d .  thereby Rather,  industry CAIMAW  lacks  making the  do  them  central  \u000C- 251 -  cause  appears  to  be  conditions  inherent  in  the  mining  industry  itself.  M i n i n g c o m p a n i e s do n o t f a c e a l o s s o f t h e i r m a r k e t s h a r e o r s p o i l a g e their  p r o d u c t as  a result  one m i n i n g company its  profits  involved The  even  of  a work  typically  if  one  owning s e v e r a l  of  its  in a labour dispute  result  of  these  If  Board  this  and  operations  typically  factors  The L a b o u r R e l a t i o n s  is  long  other  B.  industry  mining strikes.  operate find  its  the  other  will  trade  not  while  longer.  it  struck. town  labour  can  Mining  and f i n d  disputes  which  is  in  with  maintain employees  other  the  and  the  jobs.  industry.  it  is  long  to  be  that  left  in  the  in and  continues  striking both  has  trend  many  of  seems  Board  recent  employer  The a t t i t u d e if  the  towards  struck  mines  union  spoil  is  i n d i c a t i o n , the  The  other jobs.  and  Moreover,  properties,  leave  cases  any  bitter  a mine.  stated:  experienced are C.'s  stoppage at  of  to  employees  the  employer  the  mineral  ground  for  a  1 0 1  WAGE SETTLEMENTS IN THE MINES  Comparisons particularly different formulae contract union  of  difficult  contracts, and  so  on.  bargaining  because such  as  It  can  of tool be  successes the  wide  in  variety  allowances, said,  the of  shift  however,  mines  is  provisions  clause  and  the  banking  of  overtime,  in  premiums,  COLA  CAIMAW's  1979  that  n e g o t i a t e d w i t h Similkameen c o n t a i n e d such i n d u s t r y f i r s t s  shop  made  provisions  as  which  a  the  102 Steelworkers on c o s t i n g  later the  wide  incorporated variety  of  into  the  Babine  continuous  shift  contract. premiums  Moreover, in  effect  at  \u000C- 252 -  different  mining  properties,  employees  CAIMAW o f f i c e r s  premiums  for  working  much  as  $1.20  per  hour,  a  extreme.  They  have  since  had  g a p , an i s s u e w h i c h t h e  Unions had  used  the  to  get  afternoon  and c o s t e d  it  the  worked.  nobody  had  extreme  out,  ever  range  averaging It  Perhaps bargaining these  is  the  figures  affected  relations  policy  willingness  and  indicates industry  not  pursued to  examination  that  Western  i n wages.  But  visible  used only  molybdenum  in several  wage  be  or a b i l i t y  An copper  hourly  must  obviously  most  to  One  would  We j u s t  down  sat  premiums  elementary,  and  this  who have  so  as  addressed.  other would  total  before.  members 103  closing  as  for but  We  explained  the  the  employer  was  it.  l e d t h e way  the  the  sounds it  our  f o r c e d to respond to  CAIMAW, t h e n , has  premium.  described  at  as  premiums.  hourly  f r o m 400 t o  success  arguments  premium, the  done  to  shift  averaged  Cameron  have n o t t o d a t e  silly  shift  the  ranged  Peter  bargaining  into  weekend  shifts  which  some  continuous  have a b e t t e r  hours  range  Steelworkers  best  a better  continuous  found  by  by  aspect  rate with  issues  i n the  of  negotiated caution,  the  union,  different  a  industry.  union's  for  its  however, but  mining  also  success  members. since  by  the  companies  in  in Even  they  are  industrial terms  of  in  C.  pay.  of  the  top  producing Mines  and  mines  (CAIMAW)  due t o t h e  bottom (see and  leapfrog  wage  Tables Lornex  pattern  rates VII  (Steel)  and  B.  VIII)  lead  o f wage i n c r e a s e s  the in  \u000C- 253 -  the  mines,  contract Lornex it  it  is  also  expiry.  and  is  essential  Because  ahead  of  Western  Lornex  Although  the  Utah  next  three  months,  the  following  throughout.  This  months b e f o r e the  next  Gibraltar  perhaps  best  contracts  (CAIMAW)  can  comparable  in  be trade  ranked rates,  Although t h i s  four  before  better  the  contract.  are  nine  months  be  rates  outweighs  months  before  the  next  rates  of  before  its  exceed  expiry,  those  Utah it  contract.  higher of  rates  that  (CAIMAW),  best  are  labourer fact  time  two.  same r e a s o n i n g ,  Bethlehem  (Operating  throughout. months  trade  the  expires  trade  its  By  the  for  the  Utah  for  are  higher  expires  seven  would appear  Endako,  (CAIMAW)  that and  respectively.  Utah Mines Engineers)  to  and  Similkameen.  account  of the  Engineers)  months,  into  three  appears  Simi1kameen's  seven  Mines  contract  (CAIMAW)  (Operating  take  up u n t i l  c a n be c o n s i d e r e d t h e b e t t e r  Similkameen  to  Engineers)  next. but  These  contracts  Highmont  rates  m u s t be o f f s e t  Highmont,  Highmont  and H i g h m o n t M i n e s  for  by t h e  can  seem  to  be  labourers  fact  probably  that be  (Operating  are  Utah  roughly higher expires  considered  the  \u000CTable  VII  QUARTERLY COMPARISON OF B. C . OPEN PIT MINES PRODUCING COPPER AND/OR MOLYBDENUM ( J o u r n e y m a n and B a s e Afton Mines STEEL  Brenda Mines STEEL  Apr/81  11.70 9.10  11.75 9.32  Jul/81  11.99 9.39  Oct/81 Jan/82  Utah Mines OP ENG  Rates)  Babine Div STEEL  Lornex Mines STEEL  Highmont OP ENG  Endako Mines CAIMAW  Gibraltar CAIMAW  Bethlehem CAIMAW  Simi1 kameen CAIMAW  13.25 9.63  12.15 9.09  12.69 10.19  12.50 9.65  12.45 9.63  12.35 9.60  12.50 9.87  12.50 9.83  11.97 9.54  13.25 9.63  12.40 9.34  13.98 11.48  12.50 9.65  13.10 10.13  13.10 10.10  13.50 10.87  13.50 10.83  12.25 9.65  11.97 9.54  14.44 9.82  12.62 9.56  13.98 11.48  13.50 10.65  13.45 10.40  13.45 10.37  13.50 10.87  13.50 10.83  Exp Oct  Exp Oct  13.63 10.01  12.85 9.79  14.18 11.68  13.70 10.85  13.78 10.66  13.78 10.63  13.78 11.15  13.77 11.05  Apr/82  13.83 10.21  13.08 10.02  14.44 11.94  13.90 11.05  14.06 10.88  14.06 10.85  14.13 11.50  14.05 11.28  Jul/82  Exp Apri 1  Exp June  Exp June  14.01 11.26  14.40 11.15  14.40 11.12  14.48 11.85  14.38 11.56  Exp Aug  Exp Sept  Exp Sept  Exp Oct  14.77 11.88 Exp Nov  Oct/82  EXPIRY DATES WITHIN F I V E WEEKS N.B.  The e f f e c t o f a l l COLA c l a u s e s i s i n c l u d e d . on t h e b a s i s o f i n f l a t i o n e x t i m a t e d a t 1 2 % .  Source:  CAIMAW M i n e r , M a r c h , 1 9 8 1 .  Future  payments a r e  calculated  \u000CTable  VIII  QUARTERLY COMPARISON OF B. C. UNDERGROUND MINES PRODUCING COPPER AND/OR MOLYBDENUM ( J o u r n e y m a n a n d B a s e R a t e s Western Mines  Craigmont  Apr/81  13.20 10.91  11.64 9.14  11.65 8.98  Jul/81  13.54 11.25  11.96 9.43  11.90 9.23  Oct/81  Exp Sept  12.22 9.69  12.12 9.45  Jan/82  12.48 9.95  12.35 9.68  Apr/82  Exp Jan  Exp Mar  N.B.  Boss  The e f f e c t o f a l l COLA c l a u s e s i s i n c l u d e d . on t h e b a s i s o f i n f l a t i o n a t 1 2 % .  Source:  CAIMAW M i n e r M a r c h , 1 9 8 1 .  F u t u r e payments a r e c a l c u l a t e d  Rates)  \u000C- 256 -  Babine mines.  But  other  mines,  (Steel) to  trade  rates  the-labourer  rates  at  and  its  and Brenda  both  these  Craigmont later  (Steel)  (Steel)  factors,  has  and  contract  roughly  therefore  slightly  ahead  of  contract  f o r wages  expires  is  be  i n the  rates  Boss  rates  a  full  eight  months a f t e r  Afton  behind  Mountain  to  the  remaining  rates  at  after  all  the  Afton  Afton is  Due  three  mines.  but  expires  Brenda,  them.  the  the  months  and  (Steel)  industry, with  of  Craigmont ( S t e e l ) .  inferior  to  ranked  Brenda.  the  do n o t m a t c h  probably  similar  can  Babine  and f i v e  it  exceed  appears  clearly  to  be  the  worst  t o p and b o t t o m r a t e s  being  104 inferior  t o C r a i g m o n t and B a b i n e  However, industry must  in  be  traditionally  taken  by  mining  expected  to  have  Finally,  the  rates  and  be  remembered  can q u i t e  into  paid the  followed  of  must  recent years,  also  degree  it  rates  management a  ranking of  subjectivity contract  in  that  that  i n the terms  concerning expiry  the  dates,  rankings.  It  Placer  i n d u s t r y , and t h a t relative  necessarily relative  a  the  and  wages  contribution  contracts  common i n  these  Noranda  of  considerable  these  reopeners,  s u d d e n l y change  account  lowest  made  throughout.  to  policy  paid the  can  to  be  results.  incorporates  emphasis  factor  the  have  be  a  high  given  which  is  subject  be  drawn  with  to to  interpretation.  Nevertheless, degree  of  confidence.  Steelworkers, bottom Noranda  of  the  mine,  employer w i l l  certain First,  conclusions in  mines  can  that  are  certified  N o r a n d a and P l a c e r m a i n t a i n t h e i r t r a d i t i o n a l rankings. and  CAIMAW  therefore  how  no  longer it  would  have t o remain s p e c u l a t i o n .  has  a  have  by  the  place at  certification fared  some  against  CAIMAW h a s , h o w e v e r ,  the  for  a  this  improved  \u000C- 257 -  the  relative  Endako.  (It  strikes are  position  certainly  by  this  Placer  employer.)  corporations  held i t s  own.  To  extent,  introducing  its  m u s t be remembered t h a t  against  owned  of  some such  concepts  certifications,  it  has  also  Secondly,  other  than  CAIMAW  has  as  banking  the  in  been  a of  fought  dealing  Noranda  Gibraltar lengthy, with  and  Placer,  leader  in  overtime,  the  stronger  and  concept  of  averaging. CAIMAW  at  Brenda. peacefully CAIMAW a t  Also,  the  Similkameen However,  E n d a k o and  served  it  negotiated  rates  is at  comparing  negotiated as  also Lornex  Gibraltar.  the  in  basis  true in  continuous a for  that  1980  has  the  shift  has  industry,  t h a n t h e Rand f o r m u l a t r a d i t i o n a l l y f o u n d i n t h e and  that  CAIMAW  clauses  costing  bitter  mines  security the  and  union mines,  premiums  by  peaceful  settlement  by  the  settlement  at  wage  Steelworker  served  as  a  contract  pattern  for  \u000C- 258 -  Table  RANKING OF B.  IX  C. MINES BY WAGES  (Coppe r and Molybdenum)  Ranking  Mine  Union  Owner  1  Western  CAIMAW  Brascan  2  Lornex  Steel  R i o Algoma  3  Simi1kameen  CAIMAW  Newmont  4  Bethlehem  CAIMAW  Cominco  5  Endako  CAIMAW  Placer  6  Gibraltar  CAIMAW  Placer  7  Highmont  Op Eng  Tech Corp  8  Utah  Op Eng  Utah M i n i n g  9  Afton  Steel  Tech Corp  10  Brenda  Steel  Noranda  11  Craigmont  Steel  Placer  12  Babine  Steel  Noranda  13  Boss  Steel  Noranda  \u000C- 259 -  Each u n i o n ,  therefore,  c a n be s a i d t o have had an e f f e c t  THE BARGAINING STRUCTURE IN B.  The a r e a  of  bargaining its  such  as  forest  hospitals,  the  fragmented  bargaining.  mined,  mine  they  sites  C.  i n d u s t r y , has b e e n t h e c h a n g e  mines  it  products,  The  - r e g a r d e d by CAIMAW as  in one  and  has  great  for  in  makes a  this  variation  in  C ,  occurring  in  terms  decentralized  of  of  of is  and  firmly  twofold.  location  price for  stuck  are  a market which  sense  B.  traditionally  international  clearly  common i n  geographical  product  the  is  construction, transportation  reasons  exhibit ore  flexibility  bargaining  industry  their  in  environment, own  of  sell  fluctuations  its  mining  richness  Further,  B.  association  industries  individual  i n the  and  achievements.  Although in  MINES  i m p a c t on t h e  structure  greatest  other.  i n w h i c h CAIMAW has u n q u e s t i o n a b l y b e e n a l e a d e r ,  has had t h e m o s t d r a m a t i c the  C.  on t h e  First,  the  the  to  product property.  subject  metals.  to  sharp  \"In  a mining  employer  to  bargaining  format  which  that  preserve can  be  105 sensitive  to  the  p e c u l i a r market  s i t u a t i o n at  each m i n e . \"  Secondly,  f r a g m e n t e d b a r g a i n i n g has b e n e f i t e d t h e e m p l o y e r i n t h e m i n i n g making  mining  employers brand  in  name  particular several  mines  mine,  mines  struck.  face  resistant neither  differentiation  maintain their is  companies  to  nor be  a  a  by  of  event  of a  change.  loss  the  spoilage  owned  cash flows  in  to  their  common  Unlike  many  their  market  of  work  a  goods. employer,  It  industries,  share  due  stoppage is  from t h e i r o t h e r o p e r a t i o n s w h i l e  one  to  at  common  enabling  Consequently, a t a c t i c which mining employers  industry,  a for  them  to  property  can use w i t h  a  \u000C- 260 -  considerable mine  degree  in order  pattern  to  to  of  is  impose a low  negotiate  n o t e d by t h e  success  Labour  a  low  t o engage  settlement,  settlement  Relations  Board,  in a lengthy  which  at  they  their  fragmented  dispute at  can  other  then  bargaining  \"has  o f wage  which  This  be won by  graphically  local  demonstrated  unions by  a  at  any  one m i n e .  comparison  of  wage  as  operations.  not unexpected r e s u l t o f r e s t r a i n i n g the upper l e v e l can  use  one  As  had  the  settlements  result  rates  a  in  can  the  be  forest  p r o d u c t and m i n i n g i n d u s t r i e s \" .  It  is  true  that,  in  some  industries,  fragmented  p r o v i d e s a s t r u c t u r e t h a t b e n e f i t s the u n i o n s , because to  utilize  bargaining  the is  successfully employers in are to to  the  tactic  only  of  one  employ  of  this  the  t o a work s t o p p a g e .  to  do s o .  withstand The  prevent  unions  Indeed Paul chairman  of  the  industry  as  an  B.  is  from  bargaining structure  the  example  favours  the  change.  addition to  necessary The  of  second c r u c i a l stated  and have  in  Relations  the  out i n h i s book, R e c o n c i l a b l e  to  susceptibility  of  considerations  have n o t but  uses  only the  the  where  managerial  already  is  lacking  employers  themselves  willing  been  able  fragmented  themselves.  Harvard U n i v e r s i t y Board,  a  mining  i n the p r a c t i c e  causing  Differences:  union  above,  proved  circumstances  employer,  a  for  unions  fragmented  ingredient  whipsawing,  Professor at  the  is  enables But  conditions  other  them t o e n g a g e  Labour  employers.  mining employers  engaging  Weiler, C.  the  reasons  strikes,  that  allows  bargaining In  This  For long  result  two  technique.  mining industry.  able  whipsawing  it  bargaining  B.  and  former  C.  mining  fragmentation  in  resistance  to  noted, Weiler  points  \u000C-  The  mining  261  employer  -  does  have  industrial  relations  department.  coherent,  overall  bargaining  department each  deals  with  its  agreement,  its  of  local  own  mine)  are  settlement: that  have  strike  employer in time are  it  is  to  accept  in  local  resists  to  elicit at  that  just  loss  of  in  to  mine i s a w o r t h w h i l e costs  other  structure  It  enjoy  kind  that  that  separate,  in  from  location,  and  who  span  The  employer  from  that  a  the  struck  in favourable  labour  entire  bargaining  single location  skills  strike).  earnings  a  the  forward  calculation  its  altering  the  the  the  investment  that  offer  will  during  is understandable  In a f o o t n o t e , W e i l e r n o t e s  It  marketable  earning  net  of  negotiations.  t h e e m p l o y e e s whose or  that  favourable  attempt.  