Volume 12, Number 1-2, January–April 1957 La fusion CMTC - CCT

FR:

Dans cet article l'auteur précise exactement en quoi consiste la fusion des centrales ouvrières et à quel palier elle s'est effectuée.

EN:

What is exactly the meaning of the merger between the TLC and the CCL and which are its characteristics?

Contrary to what is commonly believed by those who are not well acquainted with the labour movement, the creation of the CLC does not bring necessarily the unification of all bodies existing formerly inside the CCL and the TLC. A complete merger would have involved it.

In fact, the Toronto convention in 1956 realized the merger of two bodies at the superior level and it was also decided that within two years, i.e. before 1958, where there is a duplication of provincial or regional Councils, they will merge into a unique organization.

If we consider the professionnal or the industrial level, nothing has been changed. Each local and each union keeps on existing as before with the same jurisdiction. The only thing is that they are invited to comply with no-raiding agreements they have freely accepted.

The Merger does not mean a labour monopoly. The two-thirds of the Canadian workers are not yet unionized. Many labor organizations also remain out of the CLC. They are: the CCCL with its 100,000 members recruited in the province of Quebec; some unions dominated by communist leadership (United Electrical Workers, International Union of Mine, Mill and Smelter Workers) which have around 60,000 members; the National Council of Canadian Labour with its 5,000 members in Ontario; some groups of Telephone workers with around 30,000 members; the United Mines Workers, with 24,000 members. At the moment of the merger, the CLC had a membership of 1,018,000 and around 300,000 workers were belinging to other unions. Rut since, the One Big Union and some Railways Brotherhood joined the CLC. If we consider the degree of autonomy claimed by each union in its internal organization, the expression "big labour monopoly" is purely a produce of imagination.

The Merger brought the acceptance of a new principle very important for the safeguard of the freedom of association. Formerly, according to the doctrine of the AFL-TLC, each union was enjoying the right of exclusive jurisdiction in a professional or industrial sector for all the country. From now on, jurisdictional dualism is recognized. This make possible the affiliation of the CCCL to the CLC.

The unification of organized labour forces in Canada is the expression of a deep feeling among the workers as well as it follows a general movement which is found in all social organizations of the world.

The Canadian labour movement becomes more and more well equipped to defend the interests of the workers and play a positive role in the development of our country.

FR:

La compréhension du mouvement syndical canadien exige au moins la connaissance des principales lignes de son évolution historique depuis qu'il a commencé à se développer au siècle dernier. C'est cette succession d'événements importants que l'auteur rappelle brièvement au lecteur.

EN:

BIRTH OF LABOR UNIONS

The first labor unions appeared at the beginning of the XIX^th century in Quebec City, Montreal, Toronto, Hamilton and Halifax.

In 1850 and 1886, Canadian unions were affiliated to American unions, and some American unions were established in important Canadian cities. In the meantime, labor unions were grouped on a provincial and national basis. Around 1886. appeared an important group, the Trade and Labor Congress of Canada, which was created before the A F of L.

From 1902, American unions controlled Canadian unions. In 1908, the Canadian Federation of Labor is founded, but, because of friction between English speaking and French speaking Canadians, the unions of the Province of Quebec withdrew their membership. In 1919, the C F of L claimed 14 locals and 8,000 members.

Between 1902 and 1927, took place three major events: 1) "Catholic Unions were founded in the Province of Quebec; 2) The Provincial Workmen's Association disappeared, and 3) in the Prairies appeared the American Labor Union, the Industrial Workers of the World, and later the One Big Union. At the end of the World War I. the O.B.U. had 50,000 members and 100 locals, but it had almost disappeared in 1922.

In 1927, the Pan-Canadian Congress of Labor was created and grouped disparate locals and died soon.

In the U.S.A. the Committee of Industrial Organization was created in 1935, and, the next year, its members were suspended by the A F of L and the CIO was founded. In Canada, under the pressure of the A F of L. the locals belonging to unions affiliated with the CIO were expelled from the Trade and Labour Congress and founded the CCL. In 1956, following the American Unions, the TCL and the CCL merged.

