Tree Planter Union?

[GRANDSPECIAL]

With all the horror stories of quitting and being left in some-town-somewhere, unfair wages, free work, injuries, diminishing tree prices (the list goes on). Why haven't any disgruntled planters attempted to form a union yet?

Do any of you have stories about planter-camp sit-ins? What are your worst labour rights stories from the bush?

[Scooter]

Several attempts have been made throughout the years. To my understanding, there are two main reasons why they failed, and why future attempts would probably also be doomed:

1. Planting is based on piece work. It's a complete dichotomy with the concept of union-based labour. Unionization would presumably influence a "balancing" of compensation within the financial system of the reforestation industry. Everything has to come from somewhere. You want to get paid for travel time when driving between contracts? Sure, it'll just mean that there's less money for the tree prices. And lowering the tree prices hurts the fastest planters the most, and the fastest planters are usually the most senior and have the most influence, so they would resist any changes that would reduce the tree price. Say that paying everyone $200 for driving time when moving a camp from BC to Alberta means that an average of a cent per tree gets taken off the tree price for the trees on the next contract, which works out to an average of twenty thousand tree per person. But for a fast vet who plants thirty thousand trees on that next contract, they're losing $300 to gain $200. The entire planting industry is built upon the foundation that if you work hard, you'll make more money, and any changes to the system which have a negative impact on the functioning of that reward system will meet resistance. I mean yes, there are ways around it, by getting every contractor to bid higher, but that's a losing cause.

2. Planters are apathetic. Who cares about unionization if would take two years before a full industry-wide unionization system was able to be implemented, and during that time, two-thirds of the workforce moved on. Probably at least 80% of planters tell themselves that they want to and are able to find better work next year, and certainly won't still be planting two years down the road. Hell, I've even been telling myself that I'm going to retire in two years. In fact, I've been telling myself that for the last seventeen years.

I'm not opposed to the concept of unionization, I'm just not motivated enough to care if it happened or not, and I don't think it could happen based upon the current compensation structure of the industry.

Oh, and another minor thing, most established unions in North America have probationary periods where "new employees" are not considered full union members for a year or two. That means that you pay your annual union dues (say $200 or whatever) and are NOT eligible for most if not all benefits that employees with seniority are able to receive. And since planters get hired fresh every year, they'd always be considered to be in that low-class category where you pay your dues and don't get anything out of it. So external unions that come in to try to organize the industry will kind of gloss over that little point, and when planters realize, they see the dues as a big cash grab with no real benefits. This isn't necessarily always going to be the case, depending on the union, but it would be accurate for some of the big North American unions. I was on a union-based planting job in Alberta for a few years once, and we paid around $145 each summer at the time, and didn't get jack-shit for benefits.

[jdtesluk]

There was a drive to annex planting into unions several times in the 1980s. In both cases, they failed to bring the planters on board. Part of the failure was on the planters not wanting to come on board badly enough, part was the unions not understanding silviculture. Remember also, piece work is antithetical to unions in most cases.

Keep in mind that there has also been a cultural divide between silviculture and logging that drove a social wedge between planters and the union body that they would otherwise be most likely to join.

In addition to Scooter's point, there is the issue of seasonality of work, and the challenge of finding a structure that accommodates 8-10 month layoffs for the majority of workers. This seasonality is also the root of the "apathy" that he mentions, at least to some extent.

Planter-led efforts to unionize included CREWS (Canadian Reforestation and Environmental Workers Society). They tried hard and had a lot of support, and almost made a run of it. Unfortunately, they failed to identify key legislative clauses that would have enabled them to be more efficient and automatically unionize whole crews with only a portion of them signing on. They actually had significant support among many of the contractors that have stood up for worker protection in the past. Ultimately, CREWS was doomed by the sheer scale of the project they sought to take on. Michael Mloszeski put a lot of energy into it, and would be able to better explain the demise of crews, if were still here to tell the story (RIP).

There was also a few ambitious guys that talked loudly and made a bunch of empty threats and claims, while claiming to represent workers without ever actually obtaining widespread permission or support to do so. I won't name names, but none of them are respected in the industry. I even forget their name, it was like Canadian treeplanters something something. Anyway, point is, often there are people interested in starting a union that are no more scrupulous than the dodgy contractors that perpetuate the conditions which make a union desirable. Ultimately, a union take A LOT of work to organize, and someone has to do it. However, occassionaly there are people who think it is an easy way to make money not working, by representing those who work instead. This is not the case, and any such effort in planting is doomed.

On a broader scale, union membership in both forestry and blue collar industries has been in decline over the past 30 years. Union power now lies in the public sector and certain areas of service. Those that lead unions and have the resources and experience to create such bodies or annex existing ones know this, and pay little attention to forestry other than the mills. It is thus unlikely an outside body will ever come looking to unionize planters, as the IWA did back in the 1980s. Moreover, given the changing conditions of the industry, and the lack of improvement to allow long-term "professional" workers to say in the industry, it is unlikely that a movement internal to silviculture will come forth.

