ALF V1

The Alberta Federation of Labour is demanding a full and transparent investigation into the death of two workers and injury to four others yesterday in Fort McMurray. The AFL is also calling on the Federal government to launch a public inquiry into the temporary foreign workers program following the tragedy.

"Our first thoughts go to the families and co-workers of the workers. There can be nothing more horrible than losing a loved one due to a workplace accident," says AFL President Gil McGowan. "A large number of questions arise about why this accident happened and what factors led to such a horrible tragedy. Questions for which we need answers."

"I have asked Monte Solberg, federal Minister of Citizenship and Immigration, to call a public inquiry into the tragedy," says AFL President Gil McGowan, "paying particular attention to any relationship between the temporary foreign workers program and the accident."

"Labour has consistently questioned the lack of oversight, inspection, education and enforcement of the program in the area of workers' rights," says McGowan. "Our concerns have included whether or not these workers even know their basic rights - including basic health & safety regulations and procedures."

"I have also asked that if the investigation does point to weakness or failings with the temporary foreign worker program we start moving very quickly to address those weaknesses and failings," says McGowan. "Finally, we asked that labour play an integral part in any inquiry."
.
"We have also asked Iris Evans, the Alberta Minster responsible for Occupational Health & Safety, to make sure that the accident and fatality investigations will be transparent and thorough. The need to find out exactly how these workers' rights have been communicated to them and what steps have been taken to ensure that those rights are in fact enforced on the job," says McGowan.

-30-

For more information contact:

Gil McGowan, President Bus: (780) 483-3021 Cell: (780) 218-9888

[Calgary] "The Stelmach government must act now to control the pace of development," says AFL President Gil McGowan.  "The province is already paying too great a price for their past 'hands-off' approach to oil sands development."

McGowan points out overcrowded classrooms and hospitals, failing municipal infrastructures, a workforce that is overstressed and workplace injury rates that are rising.

"We want the government to pace development to reduce the social and economic cost of an overheated economy," says McGowan. "Unchecked development will simply hasten the inevitable end of the boom and make the subsequent economic and social costs worse."

McGowan also insists that the government intervene to protect the domestic petrochemical industry. "The government must take a stand against the construction of pipelines designed to send raw bitumen to the U.S.," says McGowan. "Otherwise, all the value-added production will be done south of the border while our own upgrader and processing industry stagnates."

McGowan had no sympathy for producers who demand a free ride to act as they please. "The Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers has warned of dire consequences of government regulates development," says McGowan. "We say there's too much money to be made for them to walk away".

Government needs to spell out a vision, set the targets and lay down the rules for oil sands development according to McGowan. "We want rules to cap emissions, rules to set the pace of growth and rules to promote a domestic downstream industry. And if companies don't like it - well, we can buy back their leases and give them to someone prepared to play by the rules," says McGowan.

Finally, McGowan wants an immediate end to the current one cent royalty. "We need a higher royalty rate that moves with price," insists McGowan. "The current rate is a joke. We're letting energy companies pick our collective pockets."

Gil McGowan will be addressing the government's Multi-stakeholder Committee on Oilsands Development at 1:15 pm in room 203 of the Telus Convention Centre in Calgary today.

-30-

For more information contact:

Gil McGowan, President Bus: (780) 483-3021 Cell: (780) 218-9888

In a letter sent today to James D. Packer, Executive Chairman of PBL Publishing & Broadcasting Ltd. - the Australian publishing, broadcasting and gambling giant - the Alberta Federation of Labour has asked the Australian billionaire to resolve the seven month old labour dispute at the Palace Casino in Edmonton.

"I have simply asked Mr. Packer to look at this dispute in a cool, dispassionate business way," says AFL President Gil McGowan. "His company has just acquired the Palace Casino along with the other assets of the Gateway Casinos Income Fund, and we are hoping that a fresh approach by the new ownership can break this deadlock."

