|
March
19, 2009 - No. 58
Windsor, Ontario
Aradco/Aramco Workers Force
Company
to Pay Severance and Back Pay
 
Windsor,
March 18, 2009: Rally in support of Aradco/Aramco workers.Windsor, Ontario
• Aradco/Aramco Workers Force
Company to Pay Severance and Back Pay
Montreal, Quebec
• Air Canada Machinists
Demonstrate against Theft of Pensions
• Workers and the Rule of
Commercial Law
- K.C. Adams
Air Canada
• Air Canada Could Be Forced into
Bankruptcy -- UBS
• Milton's AirAsia X Buys 10 More
Planes
• Painful Lessons Courtesy of Air
Canada
- Andy Wilson
• Rumours of Bankruptcy -- Who
Will End the Plunder of Air Canada? - New Horizons
• No to Concessions! - New Horizons
• Letter to New Horizons
Windsor, Ontario
Aradco/Aramco Workers Force Company to Pay
Severance and Back Pay
Since March 11, workers at Windsor auto parts
plants Aradco and Aramco have been blockading their plants since being
laid off and denied severance and back pay by their employer Catalina
Precision Parts.
On the evening of March 17, 2009, Aradco/Aramco
workers, local union activists and retired CAW Local 195 workers welded
themselves inside the Aradco plant vowing not to leave until their
demands for a just solution to their plant closure were met. A mass
rally was called for March 18 by the
Windsor Labour Council in support of the workers, which drew hundreds
of supporters. The broad sentiment of the rally was that the stand the
workers had taken was just and that it was by taking their stand that
they were able to uphold their dignity in the face of Chrysler and
police threats.
 Addressing the crowd, CAW National President Ken Lewenza stated that
the national union had negotiated a settlement, thus ending the
occupation: "We just struck an agreement not less than two or three
minutes ago that we have in writing that provides some support, not all
the support, for the
membership," he said. The deal, which workers will not be able to vote
on, will be unveiled to workers about 11:00 am on March 19. "It's
bittersweet because our members are still out of work," said Gerry
Farnham, president of CAW Local 195. The tooling now will be moved out
of the plants to another Windsor
plant, Narmco, which is represented by the same union local, reports
the Windsor Star.
The workers who emerged from the plant were
greeted with a heroes' welcome in recognition of the justness of their
cause and their fighting spirit. Speaking to the rally, workers who had
been part of the occupation thanked all those who had shown their
support during their actions. The workers
were hopeful that their stand would create legislative change: "If it
changes the law and protects the Canadian worker, it was well worth
it," said Mike Melo, the CAW plant chairman for Aramco. "The law needs
to be changed for the Canadian workers so they get paid before anyone
else gets paid."
 Also addressing
the rally were Windsor St. Clair MP Joe Comartin, MPP from Hamilton
East-Stoney Creek Paul Miller, CAW Local 195 President Gerry Farnham
and Windsor and District Labour Council President Gary Parent. Comartin
denounced the claim that the workers were criminals: "It's not
us who is putting us out on the street, it's Chrysler, it's Catalina
who are putting us in the street. If there were any kind of a fair
assessment, they would be the ones to be considered criminals by their
conduct." Miller spoke about a private member's bill he has introduced
to protect workers in the event of plant closures.
Lewenza also spoke of the need for legislative measures to protect
workers' rights in the face of the financial crisis. The CAW recently
announced its "Save Our Severance" campaign for such legislation in
Ontario. A campaign email sent out after the March 18 rally states "we
are calling on Ontario Labour Minister
Peter Fonseca and the Ontario government to establish a provincial wage
earner protection program, to help laid-off workers who are left
vulnerable" to "losing their job and having to fight their employer to
regain unpaid wages, severance and other separation monies owed."
TML
Correspondent in Windsor
Montreal, Quebec
Air Canada Machinists Demonstrate
against Theft of Pensions
 On March 18,
nearly 1000 Air Canada machinists, members of the International
Association of Machinists & Aerospace Workers (IAMAW)
demonstrated at Pierre Elliot Trudeau Airport in Montreal to vigorously
denounce looting of their pension funds by their employer. Workers came
in bus after bus to militantly
demonstrate outside the departures entrance.
The machinists angrily demanded that leadership
of ACE Aviation Holdings Inc. live up to their obligations and rescue
Air Canada's employee pension fund which has a shortfall of $3 billion.
The demonstrators pointed out that this is their reward after giving
concessions to the company in 2003 when
Air Canada declared bankruptcy under the Companies'
Creditors Arrangement Act and was restructured.
