IWA- Isn`t that the union that Dave Haggard the born again Liberal is involved with?

If the HEU is the friend of the immigrant female worker, why is it (and Debora McPherson) silent while thousands of Philippines- and Asia-trained nurses twist in the wind, unable to get work because their entry into the BC nursing industry would undermine one of the union's key bargaining tactics -- that there aren't enough people qualified to do the job(s). Perhaps the HEU is a friend of the woman worker... the WHITE, WELL-OFF worker. Martha Stewart, take note: your likes are welcome at the HEU. One of the leading reasons for immigrant poverty in the province is because ready-and-willing job candidates are being squeezed out by public sector union power plays. Tragically, too many immigrants are stuck in basement apartments slinging burgers at the local Burger King for $9/hour, while the public sector crowd screams for more money because they have to make the mortgage payments for their Point Grey home and Saltspring cabin. PS. Was that another man-hating manifesto out of SFU that I just read? Or completely unbiased journalism? Just wondering. Also just wondering how much credibility Marjorie Griffin Cohen has as a journalist/editorial writer when she was admits she was paid by the HEU last year "to research pay equity issues in the health care sector."

Marjorie says wages are 26% less than the national average. Colin Hanson says they will be equal to the highest paid health workers in Canada; he said that about an hour ago on CBC radio - I suspect, from experience with this government, that he's lying. Anyway, I'd love to see our MLAs force themselves to accept what is average for remuneration to MLAs across the country... including all those bogus bonuses. Pay them the market rate. Yeah, that would be fun to see.

Wow. Phillipines' Friend, I think maybe you are labouring (errr, sorry) under some misapprehension as you seem to think that the BCNU (and Debra McPherson) ARE the same as the HEU. Or did I misread your rant?

Frankly, the ones I see slinging burgers for $9/hr (IF THEY'VE MADE IT THAT FAR) are young kids. Many immigrants do have a tough go of it, but not because of unions and/or the public sctor crowds (most of whom don't live in Point Grey much less have cabins (?) on Salt Spring).

I worked in employment with immigrant populations and I can tell you that you are off base. Much of the problem relates to LANGUAGE and either lack of qualifications or, as you mention, quals that for whatever reason aren't recognized by the various parties concerned. I don't entirely disagree with you about the BCNU, by the way, but I would make sure that you can attach your argument to the approapriate agency.

And as for your PS. Geeez. "Was that another man-hating manifesto out of SFU that I just read? Or completely unbiased journalism" Get a grip. If you understood dick about anything here, you'd probably realize that there isn't any such thing as unbiased ANYTHING, let alone journalism--something the editor likely understood when he/she decided to load this article un the Views column. And MAN HATING? No, wrongo. Also, you should sit back and consider what "credibiliity" means when, Cohen or anyone else for that matter, ADMITS (your word) that they have conducted research for a group or organization. Alot of the shit you are reading and basing your opinions on is impeachable on the very gounds you trot out against Cohen--only the difference is that it isn't ADMITTED much of the time. Hence you don't know what kind of slick shit agenda is at work there, pal.

PS. I am stuck in a basement apartment and I am neither an immigrant nor a public sector employee.

Things aren't so simple as Marjorie lets on. Her major mistake is accepting these false comparaters (within and without a bargaining unit) Within a bargaining unit: Pay equity legislation often turns into an expensive joke. For example, the feds have to pay librarians the competitive wage of a computer geek because they have similar managerial responsibility, education level, etc without much (any?) consideration to market forces. (honest, do any of us want to spend our days learning about software and networking) IMHO, if you pick an easier degree and a less desirable profession (in the context of employers) - that's your choice. Just because more women are librarians than computer geeks doesn't mean they should get a raise - it's madness I tell ya. Without a bargaining unit: (1) That janitor negotiated a private sector collective agreement. (2) the janitor belongs to bargaining unit which includes a lot of people doing risky (in fact, deadly work). These male dominated industries get paid so much because people get crippled and killed. Imagine if the stats for male and female injured/killed workers were reversed, we wouldn't here so much about the wage gap as we would about the death gap. If that janitor is over paid relatively speaking, how dare Marjorie complain on behalf of a urban house cleaner - the only one with a gripe is the tree faller or mill right that has his wage compressed because the bargaining unit is too large. I'm sympathetic to the HEU, they got shafted and workers in BC won't forget. However, the male bashing arguments of Marjorie are wrong and counterproductive.

Pay equity is complicated but, Steve, you are way overstating something here. A DEATH GAP? True, not many women are fallers, but there were lots of men working as custodians making a hell of alot more than women in a comparable jobs, and, hell, there just aren't that many janitors killed on the job. Plus, there is a glass ceiling and there's nothing so simple as just picking a degree and going for it (hence it's the person's own fault if they're in a lower paying job?) for many people. IN fact, the people we are talking about here are largely those who for whatever reason aren't as lucky as you.

Nice to see you're sympathetic Steve, but how would you like to clean up vomit and diarrhea and so forth in an environment full of contagious pathogens? Not only is it not any fun, its also dangerous. Moreover I'd feel a whole lot better if I were a patient in a hospital and knew the cleaners there were properly paid and trained.

The IWA's actions aren't surprising. Anyone remember Jack Munro's betrayal of the Solidarity movement in the 1980s? And now we have the current IWA leader, Dave Haggard, running for the most right-wing version of the federal Liberals this country has seen. It would be nice to see the IWA showing some support for working people beyond those the union represents.

effle, 97% or workplace deaths are men. The worst industry is forestry. The people (most) not as lucky as me are young dead forest workers. Sorry, I don't understand the rest of your post. james, I don't disagree. My comments were related to the male bashing.

...oops forgot to give my name above...

General Strike!

