The Nine Hour Pioneers:
The Genesis of the Canadian Labour Movement
John Battye
"The automobile worker... asks that hours of labour be progressively reduced in proportion as the modern machinery increases his productivity."
Preamble at First UAW Constitutional Convention
South Bend, Indiana
April, 1936
Contents of this article:
After a recent meeting at one of our local union halls, a worker in his early forties stopped me and asked, "Will there be jobs for our kids?" He'd been reading the papers and hearing the news about a "jobless recovery" _ the economy was apparently in better shape, but the experts were warning us not to expect more full-time and decent jobs.
His question has no easy answer. Although there are good ideas and constructive policies around that could strengthen our economy and provide more jobs, it's becoming clear that this won't be enough. We have to do something more. And that something is reducing the average work time of full-time workers with no loss in pay.
The issue of reduced work time was always a basic part of trade union demands. But in recent times that emphasis has faded away. For reasons which include "jobs for our kids" _ but for many other reasons discussed in this pamphlet _ it's time to get the issue of reduced work time on the national agenda again.
Basil 'Buzz' Hargrove
President
CAW-Canada
| FACT |
|---|
| At the end of 1993, GM is shutting down to retool its car lines in Oshawa. When the workers come back to work, more cars will be coming off the line each day, but with 1,400 fewer workers.
|
For working people, getting more of their time back was always an issue. In some cases it was simply a matter of more personal leisure. In others it represented a demand for more family time. This demand included a desire for time to read, time for education. And a demand for time to carry out the responsibilities of citizenship _ time for involvement in local politics, time to participate in social change.
In 1870, a Canadian working in manufacturing had a 64-hour week. Craft workers led the fight for reduced work time and were joined by women in the textile industry and other labourers. The shorter workweek became a major focus of the labour movement and by the end of the Second World War, the 40-hour workweek was common.
Had that trend continued, we would have a 32-hour workweek today (for example, a four-day workweek of eight hours per day).
| FACTS |
|---|
| During the 1980s, Northern Telecom reduced the time to produce a telephone from 28 minutes to six minutes _ a 79 per cent decrease in labour time and fewer jobs. As one member put it, "Take the old phone ringer _ it's gone from 56 parts to one part produced off shore for 50›."
|
| Environmentalists argue that in order to provide everyone with a job, the economy would have to grow incredibly fast. The environment simply couldn't sustain it. The problem cannot be solved by growth alone. Reduced work time has to be part of any sensible strategy of sustainable development. |
| The reduced workweek in Germany created 250,000 jobs according to the ILO, (an international labour-government-business body that oversees international standards). By 1995, the 35-hour workweek will be the norm for IG Metall (the largest union in Germany) members including Ford and GM workers. The achievement came through a vigorous campaign launched by IG Metall in the 1980s. |
Reducing work time doesn't create more work. Rather, it redistributes existing work so new job openings are created; some people have more time off, others get the chance to work.
And instead of higher taxes on people working to support those unable to find adequate work, more would be working and sharing the tax load.
An average worker today is producing three times what he/she was producing half a century ago. This creates the potential for more leisure with the same pay, but the only increased "leisure" we're seeing is that of unemployment. Why not reduce the work done by full-time workers so there is more work available for others?
With each worker producing so much more today, we can have a cut in hours without a cut in pay. This means taking on the corporations to, first of all, get a larger share of what we produce. And second, it means changing our own priorities and taking more of what we can win from our employers in the form of reduced working time.
| QUOTE - UNQUOTE |
|---|
| "Both the industry and government have conceded that there is now a national imperative to reduce work hours in Japan to improve quality of life".
Automotive News March 16, 1992
|
The "typical" breadwinner of the 1950s has all but vanished. Today, both partners are now selling more of their total labour than ever before in order to make ends meet. Many single parent families are near the poverty line.
One Canadian study indicated that a family must work 65-80 hours per week today just to have the same standard of living provided by a single breadwinner who worked 45 hours per week during the 70s.
