Nelson Labor Conference Address - "LABOR LAWS SHOULD BE REMEDIAL"

CONFERE

)ral'-.

Lobor lows should hSJtS,m,:*|gju,{"1#.?Y,'#l,Lx 'H:'##?iilit"5'3is; ,, ll,iifr,?3- 'ii.";l1",1'#;[ mll;:*ilr*J,,,m;. ffi$ifr?1":",?"1$,g'i['1.

o,.,ili#i?f,}H:'H[ r"uo, di;*[;i ,i'tiiJl' 'iii;lti Fiii*tn'' iiil'q: rppea! companv's

,,ra aunu fhe lahor relations and conditions of-empioyment to ttti goyu*menitO reuiis.e ' T'1*:f-1

Le speqal meolalor

nolovmdnt to the soverntoJniib reulise g intrudingin

ffi;il;;; i;ff ?;i"ii",fi.-miru. t,,t\q' l"-::'1":1"

areas whcrc , porir€r to alter the collectived;';id-th" labor relations and con-ditions of.emplov-ment l9;tl"..C-"^Y:L1Ti"tJt""lf':i:tli, """"il""u"Jfi't*ri*[

ir tn fureementfu

#il}i*k$irl,i[{ill: '*;;i:#*[:T*#i#fi ,gki,:g'Niqt],qi$:

t#,ffi:]]*rfr,'i ,ffinHJ,[.r-1$"$i{$j*

#,Tili#t;$*hlffi ffift*lt*ffi$i :#:ffiq#*' ffi[{ftflqp* ** r*'friry*i,t'm**

ffif#iffi *;Tl ff-i$:fJ::', : :ffi htah,ffi "5;i6i ffi5ffi rrT$j*r ffixft#Hil {ffi.l Il ul. sEJ.

amendments is "qui; ;;: t}rrai idd in mind -makes .it yhi^le a cdlective agrelement is A soecia,'i. mediating offictr said he supported the right of 4,iiliii.;'"-r,.- rrld, and, possible for an emplov* *lr, in force. cai "d[""q;;;;"i;r inio " worker to jiin arnther riion mraracmrca,.more"onciliaiori' t;;;r'fild unjiistiy tp ue Amendmentstothecodedetail ,,.^,*^ or'rho lehpst of the hisiob.Theunionhasnoriehttiorepresertsa "more conciliatory has been fired--unlusttv m oe *"il3g::":'J;:"il;;; di;p,ri; at'ihe behest of the his job.Theunionhasnorighttoaopioach.,, given qryn"n.ai'i,in ior. lost ' arbitration -procedures

d."ll,q iliffi.!.;i i;b";iil; merhod expelt a worker for joining

j$t t'*t'"t*#:,"ilff"u; [r5,$,xf.l',,i;il*i]].tt eT't"1":,itftF,F:?p,ffi ilH::;1,'.#T,i;;;iiirffii *6nu'i'nio;;;;rid *:-o

[,lH:,":ffiJ,}Hrufid?;i? l;';;i;;-,-*ii ui. Matkin. term, said ]irr. Matkin. nre,

of the couts ,na u,,.,poJ'iil? ir**rrli, the. Iabor relations deparhnent has also established I

the labor relations Uo".O:'io]d fo".a'"*orta pnly force guidelines on establishing

resoonsible for al acljudica"fiil ;;;;.r;il to ."in"t t. S" i:li:1,!y^rights af er mergers of

i*[ii*. t "t flou, irom the employee' colpanles'

i;ffi;;d-j;-i" iria: ite t"tor tvti. tt'tatt<in also said safetv is

relations board no* '"frt

berh"pq the .most impoitant a prime conctirn tb the depart-

iurisdiction over all f"li?] aur"lop'ni*nt in tthe amend- ment-and a worker who is fired

fi}H;;& " di;p;;;. 'i;i* ' ;;;t.,' i"ia *," 4uplty for refusins to do a job he feels is

certification of ne* urion tb'iis *i*lrb., it that labor relaiions unsafe will be reinstated by the

!o strftes and lockouts. i"* sito"ftin't be reviewed by the tabor relations board if a

