ALF V1

The Alberta government's decision today to expand the role for private health insurance will result in a less equal health system and millions of dollars in new costs for individual Albertans and Alberta businesses, says the new president of the Alberta Federation of Labour, Alberta's largest union organization.

"This government likes to brag about building the Alberta advantage. But what they've done today is exactly the opposite. They are creating an Alberta disadvantage," says Gil McGowan.

"They are setting up a situation where Alberta businesses will be on the hook for millions, maybe billions, in new costs for supplemental health benefits for employees. And individual Albertans are going to pay more too - either because they will have to pay for private insurance themselves or because they will be forced to pay higher deductible and co-payments under their employer's plans."

McGowan points out that Medicare has given Canadian businesses a huge advantage over their competitors south of the border. But he says that cost advantage will be eroded by the changes announced today.

"If the government thinks these changes are not going to increase costs for business, they are dreaming in technicolour," says McGowan.

"As a labour movement, our first preference is to maintain and defend the public system so everyone has access to high quality health care regardless of their income or where they work. But make no mistake - if the government creates a gap in coverage, we will bargain to fill that gap. And it won't just be us - employers won't have a choice but to fork out for extra coverage for much of their non-union staff as well, especially managerial and professional staff. The end result will be one big price tag for Alberta business."

McGowan says he doesn't understand how Alberta business leaders can allow their allies in government to make a decision like this - one that so clearly makes no business sense.

"Obviously, these guys in government can't be left unsupervised. It's time for someone to take them out to the woodshed."

- 30 -

Hundreds of Fort McMurray workers are expected to rally tonight to send a message to the Conservative government and to Oilsands Companies that the boom in Alberta needs to be shared among all Albertans. The rally coincides with the visit of many Conservative MLAs to tour Fort McMurray.

"Tonight's rally is an event organized by local workers who are frustrated with recent developments in the Oilsands projects," says Alberta Federation of Labour President Gil McGowan. "It is sending a message that Alberta is built by workers, and that workers deserve a fair share of the economic prosperity."

At issue are attempts by oilsands companies to lower wages and working conditions at their mega-projects north of Fort McMurray. Three strategies are being employed: use of employer-friendly unions willing to sign sweetheart deals, use of non-union contractors, and the threat of importing temporary foreign workers.

"At a time of record profits for energy corporations, instead of sharing the growing pie, these companies are trying to trim the edges of the workers' piece," says McGowan. "This is about their greed and the rights of workers to receive a fair share."

"And the government has been actively supporting this effort to bust unions and drive down wages, through the use of rarely used provisions in the Labour Code," adds McGowan.

"In the past, all oilsands construction was built using union labour � not because the employers liked unions, but because unions were able to provide high quality workers who could get the work done," observes McGowan. "The unions are still keeping their end of the bargain, but the employers are breaking it.�

"The rally is to let MLAs and the big energy companies know that workers won't take this lying down."

- 30 -

Gil McGowan, President of the Alberta Federation of Labour, June 29, 2005

We're here today because a crime has been committed.

Laws that were supposed to protect workers have been broken.

Rules that were supposed to compel companies to honour the contracts they sign were trampled on.

As a result of these violations of the rules, these failures to observe the letter and the spirit of the law, jobs have been lost, careers have been interrupted, families have been forced to endure unexpected and undeserved economic hardship.

To make matters worse, the villains in the story didn't act alone - they had accomplices.

And those accomplices were people who - in theory at least - the workers were supposed to be able to rely on.

Unfortunately, this is not some prime-time crime drama that you might see on TV. This is real life.

The bad guys in this story are the managers at Finning - and their accomplices are the Labour Relations Board and the provincial government.

We're all familiar with what's gone on here.

The business we see in front of us today is a testament to the mean-spiritedness of one employer and the complete inadequacy of our province's labour and labour relations institutions.

Finning bankrolled OEM. Finning owns most of the stock in OEM. Finning provided OEM with most of its business.

But the Labour Relations Board, in its wisdom, says OEM is different from Finning and is not bound to honour any of the contracts negotiated by Finning.

They also saw nothing wrong with OEM signing a new deal with CLAC even before this building was finished - and even before workers had been hired.