At that time, the accumulated debt of $1.2
billion in the pension fund was to be made up by the company over a
10-year period. ACE itself was created as part of the restructuring
process "to manage the crisis," but has recently announced plans to
seek shareholder approval to dissolve the company
at a special meeting to be held on April 7.
Workers are very concerned that any dividends
resulting from the dissolution of the company will go into the pockets
of shareholders and not to the workers. "We want the money to be put in
our pension funds before being redistributed to the sharks," said
Marcel St-Jean, president of IAMAW Local
1751, representing some 6000 members. "All active employees are
demonstrating outside their working hours. Half of the demonstrators
are retirees," he added.
Demonstrating machinist Daniel Daigle said he
agreed to concessions to help Air Canada get through its crisis. "And
now, they want to redistribute the money from our concessions to the
shareholders!" he exclaimed.
TML
Correspondent in Montreal
Workers and the Rule of Commercial Law
- K.C. Adams -
 The refusal to
pay laid-off Windsor autoworkers their contracted severance and
termination pay and the issuance of injunctions against their pickets
highlight a contradiction within the law and its enforcement under
conditions of an economic crisis.
These are not ordinary times; they sharply reveal
the contradictions and inadequacies in the rule of law as it pertains
to relations between workers and the owners of capital. Capitalist
commercial law at its core recognizes the supremacy of private
property, which has been usurped by force, above the
human productive factor. Workers and their claims on what they produce
or for the services they perform are considered labour costs, a cost of
production. Workers' claims on the wealth they produce or service they
provide are not considered their property. Those claims are considered
deductions from the private
wealth of the owners of the socialized means of production or provider
of services. Commercial law recognizes workers as chattel labour
enslaved within a labour market that sell their capacity to work to
owners of the socialized means of production. Chattel labour enslaved
within a labour market, in the same oppressed
class tradition as chattel slaves, has no property rights over what it
produces or over the socialized means of production that it built, only
over what it is given in exchange for its labour capacity and only
after the wage has been received.
A difference between capitalist commercial law and
slave law pertains to the involuntary nature of the relation between an
individual slave and the slaveholder compared with a generalized
relationship between workers, as involuntary or enslaved members of a
labour market, and owners of capital. The
labour of chattel slaves within its captive relationship with
slaveholders is measured and compensated by its specific individual
capacity, productivity and the class struggle of slaves in defence of
their rights while working on the slaveholders' property. The labour of
workers within its captive relationship to the owners
of capital, as enslaved members of the labour market, is measured and
paid according to its social capacity, productivity and the class
struggle of workers in defence of their rights while working for a
privately-owned part of the socialized economy or for the government.
In the case of the two auto parts factories in
Windsor, the claim for termination and severance pay are on wealth the
autoworkers have produced over the years. But the value workers have
produced does not yet belong to them even though they are its source.
Under capitalist commercial law, the wealth
the autoworkers have produced is the private property of the owners of
the Aradco and Aramco factories until such time wages, benefits,
pensions or severance and termination pay are paid. In this situation,
which is common in bankruptcies and crises, other owners of capital
such as Chrysler have filed ownership
claims on the private wealth of the owners of the Aradco and Aramco
factories. Under commercial law the Chrysler claim is against the
property of the owners of Aradco and Aramco and not against the
property that the autoworkers have produced and claim as their own. The
workers' claim to their own property
in the form of severance and termination pay is considered by
commercial law as a labour cost or unsecured claim against the property
of the owners of Aradco and Aramco. This reflects the anachronism of a
commercial law that has not been modernized in accordance with the
socialized nature of production. It represents
the obsolete underlying logic of capitalism that workers are a cost of
production and chattel labour in flagrant contradiction with the modern
social character of production and the fact that workers transforming
the bounty of Mother Earth are the source of all wealth and have first
claim on that added-value. Commercial
law needs a modern definition like everything else in society.
If workers give in to the backward logic of
capitalist commercial law that the property they produce does not
belong to them but to the owners of capital until it has been paid then
they give in to the backward logic that they are labour costs and
chattel labour. They have no standing under current commercial
law. The underlying logic of current commercial law that workers are
chattel labour or labour costs must be resisted in the consciousness of
workers and their organizations, in commercial law and practice of the
courts, and through public demonstrations of workers' resistance and
determination to defend their rights.
