The following text may have been generated by Optical Character Recognition, with varying degrees of accuracy. Reader beware!

PAGE 4, WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 25,1982, WHITBY FREE PRESS whitby Voice of the County Town Michael Ian Burgess, i The only Whitby newspaper independently owned and operated by Whitby Publisher - Managing Editor residents for Whitby residents. bllshed every Wednesday by M.B.M. Publishing and Photography Inc. Phone 668-6111 The Free Press Building, 131 Brock Street North, P.O. Box 206, Whitby, Ont. MICHAEL J. KNELL Community Editor ELIZABETH NOZDRYN Advertising Manager Second Class Mail Registration No. 5351 "No concessions"speils trouble for us al Last Sunday morning, the members of Locàl 222 of the United Auto Workers voted 92 per cent In favor of strike action If current contract negotia- tions with Generai Motors of Canada are not suc- cesful. Ironically, we were told last week by ap- parently informed sources that that figure (92 per cent) would be the announced result of the vote. Anyway, that means, in essence, that on Sep- tember 14, Durham Region could be in for an economic crunch that it has not experienced in over 10 years. The members will strike because they believe in their union leadership's "no concession" stand. U.A.W. leaders have often made press headlines proclaimIng they will not "go backwards." They have said that they have fought hard to win the standard of living that their members are ac- customed to. Weil, no one can really argue that for the facts speak for themselves. For this newspaper, the accompanying cartoon says it all. If the union leadership and the manage- ment of General Motors cannot reach an agree- ment, it looks as though 16,000 people will be out of work whether it be because they are walklng the picket line or on temporary or permanent lay- off. And, frankly, this isn't necessary. - The facts of life in this situation are more than evident. In the United States, for example, the U.A.W. agreed to accepta concessionary package in exchange for Job security. However, the Cana- dian U.A.W. ls having no part of this. One really has to ask, "Why?" Perhaps both G.M. and the U.A.W. should exa- mine the situation at Inco Mines in Sudbury. There, the union won a large wage and benefit in- crease in their collective agreement and now the vast majority of their workers are collecting unemployment insurance benefits (or welfare) simply because the company does not have the contract extended for a one-year period after whIch, the economy will be re-assessed and new negotiations entered into based on that know- ledge. This Is fine as far as it goes, but It does not go far enough. On the other hand, G.M. of Canada Is seeking the same kind of concessionary package that its American parent corporation woqn with the American arm of the U.A.W. From the corporate standpoint, this is a reasonable expectation. It also seems that the Canadian "Big Three" (G.M. Included) have failed to adapt their demands to the different, Canadian situation. The situation in this country is different, because the governments of Canada and the United States have embarked on a totally differen- t econonmlc policy. What works In the U.S. may not necessarily work in Canada. If the U.A.W. Is as interested in social responsi- I think it's time we recognized the fact that we're get- ting a new breed of Canadian diplomat. I would suggest, respectfully, that the bravery of our Embassy staff in Beirut and Nairobi during the recent conflicts is more worthy of a little nationalistic excitement than a Canadian victory in the Miss Universe contest, or even the last time we beat the Russians in hockey. I was in South Vietnam when a Canadian transport took off carrying a government car, but none of the Embassy's frightened Vietnamese employees. The reason given was that the Government of South Vietnam had refused such people exit visas, that the Canadian representative was still accredited to that govemment, and that Canada officially could not condone or facilitate illegal acts. Perfectly correct, of course,.but fortunately, it did not, a few years later, reflect the thought processes of the Canadian ambassador to Iran, Ken Taylor. Knowing that there were people like Mr. Taylor in Extemal Affairs went a long way towards restoring my faith in a passport which I held with some misgiving after my Vietnam experience. Theodore Arcand, the Canadian Ambassador to Lebanon, and his very tough staff, have restored it even more. I think it's unfortunate that the Lebanese experience has made the Ambassador so anti- Israeli, but I can understand it, for a number of reasons. The stubborn fury of the Lebanese invasion has made it tough all-over for people who support Israel. And I can say from personal experience that there isnothing imper- sonal about a sheil or a bomb or a bullet slung in your direction. You tend to regard the people who fired it or dropped it as one of the enemy. Mr. Arcand and his team have now been moved out of course, and one of the two Lebanese staffers who stayed behind to man the telephones and keep the fines of communication open has been killed in the midst of a so-called ceasefire. But the ,spirit of the Embassy staff in Lebanon appears to be catching. Our High Commissioner in Kenya, Frank Miller, says the Canadian officials braved small arms and mor- tar fire in Nairobi over a weekend to ensure that all Cana- dians were safe during the attempted coup there. One Canadian diplomat, Frank Macînnes, was hit in the leg by a ricocheting bullet during an assault on a Nairobi hotel. But once he'd been treated, he continued with the job of rounding up Canadian strays. lt's easy to understand, in this day and age, why the romance of postings in ex- otic places is wearing a bit thin. The wonder is that Cana- dians are still willing to serve in such places, and I think we owe them a little gratitude. That's not news but that too is reality. financial resources to meet the terms of the con- tract on along-term basis. The local economy of Sudbury ls literally at a standstill. . There ls no growth, there ls no pros- perity, there ls no job creation, there ls literally nothing. However, the U.A.W. ls correct in its assess- ment of the federal government's economic policy. High interest rates are not an Inducement for the purchase of new cars. The government's anti-inflation policy does not create new jobs. It aiso does not keep people employed. Business cannot afford the price of money, so obviously, business Is not creating jobs which creates more taxpayers which creates a demand for more goods and service, including cars. But, the U.A.W.'s current course of actlqn will not solve this problem. After ail, General Motors is probably as opposed to high Interest rates as they are. So, why ls the U.A.W. and G.M. working against each other? (From where we sit, it appears as though one is as bad as the other.) Information given to this newspaper indicates that the U.A.W. merely wishes to see their current bility as they claim, then they should realize that a strike, lock-out or mass lay-off will have a devastating affect on the rest of the community. After ail, a member earning $65 a week strIke pay ls not going to be an active consumer In the local market. Therefore, local businesses will suffer and the people (who are also workers) will aiso suffer. This argument also applies to the manage- ment of General Motors. Surely, it would be better to earn a few dollars a week less in wages and benefits In return for job security. At least, the people who work at G.M. will continue to be active members of the local economy and everyone involved will continue to be employed. After the government's economic policies have been turfed out, then realistlc collective bargain- Ing can take place in the light of a vitalized Canadian economy. The trouble Is, it seems that both General Motors and the United Auto Workers spend too much time listening to themselves and not enough time listening to other voices in the com- munity and to each other.