|
November 7, 2012 - No. 141
Workers Fight Anti-Union Anti-Worker
Attacks of the Rich and Their Governments
Workers
Fight
Anti-Union
Anti-Worker
Attacks
of the Rich and Their Governments
• Legal Opinion Says Private Member's
Anti-Union Bill Is Unconstitutional
Quebec
• Bombardier Workers in La Pocatière on
Strike to Protect Jobs and Improve Retirement
• General Cable Workers in Shawinigan Face
Gutting of Collective Agreement
U.S. Steel's 3rd
Quarter Report and Conference Call
• The Necessity for a New Direction for the
Economy and Control Over the Decision-Making Process - K.C.
Adams
Workers Fight Anti-Union Anti-Worker
Attacks of the Rich and Their Governments
Legal Opinion Says Private Member's
Anti-Union Bill Is Unconstitutional
On October 31, the Union of Quebec Government
Professional Employees (SPGQ) received a legal opinion stating that
Bill C-377, an Act to amend the Income Tax Act (requirements for
labour organizations), is unconstitutional. The author is Alain
Barré, a lawyer and professor of labour law in
the Department of Industrial Relations at Laval University in Quebec
City.
 Bill C-377 singles out
trade unions for an onerous
system of public reporting not required of any other organization or
enterprise. It was put forward as a private member's bill by
Conservative MP Russ Hiebert on December 5, 2011. It passed a vote at
second reading in February with all the Conservatives voting
in favour. Bill C-377 is now in the House of
Commons Standing Committee on Finance. Among other things, it would
force trade unions to report all
individual transactions above $5,000 identifying the payee, payer, the
purpose and description of the transaction. Disbursements to officers,
directors and trustees would
have to be reported, with the added disclosure of the percentage of
time dedicated to political and lobbying activities. That information
would be posted on the Canada Revenue Agency website.
Barré writes: "If Bill C-377 was to be adopted
and enforced, it could certainly be declared as being 'of no force or
effect' by the Canadian Courts on the basis of Article 52 of the Constitutional
Act
of
1982: its content is inconsistent with the division of
legislative powers that has been established
by the Canadian Constitution."
The legal expert argues that the substance of the bill
has nothing to do with the Income Tax Act but everything to
do with the regulation of trade union activities, a matter which falls
within provincial not federal jurisdiction.
"The bill as written is certainly not valid
constitutionally because its very substance matter pertains to a field
that is under the exclusive jurisdiction of the Canadian provinces,"
writes Mr. Barré.
The union presented a brief to the Finance Committee in
which it argues that the bill, besides being
incompatible with the division of powers between the federal and the
provincial governments, is redundant because trade unions already
disclose the information on their finances. It also points out that the
bill is in contradiction with the Charter
of
Rights
and
Freedoms. Furthermore, the union states that the additional
bureaucracy required to process the unions' financial reports would
mean huge costs for the government and contravene its policy of "fiscal
restraint." The president of the union
called on the members of the Finance Committee to reject the bill.
The SPGQ represents about 23,000 government
professionals, including about 16,300 in the public service, 3,800 at
the Quebec Revenue Agency and 3,000 in the health and education sectors
and various state agencies.
Communications, Energy and Paperworkers Union's
Submission on Bill C-377 to House Committee on Finance (Excerpts)
For its part, the Communications, Energy and
Paperworkers
Union of Canada (CEP) also rejects the bill as legislation that would
weaken unions and single them out for additional financial reporting
that is not required of similar organizations or employers.
In its recent submission to the House Finance Committee,
the CEP points out, "The Bill would allow employers
and anti-union groups, at taxpayers' and unions' expense, to get
detailed information about a union's spending. This would give them an
unprecedented advantage in knowing the current position of the union
they are bargaining with. It could provide
them with information that would ultimately threaten collective
bargaining rights and organizing drives. A similar database set up by
the George Bush administration in the United States is used by
anti-union businesses to weaken the position of workers.
"Developing the regulations needed to enact legislation
forcing unions to publish all expenditures would create new and
wasteful public expenditures. For example, many auditors and
accountants would be needed to oversee the fillings. It would cost
tens, if not hundreds, of millions of dollars for the CRA to compile
detailed reports from the 55 national and international labour
organizations, with over 25,000 local unions, plus 12 provincial and
territorial federations and 130 labour councils.