better  that  because  s h i f t i n g production  throughout  interested  employer  niggardly  a  struck  make  current  as  that a  the  mobile  position  sacrifice  An  (whether  serves  contrast with  dead  a  locals,  collective  a relatively  Any one m i n e has a l i m i t e d l i f e is  own  a  That  union  date  employer's  really  neither a  of  weakest  which  Even (by  suffer  variety  appears  the  Suppose  employer  pursue  strategy.  termination  one in  to  can  p o l i t i c s or the economic s e t t i n g at  and f o r c e  precedent  centralized  i n w o r k i n g o r d e r can i s o l a t e  which  internal  the  It  own c e r t i f i c a t i o n , i t s  whose a n t e n n a e union  with  a  that  corporate employers  power  bargaining 107  are  who  rarely  structure  of  units.  he saw \" n o b e t t e r  i l l u s t r a t i o n of  these  1 no  dynamics  than  conditions Not  the  inherent  long a f t e r  relationship in  the  achieving  of  industry  CAIMAW have  c e r t i f i c a t i o n at  and not  Canex gone  Placer's  Placer\".  These  u n n o t i c e d by Gibraltar  and  CAIMAW. Endako  \u000C- 262 -  properties, advantages  began  to  mining  CAIMAW b e g a n f o r t h e B.  with  enjoy,  at  strategy.  of  in  of  to  terms  of  action  against  extent,  these  advantages  centralized  rivalry  the  the  with  bargaining  the  prevented  a  inherent  Mining Council  CAIMAW  enjoyed policy  Steelworkers  complete  c o h e s i o n and c e n t r a l i z a t i o n a t  by and  and  the  centralization  provided a vehicle  for  Placer's  and  Gibraltar  properties.  Secondly, dates  a  Craigmont  u n i o n p o l i c y and s t r a t e g y ,  Endako  some  interunion  USWA a t  CAIMAW t o a c h i e v e  evasive  t h e f o r m a t i o n o f t h e CAIMAW M i n i n g C o u n c i l , least  Although  certification  take  C. m i n i n g e m p l o y e r .  First,  employers  to  in  1976,  f o r the c o n t r a c t s  expiry  date  for  the  at  CAIMAW  began  to  press  for  common  G i b r a l t a r and E n d a k o , p r o p o s i n g t h a t  two  properties  could  provide  a  expiry  a common  basis  for  the  109 settlement at  the  Placer  of the ongoing G i b r a l t a r d i s p u t e .  two to  property  Placer  use that  bargaining  its  economic  at  the  common  do  we  expiry  Endako see date.  for  proposal. the  purpose  Our of  restrict  impose a  low  any  The  the  settlement  response  or  any  to the  advantage Our  in  of  Placer  position  remains  and e x p i r y d a t e s objective reaching  is a  to  collective  for  firm  l a i d out meet  joint  company.  striving  on  settlement  idea of  other mining  dates  ability  predictable.  not a t t r a c t e d whatsoever  t h e wage a d j u s t m e n t last  to  common e x p i r y  and s u b s e q u e n t l y u s e t h a t  perhaps  bargaining with Neither  severely  second p r o p e r t y .  therefore,  We a r e  would  strength  bargained f i r s t ,  later  proposal was,  properties  But  in  with  a on  our you  agreement  to  of the  when the  \u000C- 263 -  at  Gibraltar.  objective  I would  for  yourself. ''' 1  CAIMAW, t h e r e f o r e , the  Endako  property  Gibraltar found  strike.  that  the  operations  economic  increase for  strike  another  of  the  its the  is  why  over Placer  prospect of  But  it  also  favourable  noted  the  bargaining  in  during  the was  Placer  Board  that,  the  in  that  mining  policy that  at  1976  the  reacted  due t o  industry  the  should  that:  ^economic  any  strikes  one m i n e w i l l  operations. concerned  at  industry,  disrupting  Endako.  Relations  the  mining  The b o a r d a g r e e d  1 1 1  especially  That  about 112  not is the  location picketing.  \"the  results  Placer  Gibraltar  bargaining  secondary  that  time  assurance  other  is  on  by m i n i n g e m p l o y e r s ,  by t h e into  at  Labour  ingredient  precipitated spill  first  properties,  be e x e m p t f r o m s u c h u n i o n t a c t i c s .  flexibility^  pressure  the  f l e x i b i l i t y required  crucial  worthwhile  0  underway  arguing before  ...a  be a  t u r n e d t o t h e use o f s e c o n d a r y p i c k e t i n g  Placer,  1976  of  vigourously,  to  suggest t h i s  Board which  cannot mining  turn  a  employers  blind have  eye  to  secured  the from  113 that trade  structure\". union  It  tactic  in  ruled that the  mining  secondary industry.  company be a b l e t o c o n f i n e t h e e f f e c t s  p i c k e t i n g was No  longer  a  would  legitimate a  mining  o f a l a b o u r d i s p u t e t o one o f  its  operations. CAIMAW, i n f a c t , into  the  that  \"the  mining  introduced the concept of-secondary  industry.  mining industry  The is  Steelworker's  no p l a c e  for  position  secondary  has  picketing  always  picketing\".  1 1 4  been The  \u000C- 264 -  reasoning behind t h i s has  the  assertion  disadvantage  working at  the  is  twofold.  adversely  secondary  for a dispute that disadvantage,  of  is  affecting  it  c l o s i n g the secondary  has  used  that  have  strikes\"  maintained  down f o r  a few  an  Monty  days a t  picketing  own  members  the  tactic  argue,  effect  Alton  a time  But is  in  in  a  spasmodic  of  the  t o use s e c o n d a r y  mining  this  manner, than  picketing  ineffective.  \"The  industry  long  Steelworkers.  simply saves the  pay  a time r a t h e r  completely  the  lose  t o be a w a r e o f  l o c a t i o n f o r o n l y a few days a t  i n t h i s manner, the S t e e l w o r k e r s strikes  union's  CAIMAW a p p e a r s  f o r the d u r a t i o n of the primary d i s p u t e .  only  a  secondary  p i c k e t e d l o c a t i o n , by c a u s i n g them t o  n o t t h e i r own.  because  First,  \"To  are  shut  a  e m p l o y e r money.  mine  It  is  a  115 farce.\"  The  CAIMAW's  secondary  contention. off  Labour  bargaining  picketing  Rather,  balance\",  at  Board's Endako,  analysis  however,  the board argued t h a t  reduce  structure  of the advantages  Relations  the  in  the  advantages industry,  and  the  bargaining  1978 G i b r a l t a r  structure strike,  in  when  Placer \"help  not  of  support  1  workers  their this  common  r e c i p r o c a t e d d u r i n g the  employer,  Placer.  Gibraltar  workers  The  voted  undertaken to  vigorously  practice. ) The dues  an  additional  did  4 hours  voluntarily - BUT  industrial  pay  ON THE  raise  their  OTHER HAND  in  four  Gibraltar.  1979 E n d a k o s t r i k e  Steelworkers  some  6  h o u r s d u e s p e r member p e r month t o h e l p s u p p o r t t h e s t r i k e a t The G i b r a l t a r w o r k e r s  this  fragmented  on t h e e s t a b l i s h e d  Endako  of  Placer  appreciate  t h e m i n i n g i n d u s t r y was the  effect  the  Placer  structure\". '''  The n e x t s t e p i n CAIMAW's a t t a c k relations  did  the  the t a c t i c would \"keep  to  of a broader bargaining  of  against attacked  \u000C- 265 -  THE  ALTERNATIVE  choice  -  raise  secondary  blackmail.  this analysis  relations  SECONDARY  your  dues  by  4  This  is  not  demonstrates these  two e v e n t s .  aid  over  and  to  better  above  that  provided  withstand  t h e i r a b i l i t y to achieve  not  donating  hours  impose  able  to  have  undoubtedly  negotiations. not  just  well.  by  The  a  the  by  at  their  hardships  the  engaged per  in  of  strike,  month  is  industrial  strike a  donations,  o t h e r mines w i t h fund,  lengthy It  economic  thus  enabling  strike,  is true  offer  on  the  been  used  to  hold  Gibraltar  Gibraltar  recognition  and  making  attractive.  low  The  i n the  - it  By m a k i n g t h e s e  an i m p r o v e d c o n t r a c t .  pay  Endako and G i b r a l t a r change  a  and  that  hence  CAIMAW's  p i c k e t i n g c o u l d i m p o s e h a r d s h i p s on members o f a  currently  four  face  a l a c k of understanding of the  miners were p r o v i d i n g s t r i k i n g workers  local  or  1 1 7  significance of  use o f secondary  hours  Some  democratic choice  the  them  PICKETING.  p i c k e t l i n e when y o u come t o w o r k and LOSE  8 HOURS PAY.  But  WAS  employees  But at  down wages  dispute,  but  by  acceptance  of  this  power d y n a m i c s o f  therefore, industrial  alternative  if  Placer  Gibraltar, in  therefore,  employees,  represents,  the  the  was  the  this  one  by  to  be  the  i n t h e B.  of been  would Endako fought  employees  a s i g n i f i c a n t and relations  had  upcoming  Endako  fact  sister  miners  as at  historical C.  mining  industry.  In concept  of  October mutual  forming a Mutual The  terms  of  of  cooperation  Defense the  1978,  pact  the  CAIMAW M i n i n g  between  miners  at  P a c t f o r CAIMAW members are  that  workers  Council  at  extended  different  i n the mining  this  mines  by  industry.  participating  locals  \u000C- 266 -  automatically  send  or  at  l o c k e d out  benefits strike  in  a  hours  to  the  Participation  the  pay  particular  addition  fund.  requiring  two  approval  CAIMAW m i n i n g l o c a l s  of  per  local,  month  strike  in  pact  the  local  the  industry  properties. see  it  as  is  on  provides  provided  voluntary By  by  the  for  Defense  Pact  -  the  support  of  It  has  been in  mine  vigorously  \"exorbitant  union's  each  January  local,  1981,  all  Bethlehem  participate.  represents  a  strike  economic  had j o i n e d t h e p a c t w i t h t h e e x c e p t i o n o f  Mutual  resulting  pay  workers  that  membership.  C o p p e r , w h i c h t o d a t e has c h o s e n n o t t o  The  assist  assistance  normal the  to  on  an  strike  attacked dues  innovative  by  by  the  concept  miners  at  other  Steelworkers,  assessments\"  for  in  a cause  who which  118  they  do n o t  taking  see  this  namely  position,  that  benefited stoppage  as w o r t h y , the  employers  from t h e i r via  their  namely  a strike  Steelworkers  in  the  ability  mining  from  doing  companies arrived  so?  In  in arriving  at  in  other  employ the  mines.  This  because  relative to  be  they  appear  labour to  p o s i t i o n s f o r wages i n t h e a  pattern  setter  have  Their  point  -  unquestionably  cash flows  d u r i n g a work  to  consideration  due  appears  to  both  the  company industry.  Bethlehem  economic  and d e r i v e  to  (particularly  pursue  basic  in  Why t h e n , s h o u l d t h e o t h e r p a r t y  major  is  the  But  is  a t wage s e t t l e m e n t s  c o m p a n i e s must compete f o r also  a  mine.  strength  same t a c t i c  addition,  missing  their  other mining operations.  r e l a t i o n s h i p not  another  industry  to maintain  n o t i s o l a t e d t o t h e m i n e on s t r i k e . the  are  at  the of  be t h e fact  same  benefit  the  mining  settlements that  mining  s k i l l e d tradesmen),  policy  in  terms  of  their  \"Similkameen doesn't  doesn't  like  to  get  and  like  too  far  of  the  119 behind  Lornex  believes  p o s i t i o n o f Noranda mines a t  in  paying\".  The  consistency  t h e b o t t o m o f t h e wage g r o u p i n g s c a n  almost  \u000C- 267 -  certainly wages  be  attributed  relative  to  other  one m i n e i s o f v i t a l an  isolated  to  interest  i n the  struggle is  employers as  conceded  out  of  part  of  to  a  tactics the  have  date  it  attempted  to  escape  Gibraltar  employees  an  unsolicited  miners  rejected  97 p e r c e n t . strike,  for  this  an  Secondly,  Placer  as  it  at  It  is  not a  by CAIMAW,  h i g h e r wages  regardless  c a n o n l y be an  part the  in  increase  moving  bargaining  contracts  at  this one  a  arrangement dollar  to  the  per  ballot  the  settlement  of  by  interrelationship  of  Endako i n 1976.  The a  the the  and In the  mid-term  by  of  Placer  offering  hour  vote  structure.  its  contract.  secret  mining  strike,  had r e f u s e d t o c o n s i d e r  from  in  acknowledged  by w o r k e r s  represents  1978 G i b r a l t a r  the  extension  offer  Pact  successful  the  for  1980,  return  of  certified  fragmented  for  p r o p e r t i e s , a proposal  in  terms  industry.  properties  proved  settlement  common e x p i r y  in  union.  traditional  the  i n the  The r e s u l t  policy  struggle  Defence  at  occurring.  of  a  struggle for  Gibraltar  increase  workers  Mutual  i n the  b a r g a i n i n g power o f t h e  CAIMAW's  First,  to a l l  by t h e m i n e r s  to partake  pursual  Consequently,  CAIMAW's  r e a l i z a t i o n of the f a c t  o f where t h a t  corporate  mines.  battle.  and a w i l l i n g n e s s  the  wage  Gibraltar resounding  1979 two  Endako  locals  by  120 agreeing the  to  miners  another  a at  mine  breakthrough\".  5 percent one  the  two  committee.  mine  was  to  unique,  for  the  negotiate and  a  Gibraltar wage  described  by  employees.  increase CAIMAW  for  For  miners  as  \"a  at  major  1 2 1  Thirdly, for  increase  in  properties Although  1980,  Placer  with  a joint  the  management  simultaneously  bargained  Endako/Gibraltar negotiating  union  committees  reopeners negotiating  for  the  two  \u000C- 268 -  mines  were  joint  union committee,  the  separate  same  hotel  alternately two  with  properties  essentially attempts  the  by  expiry  improvement 122  workers\", between  in  the  two management  same  rates  at  company  to  maintain  The  relative the  fact  the  of  time,  Placer  without  of  these  results,  the  Table  to  least  for  for  of  separate  from a  of  common  \"dramatic and  an  Endako  agreement  stoppage.  in  the  Despite  Gibraltar  work  met  VII).  a move  achievement  resort at  the  in  provided  r e o p e n e r was  wage p o s i t i o n f o r  first  same day  appearance  the  the  committee  which  (see  with  agreements  represented  result  and  both  until  mines  bargain  union  agreements  two  in  to  o u t on t h e  joint  committees  the  negotiations  for  together  The  reached,  bargaining.  CAIMAW  attributes  George.  been  the  sit  n e g o t i a t i o n s were c a r r i e d  had  and  to  Prince  these  to j o i n t  refused  at  the  bargaining,  and  part,  to  CAIMAW its  new  123 bargaining  strength. 124 Finally,  CAIMAW  has  certified Table and  such  VII).  then  Such  lined  an  i n the face of up  that  \"It impose  the  expiry  they  will  arrangement  all  enable  pattern  \" c o n s i d e r a b l e employer r e s i s t a n c e dates  expire us  to  also  the  within  isolate  bargaining  may  of  on  \"enable  us  to  for  five  week  a  the  the  mines  employer  rest\"  it  period  of  said  bargain  which  ,  our  Peter  such  is (see  choice, Cameron.  issues  as  a  125 portable pension p l a n \" , CAIMAW bargaining  Steelworkers as  proud  structure  Steelworkers,  locals  is  an  never  at  however, points  to  example  its  the  mines  refuse  to  the of  of  before p o s s i b l e i n the accomplishments for be  unions  it  impressed.  coordinated  his  which  bargaining  industry. in  is  changing  certified.  Monty  Alton  structure  accomplishments,  and  at  calls  the The  of  the  Cominco CAIMAW  \u000C- 269 -  \"babes  in  the  woods\"  discovered  fire  in  comparison.  