In lieu of unions, there is legislation, and the most viable way for workers to affect thier working conditions is through A) active assertion of their rights according to existing laws, and B) lobbying for legislative change, perhaps through partnership with key contractors or contractor associations (such as the WSCA). Many contractors in the WSCA have played a key role in the past in implementing legislation to protect workers and establish minimum guidelines for wages and conditions. Many of them also supported CREWS through its effort to grow. However, workers would still need some form of representation in order to interface with the organized body of silviculture (WSCA).
I should point out that the targets of change are not necessarily contractors. There are many aspects of forestry that directly impact workers that many people believe should be changed. Structuring of the bidding process for example. Just to be clear, worker conditions are not wholly determined by the employers, and there is a bigger picture of industry that affects worker conditions.

[Scooter]

the most viable way for workers to affect thier working conditions is through A) active assertion of their rights according to existing laws,

This is something that I can't stress strongly enough. Jordan's second point is harder for planters to take part in, but knowing your rights, and knowing how to proceed when your rights aren't being respected, is the first thing that a planter should be aware of. If you're being taken advantage of, and you don't speak up, nothing will ever get better.

If you want a bit of insight into some of the situation surrounding the 1990's attempts to unionize, which Jordan spoke about above, look through some of the newsletters and publications that are linked at the bottom of this page:

http://www.replant.ca/reference.html

Unfortunately, that's nowhere near a complete collection of publications, but hopefully over time some people who still have some of these buried in their libraries will be able to loan them to me to scan and put online.

[ryguy]

In the mid-90s, during a slow-down in logging and with IWA membership lagging, there was an attempt to enlist planters to "join" their union. Their offer was pretty pathetic. Whoever had IWA seniority would have 1rst dibs on work, regardless of planting experience. It was an ill-thought out "offer" and really just a slap in the face to Michael, who had put a lot of effort into bringing some sort of representation of tree planters to the table. The loggers back then really had no idea what we were about.

[Scooter]

Some more background can be found in the Ekers and Sweeney study which I've just attached to this post. Also, this information just came to me:

The second attempt by Michael Mloszeski and Ananda et al. started on a crew at Heartwood (originally Rothkop Contracting) when they were shut out of work in Alberni. They had finished in the Charlottes and come down for April work in Alberni for MacBlo. The Unionized harvesting work force was unable to work because of snow at elevation. Most if not all of the blocks were open but they were blocked by the IWA union. They had a clause in the Master Agreement that prevented contractors from working if the union was unable to work for any reason. The union boys planted some of the trees for a time. it was a fiasco.

The Union subsequently got weaker.

To add to the story of being shut out…the planters were furious. They went to the union to no avail. The union had to that point charged them 30 bucks to become members yet they were not protected or did they receive any benefits. It was an extortion fee. Rude fat Bastards!

So the crew worked for other crews and other companies for the month and then rejoined in the interior where Michael joined them from Timberline. He lived in Argenta and this was one of the long term jobs in his neighborhood. Meadow Creek Cedar. This must have been spring of ’96. The crew was full of great veteran planters from the Kootenays and beyond. A powerful crew. They were very stirred up by the experience in Alberni and with Michael and Ananda’s leadership away it went.

[Scooter]

I was able to dig up a couple documents about wage rates for tree planting in union-based environments. There are two graphics posted below, which show the Coast Master rates for 2007 to 2009. I think the current rate listed in the United Steelworkers documentation is around $27.92/hr, which works out to around $332 per day for a ten hour day, once you factor in overtime, vacation pay, and statutory holiday pay. Maybe the entire industry SHOULD join a union.

The second of the two graphics, the one referring to spacing and pruning, is quite old. I believe from the late 1990's. So by now, with inflation, those amounts should have increased by about a third.

[RPF]

Just a few corrections to Scooters last post:
As of June 15, 2013 the Steelworkers union rate for tree planters was $26.71/hr. They had a 2% wage increase in 2014 making that rate about $27.41/hr (plus benefits).

The spacing and pruning rates were based on a BC government program through Forest Renewal BC (FRBC) in conjunction with the IWA union at the time. The idea was for the silviculture industry to employ laid off forestry workers during the late 1990's when the pulp market crashed which had a significant impact on mill workers & loggers. The program was called New Forest Opportunity Program or NEWFO.

The concept was to employ laid off forestry workers to take part in a meaningful way to improve the value of future forests by spacing and pruning 15 to 20 year old plantations. The IWA union quickly jumped aboard and forced the government to hire these workers through the union. Through those consultations, NEWFO was born, and along with it all the bureaucracy that goes with it.