"The detailed reporting required by Bill C-377 would
threaten individual privacy rights. Under the proposed legislation,
labour-associated pension and benefit plans (which are not funded by
union dues and are not directed by unions) would be required to
publicly disclose 'the name and address' and a 'description'
of benefits paid to individuals greater than $5,000. This could include
personal medical information. According to the CEP Pension Plan Legal
Counsel Koskie Minsky LLP:
 "'Although the Bill is
being brought forth as an
amendment to the Income Tax Act, it really has nothing to do
with taxation and everything to do with making it harder for unions to
operate as a progressive force in Canadian Society. It will inflict
considerable collateral damage on pension and benefit
funds, even those which have nothing to do with how unions spend their
money.'...'This Bill will make it much harder for both unions and
benefit plans to operate. The United States Office of Management and
Budget estimates that in the US, completing the forms under similar
legislation requires approximately
550 hours of work each year for each union. Transparency is an
important goal for all unions, but only as it relates to their members.
Unions and pension funds should be transparent to their members and
beneficiaries, but there is no justification for requiring total public
disclosure of the minutiae of how money
is spent, nor is there any reason for the profound invasion of privacy
that will result if Bill C-377 passes.' (Koskie Minskie LLP, Pension
and
Benefits
Report,
Fall
2012
Edition)
"The proposed Bill and the proposed amendments are
inadequate to protect the privacy of individuals. Usually, the
disclosure of taxation information under the Income Tax Act
is treated as confidential, but Bill C-377 would make all information
openly accessible. By forcing unions to detail any payments
over $5,000 made to a legal firm, Bill C-377 threatens lawyer-client
privilege. We believe the collection of such information is an
intrusion into the private lives of Canadian citizens.
"This Bill is
discriminatory. There are over 90,000
organizations categorized by the CRA as nonprofit.
"Yet, the Conservative government is not requiring other
professional associations that collect fees or dues from their members,
such as the Canadian Medical Association or Law Societies, to follow
the terms of Bill C-377. The Canadian Labour Congress writes: 'There is
not a single organization in Canada --
not a single publically traded company, not one of the 85,917 charities
registered with CRA, nor one of the estimated 90,000 non-profit
organizations with the exception of labour organizations, that will be
required to make confidential detailed information publically available
in the way this bill demands of unions.'
Proponents have justified this Bill with the argument that unions are
subsidized by taxpayers because union members are able to deduct their
dues from their taxable income. This assertion is simply not true. The
same section of the Income Tax Act that allows for the
deduction of union dues also allows
any taxpayer who is a member of a professional association, like those
mentioned above (Medical Association or Law Societies) to also deduct
their professional dues. [...]
"The bill demands that unions segregate 'the percentage
of time dedicated to political activities and to lobbying activities.'
This is extremely difficult to do. A union representative might help
with bargaining in the morning, walk a picket line in the afternoon and
speak at a forum criticizing back-to-work legislation
in the evening. What proportion of this would be lobbying or political
activities? This element of Bill C-377 is an attack against the 1991
Lavigne Supreme Court decision, which protects unions' right to engage
in political activity without restriction."
CEP represents some 110,000 workers across the country
in forestry, energy, telecommunications, media and other sectors.
Quebec
Bombardier Workers in La Pocatière on Strike to
Protect Jobs and Improve Retirement
La Pocatière,
November 1, 2012
The Bombardier workers in La Pocatière went on
strike November 1, after 39 sessions of bargaining in which the company
refused to seriously negotiate with them and even to table a global
offer. The collective agreement expired on September 30, 2011. The
workers, who build subway cars, are members of
the Syndicat des employés de Bombardier de La Pocatière.
They are picketing 24/7 and calling on the workers of the Lower
Saint-Lawrence region
of Eastern Quebec to take up as their own this fight in defence of
manufacturing jobs with decent working
conditions.
The main issues for the workers are
subcontracting and the improvement of wages and retirement conditions.
The workers decided to go on strike after two days of
bargaining in front of the government-appointed conciliator on October
30-31 where the Bombardier representatives tabled
offers on some issues that are inferior to what is in the present
collective agreement. Prior to this, on October 27, the workers voted
95 per cent of a strike to
pressure the company to negotiate seriously on the basis of
their demands and concerns.
The workers underscore the need to limiting
the use of subcontracting, which is rapidly reducing their numbers,
even faster than the technological changes. In 2006 there were more
than 1,000 production workers at the plant and now about 330 are left.
