The BC Carpenters Union is noted for lively conventions and this year should be no exception. It is expected there will be heated and exciting discussion of issues around the dispute with the international over Canadian autonomy and the democratic rights of members to vote on the governance and structure of their organization.
Jerry Coelho, who represents the Brick and Allied Craft Union of Canada in Ontario, has been invited to comment and field questions on their recent successful confrontation with their international body.
The convention this year has been scheduled a little earlier than usual because of the lateness of the Easter Holiday has put hotel space at a premium.
April 13 to 15, Holiday Inn, Downtown Vancouver

McCarron breaches two sections of Labour Code
BC Law stops International in its tracks for now
by Doug McCorquodale
Until now, repeated warnings by the British Columbia carpenters leadership that any forced mergers of Local unions imposed by the International would be a breach of BC labour law have fallen on deaf ears in Washington. But in a Labour Relations Board decision released on February 17, 2000, the Board found that the International breached two sections of the Labour Code when it tried to force a merger of Dawson Creek Local 1237 School Board Maintenance workers into Fort St. John Local 2397.
The events that led to a Labour Board decision against the international began less than a year ago.
In April of 1999 the construction locals in Northern British Columbia (Local 1237 in Dawson Creek and Prince George Local 1998) concluded a merger agreement wherein Local 1237 would merge into Local 1998. The membership in both locals voted overwhelmingly to approve the merger. They then sent a routine request to Washington for its approval.
The International Union 10th District Board member James Smith sent Alberta International Union Representative Ray Drisdelle to Northern British Columbia to investigate. There was no indication from Drisdelle, Smith or International President Doug McCarron that the merger would be approved in any other form than already agreed to by the membership in the Locals. It came as a complete surprise when McCarron carved out the school board members of Local 1237 and transferred them into the all-employee Fort St. John School Board Local 2397. McCarron approved the merging of the remaining construction members of Local 1237 into Local 1998.
All this was contrary to the agreed merger between Locals 1237 and 1998. Local 1237 and local 2397 never voted on a merger between themselves.
Locals 1237 and 1998 appealed to the UBC General Executive Board to overturn McCarron’s decision. This appeal was denied. The locals then made an application to the Labour Relations Board under sections 10 and 37. Section 10 deals with the denial of natural justice. Section 37 sanctions the transferring of bargaining rights between unions.

Natural justice denied
Section 10 deals with the principles of natural justice, setting out procedural rights requiring notice in the form of the right to know the particulars of any case against individuals or groups.
Board vice-chair Laura Parkinson wrote, “There is also a right to a hearing, the ability to call evidence and introduce documents, the right to cross-examine and to make submissions. The obligation to respect natural justice also requires trade union decision-making bodies to provide reasonable notice of the proceedings. A breach of natural justice can be founded on the absence of notice and the opportunity to make submissions.”
Parkinson found that the International violated Section 10 of the Code. She stated that the International’s propensity to issue edicts without reasons breaches the principles of natural justice. Parkinson concluded that the lack of notice and the failure of the International General President to offer reasons for his forced merger decision produced a breach of natural justice.
The Board decision also concluded that the International could have corrected itself and avoided a natural justice breach of the Labour Code. The General Office appeal procedure to challenge the International President’s decision was flawed. The Board vice-chair concluded, “The combination of the absence of reasons at the first level with the lack of an opportunity to cross-examine leads me to conclude that the defect in natural justice has not been cured. Although those two grounds provide sufficient basis taken by themselves for that finding, yet a further issue arises in relation to the adequacy of the reasons of the General Executive Board. The decision of the General Executive Board is most brief.”
Besides denying a fair hearing the International’s fondness for issuing edicts and pronouncements on decisions without reasons damaged their case severely. The Board pounced on the fact that even with the most “charitable reading” of the International’s decision there was no explanation, just conclusions. In addition, the appeal was dismissed by a “simple confirmation of the General President’s decision, which in turn had no reasons.”
The Board vice-chair went on to say, “I am mindful that unions are not organizations run by lawyers, nor should they be (and) the Board does not expect internal union bodies to render a decision with the same complexity as a Supreme Court judgment (and so) the degree of formality and completeness required may be tied to the level of sophistication of the union body that is being challenged.”
The vice-chair’s view of the International leadership is embarrassing. “In this case a different level of sophistication would be expected of the General Executive Board as the highest level of the union hierarchy. At the very least, some statement would be expected of such a body as to why it reached the conclusion it did. I do not consider that minimal standard to be unduly onerous yet it was not met in this case.”