I know that most workplace deaths are men. But I don't think that means that men should make more than women who are doing the same or a comparable job. I grew up in Port Alberni my friend, so I think I can talk about the forest industry. My post is a response to your earlier one. It's not that hard to understand, really. You say that male dominated jobs are paid more for the danger factor and I am saying that I have personal experience in organizations where male custodians made a hell of a lot more than a female doing comparable work. Sure, the female isn't going to be killed by a falling typewriter, but neither is the male like to be impaled on his broom or become tangled up in his floor polisher. So the whole issue of pay equity has roots in some completely valid desire to correct something fundamentally wrong.

A general strike. Yeah. Bring it on. There is NO opposition in the house, therefore it HAS to happen in the streets and parking lots. But what is this I just heard: Debra McPherson directed her members to CROSS? Is that right? Holy shit. If anyone did that to her union members, she'd be rabid. I hope I heard that wrong.

You grew up in Port, so what? (Besides, I've got family in both the pulp mill and saw mill and I've had a lot of death defying jobs myself.) If a male custodian is making more than a female cleaner and they're in THE SAME BARGAINING UNIT - you've got a legit complaint. Comparing a IWA member pushing a broom in a pulp mill and a HEU cleaner is NOT legit. Like I said, if the wages are unfairly compressed in the IWA so that guys pushing a broom or a buttom make too much compared to the truly risky jobs - then it's the guys doing the risky jobs that have a complaint - not an HEU cleaner, not Marjorie, not you not me. Besides, that guy pushing a broom in a saw mill probably worked the line for 20 years and saw a lot of his buddies crippled over that time.

To back up Clairess's post- What Philippines' Friend wrote (oh, and I see Steve too) about "male bashing" is getting sooooooo old. Every time a woman stands up and speaks for herself or women in general (I won't even utter the "Fem..." word because it so freaks people out...) she is suddenly a man-hater. Get over it!! There was not ONE mention of hatred toward men...I want to make one thing clear- this is about WOMEN. Some women actually have better things to do than think about hating men. Talk about believing the world revolves around your gender...geesh...Have I made it clear yet?? That "Fem..." word has NOTHING to do with disliking men. Please,...look it up if need be. What Marjorie wrote is factual! (This week's Straight has a similar feature story). Now, I imagine I will have all sorts of rants in response to this- so I'll tell you up front- I LOVE MEN and I AM A HARDCORE FEMINIST...??!! (so mull over that one). P.S Funny that some found this biased...I didn't...it's all in perspective isn't it? Who you are, how you see the world, who you relate to...

Fiona, right on. That kind of reductionist thinking--everything is about hating men if someone comments about some, ANY, kind of disadvantage to women--makes me sick. ANd to Steve: why would the "guys doing the truly risky jobs have a complaint" if someone else pushing a broom or punching a button makes as much money as they do?

The HEU got screwed because Gordo n' Friends could get away with it. They could get away with it because there is a ready supply of cheap labour to fill those soon-to-be-former HEU jobs. A ready supply because the jobs don't require education/training/language skills. They did not get screwed because they are 80% women. It's not fair, plain and simple. Because they are women doesn't make it more or less fair! The male dominated equivelent jobs are roofers, labourers, saw mills workers etc. If these soon to be out of work HEU members want to haul drywall all day, go for it. Call my a chauvinist but I don't think many of those women could do it - heck I'm 200 lbs and I couldn't do it for more than a summer. I'm a left winger (heck I read the Tyee) but supply and demand should have some roll in wages. Men making more than women (in the aggregate) is NOT ipso facto discrimination. The problem with seeing everything through a gender lens, is that it tends to obscure more than enlighten. When I put on the gender lens I see 97% of workplace fatalities being men. Does that mean there is discrimination in the workplace? Are men not as valued? I think we should deal with all these issues more as labour issues rather than gender issues.

Steve- death gap, aye? How many women have, let's see...died...giving birth?? And how many men?? Save the lame argument...

Simon, why would the "guys doing the truly risky jobs have a complaint"? Isn't it obvious. All other things being equal, risking your life should mean you get compensated more. Wouldn't you want more money falling trees rather than counting trees? - working in Iraq rather than Sweden? If a bargaining unit negotiates for the dangerous/hard/dirty/smelly jobs and the easier/enjoyable jobs and the wages are identical then the guy with the crappy job in that bargaining unit has a complaint with the IWA, not a dishwasher at VGH. (The complaint should be with the IWA since the employer is only concerned only with salaries in the aggregate.)

Simon, why would the "guys doing the truly risky jobs have a complaint"? Isn't it obvious. All other things being equal, risking your life should mean you get compensated more. Wouldn't you want more money falling trees rather than counting trees? - working in Iraq rather than Sweden? If a bargaining unit negotiates for the dangerous/hard/dirty/smelly jobs and the easier/enjoyable jobs and the wages are identical then the guy with the crappy job in that bargaining unit has a complaint with the IWA, not a dishwasher at VGH. (The complaint should be with the IWA since the employer is only concerned only with salaries in the aggregate.)

OMG Fiona, that has to be the dumbest comment ever on the Tyee. Let's recap - no men have died from labour, no women have died from testicular cancer, no men have died from ovarian cancer. Why? - because they can't. So what, let's move on. Now comparing apples to oranges, you don't think it is at all revealing that 97% of workplace deaths are men 15-24 (Canadian Medical Association) Honestly, you don't think it is an important stat? - you think it's a coincidence. What would you think if those numbers were young women? Of course they would mean something.

Steve, if you never question that ideology that spews from your keyboard (I mean, supply and demand and that it should have the some roll in determining wages), then be careful when you talk about the REASONS that people get screwed in these affairs that are driven by the ideology that you say you reject (being the left-winger that you are). No one is saying the HEU is getting the shaft BECAUSE its membership is primarily women. But that women and men, IN THIS CASE, are easy targets because they have very little, if any, employment mobility--meaning that they haven't got the options that other people with--what d'you call it, education/training/launguage skills. In many cases, they can't just go and GET another job. Same is true for lots of men, but the TRADES that you so cavelierly rhyme off are generally APPRENTICEABLE, and I guess you know what that means.