Bombardier is subcontracting the work at La Pocatière not just
to outside companies, but also within its private
empire by moving work to its other facilities in Canada, the U.S. and
Mexico. It does this without explanation or regard to the effects on
the workers and their communities.
This wrecking of manufacturing is justified by the
neo-liberal dogma that workers are a "cost," not the force which
creates all the wealth, and that cutting "costs" is necessary to
compete on the global markets. The workers do not accept seeing their
livelihoods and that of the region disappear. The plant in La
Pocatière
is one of the few big manufacturing plants remaining in the
region and any reduction in the activity at the plant has a big impact
on the entire region.
At present, the workers' concerns about subcontracting
are focused on the contract
for 468 Montreal subway cars awarded to Bombardier. In 2009, just prior
to receiving that contract, Bombardier had invoked the Buy America
Act to transfer the part of the production at La Pocatière
for the Chicago subway cars to its Plattsburgh,
New York facility. The La Pocatière workers reject this
self-serving rationale because for years they have been working with
parts for U.S. subway cars that are mostly built in the U.S. However,
the union decided to avoid costly legal proceedings to challenge
Bombardier regarding the Chicago subway cars. Instead,
the workers used Bombardier's contract for the Montreal subway cars to
negotiate
an agreement with the company according to which all the primary parts
and the minor and major sub-assemblies of the Montreal cars would be
built in La Pocatière. The workers report that the company is
blatantly violating this agreement,
sending these parts to be built where ever it wants. The union has
filed a grievance which will be heard sometime before the end of the
year. This makes it even more important for the workers to fight for a
new collective agreement that imposes definite limitations on
subcontracting so as to do everything possible
to preserve the manufacturing jobs in the facility and in the region.
TML wholeheartedly supports the just struggle
of the Bombardier workers against the destruction of manufacturing.
 
General Cable Workers in Shawinigan Face
Gutting of Collective Agreement
 The General Cable workers
of the Saint-Maurice plant in
Shawinigan are faced with the demands of new employer U.S. monopoly
General
Cable that amount to the gutting of their collective agreement.
The plant was part of Cable Alcan a division of Rio Tinto Alcan until
the summer of 2012 when Rio Tinto
sold this division to General Cable. U.S. monopoly General Cable is a
major producer of communications wire and cable products with 55
manufacturing facilities in 25 countries. The Shawinigan plant produces
aluminum rods used in building wires and aluminum utility cables used
by Hydro-Quebec to carry
hydroelectricity from the power stations to the points of utilization.
The 130 production workers at the plant are members of the Syndicat
national de l'usine Saint-Maurice.
On September 17, the
five-year contract signed with Rio
Tinto Alcan expired. When the union presented itself at the first
bargaining session, such was the company's arrogance that it
blatantly said it did not even consider there was anything to negotiate
and that the workers' only choice was to accept its demands for
concessions.
"When we sat down at the bargaining table, the
representative of General Cable tabled their offer and said that it
would be dealt with not point by point but as a whole. The company, he
added, needed the whole thing to be accepted by us, and the offer was
not negotiable," the union president Steve Dupont told TML. "The
company
is
doing
a
total
restructuring
of the plant, he said. 'There is no choice. You have to agree with the
whole thing.'"
"They came up with wage cuts in the range of 25-30 per
cent according to the jobs the workers do," Dupont told the local
press. "If we include the pension funds and benefits they want to
take away, I would say that the concessions amount to a monetary value
of about 35 per cent [of our wages]. This is
crazy."
The current wage scale of regular production workers
ranges from $27.02 to $32.86. Other points of the company's demands are
on the pension funds and subcontracting.
"Our pension fund was transferred to a trust
following the sale of Rio Tinto's cable division to General Cable. That
is a major cause of concern for our workers -- what is going to happen
to the pension funds? At the moment, it is still a defined benefit
pension fund with the same conditions, but at the
end of the negotiations it will be registered as a new fund and it is
not certain if the company will maintain it as a defined benefit fund
or change it to a defined contribution fund. Also in the new offer, the
company wants to introduce subcontracting starting with the work of our
janitors. At the moment there is no
subcontracting at the plant and we want to keep it that way. Of course
when you consider the wage cuts they are asking for, we are all going
to be
treated as contract workers."