when w e ' v e  been  \"You'd  cooking  think  on j o i n t  they  had  bargaining  just  for  years\"  126 he s a i d . for  But  the  what Mr. A l t o n f a i l s  coordinated  Trail-Kimberley-Salmo achieved the  by  time  the  of  bargaining  of  properties,  and  Steelworkers,  the  Steel-Mine-Mill  C o m i n c o owned p r o p e r t i e s Steelworkers. industry,  But  and  i n B.  these  therefore  Steelworker's  but  Cominco  Trail,  C.  the  bargaining  produced  example,  at  particularly production  the  is  advantageous  at  one  site  is  full  closed  bargaining  the  To  structure  dependent  on  situation at  this  at  Steelworkers,  Cominco l o c a l s w i t h  that really  CAIMAW  has  addressed.  bargaining  in  the  for does  attempt  something  Steelworkers  mines,  he  claims,  process  at  the  the  have  not  because  moved they  not  because  if  one at the 1  a  legitimate  research  his  This  Steelworker s  coordinated  date,  is  altering  director bargaining  i n t h e m i n e s , and  to  ore  to operate  in  to  the  the  other.  therefore,  liken  which,  of  situation,  Peter Warrion, to  mining  p r o p e r t i e s , where,  coordinated bargaining  achieved The  not  reason,  the  bargaining  pointing  comparison. the  to  mines  Possibly  to  the  property  this  not,  other  The C o m i n c o  in  is  some  at  greatly  achievements  Cominco l o c a l s  Mill  p r o g r a m by  the o t h e r can c o n t i n u e  by  not  differ  CAIMAW's  C.  was  locals  downplay B.  the  dynamics  production  Placer's  the  used  in  Mine  is  power  Fragmented  coordinated bargaining at  for  is  employer  in a labour dispute,  capacity.  that  mine.  to  Cominco  C.  time,  confined  i n the mines.  smelter  Kimberley  c a n be c o n t r a s t e d t o t h e mine i s  a  from  that  relations at  B.  foundation  structure  added t o not  the  in  them  Since  are  that  joint  by  have been  industrial  is  locals  this  merger.  properties  coordinated  for  that  inherited  f r o m CAIMAW's c o o r d i n a t e d b a r g a i n i n g at  to mention  union  conceeds has  not  towards  coordinated  h a v e been  preoccupied  \u000C- 270 -  with  achieving  coordinated  Cominco l o c a l s .  It changes of  to  be  will  that  moving  attacking  remain  to  bargaining  wages  One e f f e c t  for  the  thousands  of  workers  how  great  impact  at  127  in the  higher  bargaining  and is  greater  CAIMAW's M u t u a l  Defense  industrial  in  of  just  achieved  emerging  hesitatingly use  seen  structure  already  CAIMAW's  be  is  the  secondary  Pact,  the  by CAIMAW w i l l  peace that  same  the  in  the  the  be i n  mining  Steelworkers  direction.  picketing  Steelworkers,  the  in  June  the terms  industry. now  After  and  of  appear  vigourously  concept 1979,  behind endorsed 128  their  future  \"But  they  goal  of  don't  picketing  common e x p i r y  have  a  Mining  i n the mining i n d u s t r y \"  in  their  Council  B.  C.  and  said Peter  certified  they  mines.  oppose  Cameron.  \"I  secondary  don't  know how  129 they  think  they  are  Steelworkers  have  membership a t  Babine  going not  to  had  that  get  there.\"  success  in  Certainly, this  goal.  they were g o i n g t o s t r i v e  to  They  date,  the  told  the  f o r common e x p i r y  of  130 all  the  N o r a n d a owned m i n i n g p r o p e r t i e s .  bargained at  Babine  N o r a n d a owned m i n e s  maintains  the widely  i n the province  (see  But  the  different Table  contract  that  expiry dates  they  for  all  VII).  CAIMAW'S PHILOSOPHY AT WORK IN THE MINES  RANK AND F I L E  CONTROL  CAIMAW's p h i l o s o p h y has making from  in  the  the  instructions  mines  business from  they  represent,  agents the  r e s u l t e d i n a change o f u n i o n  to  s h i f t i n g even  elected  membership.  The  day-to-day  committees practice  of  who this  decision decisions  take  their  philosophy  \u000C- 271 -  perhaps a  suffers  paternalistic  because, union  in  order  to  of  strain in  votes  arise,  people  in  are  with  union  taken  miners turn  i n m i n e s w h e r e management  dealing  partake  where  issues  handful  greatest  philosophy  meetings  important a  the  tend  out  decision  is  to  making,  go t o  union  to  This  is  attendance  at  employees.  essential.  not  to  their  adheres  In  mines  where  union meetings.  meetings,  and  few  \"Only  therefore,  in  131 practice, it  is  decision  also  that  are  least  true  seen  making  that  as  falls  even  in  important  on o c c a s i o n .  At  into  the  mines  by  hands  which  the  of  practice  membership  such t i m e s ,  a few.\"  the miners  do  However,  paternalism, inevitably  do a t t e n d  issues  arise,  union  at  meetings,  132 a n d do f u l l y A making,  partake necessary  however,  recognize  this  with  the  This  paper  is  lays  averaging,  information  of  all  copper  it  out  so t h a t  and  the  explains  membership  can  issue.  control  CAIMAW n o t  r e s p o n s i b i l i t y of its  for  newspaper  the  costing  continuous  and molybdenum people  to  through  i n c l u d i n g the  alternative  surrounding that  informed membership.  but accepts  out  issues,  decisions  prerequisite  an  fact,  required  relations  i n the  shift  of  p r o d u c i n g mines  see what i s  in  going on.  appears  many shift  Miner.  industrial premiums  by  comparisons  province.  Nobody  to  miners  CAIMAW  and wage  the  decision  providing  membership  schedules  only  the  continuous  in  i n the  \"We  lay  industry  133 had  ever  done  'propaganda'  that  just  before,\"  has  to  be  said  Cameron.  admired\"  said  \"Their  George  level  Atkins,  of  Industrial  134 Relations  Manager  responsibility to  provide  leadership George  of  at  conducting  education that  Atkins.  Gibraltar  to  exhibits  135  numerous  the \"a  A mining  Mines.  local  very  CAIMAW  shop s t e w a r d leaders.  high level  official  at  of  also  schools  The  result  expertise\",  another  of  assumes in is  the  the  mines  a  local  according  CAIMAW's  to  certified  \u000C- 272 -  mines a g r e e s , should  be  doing  expertise other  but added, -  in union  industry,  \"It  and  is just  that  aren't.\"  they  To  are  d o i n g what the  CAIMAW,  leadership  is  more p r e s s i n g  and t h e r e f o r e  it  provides  in  the  the  the  others  importance  mines  education  than  and  of  in  any  information  137 necessary  to achieve  Perhaps the  leadership  great  deal  contrast  to  apathetic,  because  at  of  respect  is  of  the  high  CAIMAW c e r t i f i e d  the  it  it.  for  not  at  mines,  their  membership all  level  of  the  membership  leaders.  in  expertise  The  construction  difficult  for  exhibited  tend  result  to  is  unions  CAIMAW l e a d e r s  by  have a  that,  \"in  who  are  very  to  drum up  any  138 response  they  that  is  it  want  from  their  perhaps  this  membership\".  phenomenon  that  It  has  has  been  been  speculated  responsible  for  the  139 perception is  certainly  rank  a factor  order  and f i l e ,  and to  that  control.  on t h e  dictated,  the  CAIMAW by t h e  and f i l e  leaders  In  of  therefore  is  it,  Considerable  a highly  the  only  at  militant  practical  voluntarily  the the  as  same t i m e ,  exists  and t h e r e f o r e  leaders.  qualifies  At the  membership  maintain  industry  however, given  the  leadership  application this  pleasure  membership e x e r t s operates  of  the  CAIMAW's  philosophy  of  the  membership.  responsive  i n both  total  constitutionally  considerable  influence  It  of  influence  and n o t  m u s t be  union.  to  the  influence  rank on  directions.  LOCAL AUTONOMY  In mines  at  keeping  which  with  CAIMAW  authority  over  the  example,  has  the  is  certified  decisions  that  constitutional  enjoy  local  affect  them.  right  to  of  local  rights  autonomy,  and  Each m i n i n g important  the  considerable local,  for  information  \u000C- 273 -  pertaining NEB  to  board  funds  the  meetings  are  the  Each  vote of  the  by  company  enabling funds. in  of  of  the  the  local  local  and  sets  and d u e s rather  Even i m p o r t a n t u n i o n d e c i s i o n s  mining  sector  membership  i n the  the Mutual  Defense  are  made  at  the  as  minutes  local's  local  amount  complete  such  The  the  the  union  retain  union,  statements.  involved,  local  to  National  local,  membership to  the  financial  mining  local  each  1 4 0  the  and  property  trusteeship.  the  operation  records  cannot  of  its  be own  check-offs  than  the  mines  resulting Fairfield  by  union,  relating  to broad union  level,  share  such  as  a  remitted  of  CAIMAW M i n i n g C o u n c i l , a n d a l o c a l ' s  of  a  the  policy local's  participation  in  Pact.  has  been  in  chaos.  said,  dues  are  The i m p l e m e n t a t i o n o f CAIMAW's p h i l o s o p h y o f l o c a l the  under  control  local  and  put  National its  of  strongly  criticized  Speaking  \"The  trouble  of  is  by  the  that  Lori  Fairfield  bitter  the  1978  leaders  autonomy of  Placer  Gibraltar  at  in as  dispute,  the National  level  141 just  won't  George than  lead\".  Atkins,  less.\"  agent  regards  interference National large\".  but  as  \"CAIMAW  In  the his  from  officers  in  however,  fact  construction own' a r e a  as  anyone\". in  high  do n o t  exhibits  more  industry, his  In  own  and  In  central  he o b s e r v e d , personal  contrast,  regard,  agree.  CAIMAW  therefore,  the  opinion  control, \"every  fiefdom  \"their  rather business  and  locals  of  resents  hold  their  influence  is  1 4 2  a  exhibited the  Others,  Again,  this  result  of  by  industry.  the  influence  respect  National The  occurs  gained officers,  Financial  Post  not  through a  by c o n s t i t u t i o n a l the  respect  noted,  high which  \"the  level is  union  of  held does  authority, expertise throughout boast  some  \u000C- 274 -  top-flight served  leadership  on  Walker,  the  a  B.  from people  C.  Labour  recognized  such as  Relations  authority  Succamore,  Board  on  the  for  Peter  four  Cameron  years)  operation  of  (who  and  the  Cathy  Workers'  143 Compensation again  Board\".  imposes  autonomy  The  technical  taking  influence  limitations  place  in  National  CAIMAW  influence  of  authority,  but e x i s t s only at The  influence Placer  of  the  George A t k i n s . National.\" observing  144 is  probably  not  analysis,  however,  officers  locals  Peter  is  pleasure  \"Relations  \"The  the  the  National  owned m i n e s .  on  has  with  due t o  the  officers  total  But by  local  again,  the  constitutional  local  requires  involved.  qualification.  The  been most s i g n i f i c a n t  have n o t been g o o d \" feel  that  of  mines.  of the  \"The  fact  National  achieved  Placer  agrees.  the  practice  perhaps  may t h e r e f o r e  Cameron  by  certified  officers  foregoing  exerted  the  need  to  phenomenon Gibraltar  admitted  defer  that  in  to  the  George  is  have  had  employees  145 to  agonize  appears difficult than  do  through  likely,  arise which  p r o b l e m s , when l o c a l s National  very  therefore,  issues locals  some  difficult'  that  operate must  with  deal  require,  CAIMAW a  locals  greater  with  request  decisions\"  he  said.  at  mines  degree  of  difficult  where  few  independence  industrial  and r e c e i v e  It  relations  the  assistance  have  resulted  of  the  union.  ISSUES C R Y S T A L L I Z E D IN THE MINES  CAIMAW's clarification of  democracy,  have  become  and  experiences refinement  rank  and  crystallized  file more  in  of  the  issues  control sharply  mines  surrounding and in  local the  its  basic  autonomy.  mines  than  in  a.  philosophy \"The  anywhere  issues else\"  \u000C- 275 -  said  Peter  between  Cameron.  CAIMAW and  define  the  autonomy  has  resulted  making  certified  i n the mines.  president  has  a  probably  respective  philosophy  decision  over  is  Steelworkers  and d e f e n d t h e i r  CAIMAW's local  This  1 H U  power  of  rank  constitutional  right  the  caused  bitter  the  two  unions  file  and  powers.  the  to  practices.  control,  democracy  the  This  power  international  and  in  international  t h e USWA, f o r e x a m p l e , t h e  because  rivalry  identifiable differences  CAIMAW  Within  union,  and  in several  between  has  to  p o l i c i e s and  broad c o n s t i t u t i o n a l  local  that  due  union unions  international  can  be  exercised  president  has  t o e s t a b l i s h an \" a d m i n i s t e r s h i p \" o v e r a l o c a l  the if  he  147 deems  this  officer has  action  in  the  to  be  CAIMAW e n j o y s  in  the  this  constitutional  best  right.  right  to  interest On t h e  secede  of  the  contrary,  from  the  union. the  No  local  National  union  union  and  148 retain the  its  assets  if  Steelworkers,  power t o  the  s u s p e n d any  President  the  the  best  local  membership  international  officer  interests  president  \"where i n of  so d e c i d e .  the  the  has  Similarly, the  opinion of  International  in  constitutional  the  Union  International or  Local  Union  149 require\". Instead, the  No it  is  union's  recall  the  provision  exists  in  the  m e m b e r s h i p who h a v e t h e  officers,  officers  25 p e r c e n t  such  and  o f members  through  staff  exercise  \"working within  right  of  representatives the  constitution to exert  the by  a  declared  of  CAIMAW.  discipline  memberships  right  petition  at  of  jurisdiction  on to  least  of  said  150 officer  CAIMAW  or f u l l  time  The  vesting  is  collective  also  representative.\" of  union  reflected  agreements  with  in  decision the  employers.  making  in  the  constitutional In  CAIMAW,  the  membership  requirements right  to  by for  ratify  \u000C- 276 -  collective  agreements  firmly  vested  staff  representatives  restricted  in  and  the  by t h e  membership, in  Officer,  Local  has  membership  provision  provision Union  on  shall  any  be  and  the  power  area  of  entered  of  union  with  or  into  terms  granted 151  is  officers  and  making  is  decision  that  by  or f u l l - t i m e  any  employers  union  any  National  representative,  t e r m s o r p r o v i s i o n s o f an  been  be  contrasted  collective the  understanding  of  for  existing  employment, such  action  unless by  the  concerned.  can  be  of  provision  Officer,  agreement  approval  This  shall  changes  labour  this  constitutional  No a g r e e m e n t  which  memoranda  to  agreements  contracting  the  Steelworkers  which  party  in  states,  all  constitutional  \"The  collective  International agreements  and 152  all  such  And  the  agreements  shall  Steelworker s 1  be  signed  constitution  by  the  International  contains  no  provision  Officers.\" requiring  r a t i f i c a t i o n o f agreements  by t h e m e m b e r s h i p .  Real c o n s t i t u t i o n a l  over  is  i n the  negotiated  agreements  therefore  vested  USWA  the  power  international  officers. The power o f d e c i s i o n m a k i n g o f CAIMAW o f f i c e r s more  limited  decision than  that  than  making  of  provided  CAIMAW's b a s i c  the  power  of  CAIMAW's for  in  Steelworker  local the  unions  officers.  