And you are DEAD WRONG if you think this isn't discrimination. It's systemic, and it sucks, and it is the agenda of this government to break the back of labour. What makes this case SO COMPELLING is that they have tied it to the general HYPE about patients and a health care system in crisis etc etc, which is part of a much bigger plan to open OPPORTUNITY for the private sector. And last time I checked, it took a hell of alot of money and influence to start your own business. So, it aint you and it aint me, you're right about that. The people whose purses get rich here are the ones who, well, who've already bought up all the property on the Sea to Sky highway, if you get my drift?

Who voted for these assholes anyway. I didn't. I can't believe that people are SURPRISED.

Clairess; 1. What is my ideology? - please tell me. You don't think supply and demand has any roll? - wow that would put you on the 1% lunatic left fringe. Assuming I'm somewhere in the middle, who is the idealogue? In fact, I agree with most of the rest of your first paragraph. However, the jobs I listed were purposesly non-skilled/apprecicable jobs. Generalizing, but besides their brawn, those roofers usually have even less skills than an average HEU worker. I think your second paragraph about discrimination contradicts your first paragraph. Is it there skill set or is because they are women that the BC Libs have got away with this? Or, do they lack the skill set because they are women?

...oops that was me again.

Steve: Lemme answer that question you put to me, after it was put to you. WHY would the guys doing the crappy dirty dangerous job be pissed if someone doing a nice enjoyable job was making as much money as they were? Why indeed. As long as the guy doing the crappy dirty dangerous job is getting a good wage and one that weighs the equation in favour of STAYING in that job.

You say this: "IMHO, if you pick an easier degree and a less desirable profession (in the context of employers) - that's your choice." Well......uhhhhh.......sooOOoooo, by your logic if you pick a crappy dirty dangerous job......then it's your choice, and by extension, I would ask you why you give a shit that someone else made theirs.

One might consider that the people (oops mostly men, but that's just a matter of choice I guess) in health care administration who are making SIX figure salaries with pretty nice bonus packages are just pissed because a hospital kitchen worker wants to make one tenth of that.

Just to clarify, I meant "non-apprenticiable." Last I checked, you didn't need a ticket to be a roofer, labourer or work in a saw mill.

you are so fun to debate with steve. But **I** am the middle of the road.

Simon; You're conflating two of my points - I don't think they contradict each other. In the first case, I suppose I'm thinking about a unionized sawmill in the middle of bargaining. The employer has a total set amount of money they can spend. Dividing it up isn't their concern. All other things being equal (education, responsibility, etc) the person pushing logs probably thinks he or she should get paid more than the person pushing the broom. Any complaints should go to the bargaining agent. That's all. Life's relative man. The second point related to pay equity - not dividing the pie; only expanding the tax payer funded pie based soley on gender stas. The computer geeks are able to negotiate a certain salary and the librarians another salary (in part based on supply and demand). A judge can then unilaterally raise the librarians salary because of the gender skew. I find that odd, so do most people - don't you?

Steve- are you SERIOUS???? You "don't think any of these women could do it?" Let me tell you something, buddy- I have travelled in third world countries where girls as young as 10 were doing manual labour that would put most people in this country to shame! True, we are pampered here and women are hardly encouraged to develop their physique, but that is another topic. You do make some good points- what is interesting is our value system. It's true- if one is going to risk one's life in Iraq, say, there should be high pay. (By the way, I currently have a female friend in the American army- in Korea. She might have something to say in regards to your comment implying women are physically unable to do what men are, having passed basic training with flying colours :) BUT we are talking about janitors- or we were- weren't we? Janitors and housekeepers. So you lost me there...You talk about jobs requiring education/training/language skills. So we create a society wherein there will always be high paid work for men (pencil pushing CEO's because they are SO highly educated) and "tough guys" who may not be all that bright or fluent in English but hey- we'll find another reason they should earn high pay- they got brawn!! Do you see what I am getting at? So a woman, unless she is brilliant and very assertive and usually white, will not earn the CEO pay, and if she is uneducated and can't speak the language- she is- um, ...worthless? In our value system, this one you are talking about with "market forces" and all this economic jargon; she is, yes, worth (monetarily) nothing/very little. This is the problem. I think this whole strike is about a lot more than wages. These women are demanding dignity. And THAT is priceless.

Stop fighting amongst yourselves with this sex discrimination argument. The battle is with this dictatorial regime of bullies who pick on the most vulnerable in our society. Midnight laws, next it will be secret police. What type of totalitarian subservience do these miscreants think they can bestow upon the ciizens of BC before the get purged? I have only met one preson who has openly admitted to voting for this disgusting band of thugs. They have alienated every aspect of our society and this latest act re-enforces their total disregard for any " open and accountable " dialougue or discussions on absolutely anything in BC. You must dispose of them in May 05 or that will be it for BC. You will have conceded defeat and let the madmen control your lives. Now with this latest nightmare with HEU, it gave them the opportunity to sell off some prime land for less than half of the purchase price , let alone all the mortgage money spent in the meantime. All this with little or no resistance, minimal mainstream coverage. Always cast a wary eye for the smoke and mirrors that this pustule on the province is becoming expert in. They are supposed to work for us, well I believe that they are overpayed, so as a ciitizen of BC. I demand we contract out for a new HUMAN government and in they interim we institute a 75% reduction in their wages.

Your last post Steve, yeah, I get your point and I think you make it pretty well actually. I think Fiona is SO right-on though and, man, (errrr sorry, I'm assuming something there I guess), she sums it up beautifully.

I guess what I was saying and DON'T want to loose sight of here, is that lots of women--especially women not raised in north-North American HAVE culture, or tons of reasons some of which Fiona has alluded to--are vulnerable to these money grubbing shits in Victoria and their hopelessly single-viewed agenda. To people like that, everything boils down to the DOLLAR. What can a tree be worth when you send it to market etc etc. No recognition that there are other ways to value. I just hate them. ANd I don't want to get so caught up duking it out over tin-bashers (who do do some roofing by the way) and millwrights, when the real challenge is unfolding in front of us as we sit here pounding out our thoughts. I just can't believe the Debra McPherson telling her members to cross the protest line. Essential service levels are maintained in the event of a strike....