THE CCCL

In the U.S.A. the Committee of Industrial Organization was created in 1935, and, the next year, its members were suspended by the A F of L and the CIO was founded. In Canada, under the pressure of the A F of L. the locals belonging to unions affiliated with the CIO were expelled from the Trade and Labour Congress and founded the CCL. In 1956, following the American Unions, the TCL and the CCL merged.

Catholic Unions appeared at the beginning of the XX^th Century, following a strike in the Shoe Industry in Quebec City and the expulsion, from the TLC, of Canadian Local unions not affiliated to International Unions.

Other reasons influenced also the Creation of the CCCL:

1. The social teaching of the Church with the Encyclicals Rerum Novarum and Singulari Quadam.

2. The dawn of nationalist ideology with Bourassa and Tardivel.

3. The socialist and anticlerical attitude of some American Unions established in Canada.

4. The industrial progress which came with World War I.

The principal characteristics of Catholic unions were their "confessionality", and their adhesion to the Social Teaching of the Church and the presence of chaplain.

In 1921, their unions founded the CCCL and the membership was around 25,000. In 1932, the CCCL had 26,000 and 8 regional councils. In 1953, it had 100,000 members and 400 local unions, and, today, it represents 50% of all union members in the Province of Quebec.

FR:

Le patronat ne peut rester indifférent devant le fait de la fusion CMTC-CCT. Aussi cet article a-t-il pour but de faire connaître d'une façon succinte une réaction patronale sur le sujet. L'auteur considère que la nouvelle centrale devra tenir compte de deux principes fondamentaux: le respect de la liberté et le respect de la loi. Il expose les critères à l'aide desquels pourra être vérifiée la fidélité à ces principes.

EN:

Employers avoid to interfere in a field which is not theirs, but they cannot ignore such an important fact as the Merger of Labor unions. Because they will have to deal with the new Union, they wonder about its orientation and its effect in their enterprises; but, they are confident that after the examples of European experiences and with the application of those two important principles: respect of freedom and respect of the law, the CLC will be useful to all.

This freedom means the possibility for every human being to associate with other men in order to pursue honest objectives within the laws. So, the new Central will have to respect this fundamental freedom of the worker which makes him free to join or not join it; and once a member, he may express his own opinion which can influence the whole supra-structure. Some unions are organized on trade basis and other on industrial basis: the CLC will have to let every worker free to make his choice and experiment, if he wishes so, new formulas. Furthermore and primarly, the worker should be respected as a human being. It is not indifferent, but of first importance, that union members respect the Christian thought and be free to express themselves. Fortunately, Canadian unionism has never been revolutionary. To realize its main objective: unity of the movement, the CLC shall try to gain as many members as possible, but to do so, it shall never act as a monopoly.

The CLC, having by the merger, enormous funds at its disposal will have a good chance to organize the unorganized, to insist with all its weight on union bargaining, to exert a political influence and to gather all the money for which it shall be honestly accounted for. In every way, it shall always respect the law and it is appreciable that, with the merger, there will be no more raidings, and jurisdictional disputes.

With the growing strength of the union movement and the mergers in the United States and Canada, will the Minister of Labour in either one or the other country still be necessary, as they were created to protect the workers? Fortunately, the CLC has categorically declared that it shall not consent to direct political action, which can easily be a cause of division or scission among the labor class as anywhere. Canadian employers are very happy to realize that, in North America, Labor unions got rid of communist infiltration and they are confident in the honesty of the CLC and of its leaders. They also approve its autonomy and independance from the AFL-CIO.

FR:

Après avoir brièvement rappelé l'histoire des rapports entre la CTCC et les autres groupements syndicaux, l'auteur expose la position de celle-ci en face du CTC. Il montre l'évolution qui s'est produite ainsi que les obstacles qui devront être surmontés avant que soit réalisée l'unification des forces syndicales canadiennes.