and  Steelworkers.  philosophy which  \"retains  its  therefore,  And t h e  membership  This  effective  is,  is  in  control  power  is  greater  keeping at  of  the  with local 153  level  where  Power o f bottom  it  union  towards  is  most  decision the  top.  accessible making The  in  to  the  CAIMAW  constitution  rank is of  and  designed the  file to  members\". flow  Steelworkers,  from  the  on  the  \u000C- 277 -  other  hand, allows  flow  from  extent,  the  the  top  downwards,  is  the  mines.  duties,  deal  with  that  might occur.  also  utilizes  make d e c i s i o n s .  Indeed,  and  earlier,  the  CAIMAW  Their  also  successful,  the  the  concur with  the  agreements  bargaining restricted  objective of  committee,  that  engage  reached  the  the  representatives  to  course  of  their  problems  their  have  authority  has  to a vote at  result  role  of  t o c o n s u l t a t i o n and p r o v i d i n g  to  the  staff  bargaining.  As  stated  sometimes  then, and  contrast,  decisions staff  advice.  engage  negotiations  bargaining with  the  Mining  of  role  committee  of  to  local  such  In  mining  the  The  made.  no  advisory  If  CAIMAW  service  representatives  bargaining  the  making  day-to-day  representatives  staff  he  to  collective  i n one-to-one  are  and  mines.  a  in  the  of  soley  company.  the  the  decisions never  the  of  in  even e n t i t l e d is  the  staff  decision  of the unions  staff  representatives not  this  resemble  c a n and do make d e c i s i o n s .  during  with  persuation  representatives all  differ 1  bargaining  becomes  at  of  practices  representatives  are  closely  To  to  CAIMAW.  resolution  they  function  Steelworker s  one-to-one  than does  the  control.  more  appointed  staff  they  membership  representatives  in  staff  But  Meetings.  to  representatives,  doing so,  appointed  central  distribution  employ  management  certifications.  officers  said  the  staff  d e c i s i o n making a u t h o r i t y  more  i n the o p e r a t i o n a l  The  In  of  for  be  in  Steelworkers  service  Council  and  can  difference  reflected  The  degree  structured bureaucracy  This  mines.  a greater  Steelworkers  hierarchically  authority  for  in  are  effect,  membership CAIMAW the made  in  to  staff  employer, by  representative  the is  \u000C- 278 -  These practices  differences  between  difference through  in  the  their  more achieve  efficiency  in  decision  making a u t h o r i t y  in  legitimately  limiting  the  resulting  in  approach  local  unions  ability  anarchistic  decision  are  who  is  in  control  of  unions.  membership,  motivated than  the  by  their  own  its  philosophy  pursues with  the  a  policy  of  it  in  of the  attempted  can  necessary  system  of  identify.  providing information  and  In  of  argued by  to  a  make  membership.  principle  and  and  adherence  made  the  of  rank  argue  that  reliance  the  officials and  unity,  union who  objectives,  may  on from be  rather  file.  the  members  hand,  policies,  expertise of  as  decision  legitimately  making  of  well  other  legitimately  ambitions  limit  the  control  hands  First,  its  as  decision  the  on t h e  efficiently  to  removes  as  vesting  making. as  a  making  organizational  interests  r a n k and  to  of  and  dedicated  hierarchical  n e e d s and d e s i r e s  CAIMAW has of  best  t o make d e c i s i o n s places  most  CAIMAW c a n j u s t  structured  and  decision  knowledge  the  and f i l e  the  this  in  decision  centralized  and  the  philosophically  officials  policy  union  Steelworker's,  cohesion,  c a n be j u s t  best  has  genuinely  to  it  is  appointed  and  pursue  however,  hierarchically  unity  of  and  origins  The  and m e m b e r s h i p ,  to  CAIMAW,  a  structure  approach  making  their  unionism.  CAIMAW's  unionism philosophy,  that  to  provisions  have  be s e e n a s e n d a n g e r i n g  professional,  decisions  probably  making.  union's  to a business  trained  unions  organizational  its  can q u i t e  an  constitutional  bureaucratized  can  union  two  philosophical  authority,  that  in  deficiencies  as  noted and  training  to  that  earlier,  opponents  it  actively  local  officers  in  mining  make  informed  decisions  \u000C- 279 -  through  its  newspaper,  the  CAIMAW M i n e r ,  on  the  membership's  reliance  professionals  i n making good d e c i s i o n s  Secondly, local  autonomy  have  probably  policy  out  of  part local  to  its  As  benefited while  locals.  autonomy and  is,  their  keeping  individual  acknowledge  earlier,  from  with  mold  decision  making  very  and c o h e s i o n .  the  a  united  inappropriate  need  to  industry  the  and  industry  effort  on  the  practice  for  achieve  \"To have a sense o f o r g a n i z a t i o n i s  of  fragmented  moving  of  centralized  r e s u l t i n g from the  particularly  apparent  a  degree  mining  pursue  requires  trained  philosophy  high  to  The d e c e n t r a l i z a t i o n  made  the  the  of  of  The  reduced.  a in  CAIMAW's g o a l  bargaining  therefore,  it  ability  schools.  expertise  that  employers  union  locals.  and  i s , therefore,  carries  noted  fragmented  of a l l  industry, unity  CAIMAW o f f i c e r s  themselves,  restricted  information  necessarily  decentralization.  and s h o p s t e w a r d  the  of  mining  organizational important\"  said 154  P e t e r Cameron.  \"Otherwise  High l a b o u r t u r n o v e r  all  i n the  you have i s  an e m p l o y e e  i n d u s t r y makes t h i s  organization.\"  n e e d e v e n more  pressing.  155 \"The  c o n s t a n t m u s t be t h e  The unity  and  making. rejects  that  only other  traditional  cohesion But  organization.\"  with  is  method through  CAIMAW's  approach.  alternative  It  for a  unions  bureaucratic  philosophy  chooses  to  of  achieve structure  of  and  control,  rank  file  i n s t e a d , w h a t Cameron  - i n s t i l l i n g in  its  organizational  members  decision  regards  a sense  of  the  as  it the  value  156 o f membership to  achieve  itself.  It  an o n g o i n g s e n s e  is of  through formal  this  method t h a t  CAIMAW  o r g a n i z a t i o n , cohesion  and  strives unity.  \u000C- 280 -  It  is  a  structure  that  represents  a  \"dramatic  departure  from  the  157 traditional  union  CAIMAW of  bureaucracy\".  attempts  organizational  members  a  policies  that  It  of  to  instill  in  its  members  m e m b e r s h i p by p u r s u i n g p o l i c i e s  keen  sense  of  organizational  this  that  formality  sense  create and  of  value  in  CAIMAW  discipline  I  is  clearly vital  confer  on members  importance  to  both o b l i g a t i o n s  CAIMAW  that  and  CO  rights.  \"membership  means  159 something\". in  this  It  regard  clearly  has been  have  contrasted  making s t r u c t u r e  picket  are  creates  a  clearly  like  that  only  entitled  sense  principled to  in  to  of  the  organization  because  CAIMAW's  policies  and  be  illuminated,  some  other  workers  can  traditional  strike  and  most  decision  its  union  in  said  but  the  Peter  unlike  dues  event  the  or  perform  of a  strike.  Cameron,  \"and  some  is  not  only  sense  of  value  cn  To  essential  therefore  of  pay  benefits  discipline\"  also  unions,  who  struggle\".  u n i o n i s m , but  union membership,  that  f l o w i n g from the  \u2022I  participation  C.  Steelworkers.  CAIMAW,  insists  \"It  most  to the p o l i c i e s  Steelworkers, duties  been  of the  First,  i n t h e m i n e s o f B.  to  CAIMAW,  in the  structure.  this  instilling a cohesion  It  is  a  of  the  policy  union  that  as  an  has  been  feel  that  161 vigorously  attacked  all  striking  and  that  employees  CAIMAW  members  it  to  policy  this  by t h e  is  are  not  represents.  Steelworkers. entitled  fulfilling They  d u r i n g the  to  The strike  its  vigourously  CAIMAW  Steelworkers  benefits  obligations attacked  certification  from the to  CAIMAW  campaign  at  union,  the  non-union  for  adherence  Gibraltar  in  \u000C- 281 -  1975,  portraying  attack  that,  political  Endako  i n i t i a l l y at  CAIMAW's  apparently  does  deal  with  the  a  result.  It  s u c c e s s f u l , causing CAIMAW r e m a i n s  requires  during the the  value  controversial  of a c o l l e c t i v e in  proved  as  it.  The  was  CAIMAW  unswayed  an some  from  Steelworker's  the  structure  not.  instill the  starving  Nevertheless,  structure  Secondly, clearly  as  least,  difficulties.  policy.  to  workers  industry,  of  CAIMAW a g a i n was  o f who c o u l d v o t e on t h e  In a manner t h a t many  dispute,  u n i o n m e m b e r s h i p when i t  issue  agreement.  mining  1978 G i b r a l t a r  of  the  is typical  Gibraltar  forced  to  ratification  of long  employees  had  disputes  had  left  the  a r e a o r f o u n d o t h e r j o b s , and had n o t m a i n t a i n e d t h e i r u n i o n m e m b e r s h i p . The  company,  membership,  fearing  that  only  insisted  that  all  \"union  radicals\"  bargaining  unit  had  maintained  employees  vote  their on  any  162 offer  made  CAIMAW's  to  end  basic  instilling  a  the  policy  several  times  This  organizational  clear  painful  dispute.  sense  for  of  CAIMAW  over  the  structure,  the to  value  pursue,  issue,  the  a controversial  issue.  of  that  employees  for  all  of  which  union  because  dispute  politically Placer  position  is  anethma  to  dependent  on  membership.  negotiations  dragged  The S t e e l w o r k e r s to  was  vote,  on  It broke  and  it  echoed the  regardless  was  a  down became  position of  union  163 m e m b e r s h i p , was  the  CAIMAW was  to  of let  that  exercise allow  union membership. non-union  P e t e r Cameron.  members 164  It  of  true  such a vote  \"The vote,  crucial but  is evident  democracy. to  that  obvious  o c c u r w o u l d make a m o c k e r y  question  rather  What was  why  s h o u l d be n o t why we aren't  they  members\"  CAIMAW's o r g a n i z a t i o n a l  to out  don't said  structure,  \u000C- 282 -  bound  together  by  a  sense  of  the  value  of  membership  a f f o r d t o a l l o w n o n - u n i o n members t o p a r t i c i p a t e decisions. against  Despite  non-union  during  the  point.  1978  The  charges  members,  was  the  CAIMAW  Gibraltar  strike  by  dispute,  ended  by  a  in crucial  Steelworkers  refused and  to  be  after  decision  itself,  of  made  ill  organization  discrimination  swayed eight  can  on  this  months,  exclusively  issue  won by  its  CAIMAW  members.  CAIMAW's clarified  certain  experiences aspects  of  its  t o g e t h e r n o t on a b u r e a u c r a t i c a  sense  file  of  the  control  referendum and  value for It  possible  have,  therefore,  The o r g a n i z a t i o n i s  s t r u c t u r e o f d e c i s i o n making, but itself.  not  control  And t h e  mean  of  the  organization,  was,  therefore,  assistance  that  had  to  been  into  pursuant  groups  a  policy  employee  status  through and  participation  by  that  of  bound  rank  organization  to  a  policy  attempting  to  form  crystallized  brought  CAIMAW  Copper,  s p u r r e d on by e v e n t s  contact with  m i n i n g c e r t i f i c a t i o n i n B.  C.  at  during  the  by  the  members  carries  with  it  effect,  with for  the  few  growth  open of  mines o f  Canadian  formation this  providing  of  pit  CASAW,  province.  CAIMAW  support  remaining in  the  immune.  a  that  Bethlehem  The  mines were a  first  affected  i n a manner r e s e m b l i n g t h e  mines  any  unions,  The e x p e r i e n c e s o f one m i n e t h e n  and t h e m i n e s t u r n e d t o CAIMAW very  the  of  K i t i m a t and T r a i l , became CAIMAW's  others,  causes  industry  o b l i g a t i o n s , r i g h t s and a s e n s e o f o r g a n i z a t i o n a l d i s c i p l i n e .  It  policy  that  mining  philosophy.  does  means  in  the  membership  CAIMAW  vote.  participants  certain  of  in  domino central  widespread  \u000C- 283 -  dissatisfaction appeal  of  with  national  aspirations.  the  independence  A  variety  countervailing forces such  as  place and  challenges  at  the  site,  forces  acting  the  on  file  mining  locals,  making  and  the t r a d i t i o n a l CAIMAW and  factors  strength  CAIMAW  support  by  suspected  the  pattern  incorporated  agents who  and in  Mining  local a  of  may  or  CAIMAW  of  the  at  of  the  national  acted  as  campaigns,  strikes  forces  each  and  high  have  taking  acting  individual  employer  autonomy  h a v e been take  Even  basic  different  for mine  interference,  CAIMAW's  to  philosophy into  style that  replaced  their  is  certification  result  i n which  membership  to  these  as  the  a  means  has  once  they  decision  i n CAIMAW c e r t i f i e d m i n e s  by  membership,  determining  bureaucratic  union  structure  has  membership  together.  been a r e d u c t i o n  have  and  replaced  broad  a sense o f the value o f  changes  its  in  of  traditional  of  practiced  p r o b l e m s c a n be r e s o l v e d , b u t decisions  bargaining,  i n s t r u c t i o n from the  i n s t a l l a t i o n of  of  of  democracy,  operation  traditionally  a s t h e means o f b i n d i n g t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n  The  the  of  s y s t e m o f d e c i s i o n m a k i n g has been  Council  direction.  its  structure  hierarchical  r e p l a c e d by t h e  and ease  industry,  individual certification  relative  for  the  a time  certifications,  against  organizational  committees  the  The  resulting  elected  itself  CAIMAW  control  Business  been  unionism at  other  occasion  has  mines.  policy  of  throughout  in mining.  and  the  in  the time of  explanation  CAIMAW  by  to  mines.  successes  rank  at  other  complicated  perhaps  Steelworkers  a greater been  made.  i n the  speed  commitment The  by  change  \u000C- 284 -  certainly achieve to  does  wages  those  CAIMAW's  have not an  by  structure. ability  - maintain  apparent  appear  and b e n e f i t s  achieved  traditional for  not  decline  Steelworkers, certifications  to  the  have  for  its  interfered members  international  Indeed, achieve  their in  to  these  that  are  unions  at  ability  least  operating  under  even  one t h i n g t h a t  the  international  in  all  their  mining  the  responsible  locals.  attempted  by t h e S t e e l w o r k e r s failed.  be  to  comparable  may  n a t i o n a l i s m and d e s p i t e  have c o n s i s t e n t l y  CAIMAW's  changes  support  repeated challenges  with  unions Despite  r e f o r m by  t o CAIMAW's  the  mining  \u000C- 285 -  FOOTNOTES 1.  I n f o r m a t i o n o b t a i n e d f r o m M r . P. D i s t r i c t Labour C o u n c i l , personal  2.  R. L a x e r , p.159.  3.  P. K n o x , \"Breakaway Unionism in P o l i t i c a l E c o n o m y , P. Knox and P. S t a r Books, 1974, p.42.  4.  P. R e s n i c k , \" T h e B r e a k a w a y Movement P o l i t i c a l Economy, i b i d . , p . 