Brawn, risk, emotional quotient, etc. should be valued - man or women. I'll finish by simply saying...."I think this whole strike is about a lot more than wages. These WOMEN AND MEN are demanding dignity. And THAT is priceless."

Steve- You need to lighten up, man. I am well aware no men can ever die of childbirth. I was segueing into my argument about values. It's not all about money. Mothers are the most under-appreciated people in the world. Many of those women on strike now are mothers- with children to support. They may have risked their lives already, just by giving life to those children. Now we devalue their contribution? Maybe it's a long shot for anyone to follow my line of thinking here...Anyway, those stats are terrible. Safety standards should be increased- I mean, really, you offer someone more money and that is going to make it ok? Sounds a bit daft to me. If you get hurt badly or worse at work, no amount of money is going to make a difference, is it?? Perhaps those young men shouldn't allow $$ signs to lure them into dangerous jobs. There ARE young women, by the way, who work a very dangerous (and I think it can be described as highly paid) profession- they're called prostitutes. Any stats on them? Or those women who choose to live on the street and sell their bodies and possibly get chopped to bits freely CHOSE that "career" because it was so lucrative- so tough on them? I am not belittling the men that get hurt on the job, don't think that.

OK, rcranium has a good point- yes, Steve, "These women and men are demanding dignity." Simon- you make me blush...:) I need to get the heck away from this computer...

I have to respond. "Perhaps those young men shouldn't allow $$ signs to lure them into dangerous jobs." You're not "belitting" - just blaming the victim. You think if prostitutes didn't get paid they'd work the street? That fact doesn't give me the right to make a similar comment about female prostitutes. My main complaint with Marjorie's article is that she turns this labour dispute into a gender issue. I think this obscures the real issues and doesn't help anyone. None of the comments I have read has changed my humble opinion.

What? You're saying my persuasive argument hasn't changed your opinion?

prostitutes wouldn't have work if there weren't men who wanted to buy their sexuality. the sex trade is for sure gendered. the labour dispute is a gender issue. cleaning and housekeeping work is women's work - it is feminized work. and the idiots in victoria who are driving their neocon agenda have little to no respect for women, they have proved that time and again. perhaps it's more correct to say that the labour dispute is a gendered issue. like all of the work in health care. just have a look at any hospital, see what the 'pecking' order is. doctors on top. masculinized work. the dominants. nurses next. feminized work [now done by men and women - and who is the nurse manager? likely a man.] subject to the dominance of those above, and dealing out the pressure to those below. then lab and technical staff - mixed and not in power relation to those above or those below. LPNs - feminized and subject to the dominance of those above housekeeping, dietary - feminized work. and subject to the power of all those above them. i would have thought it would be something to be proud of to have health care workers paid to a level which indicates their value to us all. isn't it a clue to the hypocrisy of all this that surgeries get cancelled when the cleaners go on strike? with people like dave haggard to look to, it's less and less surprising that there is diminished support for labour organizations. and the IWA organizing health care workers - mostly women - and working to ensure they stay at the bottom, no surprise to me. jack munro was no model for respectful treatment of women - or of anyone who was different from a white male logger. and any men who tried to make changes in the dominant mode in that outfit seemed to have a difficult time being heard. you bet it's about gender steve, just like the computer programmers and the librarians. a gendered workforce is what makes the trouble. it's a long time ago now, but when i first went to work at UBC as a secretary i was required to be able to type 40 words a minute, have a good command of the english language, and have graduated from high school. i made less than 2/3s the wages of an outside worker at the same university - who was required to be healthy and have passed grade 10. why did he make more money? the excuse was that he required a 'family wage' - had a wife and kids to support. and the single mothers who worked as secretaries and library assistants? they didn't get a 'family wage.' what's changed? not much.

If the employer (the gov't) was truly concerned about the high costs of delivering health care and truly interested in cutting non-doctor/nurse related costs, they would cut back on the cash they are just throwing at the administrators and health boards. An emergency doctor friend says there are too many desks in our hospitals, and not enough beds. But it is true that most of those behind the desks are male. The entire exercise reminds me of private corporations who cut costs by cutting the lowest paid, when they are usually way too top heavy.

The BC Liberals are just Reformers in Liberal clothing. They do not know anything about women's issues since women are just a "special interest group" and the only special interest groups that the BC Liberals will listen to are the extreme right wing Fraser Institute and it's goals of wealth for the corporate elite. The Fraser Institute is funded by corporations tired of being criticised by the media. The CBC is to be protected at all costs since they are the least likely to publish bogus research from the Fraser Institute. The Fraser Institute in turn will do its best to encourage Canadian to get rid of the CBC.

By the way, remember to use "extreme right wing" as a prefix whenever you mention the Fraser Institute. They hate people calling them that.

this is about the b.c. government decimating ALL unions in b.c. it is not a lack of money to support our health care issue. the federal liberals have reduced healthcare transfer payments to 14%, while spending billions that are unaccounted for on h.r.d.c., native affairs, guncontrol, and advertizing agencys, without as much as a whimper from campbell. why? see above.

I hope that all this talk about strikes and a general strike carries forward and we get an unprecedented voter turnout to remove the trash from office. It must send a clear message for futures governments that they work for us. When a candidate is running, test them, re-test them and if they get elected, demand the stand by their promises. Stay in their faces and do something about it, apathy begets apathy.Take a lead from HEU and BC.ferry workers.

Yeah I hope this talk about strikes carried foward and starts to look like action. CUPE has taken a stand, but where is BC FED of LAB! And where are those fucking nurses.