Section 37 also violated
The International’s proclamation forcing mergers contrary to the Local memberships’ wishes also violate Section 37. The Board noted that even if it was wrong about the breach of Section 10, the International’s forced merger edict would still fail because of Section 37 law on the transferring of bargaining rights.
The law in British Columbia requires that before unions may merge they must apply for a Section 37 application to the Labour Relations Board. Unions can use their constitutions to merge but there is no merger in place until a Board application is made and a declaration issued. Furthermore, apart from any union constitutional provision, the law requires that the merging unions that are the predecessor and successor unions, together with the affected members must give clear approval to the merger. Approval “is accomplished by having a majority of employees in a meeting convened for that purpose on adequate notice support resolutions in favour of succession.”

Vote required
The Board also ruled that it does “not accept the submission of the International that no vote is required where two locals of the same parent merge.”
The Board found that a vote of the membership is required to effect a merger whether it is between two different unions or among locals in the same union. The Board found that it could not find a “distinction in principle that would require a vote where there is a merger between separate organizations, but no vote in a merger between other entities where there is an overarching relationship between the locals through the parent-local connection.” It was obvious to the Board, “If the underlying policy is driven by a concern to ensure that the democratic will of the employees is respected, the same requirement for proof of employee support should be required in both instances.”

More cases pending
There are further applications before the Labour Relations board. These applications further confront McCarron’s restructuring attempt to carve another regional council out of the Provincial Council. In a recent proclamation, G.P. McCarron merged locals on Vancouver Island without membership votes in preparation to create a new regional council. The Board noted this in its decision, “Rather than pursuing further litigation in this case and the related applications, it may make more sense to explore other alternatives. From this decision, it should be clear to the International that before bargaining rights can be transferred, there should be proof of employee support.”

International warned
The International has come to British Columbia many times over the last twenty years to interfere in the vested rights of the members. Every time there has been prolonged litigation. Every time the International has taken a shellacking. British Columbia Carpenters have warned the International on every occasion that the UBC constitution does not override the legislative statutory rights afforded British Columbia workers. The law of British Columbia supercedes the UBC Constitution. The International has continued to ignore this fact and continues to tilt at windmills. Their continued arrogance is expected.

Expensive cases
The membership continues to suffer because of the International’s nonsense. The expenditure of funds and energy needed to preserve the vested democratic voting rights of the membership from the depredations of the General Office is the great shame of the International.
Recently another International Union (IATSE) tried to impose trusteeship on a Local Canadian union (IATSE projectionists). The British Columbia Labour Relations Board sent that International packing as well.
Despite all this, the struggle continues. The International, in its arrogance, is trying to appeal the Labour Board ruling. The International has antagonized the membership in British Columbia and there is a growing opposition to McCarron in the United States

PRESIDENT’S CORNER by Len Embree
Final decision rests with the membership
Difficult negotiations finally wrapped up
As the chair of the Negotiating Committee, I would like to make some comments about some of the difficulties that the committee encountered in this round of bargaining.
The particulars of the actual Memorandum of Agreement are reported in other sections of this paper (See page 1 and page 7). I would like to direct my remarks to the activities that surrounded the actual bargaining process.
To say it was one of the most difficult I have been involved in would be an understatement. We were in the second year with no agreement, and had minimal strength across the trades. Our own membership was very much in a survival mode, with the political climate almost identical to the one that existed in Alberta in the late ’80s, just prior to deunionization there, and facing a provincial election probably within the next year. Not the circumstances that allow for any bluster while staying responsible to the membership. All the adversity aside, the committee made a conscious effort to keep in touch with the membership, and I have to say we were impressed with their grasp on reality.
The agreement is far from perfect; however, the cuts have been kept to a minimum, and I’m confident that we have a structure that we can build on. The Negotiating Committe worked very hard to arrive at the Memorandum. We are optimistic that after thoughtful consideration of all the circumstances, the membership will support the committee’s recommendation of acceptance.
Ratification meetings are being scheduled by all Carpenter Local Unions, and hopefully will be concluded prior to convention in April.
I also would like to say, for the record, that International interference in our union made these negotiations even more difficult. Be that as it may, we were able to focus on collective bargaining as a priority.
Now we should be able to shift our focus to making structural changes in our union that have the support of our members. Predictably, the International will continue to be obstructionist and to promote their view that they know what’s best for our membership. Which always leads back to the question, “What kind of trade union would deny their members the right to vote?” The same kind that California General Executive Board Member Draper belongs to when he advised a brother in the Kootenays to, “quit hiding behind democracy up there [in BC].”
Our Provincial Council convention is scheduled for April 13 to 15, and presents a tremendous opportunity for our union to debate the issues and strike off in a new direction for the new Millennium. We are anticipating input from all areas of the province in setting in place the tools and structures to maintain a membership controlled and directed union. Although these are times of considerable adversity, there also is the potential for great gains to be made by the trade union movement. With all the political upheaval being faced by our members, they will be turning more to their union to assist in the struggle. The task ahead is for us to meet that challenge with an open democratic structure that encourages membership participation. I am convinced that we will meet that challenge.