5 2 .  5.  Information o b t a i n e d from Mr. J . Succamore, Canadian A s s o c i a t i o n of I n d u s t r i a l Mechanical p e r s o n a l i n t e r v i e w , V a n c o u v e r , B. C.  6.  CAIMAW R e v i e w ,  7.  Information obtained i n t e r v i e w , Vancouver,  8.  Ibid.  9.  CAIMAW R e v i e w ,  Canada's Unions,  Fall,  N e a l e , S e c r e t a r y , Vancouver i n t e r v i e w , V a n c o u v e r , B. C.  Toronto,  James  Lorimer  &amp;  Co.,  1976,  Kitimat\", Essays in B. Resnick, e d s . , Vancouver,  in  Trail\",  Essays  in  and  B.  C. New  C.  Secretary-Treasurer, and A l l i e d W o r k e r s ,  1972, p.3. from Mr. J . B. C.  Succamore,  op. c i t . ,  personal  Succamore,  op. c i t . ,  personal  Succamore,  op. c i t . ,  personal  op. c i t . ,  personal  S p r i n g , 1973, p.5.  10.  Information obtained from Mr. J . i n t e r v i e w , V a n c o u v e r , B. C .  11.  Ibid.  12.  Ibid.  13.  Ibid.  14.  CAIMAW R e v i e w ,  15.  Information obtained i n t e r v i e w , Vancouver,  16.  Ibid.  17.  CAIMAW R e v i e w ,  18.  Information obtained from Mr. J . i n t e r v i e w , V a n c o u v e r , B; C .  19.  CAIMAW R e v i e w ,  20.  Ibid.  S p r i n g , 1973, p.4. from Mr. J . B. C.  \"Convention  ' 7 3 \" , p.11.  S p r i n g , 1973, p.5.  Succamore,  \u000C- 286 -  21.  Information obtained from Mr. J . i n t e r v i e w , V a n c o u v e r , B. C.  Succamore,  op. c i t . ,  personal  22.  Ibid.  23.  CAIMAW R e v i e w , F a l l ,  24.  Information obtained i n t e r v i e w , Vancouver,  Succamore,  op. c i t . ,  personal  25.  Ibid.  26.  Labour R e l a t i o n s  27.  Ibid.  28.  Labour R e l a t i o n s  29.  I n f o r m a t i o n o b t a i n e d f r o m M r . D. B l o o m q u i s t , L o c a l 1 8 , p e r s o n a l i n t e r v i e w , W i l l i a m s L a k e , B.  30.  Labour R e l a t i o n s  31.  Ibid.  32.  Ibid.  33.  Ibid.  34.  C a n a d i a n U n i o n News, v o l . 5 , n o . 2 , J u l y  35.  CAIMAW R e v i e w , S e p t .  36.  Information o b t a i n e d from Mr. J . i n t e r v i e w , V a n c o u v e r , B. C.  37.  CAIMAW R e v i e w , S e p t .  38.  CAIMAW M i n e r , \" G i b r a l t a r , t h e B i g O n e \" , u n d a t e d , p . 3 .  39.  Information obtained i n t e r v i e w , Vancouver,  40.  Vermilion Miner, undated,  41.  I n f o r m a t i o n o b t a i n e d f r o m M r . P. C a m e r o n , R e g i o n a l V i c e - P r e s i d e n t , C a n a d i a n A s s o c i a t i o n o f I n d u s t r i a l M e c h a n i c a l and A l l i e d W o r k e r s , p e r s o n a l i n t e r v i e w , V a n c o u v e r , B. C .  42.  CAIMAW M i n e r , u n d a t e d ,  1973, p.5. from Mr. J . B. C.  Board R e p o r t ,  B.  C ,  91/76.  B o a r d R e p o r t , B.  C ,  47/76.  B o a r d R e p o r t , B.  C ,  President, C.  CAIMAW  16/75.  1976, p.2.  1976, p.10. Succamore,  op. c i t . ,  personal  1976, p.7.  from Mr. J . B. C.  Succamore,  op. c i t . ,  personal  p.4.  p.4.  \u000C- 287 -  43.  Information obtained i n t e r v i e w , Vancouver,  from Mr. B. C.  J.  Succamore,  op. c i t . ,  personal  44.  CAIMAW M i n e r , u n d a t e d ,  45.  Information obtained f r o m M r . P. Warrion, Research United Steelworkers of America, personal interview, B. C.  46.  Information obtained from i n d u s t r i a l r e l a t i o n s p r a c t i t i o n e r B. C. o p e n p i t m i n e , p e r s o n a l i n t e r v i e w , V a n c o u v e r , B. C.  47.  I n f o r m a t i o n o b t a i n e d f r o m a r e p r e s e n t a t i v e o f t h e B. o f L a b o u r , p e r s o n a l i n t e r v i e w , V a n c o u v e r , B. C.  48.  Information obtained from i n d u s t r i a l r e l a t i o n s p r a c t i t i o n e r i n a B. C. open pit mine, op. c i t . , representative of the B. C . F e d e r a t i o n o f L a b o u r , o p . c i t . , and M r . P. Cameron, op. c i t . , p e r s o n a l i n t e r v i e w s , V a n c o u v e r , B. C.  49.  Information obtained i n t e r v i e w , Vancouver,  50.  I n f o r m a t i o n o b t a i n e d f r o m a r e p r e s e n t a t i v e o f t h e B. o f L a b o u r , p e r s o n a l i n t e r v i e w , V a n c o u v e r , B. C.  51.  Copper M i n e r , v o l .  52.  Information obtained from i n t e r v i e w , V a n c o u v e r , B. C.  53.  CAIMAW M i n e r ,  54.  Information obtained from i n d u s t r i a l r e l a t i o n s p r a c t i t i o n e r B. C. o p e n p i t m i n e , p e r s o n a l i n t e r v i e w , V a n c o u v e r , B. C.  55.  Information obtained i n t e r v i e w , Vancouver,  from B. C.  56.  Information obtained i n t e r v i e w , Vancouver,  57.  Information obtained V a n c o u v e r , B. C.  58.  Ibid.  59.  Information o b t a i n e d from i n t e r v i e w , V a n c o u v e r , B. C.  60.  Information obtained from i n d u s t r i a l r e l a t i o n s p r a c t i t i o n e r B. C. o p e n p i t m i n e , p e r s o n a l i n t e r v i e w , V a n c o u v e r , B. C.  p.4.  from B. C.  1, n o . 5,  Mr.  P.  Nov. Mr.  Cameron,  op. c i t . , C.  in  a  Federation  personal Federation  1979. P.  Cameron,  op. c i t . ,  \" G i b r a l t a r , The B i g O n e \" , u n d a t e d ,  Mr.  C.  Director, Vancouver,  P.  personal  p..2. in  a  Cameron,  op. c i t . ,  personal  from Mr. J . B. C.  Succamore,  op. c i t . ,  personal  from  employee,  mining  Mr.  P.  Cameron,  personal  op. c i t . ,  interview,  personal in  a  \u000C- 288 -  61.  I n f o r m a t i o n o b t a i n e d f r o m M r . M. R o d o c k e r , O r g a n i z e r , A s s o c i a t i o n o f I n d u s t r i a l M e c h a n i c a l and A l l i e d W o r k e r s , i n t e r v i e w , V a n c o u v e r , B. C .  62.  Information obtained from i n d u s t r i a l r e l a t i o n s p r a c t i t i o n e r B. C. o p e n p i t m i n e , p e r s o n a l i n t e r v i e w , V a n c o u v e r , B. C .  63.  I. A b e l l a , N a t i o n a l i s m , Communism and C a n a d i a n U n i v e r s i t y of Toronto Press, 1973, p.87.  64.  Ibid.,  65.  Information obtained i n t e r v i e w , Vancouver,  66.  Information o b t a i n e d from i n d u s t r i a l r e l a t i o n s p r a c t i t i o n e r B. C. open p i t m i n e , p e r s o n a l i n t e r v i e w , V a n c o u v e r , B. C.  67.  CAIMAW M i n e r , u n d a t e d ,  68.  Ibid.  69.  Ibid.  70.  CAIMAW N e w s , N o v .  71.  B.  72.  Financial  73.  Ibid.  74.  Information o b t a i n e d f r o m M r . L. F a i r f i e l d , Chief, Relations, P l a c e r Developments, personal interview. B. C.  75.  CAIMAW N e w s , N o v .  76.  B.  77.  Information obtained i n t e r v i e w , Vancouver,  78.  Ibid.  79.  B.  80.  Information obtained i n t e r v i e w , Vancouver,  81.  CAIMAW N e w s , N o v . 2 7 , 1 9 7 9 .  C.  in  a  Toronto,  p.91.  C. B u s i n e s s  C.  Labour,  Canadian personal  Post,  Business  Business  from B. C .  Mr.  P.  Cameron,  op. c i t . ,  personal in  a  p.2.  2 7 , 1979.  Week, May 9 ,  1979,  p.4.  May 1 2 , 1 9 7 9 , p . 2 .  Industrial Vancouver,  2 7 , 1979.  Week, o p .  cit.  from Mr. B. C .  Week, o p .  L.  Fairfield,  op.  cit.  L.  Fairfield,  op. c i t . ,  personal  cit.  from Mr. B. C.  personal  \u000C- 289 -  82.  Information obtained from i n d u s t r i a l r e l a t i o n s p r a c t i t i o n e r B. C . open p i t m i n e , p e r s o n a l i n t e r v i e w , V a n c o u v e r , B. C.  83.  Ibid.  84.  Ibid.  85.  I n f o r m a t i o n o b t a i n e d f r o m a r e p r e s e n t a t i v e o f t h e B. o f L a b o u r , p e r s o n a l i n t e r v i e w , V a n c o u v e r , B. C.  86.  Copper M i n e r , v o l .  87.  Labour R e l a t i o n s  88.  C a n a d i a n Union News, v o l . 5,  89.  Labour R e l a t i o n s  90.  Ibid.  1, n o . 5,  Nov.  Board R e p o r t ,  B.  B.  a  Federation  1979. C.  no. 2,  Board R e p o r t ,  C.  in  C.  47/76. p.2. 47/76.  91.  P. A t h e r t o n and G. B o r d e l e a u , \" T h e G i b r a l t a r D i s p u t e \" , u n p u b l i s h e d m a n u s c r i p t , U . B . C . , Dec. 1978.  92.  Labour R e l a t i o n s  93.  Ibid.  94.  Information obtained i n t e r v i e w , Vancouver,  95.  CAIMAW M i n e r ,  \" G i b r a l t a r , The B i g O n e \" , u n d a t e d ,  96.  CAIMAW M i n e r ,  undated.  97.  Labour R e l a t i o n s  98.  Information obtained from i n d u s t r i a l r e l a t i o n s p r a c t i t i o n e r i n B. C. o p e n p i t m i n e , p e r s o n a l i n t e r v i e w , W i l l i a m s L a k e , B. C .  99.  Information o b t a i n e d f r o m M r . G. Atkins, Industrial Relations O f f i c e r , G i b r a l t a r M i n e s , p e r s o n a l i n t e r v i e w , W i l l i a m s L a k e , B. C.  Board R e p o r t ,  B.  from Mr. B. C .  Board R e p o r t ,  C.  L.  B.  47/76.  Fairfield,  C.  op. c i t . , p.3.  47/76.  100.  I n f o r m a t i o n o b t a i n e d f r o m a r e p r e s e n t a t i v e o f t h e B. o f L a b o u r , p e r s o n a l i n t e r v i e w , V a n c o u v e r , B. C.  101.  Labour R e l a t i o n s  102.  Information o b t a i n e d from i n t e r v i e w , V a n c o u v e r , B. C .  103.  Ibid.  Board R e p o r t ,  B.  Mr.  C. P.  personal  C.  a  Federation  47/76. Cameron,  op. c i t . ,  personal  \u000C- 290 -  104.  This a n a l y s i s i s d e r i v e d from a d i s c u s s i o n r a t e s f o u n d i n CAIMAW M i n e r , M a r c h 1 9 8 1 .  105.  Labour R e l a t i o n s  106.  Ibid.  107.  P. W e i l e r , R e c o n c i l a b l e D i f f e r e n c e s , Dec. 1980. p . 5 .  108.  Ibid.  109  Labour R e l a t i o n s  110.  Ibid.  111.  Ibid.  112.  Ibid.  113.  Ibid.  114.  Information obtained from i n t e r v i e w , V a n c o u v e r , B. C .  115.  I n f o r m a t i o n o b t a i n e d f r o m M r . M. United Steelworkers of America, B. C.  116.  Labour R e l a t i o n s  117.  Copper M i n e r , v o l .  118.  Ibid.  119.  Information obtained from i n t e r v i e w , V a n c o u v e r , B. C.  120.  Vancouver P r o v i n c e , Nov. 2 , 1 9 7 9 , p . l .  121.  CAIMAW M i n e r , \" A H i s t o r i c S e t t l e m e n t \" ,  122.  Ibid.  123.  Ibid.  124.  CAIMAW M i n e r , D e c . 1 9 8 0 .  125.  Information obtained from i n t e r v i e w , V a n c o u v e r , B. C.  126.  Vancouver Sun,c.  B o a r d R e p o r t , B.  B o a r d R e p o r t , B.  Mr.  Board R e p o r t ,  B.  C.  on  comparative  wage  47/76.  as  C.  quoted  in  CAIMAW M i n e r ,  47/76.  P.  Cameron,  op. c i t . ,  personal  Alton, D i s t r i c t Representative, personal interview, Vancouver, C.  47/76.  1, n o . 5, Nov. 1979.  Dec.  1,  Mr.  Mr.  P.  P.  Cameron,  op. c i t . ,  personal  op. c i t . ,  personal  undated.  Cameron,  1 9 7 9 , CAIMAW U n i o n  Files.  \u000C- 291 -  127.  Information obtained i n t e r v i e w , Vancouver,  from B. C.  Mr.  P.  Warrion,  op. c i t . ,  personal  128.  CAIMAW M i n e r , D e c .  129.  Information o b t a i n e d from i n t e r v i e w , V a n c o u v e r , B. C.  Mr.  P.  Cameron,  op. c i t . ,  personal  130.  Information obtained from i n t e r v i e w , V a n c o u v e r , B. C.  Alton,  op. c i t . ,  personal  131.  Information o b t a i n e d from i n d u s t r i a l r e l a t i o n s p r a c t i t i o n e r B. C . open p i t m i n e , p e r s o n a l i n t e r v i e w , V a n c o u v e r , B. C .  132.  Ibid.  133.  Information o b t a i n e d from i n t e r v i e w , V a n c o u v e r , B. C .  Mr.  134.  Information obtained from i n t e r v i e w , W i l l i a m s L a k e , B.  Mr. C.  135.  Ibid.  1980.  Mr.  M.  P. G.  in  a  Cameron,  op. c i t . ,  personal  Atkins,  op. c i t . ,  personal  136.  Information obtained from i n d u s t r i a l r e l a t i o n s p r a c t i t i o n e r B. C . o p e n p i t m i n e , p e r s o n a l i n t e r v i e w , V a n c o u v e r , B. C.  137.  Shop S t e w a r d s C o u r s e , CAIMAW L o c a l  138.  Information obtained from i n t e r v i e w , W i l l i a m s L a k e , B.  140.  C a n a d i a n A s s o c i a t i o n o f I n d u s t r i a l M e c h a n i c a l and A l l i e d C o n s t i t u t i o n , 1979. A r t i c l e s 5, 1 5 , 1 6 ( k ) , 8 ( e ) .  Workers,  141.  Information obtained i n t e r v i e w , Vancouver,  op. c i t . ,  personal  142.  Information obtained from i n t e r v i e w , W i l l i a m s L a k e , B.  143.  Financial  144.  1 8 , CAIMAW U n i o n  Mr. C.  from Mr. B. C.  G.  L.  Atkins,  Fairfield,  in  a  Files.  op. c i t . ,  personal  Mr. C.  G.  Atkins,  op. c i t . ,  personal  Information obtained from i n t e r v i e w , W i l l i a m s L a k e , B.  Mr. C.  G.  Atkins,  op. c i t . ,  personal  145.  Information obtained from i n t e r v i e w , V a n c o u v e r , B. C.  Mr.  Cameron,  op. c i t . ,  personal  146.  Ibid.  147.  United Steelworkers  Post,  May 1 2 , 1 9 7 9 .  P.  of America, C o n s t i t u t i o n , 1979, A r t i c l e  IX.  \u000C- 292 -  148.  Canadian A s s o c i a t i o n of I n d u s t r i a l C o n s t i t u t i o n , 1979, A r t i c l e 15(b).  149.  United Steelworkers S e c t i o n 1.  150.  Canadian A s s o c i a t i o n of I n d u s t r i a l C o n s t i t u t i o n , 1979, A r t i c l e 12.  151.  of  America,  Mechanical  and A l l i e d  Constitution, Mechanical  1979,  Workers,  Article  and A l l i e d  IX,  Workers,  Ibid.  152.  United Steelworkers S e c t i o n 1.  of  America,  153.  CAIMAW R e v i e w , S e p t . / O c t .  154.  Information obtained i n t e r v i e w , Vancouver,  155.  Ibid.  156.  Ibid.  157.  Ibid.  158.  Ibid.  159.  Ibid.  1979, v o l .  from B. C.  Mr.  160.  Ibid.  161.  Information obtained from i n t e r v i e w , V a n c o u v e r , B. C.  Mr.  162.  P.  163.  Copper M i n e r , v o l .  164.  Information o b t a i n e d from Mr. i n t e r v i e w , V a n c o u v e r , B. C .  A t h e r t o n and G.  Bordeleau, 1,  C o n s t i t u t i o n , 1979, A r t i c l e  n o . 5.  P.  10, no.  Nov.  6.  Cameron,  op. c i t . ,  personal  Warrion,  op. c i t .  personal  op. c i t . ,  personal  P.  op.  XVII,  cit. 1979.  Peter  Cameron,  \u000C- 293 -  Chapter  VII  CONCLUSIONS  \u000C- 294 -  The appears  to  Vancouver control  central  be who  over  external  issue  broke  force.  for  of  with  their  interference with  the  cause  own  their  wishes.  and  a  on  time  towards  unrest  the  breaking  point  the  United  from  catalyst  for  these  sovereignty  over  unrest  rebellion,  the  into  formation  Indeed,  the  their  of  own a  their  crucial  The  local  in  the  and  officers  over  Cincinnati  the  local's  representative, bargaining. united  in  officers finances,  representative,  the  resentment Michael  of  Capri.  a  the  Local  union.  174  of  and  C a p r i was  a  turned  unions, and  the  and CEW.  distribution  officers,  the  of  Canadian  International  resented  i n the  officers  influence  as  goal  that  influence  appoint  interfere  members the  to  was  file.  They  ability  this  acted  central  CAIMAW  international  Canadian  workers  international  CAIMAW i s  variance  Canada,  catalyst  resentment of the  their  their  was  their  in  any  external  for  therefore, their  from  at  these  of  rank and  of  and t h e i r a b i l i t y t o  Furthermore, their  in  It  of  between  o f f i c e r s and t h e  members  over  institutions,  story  M o l d e r s Union were u n i t e d i n t h e i r by t h e  of  labour  union d e c i s i o n making a u t h o r i t y union l e a d e r s ,  pursuit  rejection  issue  influence  control  decisions.  