Corrupt! All corrupt! google up '1-3567 IWA' and you'll find lots of dirt on this corrupt bunch of goons at the IWA - the leadership of IWA Local 1-3567 (including its president, Satnam "Sonny" Ghag) is the same crew that signed an agreement with G.H. Noble (a custom-cut sawmill in Surrey), cutting their members' wages by 35% and allowing for weekend work with no overtime, no sick pay until four months off the job, and no restrictions on the employer's right to contract out? Or that G.H. Noble is owned by Gurdial Ghag, Satnam Ghag's brother? Or, how about Satnam Ghag's gang attack on the IWA workers at Mainland Mills in Dec. 2003? Or, how about that despite B.C. Federation of Labour and IWA policy against the export of raw logs, IWA local 1-3567 has a voluntary certification at Pacific Custom Log Sort on the Fraser, which containerizes top-grade logs and trucks them to the Surrey-Fraser docks, where they are loaded on ships and exported to Japan, China and Korea for remanufacture?

Meant to include this link http://resist.ca/story/2004/2/18/132731/753

Where are the nurses? Where's Deborah McPherson? Seems to me that Deborah is only into these things when she and her cronies benefit directly. Heaven forbid she should stand up for some "lowly" hospital service/support workers. If she doesn't step up to the plate, she loses all credibility in British Columbia. Oh, and as someone else asked, where's the BC Federation of Labour? It looks like the union power brokers are going to sacrifice the poor janitors and cooks to the BC Lib sharks. What a sad turn of events indeed.

Yes, well I went to check things out this morning and to show some support and the NURSES were there on their breaks etc, walking with HEU. Someone told me that Debra McPherson was somewhat misquoted or quoted out of context, but I would hardly "report" what I don't know to be fact. WHICH IS SOMETHING that destestable rag, The Province doesn't seem to be overly concerned about: on their Letters page today something about public support for the HEU WANING? HULLO you morons, I want to say, have you even listened to the usual drivel on CKNW--whose listernship is generally pretty narrow and reactionary--all kinds of callers yesterday and today were saying that they were fed up with Campbell et al. I assume they meant Gordon, although maybe they meant The not-so-with-it Brother.

The cleaners and security were contracted out months ago and the cooks are on their way out very soon. The cleaners in the lower mainland make about $10 per hour. This does not stop the BC Liberals and the media from criticizing the "high paid" cleaners. How is someone supposed to live on $20 an hour anyway?

This province will be full into an extremely polarized general election in 13 months. Should labour back away from the confrontation the Liberals have thrown down with their legislated back-to-work-for-even-less rules against the HEU, what will workers rally around next May? The line has been drawn very clearly. If a stand isn't taken now, what will we stand on then? Final question: What side are you on? Advice for union members: stand up and demand your leadership stop the deadly infighting with other unions and insist that organizing efforts be focussed on new union memberships, not another union's current members. Stealing members only delays the inevitable crisis of overall declining union membership in B.C. and plays into the hands of the employer classes and Gordo's lunatics.

Women hospital workers face SARS, numerous other hospital pathogens, sometimes violent drug addicts and mental patients and other dangers, along with gutted security thanks to the bc liars. I have worked as a roofer and at countless other dangerous jobs, and in general, the rule -except in unionized jobs- is, the more job risk, the worse you're treated, precisely why we need strong, non-rat unions for both men and women workers. I feel very much for women hospital workers, but don't forget what campbell has already done and continues to do to the poor and disabled, the next down on the ladder for laid off women workers. And by the way, a good laborer is hard to find, and being a roofer and managing not to get hurt takes a lot of care and concentration. A general strike and massive class action lawsuits for gross misrepresentation, betrayal of the public trust and corruption of the political process (elected mlas should NOT be drilled and coached like a grade three drama class) are needed to send a strong message to all right thugs including stephen harper (and perhaps paul martin) who would love to do to canada, what gordon campbell has done to bc.

I have to say, listening to CBC radio this morning made me very glad the Tyee is around. The host of the morning show hardly challenged the Minister of Health, that weasel Hanson. He repeated their official lie ... I mean, line, that the health care support workers, when the 11% is cut from their wages, will have wages more in line with their counterparts in other provinces. Did the interviewer then point out that most of the HEU will either lose their jobs and have no income, or will have to work for one of the private corporations lined up to run things, earning about 60% what they did previously and becoming the lowest-paid health care support workers in Canada? Nope, not a word to the minister about that. CBC radio is better than the privately-owned media, but not by much. Long live the Tyee.

I gotta say honestly that I haven't been much of a union supporter in the past; however, in this instance, I totally support the HEU. I cannot understand how three million people can just sit back and be led by a dictator without more protests in the street, in the media, etc. HOw far will Gordo go? Is this not reminiscent of HItler somehow?

I hope someone can someone clear up a statement I was told. I have yet to see or hear it in the mainstream and I hope it is not true : Is the 15 % rollback RETROACTIVE ?

I did hear that too, cranium. Somebody was quoted in the province--in fact, as I think of it, it was Ken Georgetti. I figure him for pretty credible actually. I just heard that IBEW is out as of this afternoon, and BCGEU is also going. Looks like May 3 (appropriate that this should happen around May 1st). There is a general call going out for people who can, to go spend some time at a picket line.

There is no opposition in the legislature. Joy McPhail (and I don't care if you like her or not) and Jenny Kwan (and I don't care if you like HER or not) can only do so much--esp since they weren't even granted official party status by these Liberals. It HAS to happen somewhere. Opposition that is. This needs to be a national, if not an international event. It must be a crisis. ANd it needs to be the embarrassment to this country that this government is to our province. Sorry for the rant.

Thanks. We went out and supported this AM.

Yes, rcranium,- I bleieve retroactive as of April 1st, so those being fired will have to REPAY their employer- and those staying on will repay over the next year.

Ken Georgetti of the Canadian Labour Congress, said: "I've never seen a piece of legislation in my career, in my 35 years in the labour movement, retroactively taking wages back off workers who have already earned them." [Province, 30 Apr 04]

Effle, You are absolutly right. It is incumbent upon every citizen of this province to stand up and take a position. Show this regime their tactics will not be tolerated.They have infected every corner of this province with their disease. They must be vaccinated, neutered and spayed so this holocaust upon working people will never happen again! It also sends a clear message for others who wish to be elected.