Eight Ontario Locals want to leave SEIU to join CAW
Service Workers vote to breakaway from International
More than 10,000 SEIU Canada members have overwhelmingly supported a decision by their elected local union leaders to leave their Washington-based union and join the Canadian Auto Workers. In an overwhelming display of support for their suspended leaders, 10,788 local members endorsed the idea of a merger with the Canadian Auto Workers. The merger was favoured by 98.8 per cent of the 10,916 who voted, with 107 opposed and 2 spoiled ballots.
The workers, members of eight locals of the Service Employees International Union in Ontario representing some 30,000 people, work mostly as home health care workers, practical nurses and other service workers in the retail, education, manufacturing and entertainment fields.
When learning of the move shortly before the vote, the International promptly suspended the executives and placed the locals under trusteeship. The vote was held despite an injunction granted by the Ontario Court of Justice favouring the International so it has no legal weight as yet.
Along with the vote, SEIU’s Ontario members are sending a petition with about 10,000 signatures demanding their Washington-appointed trustee, Sharleen Stewart, schedule an official vote on leaving the union within 15 days. If Stewart doesn’t respect that petition, said Ken Brown, a suspended local president, SEIU members will go to court to get the petition enforced.
“It looks like an overwhelming mandate from the membership to leave SEIU,” said CAW president Buzz Hargrove after the vote.
In February, 800 executive members of the eight locals unanimously decided to seek a vote to leave the 1.3 million member International and join with the Canadian Auto Workers. Stewart then put the locals under trusteeship and got protection from the courts when the judge, Donald Cameron, found that the eight presidents, since dismissed by the International, had acted in “bad faith” because they “secretly negotiated with the auto workers, failed to give proper notice under the union’s constitution, and removed property from local union offices.”
When Cameron upheld the trusteeship granted by the Washington-based union over the affairs of the eight locals, including their finances, Stewart boasted, “We’ve kicked the butt of Buzz Hargrove.”
Hargrove responded that although the vote doesn’t yet have the validity of a dissaffiliation, “The heavy-handedness of the SEIU says to me, ‘We don’t give a damn what the members say.’” He continued, “In the short term, you can stand pretty arrogant on that position. But in the long term, the members’ wishes must be adhered to.”
An angry Hargrove said SEIU has shown itself as another “Washington-based union that doesn’t respect the right of Canadian workers to decide what union they want to belong to.”
But based on numerous similar battles won over the years with US-based unions, Hargrove predicts if a majority of SEIU members decide to join the CAW, they’ll be upheld in the courts or by the labour board even if it takes months or years. It took 10 years for the East Coast fishermen to win their fight to leave the Washington-based United Food and Commercial Workers to join CAW.
The main reason for considering a merger with the CAW is to gain more independence for Canadian SEIU members, said Brown, “And the union’s Washington leaders have just made our case,” he said. “That’s what they really think about Canadian autonomy.”
The SEIU international has charged the CAW with raiding under the Canadian Labour Congress constitution. The 243,00 member CAW could be booted out of the Congress if found guilty. After a two-day CLC Executive meeting, CLC president Ken Georgetti appointed a three-member committee to see if a solution can be found. Hargrove, who described the meeting as a healthy debate, said any solution cannot ignore the wishes of the elected leadership of the eight locals.
“I don’t see this as a raid,” he said. “It’s their (SEIU) members who made this decision.”
“The membership is outraged by the International’s heavy-handedness, which tends to stiffen the resolve of people, not weaken it. That’s what’s happened here,” Brown said. “This may not be an official vote, but it’s a clear signal to all concerned as to exactly where our members are at.”
International supporter Mark Ortlieb, president of SEIU Local 204 in south central Ontario, said, “The CAW is not welcome in our house,” calling the suspended local leaders “nothing more than self serving scoundrels.” He concluded, “A strong Union must be based on democracy. It exists to improve the lives of working people and their families. The CAW has violated these principles. SEIU will do everything in its power to stop this illegal CAW action.”
The vote—held despite the court order—may lead to contempt proceedings against leaders of the bid to join the CAW, Stewart threatened.
Local 528 president Brett Goodall concluded simply, “My membership wants the CAW—no more dues going to the US.”