The relief workers are also expected to take a wage cut
of about 20 per cent. As their job title implies, these workers are
assigned work in the plant according to what is required at any given
time, for example, replacing workers who are sick. They are the most
recently hired workers with the worst working
conditions. Besides the demands for concessions, General Cable has also
laid off more than 20 relief workers in the last two weeks.
The president of the union told TML that the
workers are ready to fight if the company does not back down from its
dictate and demands for concessions.
 "General Cable does not want
this facility to be a bench
mark with good working conditions for its other plants. It wants to
take us down to the level they brought down the working conditions at
their plant in Saint-Jerome," said Dupont. This refers to the bitter
struggle the Saint-Jerome workers waged for more
than a year in 2008-2009 against General Cable's demands for
concessions. The Saint-Jerome workers were able to fend off some of
these concessions but overall their working conditions worsened.
"Actually the company's offer to us is even lower than
the one they tabled at the beginning of bargaining in Saint-Jerome. We
are not going to accept this. Since we were first bought by Rio Tinto
until the present takeover by General Cable, our working conditions
have continued to
worsen. We are determined to put up a fight
if the company does not back off. Already our workers are wearing a
badge inside the plant to express their support for their bargaining
committee and we are going to put more pressure if General Cable does
not withdraw its unacceptable demands."
U.S. Steel's 3rd Quarter Report and
Conference Call
The Necessity for a New Direction for the Economy and
Control Over the Decision-Making Process
- K.C. Adams -
Several features stand out in U.S. Steel's 3rd qt.
Report
and Conference Call: shameless self-promotion of the executive
managers, utter lack of concern for the Canadian steel industry and
U.S. Steel workers generally, inability and unwillingness to deal with
the economic crisis in ways that overcome the basic
contradictions and serve steelworkers, their communities, public
interest and society, and absence of desire to investigate the root
problems and contradictions of the economy to discover a new direction
that opens a path forward.
CEO Surma blames general abstractions for the ongoing
crisis in the steel industry and the failure of U.S. steel to reach a
rate of return on investment that satisfies the financial oligarchy. In
particular, he cites the Chinese steel industry as a big problem for
the U.S. steel sector accusing Chinese companies of
exporting steel at a loss to themselves. Why Chinese owners of steel
production can or would want continually to sell steel at prices where
they suffer a loss, Surma does not explain. Nor does he speak to the
issue of imperialist trade relations where the private interests of
monopolies dominate, which inevitably degenerate
into bickering, protectionism and ultimately war for markets, raw
materials and spheres of interest. Surma's constant accusations against
China and other competitors are designed to line up U.S. steelworkers
behind their own monopolies and swallow the line of one monopoly and
one nation with workers and owners
of capital united in a common cause to defend the private interests of
the privileged rich. Surma's constant wailing against China also serves
as a smokescreen to divert the gullible from his and other members of
the ruling elite's lack of any analysis of the relations of production
within the U.S. steel sector and the
contradictions plaguing the economy wherein the socialized nature of
modern production forms a dialectic with its private ownership and
appropriation from which all basic problems emerge.
Obsolete Outlook in Control of U.S. Steel
 Surma refuses to
investigate and analyze the present
reality of the steel industry and its particular concrete conditions
and their interrelations. In their multitude, the particular features
and categories and their interrelations such as workers, capital,
added-value,
transferred-value, prices of production, falling rate of return on
invested capital, profit, loss, deficits, debts etc reveal
progressively more correct abstractions of the whole and its important
parts. For example, U.S. Steel steelworkers exist in themselves as a
social class within a definite point in history and dialectical
social relation with owners of capital. History finds them in a
dialectical relationship with owners of steel capital and not just any
capital but monopoly capital within the U.S. Empire. Steelworkers are
the actual producers of value but within the existing historical and
social relations they exercise no control over
the decision-making process at U.S. Steel or the socialized economy
generally. They are engaged in a constant fight to build their
collectives and independent thinking and social and political movement
so that they can have a decisive say on their claim on the value they
produce, defend their rights within an equilibrium
with the owners of steel capital and open a path forward for society.
Steelworkers exist within a moment of history and have the potential to
influence that history and move it forward to new social relations
where they have the capacity to control the decision-making process and
direction of the economy.