How much can you trust a so-called union that is hand-picked by the employer?

We all know this is a shell game. For all intents and purpose, OEM is Finning. All that's happened is that they've moved down the street and put up a new sign.

The goal of this superficial identity change has been clear from the beginning. This wasn't about contracting out or doing business differently. This was about breaking a duly negotiated contract. This was about breaking a real union and replacing it with a lap dog association that was more to the employers liking.

One important point that needs to be made is that these kinds of tactics would not have been allowed in any other Canadian jurisdiction.

In any other province, Finning would have been slapped down, found in violation - and you would be working inside as proud members of IAM.

Even here in Alberta, the law says that employers can't simply change their address or change their name to get rid of a duly elected and duly constituted union.

But our government wrote its laws badly and they tipped the playing field in favour of the employer. And our Labour Relations Board has abandoned all pretext of being object - they've bent over backwards and tied themselves in knots trying to find ways to justify what Finning has done.

The LRB is supposed to be a watchdog. But it's clear they're a lap dog - one that Finning has on a very short leash.

So where do we go from here? The message that we need to send today is that we're not giving up. IAM is continuing to fight this unjust situation in the courts. The AFL and all of our affiliates will continue to support them in that effort.

But we have to go further. If we let Finning get away with this, it's just a matter of time before another employer tries the same shell game.

So we need to support IAM. We need to fight CLAC whenever they slither out from under their rocks. And we need to make this a political issue - so working people understand that this is what Tory government brings us.

Today, they were supposed to be having a grand opening here. Ralph Klein was supposed to be in there celebrating with corporate types who have broken the letter and spirit of Alberta law - the laws that the Premier is supposed to protect and uphold. But they're not inside. We chased them away. That's a step in the right direction - but we still have a lot more chasing to do.

In conclusion, I want all of you to know that the AFL and the rest of the labour movement are behind you in this fight.

We all have a stake - because if Finning is able to get away with this kind of union-busting - then no working people in this province are safe.

That's why we're here for you today and that's why we'll continue being with you as you continue your fight.

Good luck and thank you.

EDMONTON - As of June 3, 2005, Alberta employers can now legally hire 12, 13 and 14-year olds to work in restaurants, the Alberta Federation of Labour revealed today. In a quiet policy change, implemented without public debate or discussion, the Alberta government decided to allow for a blanket exemption to the Employment Standards Code for the entire restaurant industry. Previously, a person had to be 15-years old to work in a restaurant.

"With the stroke of a pen, the government has created a new type of child labour in this province. 12-year olds can now serve you your Big Mac, or prepare your salad," says Gil McGowan. "What's next? Letting 10-year olds work on construction sites?"

"It is particularly appalling that a change of this magnitude was made without public consultation, without debate and without notice," McGowan adds.

"Allowing 12-year olds to work in restaurants is not in the child's interest, it is not in the customers' interest, and it is not in society's interest. Kids that young should be doing two things - going to school and playing," observes McGowan. "There is plenty of time in life for working, why are we in such a rush to push children into the workforce?"

McGowan said the real motivation for the policy change is clear - propping up the interests of restaurant operators.

"Restaurant employers are having a hard time finding adults willing to work for the low wages and lousy conditions they offer, and rather than raise their wages, they get the government to create a whole new pool of vulnerable workers."

The old policy prohibited children under 15 from working, except in select jobs such as newspaper carrier or odd jobs in an office or retail store. If an employer wanted to hire an adolescent (12-14), they needed to get a special exemption for that individual from the Director of Employment Standards.

The new policy now allows restaurants to hire adolescents without permission, if they meet certain safety and consent requirements. This is the first time employment standards have provided an industry-wide exemption to the age limit. (A copy of the new policy is available at www.gov.ab.ca/hre/employmentstandards.)

"The supposed safeguards are nothing of the kind," says McGowan. "They are paper tigers that will do nothing to protect these children against abuse, exploitation or danger." McGowan points out the 'requirements' are that the employer must fill out a checklist, and get the consent of the child and their parent.

"A 12-year old is not in a position to defend themselves against employer abuse. They have no way of recognizing a safety hazard, or understanding their rights," McGowan argues. "We have created a situation where young children are being put in very vulnerable positions. It's a recipe for exploitation."