What is disturbing about Camp-ball's latest glib shite is that in blathering all that bit about how HEU members won't have to take wage cuts if they just work 40 hours a week like the rest of the workers in the province (I think 37.5 is more the average, but not sure on that), is that he is OBFUSCATING the entire contracting out issue--and, just watch, they will gloss that one over. Make it look like its ONLY about wages, when in fact it is alot about job security and what people are starting to recognize as a move to pay back his pro-business campaign donors, and to further their agenda: read profits (theirs, not yours).

Where can someone get a list of the wages paid to health authority administrative and management people? WOuld that not be public domain?

NO Opposition - what planet are you on! Joy MacPhail and Jenny Kwan were up to 5 in the morning questioning every hidden, underhanded, corrupt aspect of Bill 37. Whether you like them or not is irrelevant - nobody can dismiss the job that they and their staff do everyday on behalf of British Columbians. If you think politics doesn't matter, or what happens in the Legislature doesn't matter, then think again. A lot of people thought that way during the last election, and now we're all paying the price for that complacency. The NDP isn't perfect - nobody is - but compare their record over 10 years with what's happened since 2001 and make your own decision.

I talked to a number of HEU workers today. I was surprised to find that there are computer and networking people in the HEU and they are NOT very well paid. These are good employees who prefer working in the hospital rather than doing private sector work, contracting or consulting. They risk losing some good people. It is propaganda to refer the the HEU as cleaners, cooks and security guards since all of those areas have already been laid off. The HEU consists of skilled workers such as lab technicians, electricians, carpenters, networking and computer people. HEU also represents secretaries, orderlies, clerks.

I also spoke to a doctor who had no simpathy for HEU and referred to them as cleaners and said that "they should get an education". He was more ignorant than any of the workers I spoke to. They should have taken 15% away from him.

and the ones making the MOST money are the administrators who make 300,000 to 400,000 per year plus percs and for whom there is NO risk whatsoever, and I will betcha they are almost all of them men. As for the rollback in pay....hey, Gordo and his gang of arstles are "leaders" so let's see them lead the way and take a 15% pay cut, just to set an example to all the rest of us greedy bastards who work more than 4 months of the year and aren't able to afford two residences or to fly home every weekend... of course pay inequity is about gender as much as it is about education, training, skill or any other measurement...if it wasn't there wouldn't be so many getting hot under the collar about it... just mentioning gender pay inequity has the knees jerking... it challenges one of the basics of the present system. The federal government admitted they couldn't afford pay equity; they were willing to admit there was and is inequity, willing to agree the wrong should be made right but...couldn't afford it........gee, none of us were surprised........and yes, guys, it's true, I AM a feminist, have been for most of my life. I do not hate men, I am particularly fond of my sons and grandsons but I am not able to say I "love" men because believe it or not 97% of all violent crime is committed by men so it's kind of hard to know who the non violent ones are... the rape and violent assault statistics are so high women should get risk pay every time they go shopping... and that isn't a slam at ALL men, just at the arstles, so if the comment bothers you, take a good look at yourself and your arsteliness... it happens every time a woman speaks to a woman focused issue there are always some who leap up and say "man hater". Honest, guys, it isn't always about your dicks. Many of us are really not that interested or impressed by them, even if they do mean you can write your name in the snow when you pee.

Karl, if you'd read what I said about NO OPPOSITION, and where I've said it before, you would see that I am one of Joy McPHail and Jenny Kwan's biggest supporters. What I said is that THEY CAN'T DO THE JOB ALONE and that they've been in a completely untenable position made all the worse by a bunch that wouldn't even grant them official party status. IF you think that TWO people CAN constitute effective opposition in the legislature, pal, I would just ask YOU what planet YOU'RE on.

As I have said before, I am one of the 12 people in this province who DIDN'T vote for that Campbell or any of his henchmen, so I guess your remarks to me kind of rankle. They make me think you are an idiot actually.

Good for you Bart, the rest of you get an education. Most if not all cleaners, laundry workers and food services people are already GONE!!! HEU is Information Technology, Telecommunications, Biomed techs, Xray techs, Nuclear med techs ECG, EEG techs, Cardio tech, lab techs, nurses (LPNs, care aides, and yes they are nurses when they do nursing duties), buyers, electricians, carpenters, engineers, etc. etc. etc. We are skilled workers with years of education and experience. As well, as many as half if not more of all HEU workers give DIRECT patient care.

There is a rally downtown Vancouver this morning. I note it didn't get much (any?) mention on the local TV news this morning.

Effle, I never said that they could do the job alone, and of course a bigger caucus and party status would allow the Opposition to do a lot more. But at the end of the day, a majority gov't can do pretty much as it likes. That's why we need to get rid of this government - BC cannot afford another term with these psychopaths in charge. BTW, I didn't vote Liberal, I voted NDP. And what makes you think I'm an idiot - I didn't say you were an idiot.

Campbell and his gang should look around the province and listen. They now know they are goners. I sincerely hope there is a "DO NOT RESUSCITATE " order. ( I doubt they could muster a helping hand anyhow.) They should have understood that we have two ears and one mouth for a reason.

Beautiful British Columbia, you need all your friends and supporters right now. We waste our energy when we bicker like this (above). Get a plan. Focus! And best of luck to the Left Coast.

You couldn't have said it better 'Watching from Toronto'. We in British Columbia have to recognize that our emotions will get the best of us if we don't get it together. Now is the time to get down and do the work that we have all talked about but have never come together on yet. Now is not the time for petty bickering. Think big, not small.

Don't know if you've all seen this site- quite comprehensive... www.generalstrikenews.ca

Another thing that is really a manipulation is the term "illegal strike". The strike only became "illegal" when the Gordon Campbell government imposed their unacceptably poor "settlement". Only an ignorant anti-justice supporter of the BC Liberals would use the word "illegal". You hear people making stupid comments like "the law is the law and their walkout is illegal".