own  desire  Nationalism,  in  were  and  demanding  when  that  CAIMAW  Winnipeg  interference  societal  when  of  were  unrest  American  States.  workers  a  in  unions  membership  of  and h o s t i l i t y  exercised  workers  became  the  self-assertion reached  The  development  resented  resentment  At  and  international  affairs,  This  birth  autonomy.  imposed d e c i s i o n s  their  the  control  local's  local's  exerted  a fellow  their  the  of  exercised  Local by  staff  collective 174  their  Canadian, but  were staff  he  was  \u000C- 295 -  an  external  perceived he was the  influence,  as  being  appointed  furtherance as  of  seen  than  the  local  Local  174  wanted  Capri the  and  of  accomplish system  relinquish for  this  Local  growing  to  in The  at  he m a d e ,  tried  to  for  national  therefore,  union  rather control.  their  affairs.  own  with  the  restrict  the  attempts  making of  the  own  the  American  national  making  that  level  union. and  in  Canada,  t h e members and o f f i c e r s  of Local  greater  local  within  the to  recourse  decision  making  context  resentment this  to  leaders  the only  the  of  influence  the  from  of In  wishes  for a  international  self-assertion  decision  by  authority  o v e r d e c i s i o n s meant  desire  for  centralized  variance  several  refusal  their  s t e p was one t h a t  But  eliminate  American  were  decision  forming  of  over  yet,  on them  international  represented  therefore,  by  influence  the  that  probably  Worse  reliant  o f d e c i s i o n m a k i n g by a p p e a l i n g  sovereignty  was  of  problems.  and  decisions  was  became u n r e s t when t h e d e c i s i o n s made by  autonomy.  futile.  174  completely  level  therefore  local's  control  officers  174,  change  their  and  and  officers,  Capri  authority  Cincinnati  proved  The  interests  autonomy  Canadian  the  international  the  Local  Winnipeg,  touch with  membership.  international  degree  in  career.  in  of central the  of  his  being  membership.  of the  out  by t h e  were  Resentment  rarely  of  of  rather  a the  drastic  174 w e r e p r e p a r e d  to  take.  By t h e struggle  for  confrontation membership  same t o k e n , t h e  sovereignty again  level  of  over  arose decisions  Lenkurt  dispute  decisions  because made  of at  the  higher  by  i n Vancouver the  involved  membership.  unacceptability levels.  Here,  at the  a  The the overt  \u000C- 296 -  confrontation  arose  union  rank  and  the  d i v i d e d on t h e terms  of  the  sovereignty of the  between and  issue.  Lenkurt  the  system.  fight  for  policies  change  the  power,  that  also  occurring  leaders  own a f f a i r s . to  the  that level  A g a i n , the  achieve  change  the  the  first  from w i t h i n  t h o s e who w e r e p r e p a r e d  to  system,  and b e c a u s e  of  the  suppressing  opposition  to  the  involved  this  and  had  blamed of  a  time  been  Sovereignty  Canadian  leaders  officers,  salaries.  decision  making  In  in  more  between  acting  making  lay  they  were  not  sellout  on  the  issue  was  on  going to  and b e c a u s e  be  tolerated.  country. of  the  international  Lenkurt workers,  o u t s i d e , the  membership the  for  process  the  stooges their  union. of  sovereignty  social  the  positions  Again,  Again,  and  from  on whom t h e y w e r e d e p e n d e n t the  membership  in  orders  and  eyes o f  struggle  The  under  Lenkurt  decision  as  the  Washington.  the  seen  subtle  puppets  the  were  d e c i s i o n s were u n a c c e p t a b l e ,  day,  in  headquartered  Ladyman  level.  international  these  being  demonstrated  and n o t a t  r e s i d i n g w i t h t h e C a n a d i a n heads o f t h e  the  and t h e i r  their  IBEW  officers  p r o v e d i n t o l e r a b l e t o many o f  to attempt  the  dispute  leaders,  international  Rather,  of  international  o f t h e m e m b e r s h i p on  level,  been e x p e l l e d f r o m t h e  Lenkurt  convinced  international  the  had  making  n o t seen as  over  local  leaders  proved f u t i l e , both because  international  were  their  the  of d e c i s i o n making.  The  the  control  practices  higher levels  at  of  the  Canadian  a situation that  m e m b e r s h i p was  This  and  decision  the  o f d e c i s i o n making l a y  of  heads  membership, with  settlement,  m e m b e r s h i p who w a n t e d  the  file  Canadian  By o v e r r i d i n g t h e w i s h e s  rank and f i l e ,  reaction  the  because  climate  decision  of  of  making  \u000C- 297 -  was  brought  level  of  back  into  influence  The by  the  refusal  of  the  national  aspirations  system. influence  to  of  move  i n the  both  resulted  the  the  site  of  i n f l u e n c e was  i n the  influence t o be  of  among t h e  CEW the  of  the  peak  of At  the  of  by  from w i t h i n  American  of  of  the  high  level  the  pressuring  of  that  of  i n Canada,  limit  elimination  remaining  time  to v o l u n t a r i l y  became c l e a r  enough.  a  leaders the  the  sovereignty  decisions  formation of National  it  therefore,  influence  their  American  international  was,  level.  of American  elimination  itself  allow  of  the  union.  d e c i s i o n making s o v e r e i g n t y  through the  in  and  membership  international  through  not  to  overuling  As CAIMAW d e v e l o p e d , making  elimination  rejection  CAIMAW  unions  to  to  of the  making a l t o g e t h e r ,  decision  the  the  and r e s e n t m e n t  responded  Refusal  by  for  international  making  a change  cause  founders  decision  for  country  through the f o r m a t i o n of a National  central  unions  membership  the  the their  decision  unions.  the  repatriation  international  The q u e s t i o n o f t h e  level  distribution  three  levels  of  d e c i s i o n making s t i l l  CEW  adhered  to  the  of of of had  resolved.  Both sovereignty  of  constituted, election appointed  CAIMAW and decision  rank  of a l l  the  making a t  and f i l e  officers,  officials.  the  membership  d e c i s i o n m a k i n g was and t h e  But  John  rejection Gugulyn's  c o n s t i t u t i o n a l l y authorized, represented  of  principle level.  As  of  vesting  originally  accomplished  through  the  of  exercise  influence,  power  although  power o f d e c i s i o n m a k i n g  the by not  taking  \u000C- 298 -  place  at  the  With the  National  merger  of  level,  the  to incorporate  influence  and  repeated  making,  and as  level.  The  of  the  of  h a n d , and t h e of  the  provide  B. for  as  the  sovereignty  with  CAIMAW's  decision Had t h e  CAIMAW.  seen  the  CEW.  the  mining  as  the  then,  And,  as  of  unions  power  industry,  it  and  local  of  the  officers.  accommodate  this  suffered over  sovereignty  by been  by  for for  an  the  the the  of  the  the  a  to full as of  making  resolution  union  of  level.  it  fate  can as  be the  issue.  emergence  founding of  significant  positions  change,  decision  examination  and  relinquishing  same  one  success  union  The  National  have  The  decision  centralized  to  on t h e  the  appointed of  battle  membership,  the  impetus  has  and  and  National a  representation  entrenchment  explanation  demonstrated  the  level  achieved  refused  the  National  seen  decision  therefore,  was  national  complete  was,  the  1  o f membership at  this  Gugulyn s  c o n s t i t u t i o n were  constitution  local  file  by  may  Both  influence  regional  firm  struggles  CAIMAW  the  the  and  of  levels.  to expand  and m e m b e r s h i p on t h e o t h e r .  centres  rank  did provide  the  union's  ensued  u n i o n s , and been t o r n a p a r t  the It  that  powerful  to  of  officers  Clearly itself  the  sovereignty  changing  sovereignty  that  international  in  in  internal  National  of  battle  autonomy,  be  making  speculated  of  leadership  elimination can  of  exercise  information  influence,  o r membership  s e c t i o n of the union.  violations  section  of  C.  d e c i s i o n making between  local  local  undermining of the a u t h o r i t y  local  C.  disclosure well  t h e B.  constitutional  sovereignty  than the  CEW and CAIMAW, G u g u l y n a t t e m p t e d  influence  by t h e ex-CEW a s t h e  rather  of  making and  is  not  growth  of  b o t h CAIMAW  and  CAIMAW's g r o w t h issue  for  in  Canadian  \u000C- 299 -  workers  at  Perhaps  more  influence  a  time  in  decision  dissatisfaction  not  s o much t h a t fact  a  important  the  the  of  strong  has  been  making  of  B.  desire the  C.  it  was  not  responsiveness  to  the  membership  workers which  sovereignty  of  perhaps  to to  the  the  demand  CAIMAW  for  central  international  u n i o n i s m i n Canada  like  was  Many o f  the  Union.  union with  a jurisdiction  workers.  as  founders  t o One B i g  all  Big  founded  Certainly  Although  have  making the  as  Lack  of  by  the  decision  of in the  demanded  the  not  a shift  level.  only in  Failure has  been  decision of  the  the  central  CAIMAW.  for  the  creation  control  Union  over  of  which  since  the e a r l y  CAIMAW was  their  western  have  of  of  posed 1900's.  result  of  CAIMAW w e r e i n f l u e n c e d  enough not  to  resentment  One B i g  a  labour  challenge One B i g  of  organize  pure  Union,  by t h e i r  it  the  to  centralized  before  to  the  affairs,  Union  enable  preach  own  Canadian  a  CAIMAW d o e s  in  and f i r m l y v e s t e d a t  demands  CAIMAW, l i k e  broad  country,  file.  of  was  CAIMAW, a u n i o n  but a l s o  resurgence  such  control.  One  a  in  theme  unions  the  decision  clearly  these  and  institutions  CAIMAW,  as  cause  of and  factor  Canada,  to  autonomy  represents  rank  membership  respond  A recurring  u n i o n and j o i n  therefore,  distribution  international  of  crucial  l o s s o f membership t o  Because membership  a  self-assertion.  the  outside  the  level  d e c i s i o n making t o  unions  for their  with  international  Workers,  sovereignty  international  been  their  vested  o f d e c i s i o n making i s  level.  repatriation making  has  t o abandon t h e i r  membership  cause  unions  vested  of  Canada.  miners with  d e c i s i o n m a k i n g was  national  question  from w i t h i n  that  international  for  it,  links is  a  almost  syndicalism  of  \u000C- 300 -  One B i g it  Union i n advocating worker  strongly  acceptable  adheres  the  philosophy of  institutions to Russia  to  - trade  less  unions.  philosophy  radical  of  Although  contemporary  New L e f t  rank  Union One  are  Big  their  due  to  Union  -  and  file  Similarly, practice  proponents  that  of  broadly  over  do n o t  his  ties  o f One B i g U n i o n d i d ,  and  the  rejection the  of  a  philosophy by  the  CAIMAW and One  Big  a  the  leaders  syndicalism  on  to  an  of  political  officers  and  its  means  that  beliefs  pursuations.  rank  has the and  it  is,  can  not  policies  international file  and  its  adhere  to  accommodate  therefore,  t h a n was One B i g  only  can  membership  of as  a  more  achieve  Union.  repatriated level  impose  philosophy.  to  through which workers  own a f f a i r s  that  It  members  of  unwilling  involvement  partisan  elimination of  identified  Union  mistakes  of  their  union  Big  from the  pure s y n d i c a l i s m , y e t  organization  over  learned  One  and  between  to t h i s  political  is  own  have  t h o s e who m i g h t a d h e r e  right  political  and v i a b l e  making through the also  the  exist  by  communism  rejection  all  CAIMAW  control  consistant with  CAIMAW has  attempt  do n o t a l i e n a t e  a u t o n o m y and c o n t r o l  has  that  an  of  defending  sophisticated  but  fact  namely  individual  more  group.  differences  the  CAIMAW's of  perhaps  leaders  control are  CAIMAW d o e s n o t a d v o c a t e  and p r a c t i c e s  their  the  philosophy  membership.  and  production,  b r a n d o f communism and s o c i a l i s m as a d v o c a t e d  and t h e W a f f l e  Perhaps  t h e means o f  CAIMAW l e a d e r s  communism as t h e  bureaucratized organization structure of the  over  p r o v i d i n g the worker with  and t r a d i t i o n a l  CAIMAW's  control  decision influence,  the  highest  \u000C- 301 -  level  of  authority  within  development  of  policies  from  of  most  those  philosophy that  of  has  internal  and  day  in  a  education,  and  structure.  Its  partisan  in  as  of  policies  differ  of  union  problems,  determine  different  a  to  a  philosophy of  the  creation  of  broad  policy  and  information  and  of  in  bureaucratized  and t h e  the  terms  in  availability  a  been  adheres  operation  f r o m most o t h e r  involvement,  which  autonomy,  of  to  has  identifiably  local  style  councils  rejection  result  are a  and  e m p h a s i s on t h e  a  political  is  resolution  such  in a greater  control  The  that  It  different  day  institutions  direction,  unions.  file  to  union.  practices  and  resulted  bargaining  and  other  rank  the  organizational  unions a l s o  i n s t i l l a t i o n of  a  i n terms sense  of  of  the  in  the  v a l u e o f membership i n the o r g a n i z a t i o n .  These  changes  seem  s p e e d and e a s e w i t h w h i c h at the  CAIMAW r e p r e s e n t e d membership  not  appear  to  conditions  of  comparable  to  changes  is  problems  blame  is for  decisions  vested any that  from most in  for  unions.  CAIMAW  than  once  may n o t  have  in  a  reduction  p r o b l e m s c a n be  their  able  decision  a  to  be s e e n a s  with  a  all, it  is  to  and  of  the  c o m m i t m e n t by changes  win  terms  are effect  resolve  sovereignty  more  difficult  adequately  of to  authority,  promoting the  do and  at  least  of  these  internal  membership  if  centralized  resolved  The  that  significant  deal  After  on  ability  objectives  membership,  made.  membership  Perhaps  unions.  been  CAIMAW's  conflicting  the  union  is  relations  they  restricted  other  resulted  and p r o p e r t i e s , b u t a g r e a t e r  decisions  employment  that  have  industrial  plants  have  arising  effectively making  to  to  more  decision place  the  including  interests  of  \u000C- 302 -  specialized  groups  responsible  for  of  raids  repeated  It new  and  such  tradesmen.  CAIMAW's a b i l i t y  to  by i n t e r n a t i o n a l  i s apparent  different  hamper  their  firmly  entrenched  of  retain  factor  its  may  be  certifications  partly  in  spite  unions.  of  union  from  face  success.  position  and  This  t h a t w o r k e r s who c h o o s e t o c r e a t e a n d d e v e l o p  kind  chances  institutions,  as  of  the  significant  These  difficulties  difficulties  international  unions  rigidities  inherent  CAIMAW was  forced  stem  in in  the  that  from  Canada's  a  the  labour  institutions  themselves.  From traditional affiliate  its  Canadian to  the  certifications U n i o n and t h e of  formation,  CLC  for  for  and  both  employees  a CLC a f f i l i a t e ,  movement.  