Spotlight on Organizing by Josh Coles
Workers, not business, over regulated
Unions suffer most from government red tape
Contractors and developers constantly whine about being over-regulated. They cry that red tape is driving them out of business, but the real fact is it is workers and their organizers who are over regulated. We face countless government rules on when and where to talk to workers, how to sign membership cards, time limits on certifying companies, and restrictions that prohibit us from disturbing the “natural flow of business.”
When we know there are unsafe work practises, work continues. We still have to call WCB so they can investigate and only then can something be done to rectify an unsafe condition.
Instead of work stoppages, we fill-out Fair Wage complaint forms to prove that everyone is underpaid. After a long investigation workers may or may not finally get their proper pay.
And there are miles and miles of other labour law red tape.
Increasing law and order in the workplace is opposite to the deregulatory trend enjoyed by big business. While politicians and CEO’s happily hack away at business and trade regulations, environmental protection legislation and the government’s ability to protect the whole community, unions always seem to escape talk of deregulation.
In fact, if the business community had their way, governments would even further restrict workers’ rights to form unions. The BC Chamber of Commerce and Small Business Coalition support increasing Labour Board red tape to hamper free collective bargaining with employers.
Labour law is a double-edged sword. Since we have moved our fights with employers from the shop floors and streets and into the courtrooms, governments can change the rules on us and make it nearly impossible to “legally” organize. Just as governments can “give” us rights they can also take them away with the stroke of the same pen.
The “appropriate bargaining” case has hurt BC Carpenters Union organizing efforts several times. Three years ago the Operating Engineers applied for certification of Vertex Construction. Vertex responded by inviting CLAC, an employer-driven union, to sign its workers. We then applied for the carpenters. Even though the Building Trades were first in the door, we have all been waiting two-and-half years for the Labour Board to determine who is “most appropriate.” Meanwhile, the company has finished the job and left the province, leaving the workers wondering how unions protect them. This is a clear case of over-regulation helping business avoid unions.
We need an alternative to legalistic mechanisms that are supposedly designed to protect workers. It has been a long time since we’ve heard any Premier, or Prime Minister, much less Labour Board, talk about promoting real workplace democracy. While the battle to restore “fairness” in labour law is important, even a victory in this campaign still leaves us with the basic assumption of law that the natural state of the workplace is union-free with workers having and needing few rights. This has to change.

Bargaining ground on for months to reach 'best deal available'
Memorandum of agreement initialed
COUNCIL COMMENT by Dave Flynn
On February 7, following a very long and difficult round of bargaining, the Provincial Council of Carpenters Negotiating Committee finally concluded a Memorandum of Agreement with CLRA covering the Industrial-Commercial-Institutional construction sector for carpenter union members.
This set of negotiations differed greatly from any other I’ve been involved in. Most of the contractors at the table had very little work. The union sector was struggling with a minority share of the commercial-institutional market. There was no appetite with either the Bargaining Council or the employers to take economic action through a strike or lockout. The only real motivation seemed to be the realization on both sides that they would benefit from the stability of having a collective agreement in place prior to a change in government.
Against that background, bargaining ground on for months, with the employers attempting to negotiate a deal similar to a CLAC agreement and the Union trying to keep cuts to a minimum. The outcome was a deal that no one was particularly happy with, but under the circumstances, the Negotiating Committee feels is the best deal available to us.
The basis for the settlement was an agreement that the Union, providing there is non-union or alternate union competition, cannot arbitrarily withhold enabling. Framework agreements were drafted for every area of the province that will establish the minimum enabling for commercial-institutional construction for that region. The Joint Advisory Committee will review these frameworks at least every three months and, where possible, the rates can be adjusted upwards. The enabling frameworks also include a Lather Addendum that will allow for piecework rates for drywall, to be mutually agreed between the employer and the Union. The rate for work on bulk loading terminals and breweries in the Lower Mainland and Vancouver Island will be $2 per hour over the framework rate for the area.
With that established, the employers dropped most of their demands for hard cuts to the agreement. There were; however, some hard changes agreed to. They include the eight-hour day, and time and one-half for the first two hours overtime Monday to Friday and time and one-half for the first eight hours on Saturday. The option for a Living Out Allowance at a rate of $70 per day, seven days a week, is also provided for in the agreement.
In the Commercial-Institutional sector, the two holidays that were floated in the last agreement, Heritage Day and the Friday before Labour Day, were changed once again. In their place, employees can now designate their birthday, or the Monday or Friday closest to their birthday, and additionally, they may designate any one day in the calendar month which comes six months after their birthday.