I find it humourous that a guy that drove a vehicle at 70MPH with a blood/alcohol reading of .16 is an expert on legal/illegal.

Everytime I meet a new person and they find out that I am a grade one teacher, I get the same reaction. A male primary teacher - what a novelty. Oh ... and please meet my wife so I can blow that stereotype down. My buddies who became Chartered Accountants shake their heads at my career. Why did I take a women's job ... it's not like I will reap the huge financial rewards of all that post-secondary education that they will. So, Steve ... I disagree. You cannot dismiss the gender argument so easily. We've come a long way, but not so much as you'd like to believe. I find it hard to believe that you see no inherent discrimination in an IWA janitor (mostly male) at a mill making twice the wage of a cleaner in a hospital (mostly female). It seems that the mainstream media will continue to complain that we are paying workers too much in jobs that are inherently considered for women, but make excuses for work that is pretty much the same that are in the male realm. You are doing the same. Boo!

Three comments: First, about the IWA. Just in case you aren't aware, their unionized housekeepers crossed the picket lines all last week. Not just the housekeepers who clean the patient areas, but even the office cleaners. IWA has a lot to answer for. Secondly, the Phillipino nurses are perfectly welcome to work here if they meet the requirements of the RN Association of BCs requirements for minimal educational preparation and pass the registration exam. Licensing of RNs has nothing to do with the BCNU. The RNABC sets standards for nursing to PROTECT THE PUBLIC, not nurses. It may be argued that Phillipino nurses are not having their qualifications appropriately considered, but this is a matter to take up with the RNABC, not the BCNU. Third, Deb McPherson had no choice but to instruct the RNs to cross the picket line. We are bound by essential services legislation to provide patient care. 95% of us work even when WE call a strike. Many of us did picket on our lunch hours and after work in support of the HEU.

Please note that this IWA local is a renegade local operating alone.We are being supported on the picket lines by many outraged IWA members of other locals who hold the actions of this local in great contempt.We are also supported by many non union people.The fight is everybodys not just ours..HEU member

campbell & his bunch are following the feds.' lead as they are doing their share of union busting & contracting canadian jobs to the yanks. i am 1 of 22 union members illegally fired by statistis canada last october for participating in a legal strike. after 6 months the feds are still playing dumb & dumber. the feds also pay poverty(according to their own statistics)wages. and by the way; in the group of 22 there are phd's;mba's and ba's. all earned less than the janitors at the office. canadians better waken up before the "ordinary worker" is back at &5/hr. - whilst gordo,paul and there cronies are living it up. the unions can and better organize and unite to fight this trend. we know big money runs the show;but only behind the scenes. they hate publicity. spin is everything.

If you say "toilet cleaners" then fire people, you justify the act with the epithet. What if you call them "the infection control staff, working directly under the infection control officer in each facility"? Not so easy to dismiss them as unworthy of their pay, is it, when they are all that stands between you and superbugs, SARS, flesheating disease and the like, is it?

Just want to correct a consistent misconception. The BCNU has no control over who works as an RN. Licensing of RNs is controlled by the professional association, the RNABC, which sets minimum standards and requires candidates to pass a written exam. A nurse from anywhere in the world can work as an RN in BC if she meets these standards and gets licensed. The employer then hires the person and they are automatically enrolled in the BCNU. There is a perception that this is a closed shop, but the fact is that the RNABC sets standards for nursing practise to protect the public from incompetence, not to protect nurses. You can argue that the entry requirements are biased for nurses from predominantly white, western countries and work against Phillipine trained nurses but this is something to take up with them, not the union.

Most of the cleaners are already gone, replaced, many of the people forced back to work are at least technicians, who could probably get higher paid work in the private sector, and likely will. There was also an annoucement today according to moe sihota on voices on the new vi, NO, the money will not be going back into the system but instead is targetted toward' s the bc liars targetted, or at least, forecast to be balanced, budget. But wasn't putting money back into the system half their excuse for the legislation?! You alway's hear they're making it up as they're going along in reference to the bc liberals, but to their storyline is increasingly reduced to the drunken blatherings of a convicted felon making up excuses about why he got stopped (or at least slowed down) this time...