Commercial law does not recognize the ownership
rights of workers over what they have produced. The current law is in
contempt of workers' rights, the socialized economy and modern
definitions. It is in contempt of what the people think is moral and
just. In this case, Chrysler argues that it has
priority over the private property of Aradco and Aramco factories and
besides workers have no rights of ownership over what they have
produced. Capitalist commercial law affirms Chrysler's right to that
property and allows it to enter the factories and seize the inventory
and equipment. Any interference with monopoly
right to claim this property will result in injunctions, and the full
force of the law will come crashing down on autoworkers who are denied
their rights and dignity as the producers of the wealth and the
rightful owners of their claim. In this case, the recourse is
resistance to the obsolete logic and content of capitalist
commercial law and to defend the rights of workers to what they have
produced including the socialized means of production.
The fundamental contradiction in the rule of
capitalist commercial law reflects the basic contradiction in the
modern economy between the socialized forces of production and their
forcible separation into privately owned competing parts. Commercial
law tries vainly to regulate competition among the
privately-owned parts of the socialized economy but has sunk into
"might makes right" because of the concentration of wealth, power and
privilege in the hands of monopolies and a few individuals. The owners
of small amounts of capital are crushed by monopoly right as was seen
clearly in the Stelco bankruptcy
fraud. In addition, capitalist commercial law is useless in regulating
the contradiction between owners of capital and workers because it does
not even recognize the ownership rights of workers to what they have
produced but reduces workers to the ignominy of costs of production,
labour costs or chattel labour.
Capitalist commercial law, besides being in
contempt of the socialized nature of the modern economy and disastrous
for the working class and society, under conditions of stress such as
the economic crisis gives rise to ridiculous and arbitrary situations
according to the relative class position and power
of those involved in a dispute. Regarding the U.S. bailout of the
insurance monopoly AIG, Larry Summers Director of President Obama's
National Economic Council is seen on one television channel upholding
the rule of commercial law and the sanctity of the contracted
agreements with AIG executives and their
bonuses, while on another channel Obama is "choked with anger" and
demands his staff "pursue every legal angle to block those bonuses."
Summers says that the legal costs will be greater
than the bonuses are worth and the government will probably lose. Yet
labour contracts are broken every day with relative ease and if workers
object, they are blackmailed and threatened with much worse, and if
they dare resist are subjected to injunctions,
government orders and other weapons of commercial law and legal class
warfare. Why? Because workers, as chattel labour have no rights under
capitalist commercial law in a manner similar to chattel slaves who had
no rights under slave law. The rights and security of workers are won
in organized resistance and
in the fight to defend the rights of all!
The situation today demands a confrontation with
capitalist commercial law and its roots in the conception that workers
are a cost of production and chattel labour. Commercial law must be
forced to recognize that the actual producers of wealth and providers
of services have first claim on the wealth
they produce or the value of the services they provide. The added-value
the working class produces must not be seen to flow to them via owners
of capital but directly from realized production. Workers claim on the
wealth they produce must be recognized as theirs by virtue of being
workers. This right does not
depend on the owners of capital, as they must be seen as not having
ownership over what is produced only over what they can legally claim,
which comes after workers have made their claim and governments have
made their claims. Modern commercial law must uphold the conception
that owners of capital do not
have legal right to the added-value produced by workers or the value
made available by service workers. Workers have first claim on the
social product they produce and governments have second claim on the
value workers produce. Only after the claims of workers and governments
have been satisfied can owners
of capital make their legal claim. This is the modern conception of
commercial law, which recognizes the claims of owners of capital as
obsolete, essentially in contradiction with modern society and the
socialized economy, and should eventually be abolished altogether.
Meanwhile within the economic crisis, emergency
legal measures must be enacted that restrict monopoly right even under
the current capitalist commercial law. As it stands, commercial law is
causing chaos and is highly destructive as we are witnessing in Windsor
with autoparts workers, with autoworkers
at the three U.S. auto monopolies, with the shutdown of Stelco by a
foreign monopoly, the layoffs in Sudbury mines, Alberta oil fields and
countless other cases.
Capitalist commercial law must be forcefully
challenged and monopoly right severely restricted or the situation will
become worse for workers and society.
Commercial law must serve the socialized economy
and the well-being of Canadians not the narrow egocentric interests of
owners of monopoly capital.
Air Canada
Articles from New Horizons, a Publication from and for Airline Workers
Air Canada Could Be Forced into Bankruptcy -- UBS
- Reuters, February 17, 2009
-
Air Canada, Canada's biggest airline, could be
forced to file for bankruptcy if it does not secure additional
financing and succeed in renegotiating covenants in credit card
agreements, UBS analyst Fadi Chamoun said.