Industrial increase
With the unions having more influence in the Industrial Sector, we were able to negotiate an increase to the Industrial rates in exchange for the eight-hour day and time and one-half provisions. Twenty-five-cent increases in each of the three years of the agreement will bring the industrial journeyperson rate up to $26.80 by May 1, 2002. The first 25-cent increase will become effective immediately after the memorandum is approved and the new conditions implemented. The holidays in the Industrial Sector will remain as they currently are unless they are changed for all at the Main Table negotiations.
The Council officers have been attending called meetings around the province over the past two months for the purpose of ratifying the Memorandum of Agreement. The recommendation of the Negotiating Committee is to approve the Memorandum.

LEVEL LETTERS
Expelled members appeals to General Convention
Reimann launches appeal

Brothers & Sisters: The following is the appeal I have submitted to the General Convention. It has been sent to Andris Silins and the General Executive Board of the UBC.
John Reimann

Appeal to General Convention

I hereby appeal my conviction for disobedience to authority as well as my expulsion from the Union. I am appealing to the General Convention to overturn this conviction and my expulsion.

I believe that the very premise under which I have been charged, convicted and expelled is faulty. Any worker has the right to walk off any job any time that he or she chooses. This right was settled by the Civil War, under which "involuntary servitude" was abolished. If a worker has the right to walk off the job, then they have the right to discuss and advocate this with their co-workers. Of course, there may be consequences to such action: The employer may fire or otherwise discipline those workers. Nobody is contesting that. However, it is not the Union's job to act on behalf of the employer.

It is true that the Union had signed a "no strike" agreement, which bound the Union as a labor organization not to cause its members to walk off the job. This agreement cannot eliminate the individual members' rights, however, just so long as there is no attempt to portray their actions as being taken on behalf of the Union itself. In fact, no members (to my knowledge) ever did this and, in fact, the Union was never found to have been in violation of the no-strike pledge. In other words, no violation of this pledge occurred.

Furthermore, even if we had been in violation of some section of the Union by-laws or constitution, there was no attempt at the time to so warn us. Gary Martin, President of the NCCRC, spoke to us on the afternoon of the first day of the wildcat and he made no attempt whatsoever to so warn us or to indicate that we might be in violation. In fact, Mike Draper himself, in a letter sent to all the locals, merely stated that he would bring charges if a wildcat were conducted again in the future. This letter was sent after the end of the wildcat strike.

These charges are a clear attempt to violate my rights, as well as the rights of others, to freedom of speech and freedom of association.

The charges against me are based on the claim of Mike Draper that I "caused" (his word) the wildcat strike at the S.F. airport on May 20-24 of 1999. I note that some 2,000 carpenters as well as some 3,000 other tradesworkers participated in this wildcat, which lasted four days. It is ridiculous on the face of it to even think that any one person could "cause" such an action. In fact, according to one of Draper's own witnesses, the carpenters at the airport were discussing a wildcat strike as early as May 10 or possibly even before. At that time I knew of no members who were working at the airport, I had never worked there, and I had never even been to the job.

This fact was pointed out by me during the trial and was totally ignored in the verdict of the trial panel. (In fact, if anyone "caused" the wildcat strike, it was the General President and John Casey, Executive Secretary Treasurer of the Northern California Carpenters Regional Council. They "caused" it in the sense that they set up the situation under which so many members felt angry and unable to express their anger in any other form. Mike Draper, as an International officer, by remaining silent in the face of the actions of John Casey and Doug McCarron, must also shoulder some of the blame.)

Mike Draper's claim is an insult to those thousands of union members and reminds me of the position of the Southern segregationists during the period of the civil rights movement. At that time, they claimed that "their" people were happy and the trouble was only due to a few "outside agitators" who were coming down there stirring up the problem. In fact, union-busting corporations today, in trying to fend off union organizing campaigns, make similar claims about their workers.

I had a whole series of witnesses testify that, in effect, I did not "cause" the strike and that the members walked off because they were angry over the contract and over not being able to vote on the contract. The trial panel simply disregarded this testimony as "not credible" without any explanation.

Furthermore, the trial panel stated that my refusal to explain the workings of Working Carpenters for a Stronger Union "weighed heavily against" me in their decision. Yet, during the course of the trial I strongly objected to their questioning me along those lines, and after discussing it amongst themselves they admitted that such questions were not proper. That is, they accept that the questions were not proper yet convict me because, in large measure, I refused to answer those questions. For this reason alone, my conviction should be thrown out.

The three prosecution witnesses testified that they saw me standing on the back of a pickup truck giving speeches (on different occasions). Yet they all three admitted that they saw others doing the same thing. This is coupled with the fact that nearly 100 members signed a petition which was submitted and which stated that I had done nothing fundamentally different from those who signed the petition. Draper never commented on these facts, nor did the trial panel when they wrote the verdict; this was entirely ignored.