*#""d;;w- iriniitii irr.i --Frocpdur.es should bq uv the union'

implications of the new "r*if: i.grfrt a Uy an aamihistrative Mr' King said he. felt the

ments. t&.{, l,:-::id: n9 "l:ltil ::::,1:}::i,,^.t:::Hf *ri:":*&f;", to the labor depart ii"i&iriliiil"l.uon,-not the scuritvforworkerswhorerue

ment,s philosophy, saia ' ur. c6urs. - -----'

r -to do -

danqerous jobs could

Matkin is that cottlciive Access to cgurts to btrtain become a Sargaining tool for

asreementrs are the pr.i...La injunctions.to.ci:ase pict<etingis unions. "We'expect responsible,

;";fi;'J'; ;;i'ir; i;;;- tt'i.i,y' Iimited isuallv - to mature use of the amendment"'

iii*"il,n""i,t il;i;iA.- picr<etiig trat involves criminal tB said'

He said collective bargaining "tG'

t"""ao"a' Mr' Kinc underscored the

p;;"d;";*",. ,oiu fr;H #:;fir*"{.'fr"o'.rf'311H :;,i111T""X!i-ilii Jil.,'l:lvailable to everybody in B'C' board wlll near '" fiaa.a'qr.!fioni'li* union

reoresmtatives in ttP audience.Asked about Picketing

NEW DIRECTOR IVAMED I sffii"t,h;,"iaiti.i*p'opui,rr.i tartw0D rfllfiD l^T1/

ili.':"lix il

t ,,*i

I-lri r

-!i*i+tili't,\1,, ,\ .^, : ..1." ,iin

t .'i,r\i

Labor Minisler Bill King addressed about I00 labor deparlmer:l workers and unionrepresenlalives in the lirst day of a two-day deparlment ol labor conferenceThursday. Deputy Minisler James M.!Un, lefl, summarired ltle departmenl's

am mendmenls lo the labor code lhal we-re.pas{63f spring. wilh lhe help of theirlegal advisor, right, lhe minislers laler fielded,slions lrom lhe audience.

'^-'l oholo

'ffi1'*I

\'D)

ADDRESS OF MR. .IA!{ES G. !,IATKII{

DEPUTY !,IINISTER OF I,ABOUR

PROVINCE OF BRITISH COLUMBIA

!{lr. President, Delegates, Guests:

I wish it gave nre as much extreme pleasure in respond.-i.ng to the introd.uction. I think you have planned your conven-tion very well--Irm afraid you've planned. it so well that myspeech now is going to be unplanned. I think the onLy line inthat speech that I dare read now is the beginning where I wasgoing to say that the Labour Code is not perfect.

I think there is often in life and times of affairsnisunderstanding about the neaning of things. ft is certainly,in my view, part of the problem with the response that Irmhearing this morning to the Labour Code.

It reminds me a little of the story told of theTexan who was a tourist visiting our good province and who cameup to Kelowna. He was speaking to a farmer and they got intothe usual argument about who had the biggest farm. fhe Texansaid to the Kelownan, "We11, you knowryou all, I get up in themorning on my farm and I get in my truck; I start driving fromone end of my farm, drive all day long, and come nightfall Ihavenrt even come to the end of my farm.' *Is that right?r'exclaimed the Kelownan, "Irve got a truck just like thatl"

Therets a famous saying by Sir Francis Bacon, one ofthe learned scholars of England, who said that one of the sevenwise rnen of Greece $ras wclnt to say that laws were like cobwebswhere the smalL flies vrere caught and the great break through.This rressage from early history about the cobweb-like effectof legislation was certainly true of the Trade Unions Act, thel€diation Conrnission Act, and the Labour Relations Act in thisprovince of British Columbia. And Irm willing to admit thatthere may even be sore great flies who are going through thecobweb of the Labour Code of British Columbia, but I would liketo try to spend the next very few nrinutes explaining a litt1ebit about the legislation to show what was an effort, and trulyperhaps an imperfect effort since it was done by some fairlyimperfect peopLe, that some of the cobwebs in the labour legis-lation have been improved.