Air Canada could not be immediately reached for
comment.
"Notwithstanding lower fuel costs, we believe that
cash from operations will be insufficient to meet rising pension
funding obligations and over C$1 billion ($800 million) of debt
repayment over the next two years," Chamoun said in a note dated Feb 13.
Covenants in credit card agreements could tighten
further in the second quarter and result in the company being required
to maintain higher cash deposits, the analyst, who downgraded the
airline to "sell" from "neutral," said.
The company said on Friday it shored up its
balance sheet with C$641 million in new financing, but warned that the
recession may put more pressure on its revenue in 2009. Air Canada said
it has up to C$1 billion of assets it could use to increase its
liquidity if needed.
The company's class B shares, whose price target
was cut to C$1.00 from C$1.50 by UBS' Chamoun, closed at C$1.45 Friday
on the Toronto Stock Exchange.
($1=1.255 Canadian Dollar)
(Reporting by Mary Meyase in Bangalore; Editing by
Pratish Narayanan)
Milton's AirAsia X Buys 10 More Planes
- Financial Post -
Malaysian long-haul discount carrier AirAsia X has
placed a firm order for 10 more Airbus A330s in a deal valued at $2.1
-billion, according to Agence France-Presse.
The airline, which currently flies from Kuala
Lumpur to the Gold Coast, Australia and China, already has 15 of the
aircraft on order. The new planes will allow AirAsia X, an affiliate of
Tony Fernandes' Air Asia, to expand to Britain in the latter part of
this year, before branching out to other European
and Australian destinations, the Middle East and Japan.
AirAsia X is the latest investment for ACE
Aviation Holdings boss Robert Milton, who announced this week he was
one of the founding shareholders of Aero Ventures Sdn Bhd. Aero
Ventures owns 48% of the airline. Sir Richard Branson's Virgin Group
also holds a 20% interest in the airline.
Painful Lessons Courtesy of Air Canada
- Andy Wilson*, February 16,
2009 -
The release of Air Canada's year-end results last
week -- the airline announced a loss of $1.03 billion -- provides an
opportunity to take stock of the changes that have taken place at our
country's largest airline since it emerged from bankruptcy protection.
The case study of Air Canada's dismantling and diminishment
offers some valuable and painful lessons for legislators and regulators
-- and the public they are supposed to serve.
It was 2003, when Air Canada was in trouble, that
the financial sharks first smelled their opportunity. Air Canada
employees were told that they had to "do their part" to rescue their
employer. And they did, with more than $2 billion in concessions.
Employees also understood the logic of restructuring
the business in order to realize the promised long-term prosperity of
their airline.
Unfortunately, that logic was not allowed to
prevail. The sale of Aeroplan and Jazz to a new parent firm, Air Canada
Enterprises (ACE), was engineered in 2006, at a deep discount. Then ACE
announced distributions of $2 billion to its shareholders. Through an
elaborate series of transactions, the result
was that the employee concessions all ended up in the hands of the
vulture funds who were supposed to be the "rescuers" of Air Canada. The
billions extracted from the airline represent an amount greater than
the entire aggregate profit earned by Air Canada since 1937. Little, if
anything, remains for the enduring
benefit of Air Canada.
The final windup of ACE is now imminent. All that
remains is a squabble over the remaining scraps. When the plan of
arrangement is eventually approved, Air Canada will be worth less on
the market than the price of a single Boeing 777.
ACE is a poster child for what ails the Western
world's economic system. That system's success was built on the model
of corporations assembling capital, ingenuity and human resources for
the purpose of efficiently producing high quality goods and services.
In return, businesses earn a well-deserved
profit and reinvest some of that profit in the corporation so that the
cycle of success can continue and grow. In the process, businesses also
employ people, who are then able to buy the products and services they
need, creating consumer demand that powers our entire economy. We all
recognize this model as the
primary source of the immense wealth and productive capacity the West
has built up over generations.
But somewhere along the line Western economies
seem to have lost their way. International financial moguls have
learned that there is more quick and easy cash to be had through
financial shell games than through the hard work and rigorous
management of efficient, productive enterprises.