I have been convicted by a trial panel that on the one hand ignored their very own rulings during the trial and on the other hand completely discounted the evidence of my witnesses as "not credible" without giving a single reason and also completely ignored the contradictions of the evidence of the accuser's witnesses.

It is clear why the trial panel has acted in this manner: The procedure under which I was tried (Section 14-d) clearly does not afford due process, and is established to carry out the dictates and wishes of the General Executive Board and the General President; it does not act independently. One member of the General Executive Board charges me and then this member's superior and political ally (the General President) appoints the trial panel. I would note that this trial panel was composed of three executive secretary treasurers of regional councils, and that all three of them owe their position to having been appointed by the General President in the first place. I have had long-standing open differences with the current regime, and it is clear that this was a major underlying reason for these charges being brought and for the verdict of expulsion to be handed down.

What we have had amounts to the prosecution appointing the judge, the jury and the executioner.

The trial panel's decision, upheld by the General Executive Board is most ironic considering the fact that General President McCarron, according to his own statements, has helped lead wildcat strikes in Southern California. In 1993, Rolling Stone magazine interviewed McCarron when he was the Executive Secretary Treasurer of the Los Angeles District Council of Carpenters. Here is what they printed in their Nov. 11, 1993 issue: "McCarron also remembers that he himself started out in union politics as a 20 year old 'hothead' leading unauthorized strikes against builders in the San Fernando Valley." Furthermore, we have the case of the wildcat strike in Alberta Canada just recently. This is the Canadian Province of which Martyn Piper (one of my trial panel members) is the Executive Secretary Treasurer. Nobody was brought up on charges in that case. In fact, during my trial, I produced the example of a walkoff that was orchestrated by the Carpenters Union and the rest of the building trades just a few years back to protest attacks against the state's prevailing wage law. This was ignored by the trial panel in their findings.

The simple fact that the charges were not timely should cause them to be thrown out. The accuser hid behind the fiction of constitutional charges, bit in fact, these charges were really based on an alleged violation of Trade Rules (violation of the "no strike" pledge). On this basis alone they should have been thrown out, since they were filed well past the 30-day limit for such charges.

In conclusion, what the struggle in Northern California (and throughout the UBC) has been and still is all about is this: for quite a few years, our International leadership has been determined to direct our union towards an alliance with the unionized contractors in the mistaken goal of helping them "compete" with the non-union. At present, this goes under the name of "recapturing market share" (a big business term, not a union one). If allowed to continue, it will inevitably mean that our union is lead further and further down the road of attempting to become nothing but another employment agency, under which our leadership skims a fat fee off the top and leaves the working members at poverty wages.

Mike Draper made clear his concerns during the course of the trial: He brought in quotes from the ABC and statements on how the wildcat might influence judges and politicians. On the other hand, he demonstrated that he has not the slightest knowledge of what is actually happening out in the field. Furthermore, he dismissed as irrelevant what the membership thinks and wants and feels. This is the inevitable result of his pro-contractor "market share" philosophy. That the trial panel clearly took the same approach is just proof that Draper is not alone in this disastrous approach.

This approach cannot work. Already, it is proven by the fact that despite a massive boom, our membership has scarcely increased and the per centage of work that is being done union has not increased. In the next recession, if the direction is not reversed, then our Union is likely to be devastated.

These charges and my expulsion represent a determination by the top leadership to continue down this path and to silence any members who oppose it. The delegates to this General Convention, thus have a clear choice to make: Either to vote in effect to turn this union into an employment agency, which they will be doing if they vote to uphold my expulsion, or to reject my expulsion and set about the task of making our Union into a fighting union that really represents the needs and interests of the membership and of all working carpenters, to make this Union one which will inspire the enthusiasm of its members and inspires them to go out and rebuild the union and to organize the unorganized.

That is what you, the delegates, will be deciding on when you vote on whether or not to uphold my conviction and expulsion from this Union.

John Reimann
former member and recording secretary, Carpenters Local 713

Wayne Stone has seen the plans grow from their infancy
Administrator retires after 28 years