Surma abstracts steelworkers, as a generalization
without their historical context, their dialectical social relation
with owners of capital, their role within the U.S. Empire and without
any prospect or potential to influence and exercise control over the
decision-making process for production and distribution, and
renewal of economic life. From his abstraction of steelworkers as a
diffuse generalization without essence or context, Surma refuses to
acknowledge their dialectical relation with owners of capital and the
necessity for equilibrium of the social relation based on recognition
of the rights of workers. Surma sees workers
as just another material factor of production similar to scrap, which
capital purchases from the marketplace and with this capital-centred
viewpoint accuses them of being a "cost of production" and not the
producers of steel value from which claims for wages, benefits,
pensions, taxes and profits are made. His obsolete
outlook recognizes only capital and not the rights of the working
class. It leads to an abstraction of steelworkers as such, outside
their dialectical relations with owners of capital, their historical
context within the U.S. Empire and role within the socialized economy
as the producers of steel value.
Surma pursues his obsolete outlook of steelworkers as a
general abstraction without historical context, dialectical essence or
interrelations with an abstraction called China and another called
economic cycles. From conclusions based on those general abstractions
Surma blames economic difficulties on the "cost"
of workers, "unfair Chinese competition," and the unknowable and
uncontrollable cyclical marketplace.
Surma creates general abstract notions based on ideas of
the economy, relations of production and modern trade learned by rote,
not on the world as it presents itself, which is knowable through
conscious participation in acts of finding out.
 The U.S. imperialist
superstructure and its historical
crib have taught Surma his ideas of the economy and his general
abstractions. They do not arise from conscious participation in acts of
finding out but from ideas spun out of ideas to fashion abstractions
that serve an intent to preserve the status quo and class
privilege of the ruling elite. From his historical crib of U.S.
imperialism and its self-serving abstractions, Surma fashions an
idealist reality that suits his subjective purpose. He is richly
rewarded for his service and praised for being pragmatic. He can
denounce workers as a "cost of production," the Chinese as "unfair
exporters" and the marketplace as uncontrollable because those
abstractions serve his intentions and capacity as a member of the
ruling elite working to preserve the wealth and class privilege of the
financial oligarchy.
From the imperialist superstructure and historical crib,
Surma rejects economic science and the understanding that comes from
conscious acts of objective investigation of the economic reality as it
exists in all its bits and pieces, contradictions, relations and
historical context.
 Abstracting absence is the
heart of science but this can
only be done with conscious participation in acts of finding out
without preconceived notions of what the absence may be. For all
members of society this demands conscious participation in acts of
finding out and opposition to the control of the imperialist
superstructure and historical crib, which form a straitjacket on the
mind. For a man such as Surma, this would require recognition of the
rights of the working class. Instead, he starts from general
abstractions that suit his narrow purposes, imposes those abstractions
on the reality and has his mignons find particular
facts and bits and pieces that support his abstractions. In science,
the opposite is the way; abstractions arise after exhausting conscious
participation in acts of finding out.
The 3rd quarter Report and Conference Call are full of
notions and facts that are torn from their context. Without the context
and their interrelation with other facts, their essence remains hidden
and the reality of the steel industry at U.S. Steel and in general is
obscured. The Report and Conference Call do not
reveal any essence of the reality and problems from which abstractions
can be postulated. They are devoid of conscious participation in acts
of finding out. As such, the Report and Conference Call cannot and do
not lead to abstracting absence, which is the heart of science and a
necessity in solving economic problems
and advancing the people's political, economic and social life.
The arrogance of the ruling
elite is such that they
declare the world unknowable yet impose their subjective abstractions
and leadership on this "unknowable" world. Surma says during the
Conference Call, "And like everyone else in the world, I think we're
approaching big projects right now with caution and
trying to make sure that we have a pretty good view of the world going
forward. Quite frankly, we don't. We're not sure what the world is
going to bring. The next 3 to 6 months could be important, one way or
the other. I hope in a positive way, but we don't know or no one does,
as we know. So I think we're
-- our CapEx doesn't have -- do not have any major new projects in it.
We are looking at iron ore, we're looking at DRI [direct reduced iron --
ed.], all those sorts of things and projects in Tubular, et
cetera. But
we're maintaining a cautious view right now. I'm not sure where the
world is going to go."
Surma does not know and
refuses to find out through
conscious participation in acts of finding out yet has the arrogance to
impose his leadership on the working class and deprive steelworkers of
any control over the decision-making process and direction of the
economy.