Our system of corporate law and regulation offers
no protection from such unethical attitudes and actions. Our system is
based on the naive assumption that corporate activity is essentially
ethical, beneficial and productive. This assumption underlies our
inadequate financial disclosure regulations and
a tax structure that in some cases actually provides incentive for the
decapitalization of industry. The recent Canada Revenue Agency ruling,
which significantly reduces the amount of tax that ACE preferred
shareholders will pay on their distribution, is a case in point. It is
little wonder that Air Canada employees
see this public subsidization of the ACE deal as a final insult to
their history of dedication and the contributions they have made to the
viability of the company.
Western nations are further hampered by a
dysfunctional collective corporate culture that is focused on the short
term, with a dearth of leadership and vision to create a better
long-term future. Worse, we have embraced a culture that accepts this
as the norm. We hear continuous reports by breathless
stock cheerleaders without considering long-term economic consequences.
We rely on a flood of cheaply produced foreign goods to give us lower
prices, but fail to see how this has deprived us of the productive
capacity to generate the national income that pays for them. In a very
real way, we have all contributed
to the financial situation we now face.
In the case of Air Canada, this has resulted in
our flag carrier -- the largest part of our national air transportation
system and the hope and pride of its dedicated employees -- being
weakened and diminished.
We all want to live in a prosperous country, where
our laws, policies and practices encourage efficient, productive and
competitive industry. But today, our laws, actions and attitudes are
permitting financial carpetbaggers to prosper, while employees, the
travelling public and the communities Air Canada
is supposed to serve are left holding an empty bag.
It's time to consider how we allowed this to
happen and what we can all do -- as employees, consumers, shareholders,
regulators and legislators -- to stop it from happening again.
Rumours of Bankruptcy --
Who Will End the Plunder of Air Canada?
- New Horizons*, February
29,
2009 -
Air Canada prides itself as being "Canada's
national airline." It was established as an integral component of the
transportation network that Canada's socialized economy requires across
its far-flung regions. It was built and supported through the hard work
of countless Canadians across this great land of ours and,
despite its private charter, it is still considered to be a part of our
collective wealth.
For many years now, we have seen our national
airline turned into a cash cow for a handful of wealthy shareholders.
Every cent that has been produced by the employees of the company has
been stolen from the coffers and given to those who had taken control
of the airline. Any responsibility the
airline has toward its employees, the Canadian people and our
socialized economy has been negated while its American masters have
dedicated themselves to ever more complex schemes to pay the rich.
Bases are closed, employees are thrown onto the street and routes and
service are cut while every few months
a major pay-out to the ACE shareholders is announced.
In 2003, Air Canada was dragged into bankruptcy
protection. Workers were forced to give up over $1 billion in
concessions, convinced that this would help turn things around and
ensure our future well-being. The process also allowed the management
to establish a whole new ownership structure and
begin the process of breaking up the company to sell off its component
parts to the highest bidder. All the surplus value that was produced
from then on, as well as the proceeds of the sales of the various
components of the original Air Canada, was quickly plundered by the
management of AC Enterprises to distribute
to their cronies.
This destructive activity is in direct
contradiction with the interests of the workers at Air Canada who have
produced the revenue and the Canadian people as a whole, as well as
being extremely disruptive to the Canadian economy. Nothing was left to
ensure that the company would survive another
downturn in a notoriously cyclical sector of the economy, let alone
ensuring that the workers' pension plans were covered.
When ACE decided to sell its remaining shares in
Air Canada, we were told that this was the greatest thing that could
happen to us. Air Canada would have access to new sources of
investment. What we weren't told is that any investment made in Air
Canada was not to ensure the well-being of our
national airline but an effort to find a way to have Air Canada workers
produce more wealth that can be plundered by these investors.
Now, less than four and a half years after Air
Canada emerged from "bankruptcy protection" and was touted around the
world as taking the most innovative approach to its structure and
financing that anyone could dream of, the rumours of bankruptcy are
starting to surface again. While the Company
is quick to assure us that, while things are tough, they have a clear
vision of where they are taking us. We tend to believe that there is no
smoke without fire and that this is clearly a preparation to try and
force the workers at Air Canada into making even more concessions. One
doesn't have to read too far to see
that the first item on the Company's agenda is the theft of our
pensions.
Who will stop this plunder of the wealth that we
work so hard to produce for Canada's national airline? We would like to
think that the government would protect the interests of the Canadian
people. This is not the case. The Harper minority government has
declared that it will change the law to allow
an increase of foreign ownership in Canada's airlines to 49%. There has
been no vocal opposition to this plan with the Ignatieff Liberals just
as happy to allow the annexation of what is left of the Canadian
airline sector.