In my humble opinion, the original concept of increasing the amount of spacing and pruning was good. However, for all practical purposes, the way the program was implemented was doomed to fail from the start. With government of the day handing money out like there was no end, everyone wanted a piece of it (the union, the licencees, the workers, etc). In the end, very little spacing and pruning was actually accomplished. A lot of the money was spent on training the mill workers and many of them quit after seeing how tough the work is - so it was a revolving door with very few sticking it out. Then came the union bureaucracy which sucked up some money. The licencees saw this as a cash cow too. They would offer to hire these workers provided their administration payload was covered (of course you know that the admin portion was padded quite well).

In the end, the union and licencees made a substantial pile of money, and the workers that this program was original set to benefit really walked away with very little.

[Mike]

Does the steelworkers union actually plant any trees?

[RPF]

Does the steelworkers union actually plant any trees?

In strong union camps, yes they will. They will either "force" contractors to join the union, or force the licencee to hire laid off loggers if that's the only job available when guys are not working their regular jobs. It's not common, but I have heard of these things happening.

[Mike]

Within the last 5 years? How many trees were the contracts?

[GRANDSPECIAL]

To Scooter's first point, part i,

Hypothetically, if an informal agreement between the majority of workers in the industry was established which simply stated, "lets all claim overtime", eventually every contract in the country would have to be sold at a higher price tag. Claimed overtime would force the entire industry to adjust.

Those companies who forecast their revenue and cut their bid in order to win more contracts would essentially bury themselves. There would be no money to sustain themselves if they underbid their contracts and clients' workflow expectations would still have to be met in-order to avoid late fees, so making sure planters don't work overtime would be impossible.

Fixing this issue would be a huge step towards progress and would take very little effort and organization. Also, on a not so side note, it's our moral duty to inform our colleagues and employees of their rights when they're in the dark.

I know there are folks out there who are claiming overtime and making a killing but aren't letting anyone else know. Tree deliverers will work 14 to 20 hours in a day, at base rates (8 hours) of $180-200--you can do the calculation, that's a lot of unpaid time.

I don't know of a single company that does its due diligence in recording individual workers hours accurately, or informing workers of their right to overtime pay. If there's a company out there accounting for these lost hours, i'd love to know.

Giving planters and title-only managers, like tree delivers and tree assessors, overtime pay would increase the foreman and supervisor pay as well, and the contract value overall. Like I said, those companies who forecast their revenue and adjust their rate to win contracts next year would essentially go under -- standard rates must still apply.

It sounds really simple to me, find <a href="http://www.replant.ca">a suitable forum</a> that tree planters often visit, inform them of their rights, even give them some spreadsheets to work with (foolproof,) have, at least, the majority of tree planters, cooks, tree deliverers and tree assessors claim over time and watch the prices soar. If there's a dispute, let them take their issues to their respective labour boards themselves.

No parasites, just grass roots.

[Scooter]

it's our moral duty to inform our colleagues and employees of their rights when they're in the dark.

I agree. I wish a lot of vets at the rookie mills would point first-year planters at the ESB link on the main page of Replant. Here's the link:

http://www.replant.ca/employmentstandards.html

[Mike]

I know I'm usually the first person to jump up for proper employment standards and properly paying workers, but I'm not entirely certain how paying management more out of the bid price is going to help planters?

[Gingerplanter]

The reality is that many planters are part of the problem and not the solution. Anyone who is employed with a company that abuses the university students for employment is further diminishing our ability to gain traction in starting a union. Folklore, spectrum, Brinkman, apex, blue collar and any company that hires university planters not only lower tree prices, but they create a stoner summer camp environment that gives the industry a bad name. If you plant for a small contractor, you will actually learn how to plant instead of slutting them in rookie mill style.

If you need help liberating yourself, please PM me.

[jdtesluk]

Folklore, spectrum, Brinkman, apex, blue collar and any company that hires university planters not only lower tree prices, but they create a stoner summer camp environment that gives the industry a bad name.

OK- I agree with your point about some planters being part of the problem (through non-reporting), even though that is a bit hard on the workers that simply don't know, or don't have any options. However, your brush is a bit too broad here, and the big/small distinction is not always accurate. I've seen vets bury their heads in the sand about problems just as much as I have see rookies do nothing out of sheer lack of knowledge.

I've seen 12-pack operations cut just as many corners as the big players. In fact, when it comes to managing payroll, I would say the risks are higher with smaller operators that lack the capital to secure loans to guarantee worker wages in case of contract non-payment. I'm not saying big companies are the best, and certainly some of the economics of the industry are pinned most squarely on big players. However, I've seen some terrible practices among some small companies (Batlang anyone?, Khaira was only about 40 people), so don't think the company size tells you everything.