Before I do that, I want to go back to a couple ofthings that I would have said to you had I not spent the Lasthour with you. In labour relations, and I think youtre the oneswho know this better than I do as a lawyer, and an academiclawyer to boot, it is my very firm opinion that legislation iscertainly not the key or the be-aIl of labour relations--itrssimply a part, and I would. be so boLd as to suggest that itisntt even the major part of industrial relations in theprovince today. There are a lot of other things going on.

Contld. .....,

I:4)-6

/44'=

I'{r. James G. Matkin - Contrd.

Iile focus our attention on the legislation as somethingthat is a good whipping boy for us to vent our stean and ouremotion on. Do you know, the reaL problems of today are verymuch more serious than the Legislation. Anyone who is thinkingat all about the nature of our province must know that the majorproblem today is inflation.

And what are tre doing about that kind of problem?I{eLlr yoo know one of the things, and I understand the press ishere, but I think this is an even-handed statement. I shouldsay that I anr here because the Honourable WilLiarn King couldnot be here, but I am a Deputy Flinister, not an alternateMinisteri I'm not a political appointment; Irn not speaking onbehalf of the NDP governnent, but I would like to say this. Ithink there has been in the publie eye much misunderstandingabout inflation.

Let ne just give you one statistic to indicate anarea of concern for Labour--a place that Labour should bespeaking out, and this Point of view should get across to thepublic because it certainLy isn't well. understood today. Thesestatistics that I'm going to give you come from the NationaLAssoci.ation of Housing, not from a Labour organization, notfrom a labour-interested organization, but from an organizationprimarily concerned with enpS.oyer interestsr and here are thefacts.

In the year L954 the cost of housing rePresented bythe on-site laboui was 328 of the total cost of a house, in1974 the cost, of housing represented by the on-site labour is17t. There has been an almost 508 decline in the labour costas a figure of the inflationary price of a home.

Now, f think itrs important, if goverrunent and thepublic are going to respond to .the problems of inflation, thatthey understand where the problems really lie, and they stopwtripping the wrong boy. I think that it's incumbent uponlabour io speak out on behalf of the extent to which, and justifythe extent to which, they are the costs. I find that the otherside of the picture, the whipping of labour, is very weLLarticulated in the nedia and very well articulated by managementorganizations.

But I do know, coming into the Department last year'one of the things that surprised me was that although we havestatistics on everything--we have statistics on strikesr sr€ havestatistics on wage settLements, we have statistics on fringe.benefits--but in the Department of Labour we have no statisticson Labour costs, and Irm suspicious to think that that's becauselabour costs do not represent the kind of dramatic inflationarypush that the public think they do. I have also heard someitatistics afout the extent to which labour wages have decLinedover the last 40 years as a Percentage of the gross nationa}Product'

- 7 contrd' ""r'

t{lr. Jares G. Matkin Cont rd.

Now, those are hard, col-d facts, nothing enotionalabout it, but that side of the infLationary picture is not beingportrayeil. I think it r.lou}d de-enphasize some of the almostirysteria that is in the public press ald public mind about wages6ttlements--hysteria that we've seen in terms of sone of thethings that haire been going on in the grain handlers' disputewher6 catch-up kinds of settLements are flogged as beingtrerendousl-y inflationary. That is one point I wished to make.

The other point I would like to make is that we are,in the Department oflabour, moving in other areas. We havebiought ii--frm very pleased about this.appointment--Ron IUeediefrom-ttre Caladian f,-abbur Congress, who is now working with us todirect a labour education program ema,nating from the Departnrent.t$e haye set up a ne!, servile in the DePartment caLled SpecialServices eranin, for the purpose of providing information tolabour and managernent on matlers of interest and concern to them.trle are estabrisiing an effecti've, new employment' programs branchwhich this sumrpr distriUuted $30 miLlion in the province ofBritish columbia, finding jobs for 131000 young peopl,e, andwhich is nol,r looking to the problem 'of winter unemplolrment.