In the letter, McGowan pointed out just how badly the strike has affected the financial picture at the Palace Casino. "I informed Mr. Packer about the massive $3.5 million drop in revenue from Palace in the fourth quarter - which coincides with the beginning of the strike," notes McGowan. "Operating earnings during the period fell from $2.167 million to a loss of $.582 million - a drop of 126.9%."

"What should be a flagship of his new Canadian holdings is actually a drag on profits because of the strike," says McGowan. "I suggested to Mr. Packer that he could restore good will in Edmonton and make the Palace Casino profitable by encouraging management to reach a fair and equitable settlement with the striking members of United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW) Local 401."

"I believe that any businessperson as successful Mr. Packer will not let this situation continue to impact his operations," concludes McGowan.

-30-

For more information contact:

Gil McGowan, President Bus: (780) 483-3021 Cell: (780) 218-9888

The AFL joined with Action on Smoking and Health, Alberta Cancer Board and the Alberta Chamber of Commerce today to launch a campaign to urge the Alberta government to implement a province-wide smoking ban in all workplaces.

"For us smoking in the workplace is an occupational health and safety issue," says AFL President Gil McGowan. "Forcing workers in restaurants, bars and casinos to be exposed to high levels of second-hand smoke runs counter to basic health and safety practice."

"Tobacco smoke contains over 50 known carcinogens, including benzene, formaldehyde, cadmium and lead," observes McGowan. "If workers in bars were being exposed to coal dust at the levels they inhale second-hand smoke, the government would have put a stop to it. Had bingo workers been exposed to asbestos at these levels, the government would have cracked down."

"They need to act now to eliminate exposure to tobacco smoke."

McGowan points out that food and beverage workers have three to six times more exposure to second hand smoke than other workers. As a result, non-smoking workers in the food service industry have a 50% greater risk of cancer than other non-smokers. "This is why we must act," urges McGowan.

"We will be mobilizing our members to contact their MLA in the next few weeks demanding a province-wide smoking ban," says McGowan. "We are one of only two provinces without one. Let's hope we don't end up being the last province without a complete ban."

- 30 -

For More Info

Gil McGowan, 218-9888

The head of the Alberta Federation of Labour says TransCanada Corp.'s proposed Keystone pipeline to the United States is a job killer that needs to be stopped.

In a submission to the National Energy Board, labour federation president Gil McGowan said the proposed 3,000-kilometre pipeline to the U.S. Midwest is not in the public interest because it would export refining and upgrading jobs from Canada, where the oil is produced.

"Canadians should be getting the greatest value for their resources," he said.

"The Keystone project falls well short of providing maximum value in the areas of jobs, economic opportunity and long-term economic and energy security."

According to a study by the economic consulting firm Infometrica, the labour federation insists 18,000 jobs would be created in Canada if bitumen was refined in Alberta instead of being shipped to the U.S. on the proposed pipeline.

"If Keystone goes ahead, we will miss a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to create a broad, healthy, value-added, and research industry centred around a rejuvenated refining industry, McGowan warned.

Instead, "billions of dollars will be spent to retool and renovate current refineries in places such as Illinois and the American Gulf Coast."

If approved, Keystone would transport some 435,000 barrels a day from Hardisty, near Edmonton, to refineries in Illinois.

In February, TransCanada received National Energy Board approval to transfer assets from its main natural gas line to a subsidiary that would operate Keystone.

In December it filed a formal application to build the line and National Energy Board hearings seeking approval to construct and operate the Canadian facilities are scheduled to begin on June 4.

TransCanada spokeswoman Shela Shapiro said the company doesn't comment on intervenor submissions or the regulatory system.

"We're aware they have filed and it's part of the process," she said.

But David MacInnis, head of the Canadian Energy Pipeline Association, said at least 450,000 barrels a day of new pipeline capacity is needed by 2009 to avert slowdowns and job losses in the burgeoning oilsands sector.

TransCanada, along with Enbridge Inc. and Kinder Morgan have put forth proposals to increase oilsands export capacity to the United States.