Hiring uni students does not equal stoner camps. Vet-heavy operations can be just as far down this road. Some companies with lots of uni-planters are adamantly strict about their no-drugs policy, and see it through.

Some of the companies that depend on uni-planters and new workers do an incredible job of training their workers to do the job right, and will fire planters that "slut them in". I've seen some sloppy vets out there too.

The problem is not found in broad blanket statements. I'm not saying there aren't problems. I'm just suggesting you consider where you're pointing that thing. Select your target properly. Shoot accurately. I fully support workers exercising their collective will.

[Mike]

@Gingerplanter, yet in another thread, you don't want planters even hearing the names of the best places to work (much less e-mails and phone numbers, I imagine). You want people to move away from bad companies? Be aggressive about giving people good solid information information about the good and bad places to work --- which has been my project for 8 years and gotten me damn little thanks.

[Gingerplanter]

@mike Those who go searching for recognition are in it for the wrong reasons;) Good job though, keep it up!

You should do more investigating because I have usually used this site to promote companies I work for.

[Mike]

I am not doing it for recognition, I'm doing it because I believe strongly in freedom of information. As for companies you actively promote, let's quote you from the top 5 planting companies thread;

1.Khaira
2.Batlang
3.Rock Reforestation
4.Bryan Adams
5.Osprey

My personal Favourites. And nothing beats a cigarette and a coffee for breakfast.

(and yes, reading through your history, I also see recommendations for Gainer and Bivouac, but some rookie that comes on here looking for good places to work is going to have a fun job of sorting through the obfuscation).

I think one of the biggest problems in this industry is that planters get to work at terrible companies because they're uncertain of where to move and what is better. I think the best way to shut down rookie mills is to make it incredibly easy for planters to be informed about what places are best and what places are worst. We've got the same final goal, but seriously, tell me about your well reasoned method and how you're helping to shape the industry in the way you like?

[theoderix]

I agree Mike, what is worse is that previously reputable companies are forced through economic pressure to join the fray.
Companies like Timberline, Zanzibar and Fieldstone are all trying to compete to keep their planters working. The Brinkman, Evergreen and Osprey will always be out there. Having to pay 2nd year planters is one thing, compensating 15 or more life long vets is another.

[Pandion]

What good is posting the contact info of the better companies if they don’t have enough work to take on new planters? The bigger issue is the bidding environment that currently exists. That won’t change until some companies bid themselves into oblivion. It could of course happen sooner if the workforce would organize a walkout at the start of the Spring season, but we know that will never happen.

[Jimbo the Mook]

It could of course happen sooner if the workforce would organize a walkout at the start of the Spring season, but we know that will never happen.

Why do we know that won't ever happen? Has anyone ever tried it before? It seems to me like this site, such as it is frequented by knowledgeable, professional treeplanters, is a great place to organize such a situation. Hmmm...

[Mike]

For all the "there is too little work for all the good planters who deserve it" type comments, I still have seen 5th + year vets at rookie mills who are sort of looking to move on but not sure where, and 2nd and 3rd year planters get hired on at very good companies --- because someone on the circuit told them that was where to be.

[Pandion]

I’ve seen it too Mike. Sometimes good companies even hire rookies, and as unfair as it may be to someone who has paid there dues working at a rookie mill for a few years, it’s not likely to change as these inexperienced planters are being hired because they have an in, not because there are no experienced planters applying to the better companies. We’re also only talking about an insignificant number of positions, so even if all the available positions at better companies were to go to the best planters coming from the rookie mills, it’s not like the rookie mills would be crippled by the loss. The good companies just don’t have enough work to take on a significant number of new employees every year.
Productive planters working at crappy companies is terrible for the industry, as these companies would not survive with an unproductive workforce, but these productive planters need somewhere better to go. For that to happen, the better companies need more work. From what I’ve observed, the better companies are actually losing work and having to bid less to keep whatever they can.

[Mike]

I don't think having an in represents the only situation where a newer planter ends up at a better company --- I think knowledge of where to look does play a role as well, and either way, that's the condition I'm capable of effecting, and thus I will.

[Gingerplanter]

I am not doing it for recognition, I'm doing it because I believe strongly in freedom of information. As for companies you actively promote, let's quote you from the top 5 planting companies thread;

1.Khaira
2.Batlang
3.Rock Reforestation
4.Bryan Adams
5.Osprey

My personal Favourites. And nothing beats a cigarette and a coffee for breakfast.

Turn on your sarcasm button.

[Mike]

You're missing the point. I get that it's sarcasm. I've been planting for 8 years. But ask my good friend who is thinking about planting for the first time and can't name a single planting company who is being sarcastic in that thread and who isn't, and her success rate is going to be far from 100%.