Selling extra labour outside the home puts extra pressure on the family: where's the time for daily chores, for taking care of sick children, for taking care of older parents? The issue here is both more time off to deal with these facts of daily life, and more flexibility in getting time when it's needed.
| FACT |
|---|
| In Sweden, the primary focus of reduced work time hasn't been jobs but the social needs of working people. In addition to 18 months paid parental leave, workers are entitled to 90 paid days per year for child care responsibilities. As well workers with pre-school age children must be given an option of part-time work.
|
| In Europe, workers commonly have one month's vacation by law | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Annual Vacation (weeks) after 1yr of Service | Workweek (hours) | Family Leave (weeks & percentage of earnings) | Family Leave (weeks & percentage of earnings) | |
| Country | By Agreement | By Agreement | Pregnancy | Parental |
| Germany | 5.5 - 6 | 35 - 40 | 14 (100%) | 78 (partial) |
| Denmark | 5 | 35 - 37 | 18 (90% to max) | 10 (90% to max) |
| Spain | 4.5 - 5.5 | 37 - 40 | 16 (75%) | 52 (unpaid) |
| France | 5 - 6 ~ (5 weeks by law) | 35 - 39 | 16 (84%) | 3 yrs (unpaid) |
| United Kingdom | 4 - 6 | 35 - 39 | 40 (6 wks + 12 wks partial) | none |
| Italy | 4 - 6 | 36 - 40 | 20 (80%) | 26 (30%) |
| Sweden | 27 - 40 days (5.5 weeks by law) | 35 - 40 | 78 total, 90% max + 90 days paid child care responsibility | 78 total, 90% days paid child care responsibility |
| Canada | 2 - 3 weeks (varies by jurisdiction) | 40 (below 40 in offices) | 17 (57%) | 24 (10 wks at 57%) |
Working time and self-development
You can't pick up a newspaper, or listen to an economist talking about the future of the economy, without being bombarded by the desperate need for greater workforce "training".
We can question some of the claims made for the benefits of training _ training, by itself, is not going to provide us with jobs or solve our economic problems. But we should also take advantage of the discussion around this issue to press for an agenda that develops the skills, capacities, options, and confidence of working people. Canada's record on providing training time for its workforce places it close to the bottom among major industrialized countries.
We have, for example, minimum standards on the right to an annual paid vacation each year. Why not legislate the right for all workers to have a week off for education/training each year? Like vacation time, this would create some jobs as workers who are away must be replaced. But it would also address a specific need and represent an investment in the future of our society.
Consider another example. Everyone likes to talk about the need to get workers more "involved" in their workplace and to "empower" them. Usually, this is more about getting workers to identify with the company's problems than about doing something for workers.
But why not, through negotiations or legislation, win a "right-to-know" for workers? Every day, the company would have to provide paid time for workers requiring specific information; computer skills, English as a second language, health and safety, union update, retirement planning and future corporate plans. Again, this would create new job openings to replace those off the job while also treating workers as more than just commodities who sell their labour.
Forms of reduced work time with no loss in pay:
| <> shorter workweek |
| <> adequate pensions for early retirement |
| <> time off for shift work |
| <> parental leave |
| <> increased vacation time |
| <> training programs |
| <> education and travel leaves |
| <> time off in lieu of overtime pay |
| <> extended long weekends |
| <> time off for child care responsibilities and elder care |
| <> rotating days off |
| FACT |
|---|
A training program of one day per month for airline workers would create 300 additional jobs in a workforce of 6,000. |
Nine Paid Personal Holidays (PPH) days for example at the auto majors would provide about 2,500 job openings.
|
each worker is so much more productive than ever before;
each family is now contributing more hours to the economy than ever before;
so many people are unemployed or underemployed and desperate for decent jobs;
there is a need for more time off to deal with family needs;
we want to develop ourselves as workers and as citizens...
why can't we do the obvious and logical thing: reduce the hours of work for those working full time?
The simple answer is that the corporate community wants to retain more of our working time for their own profits, while we have had neither the commitment to this issue nor the power to win back some control over our time. If we want to really take on this issue, we can't do it without broadening support for reduced work time.
Can people be mobilized around reduced work time?
Our own history suggests an emphatic "Yes!". The history of the labour movement is, in one very real sense, a history of the fight for reduced work time.
Reduced work time has been and, especially in today's circumstances can be, an issue around which to build solidarity between our own members and the unemployed, with women's organizations and among environmentalists, and with young people who face so much uncertainty.
It's time to have a national debate on reducing work time.
Tel: (416) 497-4110
Return to main CAW
Digital Collections index page
Produced by the CAW Communications & Research Departments, 1993
205 Placer Court
North York, Willowdale, Ontario
M2H 3H9
Fax: (416) 495-6552