EN:

The CCCL occupies a peculiar place in unionism in our country. It is an institution which has succeeded in the course of its 37 years of existence to become, in the panorama of the Province of Quebec, a component essential to its character. Its representation power exceeds largely its membership and its symbolic value proves nowadays that nobody in the whole country may feel indifferent about its existence as well as its attitudes.

In 1921, when the Canadian labour movement was far from being unified, the CTLC charged the CCCL with dividing the labour forces. This reproach went on against the CCCL until the forming of the CCL in 1940. Furthermore, the CCCL justified its existence in accusing the CTLC of socialistic tendencies and in reproaching it to be under a foreign domination. There has always been a rivalry between the CCCL and the CTLC so much that cooperation between both movements has never been great. It is still felt today. Relations between the CCCL and the CCL have been better. In many instances attempts at closer cooperation have been made but without no great success since the CCCL took refuge behind what it then considered as being principles.

While the CTLC and the CCL intended to merge, two important problems hold the attention of the CCCL: structural reforms with a view to giving more cohesion to the movement; the enlarging of "confessionality" in order to do away with an obstacle impeding larger expansion.

Whereas the CCCL has been kept aloof from the talks witch succeeded in the merging of the CTLC and the CCL, at the 1955 Convention, the CCCL adopted a resolution in which it showed itself favourable to the principle of labour unity as a fundamental condition to the promotion of the workers in the country and the whole world. It considered that there are many ways of realizing this unity and declared that "it is ready to undergo the study of the methods deemed best to attain this aim whilst saveguarding the spirit of independence of the Canadian labour movement and the respect for the characteristics of each group." A Committee has been nominated for this purpose.

Immediately after the Toronto merging Convention, serious negotiations were entered into between this Committee and the future directors of the CLC. All agreed upon the possibility of an affiliation of the CCCL to the CLC according to conditions warranting the integrity of the Catholic movement. A draft resolution was even written to be proposed at the Convention which would have permitted the CCCL to benefit from the same advantages as the constituting groups. But to avoid all discussion, this proposal was not made as such before the Convention. This resulted in a disappointment in the groups which favoured the affiliation of the CCCL with the CLC. However, a formal invitation was made to the CCCL to join the CLC.

The Committee of the CCCL has formulated a mode of adhesion to the CLC. According to this mode, the CCCL would be endowed with the statute of a national union, would affiliate in whole with the CLC together with all the groups which belong to it, would modify its name and see that nothing in its constitutions waive the non-discrimination principles as to creed and breed, in conformity with the declaration of principles it has adopted many years ago. Neither its local syndicates, nor its federations would have to merge with rival groups. As the whole of these conditions are not in opposition to the constitution of the CLC, in the opinion of the president of this group, the CCCL at its September 1956 Convention has adopted the principle of an affiliation with the CLC under these terms. Some difficulties must be overcome before a final settlement can be reached.

For the part of the CCCL, a deep evolution has been made during the last ten years or so in the field of ideas and union activity. However, there remains to operate an internal reform of structure capable of giving the movement more cohesion and strength.

On the part of the CLC, nothing would prevent the affiliation of the CCCL and impede upon its integrity. Objections are raised by unions belonging to the CLC. They must agree on the affiliation of the CCCL. Moreover, some among them will have to do away with the old idea of one unit unionism and hold sincerely to the letter and spirit of the constitution of the CLC which makes it possible, within the same jurisdiction, to have rival unions. There also remains that constitutions of local unions do not readily allow changes of affiliation as this is the case with syndicates affiliated to the CCCL.

The future of Canadian labour unity lies in the hands of the CLC unions of this Province formerly members of the CTLC.

If Canadian labour unity were to be realized, the Canadian workers would give the whole country a concrete example of the possibility of setting up a federalism respectful of the true aspirations of our People.

They could thus on the international level pave the way to cooperation between tie International Confederation of Free Trade Unions and the International Confederation of Christian Unions.