 The absence of economic
science; the absence of a will
to use economic science to find out and to solve problems inevitably
leads to paralysis in the face of the situation. Instead of science and
a will to solve problems, Surma resorts to general abstractions that
come from his historical crib and obsolete outlook
and not from an investigation of the world as it presents itself. He
denounces the working class and its wages, benefits and pensions as a
"cost," which is a gross misrepresentation of the modern reality and
insult directed at the actual producers of all value. He decries
Chinese steel competition as unfair, which is
in essence promotion of dangerous U.S. chauvinism and the private
interests of his particular monopoly. His incessant attacks on
competing steel mills from China represent a refusal to demand
political changes for renewal of international relations on a new basis
of equality amongst all nations big and small, respect
of sovereignty, and trade based on mutual benefit and cooperation.
Importantly, he uses his
subjective preconceived
abstractions and legal position as CEO to deprive steelworkers and
working people generally of control over the decision-making process
not only for his particular monopoly but the steel industry and economy
generally. Surma participates with other CEOs and
the political elite to block those forces in society who are determined
to use science and discover why the U.S. steel industry and economy
stumble from one crisis to the next and fix it without preconceived
notions, hesitation or servitude towards class privilege, holding high
the notion that the actual producers should
control the process for making decisions. Surma and other members of
the political and economic privileged elite use their power to deprive
the actual producers from controlling the decision-making process and
renewing the steel industry and economy generally on a modern basis
that favours the actual producers
and public interest.
The 3rd qt Report and Conference Call reveal the
necessity for the working class to step up its efforts to organize
itself as the social force that can deprive the ruling elite of its
power to deprive the working class of exercising control over the
decision-making process and from discovering and implementing a
new direction for the economy through conscious participation in acts
of finding out.
Conference Call
In an ugly display of self-promotion, various vetted
participants during the Conference Call lavished praise on U.S. Steel
executive management such as the comments of Michelle Applebaum who
says: "First, I want to complement you on the precision of the guidance
this quarter.....
It's great that you guys really stepped up in here because I think
we're all -- I've never seen such a spinning wheel of pricing trends
and cost trends in my career before. So speaking for all of us, it's
not easy. So the most help you give us is great."
After the smarmy praise, she asks a convoluted question:
"It's been 3 years of these kind of crazy 6-week, 6-month [steel price]
cycles. A, what can you do -- is there anything to do to fix that...."
Surma replies, "Well, Michelle, it's very hard to do
much about the market."
 Rather than giving a
scientific reply based on a
thorough investigation of prices, value and how the problem poses
itself in all its particularities, Surma falls back on abstractions
learned by rote from the imperialist superstructure and historical
crib. For Surma and representatives of the financial oligarchy, his
abstractions
let him and his executive off the hook for their refusal to solve the
problem of the damaging market price fluctuations of steel and its
material inputs. Rather than solving any problem, the problems
themselves become a rationale for the status quo and refusal to allow
others, namely the working class, to solve problems
and discover and implement a new direction for the steel industry and
economy.
With regards to the serious situation and problems
facing the Canadian steel industry and in particular the portion U.S.
Steel controls, Surma gives no indication that he even recognizes a
problem. The Report and Conference Call make no mention of the fact
that U.S. Steel shut down the Hamilton blast furnace
in October 2010 and it remains idle.
The only mention of Canada
at all is a complaint that
U.S. Steel has already recorded a "full valuation allowance on deferred
tax assets," which result in "a minimal tax provision or benefit in the
fourth quarter, primarily due to the full valuation allowance on
deferred tax assets in Canada."
This absence of any concern for the portion of the
Canadian steel industry U.S. Steel controls is a sharp reminder that
lack of control over the decision-making process marginalizes all those
not in positions of political and economic power. In this case,
Canadians generally are marginalized from a crucial sector
of their economy. Without control over the decision-making process,
U.S. Steel executives reduce Canadian steelworkers, Canada's steel
industry and economy generally to factors that must serve the U.S.
Empire. Not only steelworkers but all Canadians should be concerned
with this lack of sovereign control over
the economy and absence of power to renew the situation in favour of
Canada's steel communities, economy and public interest. The people are
duty bound to organize themselves to deprive those forces inside or
outside Canada that deprive Canadians of the power to control the
decision-making process, solve problems
based on science and the public interest and chart a new direction for
the economy.
Note: U.S. Steel 3rd Quarter Report and transcript of
the Conference Call are available here.
Read The Marxist-Leninist
Daily
Website: www.cpcml.ca
Email: editor@cpcml.ca
|