labour  the  the  both  had  newly  the  established  that  workers  fact should  Local  174  of  f o r b i d d e n by t h e  the  This  in  unions  already  For  unions.  Canadian  i n t h e CLC  as  there  They  labour  union  Molder's  the  raiding  traditional  exclusive  reasons,  in  the  organizing workers  granted  both these  established  labour  in  fields  jurisdiction  was  would  no room i n  have  institutions  to  to the  operate  because  of  system.  has e n a b l e d t h e not  were  the  unacceptable  changes  strictly  CLC  inherent  dissidents  The  outside  an  an a c t  CLC  rigidities  bodies.  was  Cables were regarded  unions.  outside  related  it  Phillips  international for  its  because  operate  of  Furthermore,  which  movement,  to  support  traditional  CAIMAW,  l a b o u r movement  because  to  do  so  to  would  argue be  to  \u000C- 303 -  fragment that  and weaken  lacks  these  the  l a b o u r movement  affiliation  arguments  on  to  workers  i m p o s s i b l e to measure. in  certification  CAIMAW's  the  But  CLC who  to  campaigns,  as  is  inherently  were  the  CAIMAW,  would have f a c e d set  the  for  CEW  very  itself  existed  affiliates,  extent  rejection  from  the  little goal  seems  even  institution.  its  though  from  But  as CAIMAW  the  announced  CLC  Vancouver,  the  of the  Federation  But  obstacles  can  faced  new to  union to  rulings  what  may  union  impact  of  CAIMAW  is  workers  have  impeded  were  The  institutions, it  appears  from the that by as  on  CLC i f  both the  a  destruction  its  Steelworkers,  it  had  CAIMAW  and  CLC  and  legitimate  of  by  angry,  Winnipeg,  CAIMAW,  certifications b a c k e d by t h e  In  its  labour  head the  labour establishment.  the  attacks  operate  fact  accepted  forced  b r o u g h t down on i t s  Canadian of  to  tolerated  not it  was  and  the  in  combined  CLC and t h e  B.  C.  complained  of  position  of  Labour.  international  Board  a  h a v e swayed  CLC  difficulty  been  grew,  policy  IBEW and t h e  of  appear  a  CEW  Finally,  does  The  joining  they  the  labour  growth.  have  they  o p p o s i t i o n of the  facing  that  formation,  other  of  to  vigourous  forces  weak.  considering  o u t s i d e of the mainstream of t r a d i t i o n a l  not  and b e c a u s e  growth.  Although  it  a whole,  be have  be  independent  t h e i r , growth  due  representatives some  evidence  tended  said  with  to  be  more  Canadian  on  that  to  unions  the  Labour the  established Relations  pattern  of  unsympathetic  to  confidence  that,  is  have  Boards.  Labour  CAIMAW as  There  Relations  presentations. members  of  the  \u000C- 304 -  CLC,  an  and a t  organization that one  time  another be  in  of  a  on  CAIMAW  problem to  the  ease w i t h  hostile  its  on L a b o u r B o a r d s  ruling  stance  towards  d e s t r u c t i o n , the  CAIMAW,  international  are o p e r a t i n g under a c o n f l i c t  presentations. which  This  fact  independent  represents  Canadian  of yet  unions  can  built.  The however,  view  interest emerged  on on  experience is  that  of  requires  international  It  adopted  adopted a p o l i c y  union representatives interest  has  CAIMAW's  qualification.  CAIMAW the  for  the  scene  members  of  CAIMAW  was  an  the  Although t h i s  no e v i d e n c e overzealous  deny w o r k e r s CAIMAW i s  that in  their  a well  it  formation  certification diminishing.  are  also  true  that a  - a breakaway  was  employees,  viable  Boards,  that  to  fact.  their  more  unions. before  the  when  CAIMAW  reasonably Canadian  enough  The  union.  scepticle  and be immune f r o m  employer  The  Labour  Boards  unsubstantiated  choice  of  trade  union,  to  Also,  the  there  may  have  concerns  unions.  are  due t o t h e CAIMAW  whole  Boards,  to  Today,  and s u c h c o n c e r n s  problem faced  Labour  new  provide  but  used  of  to  in board d e c i s i o n s .  perhaps  applications  true  t h e b o a r d s may h a v e b e e n  legitimate  right  new b r e a k a w a y  is  represented  known and r e c o g n i z e d t r a d e  boards  of  it  that  represented  p r o b a b l y no l o n g e r a f a c t o r experience,  the  it  Labour  c o n c e r n may have b e e n u n d e r s t a n d a b l e ,  allowing legal  is  boards  that  organization for  it  1964,  understandable, therefore,  interference.  been  in  the  may be o p e r a t i n g u n d e r a c o n f l i c t  presentations,  labour  with  Although  union representatives  long-term representation  was  relationship  by  concept new  therefore,  of  unions may  the in be  \u000C- 305 -  Despite development labour the  of  scene  a new  has  traditional  to  the  the  abandoned  the  international  not  to  to  unions  been  because  serve  with  they  CLC  craft  feel  Labour  described  on  the  within  at  least  in building a  Machinists  inadequate  the  system.  change  from  new  are  suppression of to achieve  and  the  Molders  union  to  well. has  their  greatly  membership.  system  is  outnumbered,  opposition within  or  their  their  Winnipeg  Neale, that  who  reach  this  Both  Secretary  craft  time,  unions  CAIMAW's  the  expense  unions which Workers attempt  who  to  union.  either  they  Workers  None.  have who  futile.  But what r e c o u r s e  conclusion?  find  achieve  impossible, because  have  beginning  c h a n g e f r o m w i t h i n may f i n d t h e i r a t t e m p t s  workers  Alberta  in  may c o n c l u d e f r o m t h e  the  by  and  been a t  Molders,  may  were  CAIMAW.  that  largely  i n u n i o n s t h e n becomes t h e o n l y a n s w e r . provide  Paddy  admits  representation Or t h e y  form  Since  they  provided  Vancouver  and t h e  within  because  in  and e v e n  plants  to  CAIMAW  council,  workers  responsive  they  CEW,  unions,  certified  the  such  achieve  do a t t e m p t  the  CAIMAW  has o f f s e t ,  representation  Molders  industrial  adequately  experienced  A change  of  successful  and w e a k n e s s e s  fact  employees  the  and D i s t r i c t  change from w i t h i n to  join  are  and  Phillips  International  Steelworkers,  themselves  that  This  developed  autonomy  growth from p r e v i o u s l y the  the  emergence  deficiencies  itself.  and  The  IBEW  Vancouver  not  the  unions.  abandoned  of  the  d i f f i c u l t i e s previously  formed  with  international  tend  union,  against  union.  dissatisfied  the  mitigating  independent  l a b o u r movement  Workers  of  factors  illuminated certain  some e x t e n t ,  Canadian  the  Because  does of  \u000C- 306 -  the  policies  these  of  the  workers  must  representation course  viable  alternative.  exclusive the  of  be  in  of  leave  the t r a d i t i o n a l  unions,  certifications,  and  some  replace  them  undermines choice. its  a  The  \"fold\",  better  worker's CLC has  its  union  really of  replace more  been  their  choice,  pallatable. a  to  the  have  policies  contributed  within  to  its  become the  to  ranks.  accommodate a  protect  have  seems by  blame,  contribute  to  to  law,  be to  existing lax  about  certifications  a  the  position  the  therefore,  a  of  i n t h e p a t h o f w o r k e r s who w i s h  protected  itself  choosing  CLC  t h e CLC p r o t e c t s  This  \"unprincipled\"  nothing  inadequate  demanding  Yet  may  inadequate  union  if  growth o f  an  that  of  workers  to  his leave  independent  CAIMAW.  CAIMAW's have  right,  serve  raiding,  CAIMAW p r o v i d e s  these  raiding  unions  unions.  only  on  policies  obstacles  and by d o i n g s o ,  u n i o n s u c h as  perhaps  representation  international  u n i o n s , and p l a c e s  In  u n i o n s u c h as  that  and  the  l a b o u r movement c a n n o t e a s i l y  that  of these  to  CLC a l t o g e t h e r .  union  responding to t h e i r membership.  with  the  restrictions  poor  jurisdiction  themselves  independent  and  some  exclusive  resign  speculated  jurisdiction  emergence  change  either  a c t i o n , an  can  Knowing t h a t  regarding  provided, or  latter  It  CLC  change  and  union Yet in  but  the  the the  and  \"cannibalistic\"  exercise  of  the workers'  provision  of  a  representation CLC  unions  has as  acts,  used cause  with  vehicle  to  right  for  representation  CAIMAW's refuse  acceptance moral  therefore,  and  to  workers they of  the to find  workers financial  \u000C- 307 -  support  to  CAIMAW  destruction the  of  public  Indeed,  CAIMAW.  and  many  illustrated  by  movement  balance  support  basic  the  the  found  union  employer  on  protection  of  concerted  failure. Canadian  It  improved the  trade  apparent  for  important  sympathy. it.  As  established of  having hand,  strife  with  were  unions  to with  their  demanding  refused  to  put  result  was  an  The  Defiance  of  one  unions  principles.  criticism  the  on t h e in  the  to  position  workers  Canadian  union  an  1969,  affiliates  pledged  with  adhere  in  international  that  against  the  o f t h e CLC p o l i c y  contribution to  CLC  be  speculated, of  public  chances  t h e . CLC sector  that  an  is  not  a u n i o n s u c h as  Canadian a f f i l i a t e s  can  of  support  CAIMAW  difficult  its  CLC t h e  to  Foundry  that  the  inability  by of  CAIMAW.  composition  development  of  the  provided  the  of  policy  refused  Bell  While  made  offensive  a p o l i c y by i t s  has  in  a  earned  i n the Congress i t s e l f .  t h e CLC t o d e s t r o y  is  has  jurisdictions,  before  affiliates  It  itself  other.  inter-union s p l i t Canadian  at  protection  their  sectarianism  and  launch  affiliates  principle  the  to  policy  press,  strike  and  and  This  Canadian  labour  the  strikers,  able  CAIMAW.  to  mount  a  Opposition to  h a s b e e n an i m p o r t a n t f a c t o r  therefore, that  has  collective independent  that  the  occurred  as  bargaining Canadian  united  in  such its  increase  in  the  a  of  the  has  result  significantly  u n i o n can  survive  and  grow.  The e m e r g e n c e o f CAIMAW on t h e illuminated  the  existence  of  intra-union  labour relations divisions  within  s c e n e has the  ranks  also of  \u000C- 308 -  the  international  society,  unions.  were u n d e r g o i n g  strong  ties  desire  for  resentful  between  Canadian  U.  on t h e  S.  unswerving  own h i e r a r c h i c a l  security  result  was  international membership's  the union  of  their  willingness  to  their  nationalist  sentiments.  firmly  entrenched  institutions, building is its  there  a new  weakened  by  replace  the  Perhaps answers labour  some v e r y  in unions  rift  were  unions  and  are  it  CAIMAW's  affairs.  Canadian  The  an i n d e p e n d e n t  and  the  weaken  the  contributed  unions  p o s i t i o n of  their  and  leadership  to  and  the  these  overcome  international intra-union  to  shared  in  be  in  sentiments.  institutions  difficulties  inter-union  doubt  to  and  international  The  of  unions,  labour  no  membership  served  a  increasingly  these  a u n i o n whose  significant union.  the  of  experiencing  Canadian  perhaps  international  of  real  over  Canadian  desirability  becoming  between  that  position  existence  establishment  a  in  difficulties  were  their  them w i t h  r a n k s , s p l i t s which enable  despite  the  States,  and  to  rigidities  independent the  of  in  hand, o p e r a t i n g under a genuine b e l i e f  hierarchy to  many  and a m b i t i o n s , d i d n o t s h a r e  their  Because of  United  loyalty  creation  loyalty  the  domination  other  continental ism,  The  and  like  reassessment  self-assertion,  obvious  leaders,  membership,  a critical  Canada  Canadian of  The  in  unions  splits  in  Canadian union to  survive,  lies  that  faces.  greatest  needs  cannot.  by C a n a d i a n w o r k e r s  in  strength  Canadian  First, who a r e  it  society  provides  in  the  which  the  a vehicle  d i s s a t i s f i e d with  fact  it  traditional for  their  a  change  incumbent  \u000C- 309 -  union. this  Because need.  Canadian  of  rigidities  CAIMAW  also  which  philosophy,  three  support  from  union  dissidents,  dissatisfied  with  the  international  union.  of control  over  agreements  perceived Failure  of  not  groups  CLC,  with  the  for  CLC f a i l s the  dominated  to  meet  expression  by  of  international  able  resolve  the  CLC's  prohibition  on r a i d i n g .  They  CAIMAW  provide  because  can  of  on b u s i n e s s  reliance  the  membership  to  their  involved  of  h a v e had t o  look outside  alternative.  They  business  in  can  their on  lack  and a  return. to  these  from w i t h i n  exclusive  draw  hierarchy  respond  But  can  support,  received to  rebellion.  principles  u n i o n i s m , because  being  problems  union  do n o t  draw  by  have c e n t e r e d  i m p o s i t i o n by t h e  to  themselves  provided  complaint  little  it  find  the  led  viable  who  it  membership  international  at of  They  u n i o n i s m , because  making d e c i s i o n s membership  agree.  the  that the two  are  the  existing  jurisdiction the  CAIMAW's  be v i e w e d  conflict.  of  interests  their They  can  CAIMAW's  unions  can  of t h e i r  Canadian support  and  s y s t e m - and  support  u n i o n i s m can  support  international  i n the best  expense  can  this  dissidents  on t r a i n e d p r o f e s s i o n a l s who may n o t a l w a y s make d e c i s i o n s  the  interests  a  for  allow  First,  representation  unions  has  to  system,  unionists  with  international  dissatisfaction  been  trade  that  funds  practices  society.  own a f f a i r s ,  dues  and  Canadian  union  management  of  the  in  Common c a u s e s  their  drain  membership  which  vehicle  policies  from  attack  a  the  support  have  CLC s y s t e m ,  cannot.  CAIMAW's  of  the  provides  self-assertion  unions,  in  be  with  attack  on  regarded  as  larger  membership  as  American when  CAIMAW's p h i l o s o p h y  the of  \u000C- 310 -  rank  and  file  decisions  that  control, affect  dissatisfaction  for  the  membership  them, then they  they  had  has  control  can o b v i o u s l y a v o i d the  experienced  and p r o v i d e t h e m s e l v e s w i t h  Secondly,  if  with  their  draw  support  probably  particularly  the in  refusal  craft  Canadian  autonomy t h a t  form  of  a  they  exerted  Or  it  break  could take  leadership, the  salaries.  run  the  from  Canadian  form of  and  because  business  philosophy  that  been  controlled  in  the  Canadian  labour.  control,  because  worker they  on  affect,  can  It  is  States, can  places  be  their  union  for  because  represents  influence  membership.  and  as  of  positions could  and view  controlled  attack  on  as  an  They  and  Canadian business American  can  support  international  unions,  American  policy  of  domination rank  i n t h e hands o f t h e true  Canadian  stooges  complete  seen  labour.  