EN:

The position of the National Council of Canadian Labour towards the Canadian Congress is that the CLC is simply the newest and the most spectacular "front" for international (American) unionism created in Canada. The author explains briefly in this article the reasons for such a statement.

FR:

Le National Council of Labour est d'opinion que le Congrès du Travail du Canada est tout simplement la plus nouvelle et la plus spectaculaire façade pour le syndicalisme international (américain) créé au Canada.

Les membres canadiens d'une union internationale constituent rarement plus de cinq pour cent du total des effectifs, et cela entraîne des conséquences sérieuses et désavantageuses pour eux.

Aussi, est-il difficile pour une organisation ouvrière purement canadienne comme le National Council of Canadian Labour de voir comment le Congrès du Travail du Canada peut faire avancer la cause d'un mouvement ouvrier purement national au pays; il aide activement à l'expansion plus vaste du syndicalisme international au Canada.

Il est vrai que bien des succursales de plusieurs entreprises canadiennes sont des propriétés américaines; mais les ouvriers canadiens dans ces entreprises devraient être représentés par des organisations purement canadiennes sur qui elles peuvent se fier pour exprimer leur point de vue exclusivement canadien auprès de ces entreprises.

L'an dernier, on annonçait que les effectifs globaux des organisations ouvrières canadiennes s'élevaient à 1,351,652. Aussi peut-on admettre raisonnablement que ce nombre imposant de syndiqués canadiens ne puissent diriger seuls leurs propres affaires sans contrôle ni influence étrangère?... Tous ces imposants milliers et milliers de dollars payés par les travailleurs canadiens pour supporter ces organisations étrangères pourraient facilement être utilisés pour édifier un mouvement ouvrier exclusivement canadien.

Mais qu'est-ce qui empêche cet imposant nombre de Canadiens membres de ces unions internationales de prendre une action concertée pour mettre sur pieds un organisme purement canadien? C'est le contrôle excessivement efficace des internationales... toutefois, il existe un courant d'insatisfaction chez un bon nombre de membres canadiens. Ce courant se manifeste extérieurement par un désir de séparation, « d'autonomie » et d'indépendance. De plus, certaines unions internationales ont été utilisées au Canada pour faciliter l'infiltration communiste et certaines le sont encore.

Malgré des dimensions colossales du Congrès du Travail du Canada, le National Council of Canadian Labour est extrêmement confiant dans son propre avenir en tant que fédération ouvrière canadienne indépendante et en tant que noyau pour un mouvement ouvrier éventuel vraiment canadien.

EN:

In this article, the Author addresses himself to answering tentatively the following questions. What is the situation regarding the evolution of the wage structure, or relative wage rates, and the general level of money or real wages? To what extent can unionism be insolated as a causal factor in such movements, apart from traditional "market forces" or government action? In what ways, if at all, is the TLCC-CCL merger likely to bring about changes in the present wage situation?

FR:

La fusion du CMTC-CCT, survenue il y a un an au Canada et cinq mois seulement après celle de la FAT et du COI aux États-Unis, soulève de nouveau et avec plus d'intérêt la question des conséquences du syndicalisme sur les salaires. En premier lieu, quelle est la situation actuelle en regard de l'évolution de la structure des salaires, ou des taux relatifs de salaires et du niveau général de salaires? Deuxièmement, jusqu'à quel point le syndicalisme est-il un facteur causal de tels mouvements dans les salaires? Troisièmement, cette fusion amènera-t-elle des changements dans la situation économique actuelle?

Comme une connaissance empirique de l'évolution des structures et des niveaux de salaires s'avère nécessaire avant de pouvoir déterminer des influences causales et qu'au Canada les chiffres dans ce domaine sont malheureusement rares, il faut jeter un coup d'oeil du côté des autres pays, et des États-Unis, en particulier, la nouvelle étude de Reynolds et Taft, intitulée The Evolution of Wage Structure et publiée en 1956, résume les récentes recherches faites dans ce domaine en France, en Suède, en Grande-Bretagne, au Canada et aux États-Unis. En France, la politique joue un rôle très important dans la détermination des salaires; ceci s'explique car c'est le gouvernement qui est le plus gro3 employeur du pays.

