The Marxist-Leninist Daily

Harper refuses to intervene in U.S. Steel's private decision to
close down steelmaking in Hamilton

Harper's Conservative Party in government speaks constantly of how great it has been in managing the economy. In the wake of the 2008 economic crisis, Harper says the government intervened to save the economy by giving public money to the auto monopolies and big banks. Part of this was to buy a huge number of new shares in GM and Chrysler and to set up a public fund for use by all foreign auto monopolies operating in Canada. Harper also created his Economic Action Plan to dole out public money mainly to private construction firms. He also set up PPP Canada. The program requires that all

infrastructure projects of a certain size must be constituted as public-private partnerships (P3s) to receive federal funding. One of the largest P3s is the Detroit River Crossing, where the Canadian government is paying most of the U.S. share in the project, while all construction, management and operations of the crossing will be in the hands of private companies. P3s are highly favoured and promoted by the Harper government. By definition, P3s are joint projects of government and private companies. The Harper government, as all governments in the capitalist system, is completely integrated with the most powerful companies. The government intervenes on behalf of private companies regularly such as issuing back-to-work orders against workers at Air Canada and the rail industry. Workers are severely punished if they disobey Harper's legislation.

Harper also acknowledged as positive the intervention of Presidents Bush and Obama in the economy with massive handouts to specific private mortgage lenders, insurance companies, banks, auto monopolies and others, and the actions of the U.S. Treasury Department in authorizing massive amounts of money be given to the private big financial institutions that are members of the U.S. Federal Reserve. This action to increase the U.S. money supply to stimulate the economy is known as quantitative easing and continues to date.

The Harper government through its actions intervenes regularly in the private affairs of corporations through handing over of public money to them, through legislation that favours one or the other and in myriad other ways. Intervention in business is routine for governments at all levels. This intervention is also international, as the government supports big business in its overseas adventures in various ways. That is the nature of government and to suggest otherwise is naïve or deceptive. The issue for the working class is not that governments intervene in business affairs but on behalf of whom, the working class or big business, to support public right or monopoly right.

Canadian government intervenes on behalf of corporations; October 13 2011 demonstration of Air Canada Workers
against back-to-work legislation (left), CP Rail workers rally in Ottawa against back-to-work legislation May 29, 2012.

When confronted with the actions of U.S. Steel to shut down permanently the steelmaking capability of Hamilton Works, Harper's government through the office of James Moore, the Minister of Industry, issued a terse statement saying U.S. Steel's move is a private business decision and that the government does not get involved in the day-to-day decisions of any company.

Why would the Harper government make such a statement that does not make sense? Moore's assertion goes against his government's daily practice. For example, the Harper government routinely intervenes to allow or not allow foreign investment. Just last week, Egyptian billionaire Naguib Sawiris was so incensed at the refusal of Harper to allow his purchase of MTS Allstream he vowed never to invest in Canada again. In this case, the Harper government became very involved in a private business decision. Sawiris' decision to purchase Allstream could be considered similar to U.S. Steel's decision to purchase Stelco and then to shut down its steelmaking capability. They are all day-to-day decisions of the global monopolies.

Further on this matter whether to intervene or not intervene, Harper's minister in the House of Commons made the following comment as reported by Hansard on October 30 in response to a question on the closure of steelmaking at Hamilton Works.

"Mr. Speaker, the agreement that we had will keep jobs in Hamilton and keep jobs in Lake Erie. What she is describing is entirely not true with regard to the matter before us. Again, we have the NDP leader and an NDP environment critic going to Washington, D.C., saying not to approve Keystone, do not approve the Enbridge line, do not approve the Kinder Morgan pipeline, have no more pipelines, and yet those steel pipelines are actually manufactured in Hamilton and Hamiltonians are losing their jobs. It is little wonder. It was John Quincy Adams who once said that being all things to all people means being nothing to no one. That is today's NDP."

Moore says that government intervention to stop U.S. Steel's shutdown of steelmaking in Hamilton is bad while government action to ensure construction of the pipelines Keystone, Northern Gateway and Kinder Morgan is good. The issue for Moore is not intervention per se but the quality of the intervention and who benefits from the intervention.