"Is this the Alberta Advantage?" McGowan asks. "Child labour in our restaurants? I don't think this is what Albertans want."

- 30 -

For more information contact:

Gil McGowan, AFL President at 780.915.4599 (cell) or 780.483-3021 (wk)

EDMONTON - Industrial construction sites will be less safe, and the lives of workers could be at risk if the Minister of Advanced Education confirms a change of regulation recommended yesterday by the Alberta Apprenticeship and Industry Training Board, says the Alberta Federation of Labour (AFL). The AFL is Alberta's largest labour organization, representing over 113,000 workers and their families.

The Apprenticeship Board has recommended that the Minister of Advanced Education, Dave Hancock, approve a reduction of the ratio of journeymen to apprentices on job sites in selected trades. The new rules will require only one journeyman for every one apprentice (1-to-1 ratio) for ironworkers, boilermakers and pipefitters. The previous rules required three journeymen for every apprentice (3-to-1 ratio).

"The proposed new ratio of journeymen to apprentices will weaken safety on construction sites, and could put lives at risk," says AFL President Gil McGowan. "The 3-to-1 ratio is a longstanding arrangement that ensured two things: quality training of apprentices and adequate supervision to ensure safety on the worksite. Both of these things are undermined with this decision."

During consultations over the change, representatives from both employers and labour argued against reducing the ratio. "The Apprenticeship Board is ignoring sound advice from the people doing the work. If the Minister simply rubber stamps their recommendation, more workers will get hurt."

The real reason for the decision, McGowan says, is to help a minority of well-connected employers who are looking for ways to lower their labour costs. "Apprentices work cheaper than fully ticketed tradespeople. The reason for the reduced ratio is to allow for fewer journeymen and more apprentices - lowering the employer's wage costs."

"It is clearly an example of putting profit ahead of safety."

McGowan says the new ratios might be appropriate for residential or small commercial construction, but are dangerous for large, industrial projects. "Industrial projects are complex jobs requiring high levels of skill and experience. Workers are often spread out and can be ten or fifteen minutes away from their apprentice. A 3-to-1 ratio builds in multiple contact points for an apprentice. With 1-to-1, what happens if something goes wrong?"

"Ignoring stakeholders while blindly doing the bidding of their corporate friends. This is classic Alberta Tory policy-making - and workers will pay the price," concludes McGowan. "I urge Minister Hancock to refuse this ill-advised regulatory change."

- 30 -

For more information contact:

Gil McGowan, AFL President at 780.915.4599 (cell) or 780.483-3021 (wk)

The Conservative government needs to stop living in an ideological past that no longer exists and support a national child care program, says the Alberta Federation of Labour (AFL) today. The AFL President was participating at news conference with Public Interest Alberta to pressure the provincial government to sign a deal with the federal government on child care. The AFL is Alberta's largest labour organization, representing over 113,000 workers and their families.

"The Conservatives need to pull their heads out of the sand and realize that the 'leave-it-to-beaver' era is over and that most mothers simply can't afford to stay home full-time with their kids," says AFL President Gil McGowan. "54% of families with pre-schoolers have both parents working. There is a great need for quality, affordable child care in this province."

The new reality that families need two incomes to make ends meet, McGowan points out, means the government has a responsibility to the 117,000 families needing child care. "And that responsibility is to ensure a strong supply of affordable, high quality child care spaces."

McGowan says that government arguments claiming parents don't want centre-based child care don't stand up to scrutiny. "First, there are not enough spaces currently available. Second, if you have to pay $600 to $700 per month per child, quite frankly that is more than most Albertans can afford. It is not a real choice."

McGowan challenges the government to test their ideological assumptions. "If you build affordable child care, they will come. That is why we cannot afford to squander this historic opportunity. The province needs to sign a deal with the federal government as soon as possible - one that provides for adequate funding for non-profit, affordable, high-quality child care."

McGowan also raised the issue of low pay for child care workers. "Child care workers are the backbone of the system, but we pay them the same as people who pump gas. That needs to change." McGowan points out that early childhood educators earn $10.37 an hour on average.

"If we ever hope to build a real child care system in this province, one that parents can have confidence in, then we are going to have to accept the idea that we need a public system that is generously funded, and that pays child care workers the wages they deserve," McGowan concluded.