En Suède, au contraire, cette intervention gouvernementale est minime et les organisations de travailleurs et d'employeurs sont puissantes; la négociation à l'échelle industrielle est très répandue. La Grande-Bretagne se rapproche de la Suède. Quant aux États-Unis, son système de négociation collective est moins étendu et moins national d'envergure; le pouvoir de décider des salaires est dans les mains des chefs ouvriers des fédérations surtout, et la centrale FAT-COI n'y a aucune influence directe; de plus l'intervention du gouvernement est plutôt limitée. Enfin, le Canada possède des institutions économiques semblables à celles des États-Unis; il se développe rapidement au point de vue économique et démographique; quelques-unes de ses sociétés industrielles sont étroitement reliées aux entreprises américaines, et la plupart des unions canadiennes, sauf celles de la CTCC, sont des succursales d'organisations-mères situées aux États-Unis; la négociation collective influe sur les salaires surtout dans les transports et communications, pulpe et papier, acier, automobile, construction, etc., et le gouvernement n'exerce qu'un faible rôle sur la structure des salaires.

Les taux des salaires sont fixés en s'appuyant sur certaines différences occupationnelles (entre occupations qualifiées et non-qualifiées, par exemple), géographiques, inter-industrielles, inter-usines et enfin personnelles (âge, sexe, race, etc.). En ce qui concerne le niveau général des salaires, nous ne disposons que de très peu de chiffres pour le Canada et les autres pays, même si les théories sur le sujet sont nombreuses.

La plupart des unions ouvrières ont tendance à modifier les « forces du marché » au moyen des décisions collectives en ce qui a trait à la structure des salaires; elles font converger leurs efforts vers une structure systématique et stable; elles essayent d'établir une certaine égalité concurrentielle dans les salaires et les coûts du travail et enfin, elles font tout en leur possible pour hausser les niveaux de vie au moyen d'augmentation de salaires qu'elles négocient. Toutefois, on ne peut alléguer que le syndicalisme (qui ne devrait pas toujours complètement être assimilé à la négociation collective dans ses effets) soit le seul facteur pouvant jouer sur la structure des salaires...; il y a aussi comme facteurs possibles, les fluctuations dans les conditions d'offre et de demande, l'inflation, certains' contrôles gouvernementaux, certaines politiques utilisées par les employeurs et les unions dans le procédé de la négociation collective.

D'après les économistes du travail, il semble que les unions, surtout en Amérique du Nord, n'ayant peu de politique de diminution des différences occupationnelles, ne peuvent recevoir tout le crédit des bons résultats obtenus en ce sens; il en est ainsi pour les différences géographiques et les différences inter-industrielles et inter-usines. Par contre, leur revient le crédit d'avoir considérablement contribué à réduire les différences « personnelles » dans les établissements et les occupations.

Quelle que soit l'influence que le syndicalisme ait pu exercer sur la structure des salaires ou les niveaux de salaires, en Grande-Bretagne, aux États-Unis ou au Canada, elle a été le résultat d'efforts d'unions individuelles et non d'un corps central. La constitution de la nouvelle centrale exprime clairement son désir de reconnaître l'intégrité de chaque union affiliée. Toutefois, une politique en vue de la coordination des questions de salaires par un corps central a été prônée par un certain nombre d'économistes et de réformateurs sociaux, surtout en Grande-Bretagne; le but est de parfaire les politiques et tentatives individuelles dans ce sens et d'atteindre une hausse réelle de revenus des travailleurs. Cependant, contrairement à l'ancien CCT, le CTC ne possède pas ce comité de coordination des salaires.

Le CTC continuera d'appliquer la plupart des mesures législatives et politiques entreprises antérieurement et poursuivies individuellement par chaque congrès constituant; il n'y a aucun doute que la force morale et politique de ce nouveau corps sera plus grande et plus vigoureuse, à cause du nombre imposant de ses membres et de son sens de responsabilité économico-politique en plus de son grand désir d'unité durable.