Although MacInnis wouldn't comment on the merits of any specific proposal, he said CEPA supports "market-backed solutions" to add new pipeline infrastructure and alleviate what he said is a looming capacity shortage.

He further suggested that upgraders planned for the Edmonton area over the next several years are threatened by a lack of skilled labour.

"With all that construction, I don't get the sense anybody is worried about losing jobs. In fact the opposite is true."

He said the labour federation's call for a moratorium on future pipeline construction would threaten oilsands growth and actually cost jobs in the long run.

"The AFL need to look in the mirror," he said.

"The short story is that these oilsands pipes create jobs. If they get their way, they will absolutely devastate the economy.

"There will definitely be shut-ins in production at oilsands plants . . . that's what's going to kill jobs."

Calgary Herald, Tues Apr 17 2007

Byline: Shaun Polczer

[Edmonton] In a submission to the National Energy Board (NEB) on April 13, 2007, the Alberta Federation of Labour (AFL) argues that the Keystone pipeline project that is currently before the NEB for approval is not in the public interest.

"We have asked the Board to consider the broader, long-term impacts of approving the pipeline to connect suppliers of bitumen in Alberta to purchasers of bitumen in the United States," says AFL President Gil McGowan.

"We submit that Canadians should be getting the greatest value for their resources and that the Keystone project falls well short of providing maximum value in the areas of jobs, economic opportunity and long-term economic and energy security.

"According to a study by the economic consulting firm, Infometrica, 18,000 jobs would be created in Canada if the bitumen was refined here instead of being shipped to the USA in the proposed pipeline," says McGowan.

"But, more than jobs are at stake here," warns McGowan, "if Keystone goes ahead, we will miss a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to create a broad healthy value-added and research industry centered around a rejuvenated refining industry."

"If final approval is given to Keystone, billions of dollars will be spent to retool and renovate current refineries in places like Illinois and the American Gulf Coast," says McGowan. "If, however, the pipeline is not approved, the same oil companies that are currently investing in American refining capacity will likely make very different decisions regarding investment in refineries in Canada - decisions which might be more in the public interest of Canadians."

The Federation also stressed the urgency of dealing with these public interest issues now at the National Energy Board. "The links in the supply chain are being forged now," warns McGowan, "they will become virtually locked into place if major pipelines like the one currently under consideration are approved."

"The National Energy Board cannot pass the buck on the broad public ramifications of Keystone to the federal and provincial governments," concludes McGowan. "Once the Board approves the building of the pipeline, construction will begin. They must either widen the scope of their hearings now to include the broader public interest or adjourn the hearings until such time as the federal and provincial governments and all stakeholders develop a comprehensive plan for the Canadian energy sector."

- 30 -

The AFL�s submission to the NEB is available at www.afl.org/upload/keystonesubmission.pdf

For more information contact:

Gil McGowan, President Bus: (780) 483-3021 Cell: (780) 218-9888

Gil McGowan, President of the Alberta Federation of Labour, Tuesday, April 3, 2007

Just under four years ago, the Alberta government introduced and passed a controversial law that radically altered labour relations in the health care sector.

Bill 27 allowed the government to tear up dozens of freely negotiated contracts covering the pay and working conditions of literally tens of thousands of health care workers.

It also forced unions into run-off votes, denying many workers the right to choose the union they actually preferred.

And, finally, it removed the legal right to strike from thousands of union members in areas like community health and mental health - without ever attempting to justify how the public interest would be threatened if a speech pathologist or a physiotherapist or community health nurse walked a picket line.

Our concerns about the substance of the law were profound. In many ways, it was the most blatantly anti-union piece of legislation introduced by an Alberta government in more than 20 years.

But in addition to being strongly opposed to what the new law said and what it meant for health care workers in this province, we were also deeply troubled by the process that led to its introduction.

In particular, we were concerned about the role that the Alberta Labour Relations Board played in drafting the law.

The Labour Relations Board is supposed to be the impartial referee in all labour relations matters. It is supposed to be free from influence from both employers and unions. And it is supposed to be independent from government.