Moore also spreads disinformation suggesting U.S. Steel makes pipes for pipelines in Canada. This is not true. The monopoly's main tubular plant is Lone Star Steel in Texas. Hamilton or rather Hilton Works made steel for pipelines before Stelco closed the plate mill in early 2003. Lake Erie Works, which U.S. Steel controls, produces a product called "skelp," which is in coil form and transported to pipe plants to "spiral weld" into pipeline products. Some of this product is sent to Lone Star in Texas and to U.S. Steel's other pipe producer, the Fairfield plant in Alabama. Before finance capitalists stripped Stelco of most of its productive assets, the steel company did produce tubular products. Stelco owned Stelpipe Ltd, now Lakeside Steel, and Welland Pipe.

Mayor's Coup Against Municipal Employees

Demonstration outside Quebec National Assembly, October 23, 2013 in support of QuebecCity blue collar workers.

Quebec City Mayor, Régis Labeaume, is leading his campaign against the Quebec City employees, calling them all sorts of names, and the Quebec monopoly media are having a field day against the employees of the city, especially blue collar workers. Mayor Labeaume unilaterally ended negotiations with city employees during the municipal elections, saying he wanted to crush the unions who, according to him, are defending private interests while he defends the public interest. The mayor accused the blue collar union of intimidation and muzzling municipal authorities. Already, blue collar workers are reporting harassment and verbal abuse against them while at work and death threats have also been uttered. Blue collar workers cannot work in a calm atmosphere, which is necessary for them to perform their work, tasks that are critical to the functioning of the city's infrastructure. It is not only the safety of employees, but the whole city that is challenged by the mayoral campaign against the workers.

This smear campaign and violence against Quebec City employees who perform vital services for the city, a campaign joined by other Quebec mayors, must be vehemently denounced. The campaign's aim is to declare that negotiations with municipal employees are impossible as the pretext for the Quebec government to give municipal authorities the power to unilaterally change the working conditions of city employees. This campaign is being waged not only against the Quebec City employees, but against all municipal employees in Quebec. It is an attack on unions and their right to negotiate acceptable working conditions for the services workers provide so that mayors can impose and change working conditions at will. In this vein, Mayor Labeaume is demanding that cities be granted the right to lockout, unilaterally decide what essential services to provide in the event of a strike, to impose conditions after a year of negotiations with their employees that the city considers unsuccessful and unilaterally change the terms of pension plans.

The aim of this campaign is also to push through cuts and privatization of services, as well as unrestricted outsourcing. Such anti-social changes have already demonstrated their devastating nature whether in health care, education, maintenance services and in Quebec City even the outbreak of Legionnaires' disease in 2012. In the neo-liberal conception of cities, they are seen as a hub to attract large private capital, without regard for and in contempt of the people who live there, of the utilities necessary for the life of modern cities and workers who inject tremendous value into cities through their work, which is not recognized.

Mayor Labeaume is not alone in imposing working conditions. He carried out an illegal lockout, recognized as such by the Labour Board, when he laid off 162 city support staff in April 2012 following a strike vote taken by blue collar workers at that time. The city also had to pay more than $1.5 million to the blue collar workers following the illegal privatization of garbage collection in 2010-2011. Mayor Labeaume and other representatives of the neo-liberal agenda are very experienced with such illegality which they try to dress up in a veneer of legality while usurping more power.

All workers are called upon to speak out in defence of Quebec City municipal employees and defend the right of these workers to negotiate acceptable working conditions, commensurate with the services they provide. Mayor Labeaume must let negotiations resume, and they must be carried out recognizing the important work that municipal employees do for the public.

(Republished from Chantier Politique, publication of the Marxist-Leninist Party of Quebec. Translated from original French by TML.)

Municipal Workers Demand Proper Negotiations

TML: At the demonstration in support of blue collar workers held on October 23 as part of the Convention of the Canadian Union of Public Employees (CUPE), you asked Quebec City Mayor Régis Labeaume to stop his demagoguery and false representations regarding the blue collar workers. Can you tell us more?

Daniel Simard: What I meant is that from the moment blue collar workers are compared with other sectors of the city or province, those comparisons don't hold water. In our opinion one must compare municipal with municipal. We're told that we have better conditions than those of other government employees, but our work is not comparable. We provide drinking water services, waterworks and sewer services, we dig in confined spaces with gas lines, etc. It's a particular job in the municipal world.

Our Level 1 operators with the city earn $24.50 an hour plus benefits. Our salaries are now at $20.50 for general labour, while for technicians, engineers and tradespeople $26.97 is the maximum salary that a blue collar worker can earn in Quebec City. As you probably know, in the private sector, workers in these occupations earn much more than us.