FR:

L'auteur rappelle brièvement l'intérêt porté aux questions internationales par les syndicats canadiens depuis les débuts du mouvement ouvrier canadien; il explique le développement des divers organismes internationaux qui ont surgi depuis la guerre et la part qu'y ont joué les groupements ouvriers anglais, américains et canadiens; il s'arrête particulièrement à la Confédération Internationale des Syndicats Libres dont il décrit la composition et le rôle important qu'elle joue auprès des Nations Unies. Il souligne en dernier lieu la responsabilité du syndicalisme canadien dans le domaine des affaires internationales.

EN:

Along with the development of Canadian Trade Unionism grew its interest and cooperation towards unions of other countries. This fact is easily explained by its origine so influenced and closely related with British and American unions and by its philosophic conception of unionism; indeed Canadian unions believe that world peace can be assured and maintained by the evolution of trade unionism and by free collective agreements.

Since 1898, the American Federation of Labour and the Trades and Labour Congress of Canada mutually exchanged some delegates in their annual convention and since 1913, the TLCC and British unions did the same. Besides, the Canadian Labour Movement always took an active part in the activities of International Labour Organization created in 1919. Immediately after the Second World War, the World Federation of Trades Unions was born and the Canadian Congress of Labour joined it just like the CIO, whereas the TLC of Canada like the A.F.ofL. stayed out of this organization alleging communist influence. The CCL and other unions left its ranks. And strongly supported by the T.L.C, the A.F.ofL., the C.I.O. and the Congress of British unions the International Confederation of Free Trade Union was founded in 1949. This organism now groups 54,000,000 members of 88 different countries and is closely related with the United Nations; its objective is "bread, peace, and freedom for all" and to realize it, a broad program of education is elaborated. CH. Millard, from the C.C.L., has recently been appointed director of its Organization department. At Calcutta, Asia, an important school of education has been organized and workers of other countries follow a three-months course and, this summer, at the Banff School of Fine Arts, there will be held a session for 40 to 50 international students.

Besides education, the Canadian labour movement has and always had a great interest in international affairs and proudly gives its own opinion in questions of general interest. It has great responsibilities and the CLC is aware of them and wants to share actively its own.

FR:

L'auteur dans cet article veut prouver que, pour la province de Québec tout comme pour le reste du pays, la fusion est devenue une condition de progrès. Il s'arrête dans une première partie à l'histoire des conflits inter-syndicaux, aux leçons à en tirer; il consacre l'autre partie aux effets de la fusion sur ces conflits, sur la négociation collective, sur les services syndicaux et sur la croissance du syndicalisme au Canada.

EN:

By Merger we mean the creation of a central body on the national and provincial "level". For the Province of Quebec as well as for the Nation, the Merger is a necessity if unionism is to progress.

In the United States, Dave Beck's suspension would not have been possible without the merger AFL-CIO; the merger has created a new power and a new authority inside the Labor Movement; In the Province of Quebec, the conflicts between the CLC and the CCL at Brown-Boveri's of St. John and at Baie-Comeau could have been prevented with the merger of these two unions.

Such conflicts lead to lower union standards to the prejudice of the working class; they compel unions leaders to find solutions for urging problems, neglecting, on the long run, labor interests; they are an obstacle to the exercise of freedom of association.

The merger offers indirect and direct advantages.

1. Indirect advantages: unions will help each other at the bargaining table and strikes will be prevented more often.

2. Direct advantages: unions will develop better services; the Canadian Labor Movement will become independant and powerful. In the Province of Quebec, wages will be higher; labor unions will play a political influence; labor unions will participate in social organizations and with the increase of members, unions will have a better staff.

FR:

L'auteur définit d'abord certains concepts comme « démocratie » et « bureaucratie ». Il fait une analyse critique des principaux éléments de la démocratie syndicale et en présente les critères qu'il juge les plus justes. Enfin, il examine brièvement l'influence éventuelle de la fusion CMTC-CCT sur la solution du problème de la démocratie syndicale.

