Union battles union in dispute

By Dan Hilborn
Published March 5, 2005


The union-versus-union contract dispute that has shut down B.C. Government and Service Employees' Union (BCGEU) offices across the province for the past two weeks is becoming a little more heated.

BCGEU president George Heyman is refuting allegations that his union is urging its members to become strikebreakers.

"Those allegations are absolutely wrong. They're not factual," Heyman said Friday morning after the Communications, Energy and Paperworkers filed a formal complaint with the Labour Relations Board claiming that a BCGEU member did CEP work when he oversaw a contract ratification meeting in Fort Nelson on Wednesday.

"It's disappointing to see that a proud union like the BCGEU is encouraging its own members to become scabs and do the work of people who are on strike," Randy Pearson, president of CEP local 467 said in the press release. "The BCGEU has eight excluded employees, including four directors. If there is work that must be done during the strike, they are the ones who should be doing it."

But Heyman said the union member in question, who serves on a local bargaining committee, was only acting in accord with his own union contract, which empowers him to conduct the meeting.

"His collective agreement says that he gets paid time off from his employer to conduct a ratification vote," Heyman said. "The CEP is stretching on this, and I'm sure the Labour Relations Board will reject it.

"I would urge the CEP to spend less time spreading loose allegations about our behaviour and more time coming to the bargaining table with us."

Heyman noted that the BCGEU has offered to bring in a fact finder in an effort to restart talks with the CEP.

The strike-breaking claim is not the first bit of controversy in the union versus union dispute, which began on Feb. 18 when approximately 120 BCGEU staff representatives walked off the job after five months of unsuccessful negotiations.

Earlier in the week, the CEP issued another press release lambasting the BCGEU for allegedly allowing non-union security guards to cross the picket lines at their union headquarters on Canada Way.

Heyman said the incident was the result of a misunderstanding after the unionized security firm hired by the union used the services of a subcontractor who did not understand the terms of their agreement.

"We had retained a unionized form and gave clear instruction that they were only to guard the building when the picket line was down," Heyman said.

"As soon as we found out, we immediately ordered them not to subcontract, and not to patrol except at times when the CEP is not picketing."