Wayne Stone is attending his last convention as Carpentry Workers Benefit and Pension Plans administrator in April. After 28 years working for the plan, 18 of those in the administrative hot seat, Stone and his wife Barbara are retiring to their place on Moyie Lake just south of Cranbrook (when he gets it finished).
Stone, who was born in Kimberly in 1941, and initiated into Local 1719 in 1961, served his apprenticeship with the Kootenay District Council of Carpenters and Woodworkers building houses for two years and then moving on to Industrial work. As an apprentice he actively attended meetings, taking part in discussion and debate, so he was elected sergeant at arms when he completed his apprenticeship in 1964 and soon became financial secretary of the Local Union.
By 1967, Stone was the business agent and secretary-treasurer for the Kootenay District, replacing Bruce Comerford. At that time he helped set up the Kootenay District Labour Council, becoming one of its first officers. He also sat on the feasibility committee for the East Kootenay College. Also in 1967, Stone attended his first meeting as a trustee of the Carpentry Workers Welfare Plan.
In 1969 he became a vice-president of the BC Provincial Council of Carpenters, replacing John Harper, and in 1971 took over as first vice-president from Peter Greenaway. He was part of the negotiating committee that brought in the 7.5-hour day. In 1973 he went to work for the Welfare Plan as assistant to the first administrator John Anatooshkin. He worked at this role until Anatooshkin retired in 1982.
Stone was active in the early years of the co-operative housing movement, assisting in establishing a number of co-ops in the Lower Mainland. The Carpentry Workers Pension Plan provided long term financing for a number of these co-operatives. He also was part of the group that established Western Housing Development Corporation and later Western Housing Construction. Under Western Housing some 22 developments were constructed from Victoria through Nanaimo, Richmond, Vancouver, Burnaby, New Westminster, Surrey, Delta, to Oliver, Kelowna, and Cranbrook. They provided many hours of union work for members.
Stone represented the New Democratic Party on the Handicap Industry Guild that was established to assist handicapped people in British Columbia. He was also a trustee of the Building Trades Rehabilitation Plan from the start in 1980 to 1996 and chair of the Building Trades administrators’ committee.
Stone has been a director of CU&C Health Services Society since 1989, remaining on the board of the successor agency Pacific Blue Cross until this April.
He represented the Carpenters on the provincial Pension Advisory Board from 1994-1999 and, as a result of pension investments, sat on a number of other boards: Pacific Point Corp., Christmas Hill Investment, Pencore Real-estate (Chatham Village Prince George), Concert Properties, Bamberton Investments, Prince George UIC Building, Half Moon Holdings Ltd.
Stone says the Plans and he have grown up together, starting small in the 1970s and now the Pension Plan is worth over $200 million dollars and making payments to almost 4,000 retirees.
“It’s now big business and there is a growing need for technical expertise in the day-to-day administration as well as the planning that is required to co-ordinate investments and look after a large staff.” Stone says he feels confident in Jane Richey’s abilities to replace him as administrator. “She has the background and necessary skills to be a very effective administrator,” he confidently states.
Stone explains that the Plans are so well designed and run because the overall direction and large picture planning comes from membership involvement. “The Plans have been member driven from the start,” he says, “a fact I credit to the group that originally set up the process in the beginning.”
Stone says the Board of Trustees has maintained a clear vision of where the Plans have to go to fulfill their mandate of providing the best possible benefit to the membership with the resources available.
“There would be no early retirement, no dental, no wage indemnity, no Rule 80, no integrated option without the determination of the trustees over the years,” he explains. “Now members can retire earlier with something a bit better than OAP and CPP.”
The pressure from bureaucrats to eliminate expensive items like early retirement are very great, he says. “It is up to our trustees to protect the Plans to make sure they are there to benefit the membership in the future.”
Stone explaines that the Plans only exist because of the Collective Agreements that were negotiated over the years. “The best way to protect the Plans is to make sure we continue to bring in new members and new companies. The best way to protect your investment in the Pension Plan is by increasing the member base. Get out there and organize” he concludes.
The Carpentry Workers Pension Plan is one of the best financed Plans in the Building Trades, boasting a solvency ratio of over 100 per cent when last reported by the Pension Standards Branch. Some other Plans have reported as low as 38 per cent in the past.
Stone credits the many fine people he has had the pleasure of working with over the years in great measure for his success in the job.
“We have had many dedicated and talented people on staff and it’s been my great delight to work with them over the years.”

Commission oversees trades training
Carpenters serve on ITAC
Former BC Provincial Council of Carpenters president John Harper has been appointed as Appeals Commissioner for the Industry Training and Apprenticeship Commission (ITAC). Millwright John Davies has also been appointed as a member of the Commission’s 25-person governing board. Local 1995 business agent Bill Duck sits on an ITAC advisory committee representing the Wall & Ceiling trade.
ITAC is a joint labour-business-government commission which replaces the former Apprenticeship Branch. It has responsibility to allocate a $70 million budget for apprenticeship and trades training programs. The commission has 25 board members: eight each from industry,labour and government, plus a chair, Dale Parker, formerly CEO of the Workers Compensation Board.
ITAC is mandated to monitor the needs of the BC labour market and provide skilled trades people through a smooth transition from school to the workplace.