EN:

One must be very careful when talking about democracy in labor unions, for democracy is fundamentally a political system related to the larger society. The word "democracy", however, has yielded to the fancies of analogy and the needs of a changing world, so that we now have economic, social, industrial and union democracy. In this case, it must be pointed out that the analogy should not be carried to an extreme, for the very simple reason that trade unionism and a fortiori a given national or local union — is not the larger, political society, and should not therefore be expected to seek the general common good to the same extent as the latter, since it is interested primarily in particular, specific objectives and interests.

Trade unions are, among other things, pressure groups with various axes, however noble, to grind. They are a mixture of business enterprise, mutual insurance, recreation club, and fighting unit, the latter feature often being the dominant one and not allowing the unions to tolerate much of the slowness of the "democratic" process with which the larger society has to live.

Bureaucracy has often, and wrongly, been described as the extreme point of a continuum of freedom, the other extreme being democracy. This would not have occurred if Max Weber's ideal type of bureaucratic organization had been kept in mind. For him, "bureaucratic organization fundamentally means the exercise of control on the basis of knowledge", and "experience tends universally to show that the purely bureaucratic type of administrative organization is, from a purely technical point of view, capable of attaining the highest degree of efficiency and is in this sense formally the most rational known means of carrying out imperative control ever human beings".

Democracy does not perforce mean the absence of all compulsion or coercion or of sanctions in a labor union, when and after it is established. Attendance at, and participation in, union meetings are not, in and of themselves, final criteria of union democracy, nor are other forms of union activity such as membership in union committees, bargaining or strike activities, membership in union officialdom, and so on. A rapid turnover of union officers is not necessarily a good criterion of union democracy.

Union democracy is the result of a complex of factors which must be analysed jointly. The union constitution must itself be democratic in tenor; otherwise the democratic mechanism is already blocked. And even when the letter of the constitution is democratic, the members must be constantly vigilant to maintain its spirit.

The union members must be and feel free to express themselves and to associate with their kind for the furtherance of specific interests within the union. Minority rights therein must be respected, although minority protest must not deliberately clog the democratic process.

Union elections must be held periodically and in an honest and free fashion; they are the most efficient instrument of control in the hands of the members. Fear of reprisals should not exist. Obviously, present incumbents always have an edge over opposing candidates for office; but their re-election should not be seen as an automatic and fatal event.

The most specific criterion of union democracy, however, is the sensitiveness of the union leadership to rank-and-file pressure and expressed or felt opinions. If the leaders of a given union genuinely seek the advice of the majority on important questions, lend an ear to member grievances, present their arguments to the members so as to better clarify their own positions, avoid to obstruct the expression of antagonistic views, and respect resulting majority decisions, there is a great likelihood that such a union is democratic.

"Democracy", as Rosen & Rosen put it, "means the opportunity of all union members to develop informed opinions about union goals and means of achieving them, and the opportunity to express those opinions in such a way that the organization will be governed in its activity by a majority of those who do so."

The new CLC has lofty goals with respect to union — and other — democracy. It should not be forgotten, however, that the power in economic and administrative matters still remains with the affiliated unions. The CLC's role regarding union democracy will consist mainly in spreading and enforcing — however gently — ethical norms among its affiliated bodies. But the most solid defenders of union democracy are still to be found among the rank-and-file members of labor unions.

FR:

Le nombre des syndiqués canadiens appartenant à des unions « internationales » est très important. C'est un phénomène unique au monde. Jusqu'à quel point les politiques syndicales canadiennes dépendent-elles de décisions prises aux Etats-Unis? Quels sont les avantages et les inconvénients de cette situation? L'auteur répond à ces questions ainsi qu'aux critiques portées contre le syndicalisme international au Canada.

EN:

Out of the 1,351,000 Canadian union members, 954,000 (70%) belong to "international" unions which head office and the great majority of their membership are in the United States. This situation is unique in the world. It was, and is still, the source of difficulties and critics from employers, governments, public and from the trade union movement itself.