We cannot hope that we can convince some
condescending saviours to save our jobs and the wealth we produce. We,
the employees of Air Canada and the Canadian people, are the ones whose
interests will be served by putting an end to the plunder of Air
Canada. New Horizons is convinced
that only by turning Air Canada into a public company under the control
of the Canadian people can we ensure that the Company will serve the
interests of the Canadian people and its employees. Only then will we
be able to guarantee stability in the airline sector.
We must expand the discussion on how we can
establish a pro-social direction for Canada's economy. We must
establish Renewal Committes to select our own representatives -- worker
politicians -- who will not benefit from the sell-off of our country's
resources, including the airline sector. Let us
know what you think.
No to Concessions!
- New Horizons, March 8,
2009 -
Employees at Air Canada are going into bargaining
this year. The passenger agents and other members of the CAW have
already rejected a tentative settlement with the Company. CUPE informs
us that it has been served with a "Notice to Bargain." People are
wondering "what is in store for us" this time around.
In a commentary entitled "Concessions Are Still
Not Solutions!" New Horizons wrote in April 2004
that "the demands for even more concessions have apparently become a
permanent part of Air Canada's repertory." Our experience has shown
this to be the case. The Company has acted
as if its contracts with its employees don't even exist. It imposes
increased workloads and deteriorating working conditions willy-nilly,
all under the mantra of guaranteeing profitability for its shareholders
and the well-being of its "stakeholders."
This is the essence of the problem. According the
Air Canada's unscientific and anti-worker capital-centred economic
theory, the employees of Air Canada represent a cost that has to be
reduced. We produce the wealth at Air Canada but, because of the
private ownership of "Canada's national airline,"
management seizes all the surplus value that is produced and
distributes it as it sees fit. In this process it refuses to accept any
responsibility to the Canadian people and the need for a national
airline to serve the socialized economy across this vast land of ours.
In periods of relative prosperity for the airline
sector, AC management has insisted that we have to tighten our belts to
ensure the continued well-being of the "stakeholders" and the survival
of the Company, while it plundered the Company, broke it apart and sold
off the profitable components to line
the pockets of the handful of unbelievably wealthy shareholders.
In bad years, the Company comes to its workers and
insists that we need to make concessions, accepting inferior working
conditions and even lower wages in order to guarantee the survival of
the Company and protect our jobs. Because of deregulation of the
airline sector, it can provide examples of
domestic and international competitors whose employees work for less
making it extremely difficult if not impossible for Air Canada to
compete.
However, the problem does not lie with the workers
at Air Canada or our wages or working conditions. We are entitled to a
Canadian standard of living that covers our needs. The problem lies in
the fact that the surplus value that we produce is seized by a handful
of people who are determined to
increase their profit levels, even during crises that their system has
produced, such as the current one. Concessions only transfer surplus
value from the workers who produce it to the owners of capital.
Not only do concessions not solve any problem,
they contribute to the deepening of the crisis.
More money is taken from those who produce the
wealth to be taken out of the economy. This cannot be allowed to
continue.
We must pay attention to our own experience and
refuse to accept the unscientific claptrap that will be trotted out
once again to convince us that we have no choice but to make
concessions if we want to ensure "our" well-being. We must discuss
these matters and work to bring about a situation where
those of us who produce the surplus value at Air Canada and throughout
the economy are the ones who determine how it is to be distributed.
Concessions have never been a solution,
are still not a solution and will never be a solution. No to
concessions!
Letter to New Horizons
- March 1, 2009 -
I know that you are sensitive to the problems that
the A.C. management at the highest echelons has created BEFORE
& AFTER restructuring. A diabolic way of the new trends in
western corporations to deal with economic solutions, employees and
retirees. As you know CONTRIBUTION to a pension fund
has been A CONDITION OF EMPLOYMENT from day one. Now, AFTER disbursing
$2,000,000,000 to their preferred shareholders, they cry the blues with
the FEDS and want to change the cards from under the table....They
tricked us into giving big concessions 6 years ago and they TRY the
same NOW!!!! WE
CAN NOT BE PASSIVE ANY LONGER, OUR OWN FINANCIAL SURVIVAL IS AT
STAKE!!!!!!! WE HAVE TO START DENOUNCING THEM TO THE MEDIA AND the
GOVERNMENTS at ALL LEVELS.
Fraternally,
Recent retiree, YYZ
Read The
Marxist-Leninist
Daily
Website: www.cpcml.ca
Email: editor@cpcml.ca
|
