Vol. 71/No. 42      November 12, 2007

Construction workers in Perth, members of the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union, face fines of more than $18,000 each for an “illegal” strike in February 2006. A federal law passed in 2005 placed severe legal restrictions on construction unions’ right to strike. Speakers from the platform and many workers at the September 26 rally focused their fire on voting out the government in the November federal elections.

—Alasdair MacDonald

Canada forest workers narrowly
approve strike settlement
VANCOUVER, British Columbia—Forest workers here, members of the United Steelworkers (USW), voted a razor-thin 50.77 percent majority to approve a new contract. On Vancouver Island, union locals with a high number of loggers rejected the proposal.

The vote ended a three-month strike by 4,500 workers against Forest Industrial Relations (FIR), which represents 31 forest companies on British Columbia’s coast. Strikers at Island Timberlands, Interfor, and Timber West have yet to settle.

Workers were striking to end the bosses’ ability to impose shifts and use nonunion contractors. Safety was also a key issue; 43 forest workers were killed on the job in 2005.

Fighting for a common contract expiration date with woodworkers in the interior of British Columbia was also an important issue.

In a union leaflet to the membership, USW Western Canadian director Steve Hunt stated that the union has now limited the right of companies to unilaterally impose new work schedules and that there are “dispute resolution mechanisms” in place.

The leaflet notes that the right to refuse unsafe work is currently in the contract and that there is a new clause that provides severance pay for workers affected by partial plant closures. There was no change in contracting out work to nonunion companies.

“I voted against this proposal,” said USW Local 1-3567 member Martyn Padden on the picket line at the CIPA mill in the Vancouver area. “Very little has changed since the initial contract proposal and we didn’t even get a common expiry date with the interior.”

“I can live with this. I think it’s the best we could have hoped for at this time,” said Wendy Clarke, cochair of the Local 1-2171 strike committee in Powell River. “But there are still grey areas that have to be worked out.”

—Ned Dmytryshyn

Mattress plant workers confront
lockout in upstate New York
GREEN ISLAND, New York, October 26—Dozens of workers at a Sealy Mattress factory here have set up pickets in response to a company lockout that began October 22. The 350 workers at the plant are members of UNITE-HERE Local 1714T.

The lockout, at the largest of Sealy’s 26 North American plants, comes amid protracted contract negotiations that have been under way since September. The most recent company proposal called for a speedup in production as well as wage and health benefit cuts. This was rejected by the workers by an 8-1 margin, pickets reported. Sealy, which operates 26 plants in North America, said it would shift work to other facilities.

Workers at the picket line pointed out that hourly production standards are too high and many workers have a hard time keeping up. Others reported that strict attendance policies penalize workers, even for documented family emergencies. Many are also concerned about health benefits, noting that the company immediately canceled the workers’ coverage when it locked them out.

—Ben Joyce  
 
 
Front page (for this issue) | Home | Text-version home