Before the Merger in Canada, this question of Canadian autonomy has been seriously examined. Indeed, the leaders of the TLCC and of the CCL were in favor of a complete and real autonomy for the new labour body and its constitution mentions it clearly. It stipulates that only national or international unions which conform to the rules and regulations of the CLC may become affiliated and that every jurisditional conflict be settled by the CLC only. So any union of, or chartered by, the AF of L in Canada shall be suppressed and all the organizers of the AFL-CIO in Canada shall be transferred to the CLC.

There are also a few other signs of this spirit reigning in the new Canadian central body: the unanimous choice of its name, of its officers, the amount of a 7 cents per capita instead of the 4 cents in United States. The CLC is not a simple copy of the AFL-CIO and is in no way submitted to American control eventhough the mutual relations are very friendly. This is unavoidable as 1 ) Canada and U.S.A. are so closed and so closely related: many of our Canadian industries are branches of American corporations and many belong to American owners; 2) The Canadian sections of the International unions are submitted to the International constitutions just like the American ones; 3) They play an effective part in their mother-organizations and are almost completely autonomous. (Canadian members ask for this autonomy and American members support them); 4) There is only one restriction: if Canadian unions may refuse to go on strike, as a general rule, they cannot go on strike without the previous consent of the International union.

But what are the objections formulated by the national critics against the International trade unionism? 1) International unions may force Canadian workers to adopt a policy of wage or other which does not respond to their economic conditions. 2) They try to raise Canadian wages to a level which may provoke the bankruptcy of Canadian industry. 3) With their financial strength, they enable the Canadian workers to force their employers to give wage rates which are so high that they constitute an obstacle to the growth of Canadian industry. 4) They can order to Canadian workers to go on strike so that Canadian plants be closed and that their markets pass to American business concerns. 5) They can, by the intermediary of the Canadian sections influence Canadian goverments (federal or provincial ) in impeding Canadian industry either by raising it; income-tax or by lowering its customs duties which are its protection against American competition. 6) They can deprive Canadian workers from their benefits in ordering them to strike for strictly American purposes. 7) They get from Canadian workers enormous amounts of money which are sent to the United States... this weakens both the workers and the economy of Canada. 8) Their leaders, with their conservative mind, prevent the Canadian members from formulating requests which are well justified by the Canadian economic conditions. 9) Some American agitators inspire to peaceful Canadian workers exagerated ideas and unjustified request which would have never come to their minds without their belonging to American Unions. 10) They oblige the Canadian sections to adopt the foreign policy of the AFL-CIO, and even of the American government.

These objections are easily rejected. For example, while the AFL-CIO is against the recognition of the Red China, the CLC favors it. During some strikes, the amount received by Canadian members are far greater than the sums paid by them to International unions. Besides, most of the amounts levied for the International office are held here in Canada. They are used to buy governmental bonds or are kept in a special account either to pay the expenses of the national Canadian office or of the regional offices, and to pay the salaries of the permanent officers in Canada and the per capita tax paid to CLC. And for the strike question, according to researches made by the National Industrial Conference Board, there is not one International union which constitution contains a clause allowing the central office to order a strike.

To summarize, the CLC is an autonomous labour body in principle and in fact. Its affiliated unions are also autonomous in fact although they are submitted to a few financial restrictions from the central offices, because they receive from them most of the funds which are necessary for long industrial struggles. All the officers of the Congress are Canadian citizens and most of the directors of the Canadian sections of the affiliated international unions are also Canadian citizens. Every meeting, either of the Congress itself, or of its provincial federations, of its local councils, of their committees, or their departments, is dominated by a deep Canadian spirit and against any American infiltration. The CLC has many very strong national unions: Canadian Brotherhood of Railway Employees and other Transport Workers, two unions of public employees, the One Big Union, etc. If the CCCL joins the CLC, as it is the desire of all, 27% of the membership of the Congress will be exclusively Canadian.