CAIMAW's  the  dissidents,  be  seen  of  puppets  for  can  and  Canadian  CAIMAW's  decisions firmly  and t h e r e f o r e  the  a National  unions,  support  r e b e l l i o n could take  union  support  can  for  provides  unionism  international  They  the  allow  mere  i m p o s e d on C a n a d i a n  United  it  like  as  it  hierarchy,  international's  relied  therefore  Nationalists  has  seen  control  and  the  unions,  nationalists  union  because  unions  with  they  alternative.  Canadians,  attack  local  be  whom  This  officers,  a break  could  on  central  rebellion.  of  For t h i s group,  international  loosen  American  unionism,  CAIMAW's  to  nationalists,  self-assertion.  the  Canadian  they  a viable  by  the  leaders  The  CAIMAW a s  led to  their  because  American  unions,  with  over  of  sources  want.  who r e s e n t A m e r i c a n i n f l u e n c e o v e r C a n a d i a n a f f a i r s . was  the  international  the type of unionism they  CAIMAW c a n  over  and  of  file  Canadian  self-determination.  \u000C- 311 -  Finally, the  New L e f t ,  are  socialists  CAIMAW c a n  the  same f o r c e s  who  tend  to  draw  support  that  from the  gave r i s e  incorporate  nationalism  distrust  bureaucratized  power  control  workers  of  institutions.  experiences unions  to  of  the  their  Waffle  reform  own  represented  themselves  in  of  true  socialist  similarly labour  accused,  movement  CAIMAW's  attack  limitation seen  as  of  therefore,  became  their  CAIMAW's  unions  can  be  control,  the  They  because  in worker  as  can of  on  control  International  created belief through  some by  union  certain  which  pursue  to  this  of  these  such  These  the  both  and  the  even  business  socialist  philosophy  unionism's  state.  of  bureaucratized  support  goals  because  be  Canadian  can  economic  a  achievement  sovereign  can  be  They  can  international  nationalistic  CAIMAW's of  a  unions,  the  CAIMAW c o u l d n o t  because  a  the  international  socialists  of  in  group,  goals,  as  building of  towards  distrust  political  and  socialist  rank  and  power  and  file their  o f t h e i r own i n s t i t u t i o n s .  unions  t h e i r membership, f a i l e d at to wholeheartedly  unions  international  support  their  of  achievement  hindering  their  unions to prevent  the  the  To  refusal  unionism,  movement  attack seen  to  a  goal.  business  objectives  hindering  objectives.  Canadian  and  on  support  belief  ideals.  into  of  These  and have a f i r m b e l i e f  pursuit  s e e m i n g d e t e r m i n a t i o n by i n t e r n a t i o n a l  forces  to the W a f f l e group.  philosophy, by  socialist  have f a i l e d  times  to grant  socialist  dissidents, socialists achieve  a  times  to  They  nationalistic  they  socialist  be  responsive  Canadian autonomy,  objectives.  some  that  at  are state.  not  have,  and  as  a  resentment, an  adequate  Indeed,  to  failed result, and  a  vehicle  international  \u000C- 312 -  unions  have,  at  times,  actively  suppressed a l l  o f u n r e s t by u n i o n d i s s i d e n t s have l e d t o t h e on  locals  and  autonomy  have  Canadians  who  have  been  group  was  forces are  in  not  membership been  have  arrogantly refused  Under  expelled  the  an  by  attempt  to  and  1  of  the  union  They  resentment  of  to  providing the  gain  were  to  a n d many  becoming  did  not  for  respond influence  greater  forces  of  the  with  needs,  f a c t which perhaps,  exists  to date,  New  leaders,  the  three  their  international the  groups  concerns.  supporters  and  Waffle  can  These and  join  groups  leaders  no  three.  u n i o n s f a i l e d t o accommodate  significant the  next  in  Canada  decade.  by r e s p o n d i n g t o  the  quality  the  rising  autonomy. Left.  of  union  Canadian  important  And t h e y  CAIMAW  a society creates an  of  Canadian  during  They the  not  complaints  representation nationalism  did  not  accommodate  institutions in  place  has e n s u r e d i t s  does  the the  did  i n C a n a d a by l o o s e n i n g c e n t r a l  Canadian  To t h e e x t e n t t h a t there  to  greater  pressure,  all  Stirrings  trusteeships  American  union  CAIMAW  for  regarding  forces. its  redress  for  dictates  CAIMAW,  r i s i n g labour militancy  American  social  In  significant  dissidents  provided.  and  that  by  international  some i n t e r n a t i o n a l  remained  accommodate t h e  the  sentiments of a l l  In e f f e c t , forces  follow  forces.  imposition of  Pleas  dismissed  NDP.  exclusive,  doubt adhere to the  1960 s,  to  suspended.  mutually  societal  suspensions.  three  and  control respond these  accordance  f o r CAIMAW i n C a n a d a , a  survival.  \u000C- 313 -  BIBLIOGRAPHY A.  BOOKS A b e l l a , I. M . , N a t i o n a l i s m , Communism and C a n a d i a n U n i v e r s i t y of Toronto P r e s s , 1973.  Labour,  Toronto,  B e r c u s o n , D . , F o o l s and Wise Men, T o r o n t o , McGraw H i l l R y e r s o n L t d . 1 9 7 8 . Crispo, J . , International Unionism, Toronto, M c G r a w - H i l l C o . o f Canada L t d . , 1976. G o d f r e y , D . , Gordon t o Watkins t o Y o u , New P r e s s , 1 9 7 0 .  Toronto,  H a y t h o r n e , G. V . , \" C a n a d a : P o s t w a r C h a n g e s and C u r r e n t F e r m e n t \" , W o r k e r M i l i t a n c y and i t s C o n s e q u e n c e s , S. B a r k i n , (ed.) New Y o r k , P r a e g e r P u b l i s h e r s , 1 9 7 5 . H o r o w i t z , G . , Canadian Labour i n P o l i t i c s , U n i v e r s i t y o f Toronto P r e s s , 1968.  Toronto,  J a m i e s o n , S . , I n d u s t r i a l R e l a t i o n s i n C a n a d a , 2nd e d . , M a c M i l l a n o f Canada L t d . , 1 9 7 3 .  Toronto  K n o x , P . , \" B r e a k a w a y U n i o n i s m i n K i t i m a t \" , E s s a y s i n B. C. P o l i t i c a l E c o n o m y , P . . Knox and P. R e s n i c k ( e d s . ) , V a n c o u v e r , New S t a r B o o k s , 1 9 7 4 . L a x e r , R., C a n a d a ' s U n i o n s , T o r o n t o , J . L o r i m e r &amp; C o . , 1976. M i l l e r , R. U. Canadian Prentice  \" O r g a n i z e d L a b o u r and P o l i t i c s i n C a n a d a \" , L a b o u r i n T r a n s i t i o n , R. U. M i l l e r ( e d . ) , T o r o n t o , - H a l l o f Canada L t d . , 1 9 7 1 .  M o r t o n , E . , N . D . P . The Dream o f A . M. H a k k e r t L t d . , 1 9 7 4 .  Power,  Toronto,  Newman, P. C , Home C o u n t r y , T o r o n t o , M c C l e l l a n d &amp; Steward L t d . , 1973. Newman, P. C , The D i s t e m p e r o f O u r T i m e s , M c C l e l l a n d &amp; Steward L t d . , 1968.  Toronto,  R e s n i c k , P . , \" T h e B r e a k a w a y Movement i n T r a i l \" , E s s a y s i n B. C. P o l i t i c a l E c o n o m y , P. Knox and P. R e s n i c k ( e d s . ) , V a n c o u v e r , New S t a r B o o k s , 1 9 7 4 . S a l u t i n , R., The O r g a n i z e r , T o r o n t o , James L o r i m e r &amp; C o . , 1 9 8 0 .  \u000C- 314 -  NEWSPAPERS AND PERIODICALS A d a m s , R.,  \" U . S.  Industrial B.  C.  Business  Labour L i n k Under  Relations,  vol.  Stress\",  1 5 , no. 3, Oct.  1976.  Week, May 9 , 1 9 7 9 .  Bulletin,  vol.  1, n o .  1, S e p t .  1 9 6 5 , CAIMAW U n i o n  Files.  Bulletin,  vol.  2,  1, A p r i l  1 9 6 6 , CAIMAW U n i o n  Files.  no.  CAIMAW M i n e r , v a r i o u s CAIMAW N e w s , N o v .  issues,  2 7 , 1979.  CAIMAW R e v i e w , v a r i o u s  issues,  C a n a d i a n U n i o n News, v o l CEW L i v e w i r e ,  vol.  Copper M i n e r , v o l . Financial  Post,  1978-1981.  1,  5,  1967-1981.  no. 2,  1976.  issue 2, A p r i l  1, n o . 5,  Nov.  1 9 6 7 , CAIMAW U n i o n  1979.  May 1 2 , 1 9 7 9 .  H a c k e t t , R., \" W a f f l e \" , C a n a d i a n D i m e n s i o n , S p e c i a l v o l . 1 5 , nos. 1 &amp; 2, Oct/Nov. 1980. Labour R e l a t i o n s  Board R e p o r t ,  B.  C.  Labour R e l a t i o n s  Board R e p o r t ,  B.  C. 4 7 / 7 6 .  Labour R e l a t i o n s  Board R e p o r t ,  B.  C. 9 1 / 7 6 .  Review, v o l . Vancouver Sparker, Vancouver  Province,  Winnipeg  Nov.  Edition  Files.  2, 1979.  M a r c h 1 9 6 8 , CAIMAW U n i o n Sun, various  Waffle  16/75.  3 , n o . 3 , J u n e 1 9 6 7 , CAIMAW U n i o n  Vermilion Miner,  Files.  Files.  i s s u e s , 1966-1980.  undated.  Free P r e s s ,  various  Winnipeg T r i b u n e , various  i s s u e s , 1 9 6 4 - 1 9 7 4 , CAIMAW U n i o n  i s s u e s , 1 9 6 4 - 1 9 7 0 , CAUMAW U n i o n  File  Files.  \u000C- 315 -  C.  B U L L E T I N S AND PAMPHLETS B l a c k l i s t e d Lenkurt Workers, CAIMAW U n i o n F i l e s .  \"The Lenkurt S e l l o u t \" ,  Canadian E l e c t r i c a l Workers U n i o n , \" E l e c t i o n CAIMAW U n i o n F i l e s .  undated,  Bulletin\",  undated,  \" C o n c e r n i n g a M e r g e r o f t h e CEWU w i t h t h e C a n a d i a n A s s o c i a t i o n o f I n d u s t r i a l M e c h a n i c a l a n d A l l i e d W o r k e r s \" , CEW N e w s l e t t e r , O c t . 2 , 1 9 6 9 , CAIMAW U n i o n F i l e s . International Brotherhood o f E l e c t r i c a l Workers, L o c a l 2 6 4 \" , u n d a t e d , CAIMAW U n i o n F i l e s .  \"Bulletin  Members o f IBEW L o c a l 2 1 3 Who Want U n i o n D e m o c r a c y , n o . 1 , J u l y 7 , 1 9 6 6 , CAIMAW U n i o n F i l e s . Members o f L o c a l 2 1 3 IBEW, \" V o t e O u t E x e c u t i v e J u l y , 1 9 6 6 , CAIMAW U n i o n F i l e s .  no. 2,  \"Bulletin\"  Dictatorship\"  P r o g r e s s i v e Workers Movement, Trade Union C o m m i t t e e , \" L e n k u r t S t r i k e - U. S. D o m i n a t i o n o r C a n a d i a n I n d e p e n d e n c e ? \" u n d a t e d , CAIMAW U n i o n F i l e s . U n i t e d S t e e l w o r k e r s o f A m e r i c a , \"What i s a Company U n i o n \" , u n d a t e d , CAIMAW U n i o n F i l e s . D.  UNION NOTES, PAPERS AND DOCUMENTS Cameron, J .  Reimer,  V. and W a l k e r ,  C ,  \"Lenkurt  Strike\",  u n p u b l i s h e d m a n u s c r i p t , B C I T , May 1 9 7 1 , CAIMAW U n i o n  Files.  Canadian A s s o c i a t i o n o f I n d u s t r i a l C o n s t i t u t i o n , 1968.  Mechanical  and A l l i e d  Workers,  Canadian A s s o c i a t i o n o f I n d u s t r i a l C o n s t i t u t i o n , 1970.  Mechanical  and A l l i e d  Workers,  Canadian A s s o c i a t i o n o f I n d u s t r i a l C o n s t i t u t i o n , 1971.  Mechanical  and A l l i e d  Workers,  Canadian A s s o c i a t i o n o f I n d u s t r i a l C o n s t i t u t i o n , 1978.  Mechanical  and A l l i e d  Workers,  Canadian A s s o c i a t i o n o f I n d u s t r i a l M e c h a n i c a l and A l l i e d W o r k e r s , \"1979 N a t i o n a l Convention K i t \" , P o l i c y R e s o l u t i o n no. 3 3 , CAIMAW N a t i o n a l C o n v e n t i o n , 1 9 7 9 , W i n n i p e g M a n i t o b a , May 2 4 - 2 7 , 1 9 7 9 . Canadian Congress o f Labour,  C o n s t i t u t i o n , 1978.  \u000C- 316 CAIMAW L o c a l 1 ( B . C ) , \" S t a t e m e n t u n d a t e d , CAIMAW U n i o n F i l e s .  of  Grievances\",  Cayley, D., \"Draft f o r This Magazine,\" 1980, CAIMAW U n i o n F i l e s . CEW,  P o l i c y R e s o l u t i o n s , 2nd C o n v e n t i o n , 1 9 6 8 , CAIMAW U n i o n F i l e s .  CEW,  \" P r o v i n c i a l Labour Boards are U n f a i r t o Independent Canadian U n i o n s \" , Open C o r r e s p o n d e n c e t o a l l M L A ' s , J u n e 2 6 , 1 9 6 9 , CAIMAW U n i o n F i l e s .  General E x e c u t i v e Board o f the Canadian A s s o c i a t i o n o f I n d u s t r i a l M e c h a n i c a l and A l l i e d Workers \" M i n u t e s o f M e e t i n g \" , June 1 4 , 1964. General E x e c u t i v e Board o f the Canadian A s s o c i a t i o n o f I n d u s t r i a l M e c h a n i c a l and A l l i e d Workers \" M i n u t e s o f M e e t i n g \" , J u n e 2 0 , 1 9 7 0 , CAIMAW U n i o n F i l e s . General E x e c u t i v e Board o f the Canadian A s s o c i a t i o n o f I n d u s t r i a l M e c h a n i c a l and A l l i e d Workers \" M i n u t e s o f M e e t i n g \" , S e p t 2 6 , 1 9 7 0 , CAIMAW U n i o n F i l e s . I n t e r n a t i o n a l M o l d e r s and A l l i e d Workers Union \" S t a t e m e n t C h a r g e s \" A p r i l 8 , 1 9 6 4 , CAIMAW U n i o n F i l e s . I n t e r n a t i o n a l M o l d e r s and A l l i e d Workers Union \" N o t i c e S u s p e n s i o n \" , A p r i l 8 , 1 9 6 4 , CAIMAW U n i o n F i l e s .  of  of  L i t t l e , W., P l a n t Manager L e n k u r t E l e c t r i c , T r a n s c r i p t o f g i v e n t o C. W a l k e r , May 1 9 7 1 , CAIMAW U n i o n F i l e s . List  of Seating of Delegates CAIMAW U n i o n F i l e s .  f o r 1970 C o n v e n t i o n  Motion o f General M e e t i n g , Local CAIMAW U n i o n F i l e s .  1 CEW, S e p t 9 , 1970  O f f i c e r s o f CEW, \" S t a t e m e n t C o n c e r n i n g A c c o u n t o f M e r g e r J a n 3 , 1 9 7 0 , CAIMAW U n i o n F i l e s . Poughkay, D., T r a n s c r i p t o f i n t e r v i e w given t o J . May 9 , 1 9 7 1 , CAIMAW U n i o n F i l e s . Resolutions  f o r 1970 C o n v e n t i o n , CAIMAW U n i o n  \"Shop Stewards Succamore, Sept.  C o u r s e \" , CAIMAW L o c a l  Meetings\",  Cameron,  Files.  1 8 , CAIMAW U n i o n  J . , \" R e p o r t t o Local 1 (B. C.) 9 , 1 9 7 0 , CAIMAW U n i o n F i l e s .  United Steelworkers  interview  General  Files.  Meeting\",  o f America, C o n s t i t u t i o n , 1979.  \u000C- 317 -  PERSONAL  INTERVIEWS  Alton, M., D i s t r i c t Representative, America. Atkins,  G.,  Bloomquist,  Industrial D.,  Relations  President,  United Steelworkers  Officer, Gibraltar  CAIMAW L o c a l  of  Mines  18.  Cameron, P., Regional V i c e - P r e s i d e n t , Canadian A s s o c i a t i o n I n d u s t r i a l M e c h a n i c a l and A l l i e d W o r k e r s . Fairfield,  L.,  Chief,  Industrial  Relations,  Industrial  Relations  M a n a g e r o f a B.  Industrial  Relations  Practitioner  Placer  C. open p i t  i n a B.  of  Developments.  mine.  C. o p e n p i t  mine.  McEvoy, P., Regional V i c e - P r e s i d e n t , Canadian A s s o c i a t i o n of I n d u s t r i a l M e c h a n i c a l and A l l i e d W o r k e r s . Member o f C a n a d i a n A s s o c i a t i o n o f A l l i e d Workers. Mining  Employee  Neale,  P.,  Pitt.  Secretary,  Vancouver  Industrial  and D i s t r i c t L a b o u r  A . , P r e s i d e n t , Canadian A s s o c i a t i o n of and A l l i e d W o r k e r s .  Representative  o f B.  C.  Mechanical  Federation  of  Council.  Industrial  Industrial  Succamore, J . , S e c r e t a r y - T r e a s u r e r , Canadian A s s o c i a t i o n I n d u s t r i a l M e c h a n i c a l and A l l i e d W o r k e r s . Research  Mechanical  Labour.  Rodocker, M., O r g a n i z e r , Canadian A s s o c i a t i o n of M e c h a n i c a l and A l l i e d W o r k e r s .  Warrion,  and  D i r e c t o r , United Steelworkers  of  of  America.  OTHER SOURCES A t h e r t o n , P. and B o r d e l e a u , G . , \" T h e G i b r a l t a r D i s p u t e \" , u n p u b l i s h e d m a n u s c r i p t , U . B . C . , Dec. 1978. Thompson, M . , \"The E v o l v i n g R o l e o f Canadians i n I n t e r n a t i o n a l U n i o n s \" , paper p r e s e n t e d t o the 17th Annual C o n f e r e n c e , Canadian I n d u s t r i a l R e l a t i o n s A s s o c i a t i o n , June 1-3, 1980.  "@en
<https://open.library.ubc.ca/cIRcle/collections/ubctheses/831/items/1.0095449>