WCB requires up-to-date hearing card
Mill-Pile offers annual hearing testing
Millwright member Gary Bancarz conducts WCB hearing tests at the audio testing facility at the Mill-Pile Hall in Surrey.
Bancarz, who is on disability pension and was retrained by Workers Compensation to do annual hearing tests for construction workers, is available seven days a week on an appointment basis only. Any union construction worker can arrange for a hearing test by calling the Millwrights’ office at (604) 585-2736 and setting up a suitable time.
The law requires all construction workers to have their hearing tested annually. A WCB inspector can send workers off the job if their hearing card is not up to date. Also, any claim for hearing loss compensation may depend in part on the employee being able to prove a consistent, long-term detrimental exposure to noise as shown by annual hearing test results. Get it done, says Bancarz.

The Mill-Pile Hall is at #202 - 14625 - 108th Avenue, Surrey. Please call ahead. There is no drop-in service for hearing testing.

Local 1995 hires WCB/EI Advocate
Noreen Hall has been hired by Local 1995 as an advocate to deal with WCB, EI and CPP problems that Local members might have.
After serving as a Workers Advisor in Edmonton for 10 years, Noreen is familiar with the issues that face workers when dealing with government bureaucracy.
Hall says she would like to help straighten out problems before they get to the appeal stage if at all possible.
“I like to build the strongest case I can for members so they are successful in their dealings with WCB or EI.”
Hall advocates doing it right the first time. She has expertise in correctly filling out forms to avoid hard-to-fix foul ups that can dog a workers claim for months.
“Once it’s on your file it’s hard to correct,” she says.
The main problems she is encountering at Local 1995 revolve around WCB appeals.
“The biggest issues are acceptability, rates of compensation, and claims being denied,” she claims.
Her advice for those injured on the job includes:
• Report all accidents.
• See your doctor, don’t wait, and make sure to tell the doctor the injury is work related.
• She also recommends keeping all your paystubs as WCB rates are calculated from a whole year prior to the day you were hurt.
“Record your hours daily,” she states. “Write them down somewhere.”

Hall is currently visiting as many job sites as she can to familiarize herself with the construction scene.
She attended a rigging & signalling course with about 20 other members recently and was very impressed with the calibre of instruction and the knowledge level of the students.
She’s not had much experience in construction before, but worker problems dealing with government red tape and bureaucracy are pretty common across all industries, she says.
Any Local 1995 member with a WCB/EI/CPP problem should phone the Local for an appointment. Business is booming.
If you aren’t sure what is happening with your claim or appeal, she can help. Telephone 437-0491

School Board Round Up
Negotiations top story in School Board Locals
The struggles to achieve collective agreements are heating up in the public sector. The Carpenters Union holds eight certificates to collective bargain in this sector. At least four of them have commenced bargaining or are about to soon. Two Carpenter Union School Board Locals, Quesnel, Local 2545, and Prince George 2106 have conducted successful strike votes with well over 80 per cent support in each local. Most of the “heat” on the government in current public sector bargaining is under the Ministry of Education.
A tentative settlement was reached after Local 2545 made an application to the Labour Board Relations Board to have a mediator try to facilitate talks. At press time, the Local was conducting a ratification vote. The employer has been increasingly contracting out bargaining unit work and the Local is determined to protect the integrity of the bargaining unit. In addition, the employer is showing bad faith by separating the pay equity monies of the employees’ cheques. They are likely doing this in anticipation of clawing this money back after the government changes.

Local 2106 Prince George made an offer of settlement involving a few non-monetary issues and an offer to not take the 2 per cent pay increase in exchange for an extra week of holidays or time off. Proper scheduling could have saved the School Board money. The employer rejected this and failed to table a counter offer
The Press has reported on the Canadian Union of Public Employees (CUPE) struggle to establish province-wide bargaining for themselves and the government. There is no indication to date that other unions would be included in a province-wide bargaining scheme. Nobody has contacted the Carpenters union about province-wide bargaining. If the other unions are ignored on this matter then the government will do so at its own peril.
The issues at the bargaining table with CUPE school board locals and the Carpenters Union school board locals are essentially the same. Contracting out, pay equity, and the restrictive wage controls of 0, 0,and a 2 per cent increase over three years is exacerbating the differences at the bargaining table.
The Fraser-Cascade Local 2423 (which is made up from the Carpenters Hope School Board local and the Agassiz Cupe local) has notified the employer to commence collective bargaining.
Local 2397 Fort St. John is getting its package together for a scheduled bargaining session on May 8-9, 2000. They are moving slowly on the pay equity backlog and as they are in year three of the guidelines, hope to get the two percent allowed, although the Board may be able to use the “abililty to pay” out that is available to it.
The Dawson Creek school board employees of Local 1237 will serve notice in the spring to commence collective bargaining.