I started out life on a farm in Saskatchewan over 45 years ago. I watched my mother and grandmother take care of the home and family with no running water or electricity in one room "summer kitchens" or two or three room houses. The children would sleep in the granaries until the crops came in or in the attic of the house in the winter, which they had to access from the outside and climb up a ladder to get to. The women woke up first then woke everyone else up when breakfast was ready. The women then took care of the family's needs in the morning; cleaned and put breakfast dishes away; prepared and punched down the dough for the bread for the next day or two. The “fridge” on the farm was usually a bucket at the well. The milk and other perishable items were placed in this bucket and then lowered into the well to keep them cold and prevent spoilage. Then they would wrap a tea towel or “babushka” around their head and go work in the fields after they took care of the animals in the barns. They either worked on the tractor or hitched up the horses to the equipment and then did the seeding or whatever was required, or behind the tractor that was pulling the stone bolt. The women and the children followed the stone bolt over hundreds of acres of land and had to throw the stones on the stone bolt. That was usually after the women and children had already taken care of the animals and mucked out the barns or chicken coop or butchered the chicken for the evening meal. The women would leave this work only to prepare lunch and supper, clean up afterwards and then go back out to the fields or the farmyard. I grew up watching these tiny women work harder than the men did because their work never ended until they had fed everyone and cleaned up after the evening meal. The men would then sit and relax because they had a hard day. The women would go work in the garden, using hoes, shovels and picks, until it was time to put children and men to bed. Then the women would hand wash and repair the few clothes the family had or do “whatever” for the benefit of the family and farm, when everyone was asleep, men included. When I entered the “paid working world” in 1972 I was shocked at how I had to fight to get a fair pay cheque because I was entering into a "male-dominated work force". Women’s wages were low as we supposedly had a “man” to take care of us, even if we didn’t have a “man”. I was always incensed at the fact that when women did construction or labour work in the capacity of a housewife she was expected to work for free. That was her “duty”. But when she did the same work in a paid environment she had to fight to get decent pay and most times she got less in wages than the man she worked beside, unless it was in a male-dominated union environment. Women still have to work harder than men, unless they prostitute themselves as “Christy Clark types” do, because they still have to prove that they are able to do the work even though they already do the same kind of work in the home. I worked as a "construction union labourer" in the capacity of "janitor" in 1976 (to 1981) for $10.30 per hour, double time after 8 hours, guaranteed 48 hour work week and a week off every 30 days. My mother was working in the hospital as a cleaner/housekeeper for $4.00 per hour. She and other women in that area worked harder than I did as a construction labourer or apprentice carpenter. When men do cleaning jobs they are classified as "janitors" and get a decent pay cheque and benefits. When women do the same work they are classified as "cleaners" and get a lessor wage and no benefits. I got a better wage because I was in a male-dominated union environment and my mother was in a female-dominated environment. Men would blast me for taking a job away from a man who had a family to support. They never thought to ask me if I had a family to support. The whole attitude seemed to be that females always had men to pay the bills and if they didn't have a "man" then they were expected to go out and find a “man”. When they did find a “man” then they were bashed for being dependent on the “man”. That attitude has not improved in my 49 years on this earth. The Campbell whores of the day are taking us back to the "Industrial Revolution" where child labour and exploitation of women was the norm. To this day, if women choose to support themselves then they are stuck with dead end and low paying jobs (banks, sales clerks, waitress, secretary et cetera) that they have to dress to the "nines" for, as if they are making the big bucks. Men resent women for being dependent on them financially and resent them even more when they are financially independent of them. Even with a "male provider" in the home, women are still kept in poverty and subservient to the males through financial control and terrorism. A massive majority of single parent families are headed by women! This (female) single parent number has probably increased since Gordon Campbell and his political whores came into power, due to the increased stress to families, courtesy of his government. Men usually leave the family when they can't take the stress of providing for the family or they abuse the family so much that the women have to leave to save their lives and the lives of their children. The statistics for men being in the role of single parent are much lower, practically non-existent compared to female single parents. The issue of pay should be that all people get a fair and liveable wage with enough hours per week and safe working environments, no matter what they do and what gender or colour they are or whether they have a “male provider”. We all have families to support! The red-neck attitude that women do not need an equitable wage as compared to men is prevalent in BC and there are a great many women who are selling out members of their gender so they can "play with the big boys". Look at "political and business whores" such as Christy Clark and the other female impersonaters within Gordon Campbell's government. The female leaders of today, such as Christy Clark and right to the Prime Minister's office, are an embarrassment to me. I have personally experienced where "women in power" have helped big business drive down wages all the while ensuring that they keep their excellent wage. When are women going to stop stabbing each other in the back just to attract the attention of the "boys". When are women (as well as men) going to place value on the work they do. If women were to stop volunteering their work to churches, for example, religious organizations would cease to exist. Why is it that women go brain-dead when a "penis" enters the room? Forget the fact that women have families to support. Forget the fact that people, including women, earning a good wage have money to spend in the communities they live in which supports the business community. It seems to me that, according to Gordon Campbell whores and cronies, we all have to become a society of “serfs” for the rich and famous. This is so they can become members of the Fortune 500 list or hire people such as American David Hahn and other rejects from corrupt and bankrupted US corporations for exhorbitant wages and who probably don’t pay Canadian taxes. Wonder who cleans their toilets and messes up? Or are they all so perfect that they never use the toilet. Or toilets aren’t necessary to clean unless it is their personal toilet. I would love to see Colin Hansen and other supporters clean up vomit and blood and see how good a job they did. Or would they even know how to properly clean an area so that it is germ free and safe for the next patient? Or should “patients” now be referred to as “clients” or “consumers”. I’d rather be a “client” or “consumer’ in areas other than hospitals. Going to hospital is not a “consumer choice” I want to make. I’d rather choose to be a consumer of a “holiday” somewhere in the world or better yet, just be able to buy groceries, pay the rent or mortgage and utilities in the same month and have enough money left over to buy some clothes for my children. I finally found a few women I could be proud of and call them “my hero”. Maude Barlow, Carol James, Libby Davies, Joy McPhail and Jenny Kwan to name a few. It’s too bad they, as well as women such as myself, are being sold out by other members of their gender. Were the HEU a male-dominated union there would not have been such a cut to wages and benefits. A general strike would have (and should have) happened. But there again the HEU is a female dominated union. Male dominated unions, such as the sold out IWA, can't let a female dominated union lead the charge to save jobs and wages. They would lose "face". Unions such as the IWA certainly can't support women who are fighting to keep the wages they fought and work for. Men would lose control of their women and their free labour force.

Wow. I check back to this story every once in awhile- thank you so much for sharing that, Deborah. I'm glad I read it. I have had arguments with female friends about "feminism" and every time I hear a woman say "but I'm not a feminist" I cringe, I want to cry almost- WHY is it so hard to see what you and I see? One friend I argued with is now studying at U of T and taking a women's studies course she absolutely loves and I like to think I piqued her curiosity. (The argument ensued when she said she couldn't decide if she should take the course or not, as she figured it may simply be a bunch of women whining). Another friend, after I forwarded her a story on something to do with feminism, wrote back "But I don't feel suppressed, do you?" That's not the point!! I don't, and I never ever have, but something in me dawned a few years back. Maybe my travels had something to do with it- where attitudes you described above are deeply ingrained in both women and men re: strength, justifying pay inequality due to a man needing to "support" a family, etc. But as you said, those attitudes are still with us in many ways, and they prevail in this country too. I simply see the world around me. Sometimes I wonder "Why do I care?? I don't have a daughter; I have never felt suppressed." But I just DO care. I just do. Cheers, Deborah.

deborah diduck's posting is one of the best I have ever read on the tyee....

Iwa has just been raided at 2 care holmes in victoria.