However, in the case of Bill 27, it became clear to us that the boundaries between the board and the government had become dangerously blurred.

In the process, we felt that the Board's ability to act as an independent and impartial third party had been compromised.

Our concerns about the LRB's role in Bill 27 prompted us to file numerous freedom of information requests aimed at getting a clearer picture of what really happened behind the scenes between government and the Board.

It also prompted two major unions - the United Nurses of Alberta and the Communications, Energy Paperworkers - to launch legal action.

In September of 2004, Justice Watson of the Alberta Court of Queen's Bench dismissed the unions' application for a judicial review of Bill 27 - not because their arguments lacked merit, but because so much of their case rested on things that had gone on behind closed doors. We simply did not have enough evidence.

However, in the months following the lower court decision, the evidence that had been missing started to pile up. As a result of freedom of information requests launched by the Federation of Labour, a picture of what happened in the run-up to Bill 27 began to emerge.

That picture featured a government, who was also the employer - either directly or through the Regional Health Authorities it created and appointed - using its legislative power to force concessions on health care workers that it couldn't win at the bargaining table. It featured a Labour Board helping the government draft a law which they knew would be used against health care workers. And it also featured Board officers sitting in judgment on cases involving the law they had just helped write.

The new evidence that we managed to gather - and the picture that evidence painted - caused unions across the province to ask a very fundamental question: how can we possibly have confidence appearing before a tribunal that had so clearly worked with a major employer to undermine the rights and interests of a large group of workers?

How could we possibly trust a referee who had been working with the other team?

Today was supposed to be our first day at the appeal court. We were eager to have our day in court and, as a result of the new evidence, we were confident about the outcome.

But instead of appearing before the appeal panel, we are here to respond to a major new development.

Earlier this morning the Labour Relations Board released a new protocol designed to more clearly define future interactions between the Board and the government.

The protocol begins by asserting that the only way for the Board to maintain the confidence of the parties appearing before it is to defend its independence from employers, unions and government.

It goes on to say that it is the responsibility of the government, not the Board, to develop policy and draft labour legislation.

It acknowledges that in some cases the government may approach the board for narrow technical advice on legislation or regulations. But it puts strict boundaries on what this kind of consultation would involve.

Most importantly, the protocol guarantees that all interactions between the board and government on either legislation or regulation will be fully and publicly disclosed.

No more veil of secrecy. No more backroom meetings. No more government behaving as if the Board is merely a branch of one of its departments. No more guessing about what's going on behind closed doors.

The protocol also guarantees that, in those cases where the board does give technical advice, the board officers involved will not be allowed to sit in judgment on the laws or regulations they gave advice on.

It also puts restrictions on the role of outside legal counsel - so they can't act for employers one day and as advisor to the board the next.

With this document, the Alberta Labour Relations Board has gone from having essentially no clear internal rules dealing with its independence from government to having some of the best rules in the country.

We may still have some of the worst labour laws in Canada - and we do. But this protocol makes it clear that the Board's only role will be to interpret those bad laws, not help write them.

The importance of this change cannot be overstated. In a province where working people can't count on the Legislature to consistently protect their rights in the workplace, at the very least they have to have confidence that the referee isn't working against them as well.

The Board now has the tools to say "no" when the government comes calling. They now have the tools to tell say to the government, "we won't help you with your dirty work."

We expect the Board to aggressively use these new tools when appropriate.

We also have expectations for government. Now that clear boundaries have been set, we expect the government to respect those boundaries and to not compromise the independence of the board.

As a result of this new protocol, which has been signed by the Board chair and all the vice-chairs and which will be signed by all future vice-chairs, we at the Alberta Federation of Labour, the United Nurses of Alberta, and the Communication Energy Paperworkers union have collectively decided to withdraw our court appeal.

We have pursued this case tenaciously for the past four years. We have invested significant amounts of time, money and resources. And we have persevered in the face of efforts to discourage us.