Trades practiced with the city are similar to those trades in construction, similar to heavy vehicle contractors that employ mechanics or electricians. Our tradespeople are underpaid compared to all these people. Our salaries are certainly nothing to write home about. These wages must properly support families. When we're talking about $27 per hour, you can't say that people who go to work for the city for 35 years are thieves. Our blue collar workers provide an excellent service to the city. Even polls have shown a high level of public satisfaction with respect to our work. We can always improve but still we provide a very good service to the city.

TML: When you were talking about misrepresentation at the demonstration you were also talking about misrepresentation in relation to the negotiations.

DS: Normally you talk about a negotiation when it's finished. We're forced to talk about it because he told a lot of lies. We have agreements that are signed or are in the process of being signed. Mayor Labeaume denies that when he speaks to the media as if no agreements have been made at the negotiating table.

The work week is subject to an agreement at the bargaining table. Take the example of the lunch break. Yes it is true that over the lunch hour we have a half-hour paid break. But our boss has access to our workers during lunch. If tomorrow there is work to do during lunch hour, we are obligated to do it. In the current agreement, if our bosses need a mechanic or it's snowing and a salt truck is broken at lunch time, the mechanic will have to work on his lunch break and take his lunch later. It's an obligation we have in the collective agreement. This is a service for the city. My agreement tells me that I must be available for the city. This issue is already resolved while the mayor is trying to get more. But the people he sent to the negotiating table have agreed to let us keep the paid lunch break because it works for the city.

TML: What about the issue of your pensions which Mayor Labeaume and the media have been causing a lot of hysteria about?

DS: We all know that pensions are a major issue. We're contributing to a 2.4 percent pension plan [a 2.4 percent contribution of the average salary for each year, e.g. 20 years of service equals 20 times 2.4 percent = 48 percent of a salary -- TML Note]. The lie being told is that we have a cushy plan that gives us 110 percent of our salary. Remember that when you reach the age of 65, the plan drops from 2.4 percent to 1.6 percent once you get your old age pension. It's a drop in our pension funds at that time and it was accepted because it was said that it will benefit young people starting with the city.

Someone like me who came later to the city will have other conditions. I first paid into a pension fund for the former city of Beauport at 2 percent which is untouchable at 65, then I contributed 15 years to the Quebec City pension fund at 2.4 percent, but when I turn 65 that will fall to 1.6 percent for my 15 years working for Quebec City. It is not true that it's 2.4 percent for the rest of our days.

We made a concession at the negotiating table on the issue of the future of pensions. We set aside the 2 percent salary increase owed to us for the year following the termination of our agreement, which was completed in December 2010. We said we're ready to forego the 2 percent increase, which covers the year 2011, we'll leave it for 15 years time. We won't take the 2 percent, we'll create a reserve fund with this money to cover any future deficit that may occur in the pension fund. If there's no deficit, we'll take it back.

DS: The battle we're waging is that we want a proper negotiation and to be heard at the negotiating table where the two parties agree on the conditions in relation to any particular situation. We don't want demagoguery, like saying we earn $50 an hour with our benefits. At the table, it's a negotiation. We made some gains and sustained losses. It's normal.

When they say it is impossible to negotiate with us it's a lie. We'll never see our 2011 salary increase if ever something goes wrong with the pension fund. What you must understand is that we were already sitting at the negotiating table. We were well on our way to an agreement within probably four to five months. This was possible because we felt there the city had an open mind and we also had an open mind.

DS: We are a city that provides good services despite the very painful work environment right now. We are able to provide an adequate service despite what others are saying about us. We're a union that is able to control its members and provide a good service to the city despite the context.

If pensions are undermined, it will be the destruction of our future. We must continue to live after we've reached retirement age. If there are no more pension plans, it's society that will have to bear the brunt and that's not right.

Across Canada there is a solidarity movement among workers in support of us because they feel this is an injustice against us, total demagoguery against municipal employees. We feel the support of all the trade unions.

In closing I want to say that the issue of services is very important. Even if we stay in the black, we know that the city wants to continue putting "bandaids" on city services and outsource jobs. I think a good workplace is one where the employer has good ideas and is able to implement them with the staff. When the work is done by outsiders, it doesn't work. When we do things internally, we have lots of ideas and we see job creation and that's not what happens with the private sector.

A private company will never come to the city to provide a service to the public except to make money. What the city needs is service to the people. The best service to the public is with the blue collar workers and can't be obtained through the private sector.

Government Intervention
in the Economy

Government Intervention in the Economy

Mayor's Coup Against Municipal Employees

Municipal Workers Demand Proper Negotiations