sor,I hope rre don'trin our pgblic meetings and in ourdiscussions iogethlr and our disagreements togelherr. corpLetglymiss sight of ine fact that when we talk about legislation tttisis only a part of the picture, that this is a much bigger problemwe are- involved in, an-d tegisl-ation is not the final answer.Itrs not the final answer because in the collective bargainingsystem the real essence of that system is that the parties them-seLveS resolve their orrn problems. Now, fair enough, thatlegislation must provide a framework so that the parties canreiolve those protlems with fairness and justice

It has always been my opinion that if you would askthe trade union movenrent r',rhat is the criterion that it uses tojudge legislation, there is no greater criterion than that ofiaiiness-or justice. I donrt think the trade union movenentis asking foi legislation that is pro-Iabour any mgre than theydeserve iegislation that is pro-management, but I do think theyhave the right to ask, and altc as vigo::ously and as adanantlyas they canl-and I thinl< they are very effective at that--forlegislition that is fair, beLause after all we do have, ineslence, two adversary parties and the goverlrment has to try tosee that there is a balance"

Now, you may not agree with the balance of the LabourCod,e, and f una6rstanE you don't, but I think if there is onecriticism I would make in terms of your resolutions, which Idonrt think is my pl-ace to debate but I canrt helP but make thiscomrent having :irsi heard them, it is that I would hope Perhaps-you might ",r"i"ia that judgement for a while. I think if there's'""V

"=iticisrn- it is that pSrhaps you are being too hasty in con-

aeirning the picketing and-la* Lnd-the right to use picketing fororganizational purPoses .

Contld. ......8

Mr Janes G. Matkin - Contrd.

I certainly do not deny you the right to give youropinion to Victoria and perhaps see what the result of thatopinion is.

As I understand it, when Lorne commented criticallyabOut a particular case there lras no deeision given in thatcase; f understand no cease and desist order has been issuedat this point in tire. I could be wrong; perhaps while Irmspeaking one is being issued. The legisJ.ation was proclaimedonty September firstr. hard}y one month agor and,there are nowrilten-opinions. I wonder if before we jurnp a}l over thisJ.egislation we ought to at least find out what the ta^bour Boardthinks it neans.

But I want to say that Irm not on the Labour RelationsBoard; Irm not Arnold Smith's boss. Irm certainly pleased thatArnold Srnith is on the Board. I understand from those on theBoard that he is doing an excellent job, not onLy on the Boardbut also as a panelisi on the Industrial Inquiry Conunissionssuch as the Elevator Constructorsr dispute which is in the Pressnolf .

I was invo}ved in the process of tlre special advisorswriting the legislation, and I'd Like to speak to you about whatwe thorlght the-policy was behind the }egislatiol when we intro-duced t[e area 6f picfeting and strike legislation because thatrsa very complex piete of legisLation involving Sections 84 to 91,and I think with all due respect it's very difficult on firstreading of those sections, because of the legalese, to understandwhat was meant by the Labour Code.

Let me begin with section 84, to state that sonEoneasked for a Bill of -Rights of Labour. 'rWe want to know, " Ithink the words were, i'what we can do, not what we canrt do."Let ne humbly suggesi to you that for the first time in Canadianlaw or, indeed, in any laws on the North American continent,Section 84 is a positive statement of the rights of labour withregard to the subject of information. It is a statement thataliows for a greal arnount of activity that was absoluteLy andungualifiedly prohibited by the Trade Unions Act.

The SectiOn reads, "A trade union or other Person mayat any time, and in any manner ttrat does not constitute_ picket-ing ai the word is defined in this Act, communieate informationto any Person or publicly e:ipress sympathy or gupport for any

'persoir Ls to matt6rs or Ltrings af fecting o! reLating to theterrtts or conditions of employment or work done or to be doneby that tr>erson. "

soneone said their hands were tied. Thatrs true, interms of organizational activities, but realIy, in fairnesstshouLd not the hands of Labour be tied as long as their nouthscan be open, and conununication can issue from Labour to non-unionor employeei who are seeking to decide for themseLves whetherthey wish to becone part of unions?

Conttd. '.....-9

!{r. ilares G. Matkin - Contrd.