But our goal was never to put trophy heads on our wall. Our goal was to improve public policy. Our goal was to defend and guarantee the independence of the Labour Board from undue influence from government and employers. And our goal was to restore confidence among all those who have to appear be before the Board.

Looking at the protocol released by the Board today, we are satisfied that our major goals have been achieved. As a result, we see no reason to proceed with the court case.

From our perspective, this is a victory for working people because we can now have more confidence in the tribunal that hears our concerns and complaints.

It is a victory for the Labour Board itself because it more clearly defines and defends its independence from government.

And it is a victory for the broader public because it sets in place a new model for governance which we think can and should be adopted by other public boards and agencies.

If the Stelmach government is sincere in its efforts to promote transparency and accountability, we think this protocol is a very good place to start.

Building a better model of governance - one that the public can really have confidence in - was our goal from the start.

That's why, last year, we at the AFL commissioned an expert study on the situation related to Bill 27. That study was done by Professor Lorne Sossin, a highly respected authority on administrative law from the University of Toronto.

It's clear to us that the Board took Prof. Sossin's recommendations to heart.

Prof. Sossin talked about the importance of maintaining a clear distance between government and administrative tribunals such as the LRB. He talked about the importance of rules to guarantee that distance. And he talked about the importance of transparency and full public disclosure.

The board may not have used the exact words proposed by Professor Sossin, but the spirit of his recommendations has clearly been given life in the Board's protocol.

As a result of these new rules, the Board has gone a long way to reestablishing confidence among the public and stakeholders.

Obviously, we would have been happier if Bill 27 had never been introduced. But we can't re-write history. We can, however, make sure that we don't repeat it.

If these rules had been in place four years ago, the government would not have been able to enlist the Board in its campaign to gut health care labour laws. We may still have gotten those laws - but their introduction would not have triggered a crisis in confidence in the Labour Board.

With the Board's new protocol, we consider our case against the Board's conduct on Bill 27 closed.

We can now turn our attention where it really belongs - to the bad laws we have on the books and to the government that has passed those laws and still defends them.

The Alberta Federation of Labour (AFL), the United Nurses of Alberta (UNA) and the Communications Energy and Paperworkers Union (CEP) jointly announced today that they are withdrawing their legal action against the Alberta Labour Relations Board (LRB) regarding the drafting of Bill 27 in 2003.

The announcement comes following an agreement between the parties and the LRB to create a protocol outlining the role of the LRB in creating legislation. The LRB released its "Guidelines for Consultation on Legislation", signed by the Chair and all Vice-Chairs, this morning. (Read the LRB Protocol)

"With the new protocol announced today, the Alberta Labour Relations Board has created some of the best rules in the country for accountability, transparency and guarantees of neutrality," says AFL President Gil McGowan. "We are pleased with the outcome of this case."

The protocol guarantees that LRB officials will not participate in the drafting of legislation, and that any technical assistance provided to the government will be fully disclosed. Any LRB official who participates in briefing the government will recuse themselves from any hearing related to the matter. In addition, the LRB will institute new, tougher rules governing outside counsel.

"We see this protocol as a model for transparency that should be applied to all boards and agencies in Alberta," says McGowan. "This is a significant victory for all Albertans interested in good governance."

The lawsuit surrounds the issue of LRB officials assisting the government in the drafting of Bill 27, a bill that restructured health care labour relations and stripped health care workers of many labour rights. The incident raised questions in the minds of the labour movement about the independence and neutrality of the Board.

"We launched the legal action two years ago because we felt that the LRB�s involvement in drafting Bill 27 showed a lack of transparency in a body that must be neutral and at arms length from government," says UNA President Heather Smith.

"It made a sham of the consultative process when legislation that affected tens of thousands of health workers was created behind closed doors. That made it hard to count on fairness and impartiality. Today, with the new protocol, we take the first steps in repairing that damage," she says.

The protocol adopts the principles and recommendations outlined in a study commissioned last year by the AFL. The so-called Sossin Report (titled: The Independent Board and the Legislative Process) outlined the need for a clear and transparent protocol regarding interactions between the LRB and the Alberta government.