- 30 -

For More Information

Gil McGowan, President, 915-4599 (cell)

The Alberta Federation of Labour, the province's largest labour organization, responded to the Supreme Court decision on health care today by urging governments to focus on the real problem, and not set up costly and inefficient private tiers.

"The Supreme Court Justices were clear that the problem in the Quebec case was the length of the wait, not the ban on private health care," says AFL President Gil McGowan. "This is a message to both Alberta and the Federal government that they need to do more to shorten waiting lists."

"Privatization will only compound the problem."

McGowan expressed concern, however, that the Klein Conservatives will use the decision to hasten their own privatization plans. "Even though the ruling has no effect on Alberta, I am worried that the Premier will use it as fuel for his privatization engine."

The Klein government has tried on repeated occasions to push greater private involvement in health care, usually to be told by Albertans they want no such thing. Private experiments, such as cataract surgery, have resulted in longer waiting lists in private facilities. "Albertans need to be vigilant in the coming months, and be ready to give a clear 'no' to Ralph Klein. We will be putting our membership on alert."

McGowan notes that the Justices note that private delivery will not solve the waiting list problem. In her reasons, Justice Marie Deschamps says "the relief sought by the appellants does not necessarily provide a complete response to the complex problem of waiting lists" (paragraph 100). This sentiment is echoed throughout the judgement.

"This is not a decision endorsing private health care. To the contrary, it is more of a repudiation of a decade of budget cutbacks and tight-fisted fiscal policies," notes McGowan.

"The right to reasonable access to health care is clear - now it is up to our governments to live up to it by properly funding Medicare," McGowan concludes.

- 30 -

For more information contact:

Gil McGowan, AFL President at 915-4599 (cell)

EDMONTON - In a key decision released today, the Alberta Labour Relations Board has, once again, proven itself little more than a lapdog for big business, says Gil McGowan, the new president of the Alberta Federation of Labour.

"The Board today reversed its earlier decision that found Finning Canada and O.E.M. Remanufacturing were common employers and that the International Association of Machinists (IAM) Lodge No. 99 had successor union rights to the operations of O.E.M.," said McGowan.

"If this results stands, 160 long-term Finning employees are going to be out of work - and their families are going to suffer the consequences."

According to McGowan, the situation began when Finning built a new remanufacturing plant in Edmonton, but thinly disguised its complete ownership of that plant in order to avoid its responsibilities to its current union and current employees.

"By reversing its original decision that the two employers were in fact the same entity, the Board has legitimized Finning's actions which include signing a deal with a different employee group at the new plant, and laying-off and replacing the employees in their current rebuilding facility," said McGowan.

The Board could only reach its current position by pretending that Finning International and Finning Canada - a wholly-owned subdivision of Finning International � were two different entities, claimed McGowan.

"The Alberta Labour Relations Board has once again jumped through hoops in order to get to an employer-friendly decision," charged McGowan. "This is a good example of why working people and unions have no faith or trust in the Board any longer. To say that Finning International and Finning Canada are separate entities flies in the face of past precedents and run counter to common sense."

The real relationship between Finning and OEM was recognized by the LRB in its original ruling and can be summarized as follows:

• Finning Canada, a division of Finning International, pays the total costs for the construction of the new O.E.M. component rebuilding centre.
• Finning provides all of the money for the creation of O.E.M. - financing the purchase of two existing independent firms.
• Finning International controls all of the Class A shares in the parent company for O.E.M.
• Finning contracts all of its rebuilding work to O.E.M., announces it will be shutting down its own facility and dismissing the workers.
• The "new" company signs a union contract with the Christian Labour Association of Canada (CLAC) leaving IAM Lodge 99 and its members out in the cold.

"The Alberta Labour Relations Code section 46 was clearly written to prevent employers from evading their union responsibilities and the rights of workers by simply starting up a new company," concluded McGowan.

"But now the Alberta Labour Relations Board charged with enforcing the Act is actually undermining the intent of that Act. This is a betrayal of working people, plain and simple. If there ever was any doubt where the LRB's real allegiance lies, those doubts have been put to rest. With this decision, the LRB has proven that they are not really an impartial referee in matters of labour relations."