Itrs the free speech eLement that is essenti.aL, andSection 84 gruarantees that free speech. Now perhaps you willaay, "WeLl, thatts fine if yourre dealing in the ivory towerwhere everyone are good guys and therets no unfair practicestaking place on the other side.'

Now lrm going to jumP to Section 91; thatrs a veryimportant section. I donrt think it has been understood. TheBoard may refuse to make any order, not only with regard topicketing, but any order in Part 2, including an order that astrike is illegal during the term of a coLlective agreenent,includj.ng an oider relating to arbitration, any order relatingto strikes or picketing. The Board may refuse to make thoseorders, and that was deliberately put in there. So this wholeIaw goes out the window. Part 2 is not applicable if the Boardreorki under Section 91. Wtry? If it is of the opinion that it

Now is l-abour saying that they want the right topicket when it is unjust and inequitabLe to do so? Becauselfris Section allows for the whole picketing law to be suspend'edand for the Labcur Board to refuse to issue a cease and desistorder, notwithstanding all these technical rules, and Irm surethat sorre of them could be adjusted, but the key thing to seeare those two sections

we know we have a Law--maybe it's right and maybe itrswrongi maybe you disagree with parts of it--but that law issubject to an equitabie jurisdiction; that is, is it just-r -isit equitable to have tlris Iaw in force? And what is the kindof equity that we are looking at? Inproper conduct of anyperson applying for the order.

so the idea of the special advisors when we advisedthis kind of mechanism was to lay this, "Under the certificationprocess the concept is that the decision of whether t9 join aunion or not should be made freeIy." There shouldnrt be inter-ference by the employer, nor should there be interference bythe rurion, including economic coercion. But thatrs only asystem that works when ttrerers good faiLh. If therers badtlittr, then one of the things we did was put in an 84(e) thatsaid., "Sure, W€ would like io have free decisions about certi-ficai,ion; let people decide for themselves, but if the employeris guiJ.ty of untair labour practices and the atmosphere ispoiioned then perhaps a certification should be granted auto-matically. "

so, notwithstanding the concept of free decision,ttre legislation is inconsistent in that point.

10

Contld. . . o...

Likewise on the picketing. The concept of the Law--and you can disagree with that--is that decisions should befreely made, it shouldnrt be a matter of economic coercion.But if there is improper conduct or unfair labour Practices orinequitable practiles- in a particular industry or by a particularerpfoyet, th6n that rational decision calttt take place. Itrsno- *o-re possible for the employees to have a free choice inthat dec-ision than for the euployer. So at ttrat point thepicketing l,aws shouLd be allowed.

The last thing I wiLl say is that in coming to ttris_judgenent about picketing which you- Tay +ilagqee_ Yi!|, one ofi,he-tfrings that influencea us was this kind of thinki?g. I-t'"tirrp in [,tre province of British Colrrnbia that t]re notion ofpicketing be respected for what it is, and that is somethingttr"t a g5od trad6 unionist or a trade union Person who is observ-ing the trade union morality should not cross a picket line. Ifyo,i r""d the Literature of your own organization, thatrs a cleariandate. So the law should be able to refLect that.

Instead of putting picketing under the fu9, picketingshould be seen as an essential part of the collective bargaining-pi""""", just like strikes. We dontt disinfect the word "strike";it's a woid thatrs in the Iaw, so likewise, for the first timewe put ttre word "picketing" into the }aw. We 9!ve it aomepo"itin scope; aitied picketing t9 allow for the extension oflicfeting to those areai where erpJ.oyers gang up together.

But, likewise, the word "strike" is defined and it isLimited. ftrai has been the Law and the trad,e union movementharre accepted that. Just as picketing is part- of the strikeiistem, s-o picketing is Limited. And thatrs why the law hastimitea to an extent the picketing process.

That, s my judgement of what the law means. You cer-tainl-y ha.ve the riifrl to say you _would like that law changed,ancl tfratrs a political matter and a matter, fortunately, inwhich a Deputy Minister of Labour is not involved.

!11r. Jares G. trlatkin - Cont I d.

Thank you verY much.

-lL