"The protocol announced today reflects, in a substantive fashion, the recommendations in the Sossin Report," says McGowan.

The protocol brings to an end the ongoing legal dispute between the unions and the LRB. The case was scheduled to go to the Court of Appeals this week. "This satisfied many of our concerns regarding the role of the LRB in drafting legislation," says Smith.

"We may still have some of the worst labour laws in Canada, but this protocol makes it clear that the Board's only role will be to interpret those bad laws, not help write them," McGowan concludes.

- 30 -

(Read the text of Gil McGowan's speech)

For more information contact:

Gil McGowan, AFL President Bus: (780) 483-3021 Cell: (780) 218-9888

Heather Smith, UNA President Bus: (780) 425-1025

The Alberta Federation of Labour has learned the Alberta Gaming and Liquor Commission (AGLC) has altered its policy regarding the hiring of minors to work in bars and lounges. Effectively immediately, bar and lounge owners can apply to use 12-17 year-olds in the kitchen area of their establishments.

The AFL received a copy of an email (dated March 15, 2007) widely distributed by the Canadian Restaurant and Food Services Association (CRFA) trumpeting the decision. An AFL staffer subsequently confirmed the change this morning with the AGLC's Executive Director of Regulatory Affairs. This follows the decision last year by the Alberta government to allow restaurants to hire 12 to 14 year-olds.

"Minors aren't allowed in bars, but they can toil away in the kitchens of bars. The logic of this is beyond belief," says AFL President Gil McGowan. "No one can convince me that a bar atmosphere is appropriate for a young teenager. Drunk patrons, worldly staff and alcohol sales add up to an adult environment, both in the bar and behind the scenes. It is no place for a 12-year old."

The AGLC indicates the change was made at the request of the CRFA due to their claims of labour shortages.

"The Alberta government has its priorities completely backward," says McGowan. "It is supposed to protect our kids, but instead it slavishly serves the self-interests of an industry with a spotty employment track record."

"Hiring 12-year olds to work in restaurants is indefensible enough. Hiring them to work in bars is a whole new level of appalling."

The AGLC says it will weigh the merits of each application, denying applications for employers who have breached their licenses in some way. "I�ll believe it when I see it," responds McGowan. "Where are the checks and balances?"

"Who will stand up to protect our young people from being exploited? Clearly not the Conservative government," McGowan concludes.

- 30 -

For More Information
Gil McGowan        Cell: (780) 218-9888

Striking workers at Palace Casino in West Edmonton Mall have won a major victory in arbitration, one that imposes a stinging penalty for flagrant employer misconduct. In an award issued yesterday regarding a grievance filed before the strike began, an arbitrator has awarded monetary damages to UFCW Local 401, and to the individual members at Palace Casino.

The ruling found that an employer ban on the wearing of union pins was discriminatory, and a deprivation of employee rights to freedom of expression and the union's ability to represent its members.  The arbitrator therefore awarded $10,000 to the union, $500 to each employee, and a further $1,000 to employees who were confronted in the workplace and ordered to remove their union pins.

The grievance stems from UFCW's campaign to become certified as the union representing workers at Palace Casino, after the employer withdrew an existing voluntary recognition of the union. The fact that a collective agreement was already in place, however, meant that employee rights were already protected by a contract. After hearing argument from both sides, the arbitrator ruled that:

"I find that the company's breach was committed intentionally to prevent employees from exhibiting support for UFCW. I believe that this was done in the hope that it would discourage Union membership and increase the likelihood that the Union's certification bid would fail."

Doug O'Halloran, president of UFCW 401 said: the award provides a big boost to the morale of the striking workers. "We've won an important victory with this grievance, and by sticking together we can win an even bigger one in this strike."

AFL President Gil McGowan agrees. "This ruling shows that employers can't get away with trampling over the Charter rights of their employees, at least not when there's a union in the workplace to defend those rights."

-30-

For more information contact:
Gil McGowan        Cell: (780) 218-9888