-30-

For more information contact:

Gil McGowan, AFL President  at 915-4599 (cell)

Three Issues Intertwine to Create Powderkeg in Fort McMurray

In recent weeks, Albertans' TV screens and newspapers have flickered with trades workers rallying, marching and protesting against "foreign workers" in the oilsands. One woman walked from Fort McMurray to Edmonton to highlight the problem. The stories never garner the front page, but the issue doesn't seem to be fading away either.

Quite understandably, most Albertans are probably scratching their heads wondering what all the fuss is about? Is this just a group of privileged unionists using xenophobia to keep out newcomers? Or is this a case of employers finding new ways to undercut their wage costs? How is a citizen to make sense of it all?

This is a complex issue that has become oversimplified. As a result, the real issues are being drowned out by a cacophony of charged rhetoric. It is time to take a step back and look at what is really involved.

It is really three issues that intertwine to create a labour relations powderkeg in Fort McMurray.

By Jason Foster
AFL Staff
June 2006

On June 3, 2005, Alberta earned the distinction of being only the second province in Canada to allow 12 year-olds to work in restaurants without a special permit. It did this without consultation, without debate and without informing Albertans about its potential impacts.

Alberta has also earned itself the dubious distinction of being in contravention of the International Labour Organization's Convention #138. This convention is supposed to help prevent child labour in under-developed nations. It says that for general occupations, the minimum age of employment should be 15 years of age, and 13 years of age for "light work". Regardless of whether one considers serving tables "light work", the new rules contravene the ILO Convention. (Unfortunately, Canada refuses to ratify this convention, meaning there is no way to enforce its provisions.)

The question Albertans need to ask is "how young is too young?" Do we want our children working in kitchens and serving tables at the ages of 12, 13 or 14? What does a law permitting 12 year-olds to work in restaurants say about our priorities as a province?

These are valid questions - questions the government has few good answers for. The government claims the change was a technicality, not really changing things for adolescents in Alberta. In one respect they are right, but they are missing a much bigger picture.

Before June 3, a restaurant owner could apply to the government for a permit to employ adolescents. This system, while not ideal and needing to be revoked, at least provided two layers of protection for the child. First, the government had an opportunity to review the employer's record. Do they abide by employment standards rules? What is their safety record?

Second, they had the opportunity to send an inspector to the workplace to check up on the employer, to make sure they were meeting the requirements of the permit. These checks could at least prevent the worst excesses of some bad employers.

The government admits they never did this, and had become a rubber stamp for permit applications. This is not a reason to scrap the permits. It is a desperate call to enhance enforcement of Employment Standards. The government responds to its indefensible inaction by loosening rules, not tightening enforcement.

Under the new system, even those two protections disappear. Now any restaurant owner can hire adolescents without asking government approval. This means the government will no longer have any clue where the children needing protection are. You can't help someone you can't find.

More importantly, the government is sending a message to employers. The permit system created a series of hoops to be jumped that made hiring 12 year-olds the exception, rather than the norm. Creating an industry-wide exemption says that hiring adolescents is business as usual.

The government acknowledges that the restaurant industry is one of its most problematic. It receives more complaints about employment standards violations than any other industry. Why are we giving a carte blanche to employers who can't demonstrate they know how to treat adults fairly, let only kids?

This is quite simply not acceptable. In a province as rich as ours, we do not need to send our kids out to work at such a young age.

The big picture the government is missing is that as a democratic society, we get to decide what our bottom lines are. And I would suggest most Albertans would agree 12 years-old is too young to work in a restaurant. That is our bottom line.

What can we do about it now, you might ask? Good question.

This change was made without consulting Albertans, but it was also made without the knowledge of our provincial politicians. Most MLAs had no idea this exemption was made. I believe it is time for them, as our elected representatives, to weigh in. They have a right to demand the decision be reversed. And you have a right to phone your MLA to demand that they do this.

Albertans concerned about 12 year-olds working in restaurants need to phone their local MLA, ask them if they knew about this, and demand they push to reverse the decision. Tell them 12 years-old is too young to work in restaurants.

If we band together, we might be able to protect our kids.

Byline: Gil McGowan
AFL President