INDENTURED LABOR TO RETURN? 

Back in the 1880s indentured laborers were imported into Canada both to both the trans-Canada railroad and to provide labor for the forest industry. Immigrants from such countries as India and China got their first view of North America via the Port of Vancouver.

It took many lumberjacks to produce what today would be considered a small output. By the 1950s a typical B.C. coastal sawmill employed up to 1,000 people, considerably less than in earlier times. A modern mill cutting perhaps twice the volume of an earlier 20th century operation may employ only 100 people. The reduction in workforce resulted from the rather rustic "automation" introduced between the two World Wars. WW II provided the era of high-speed, high volume production.

With the high cost of raw materials today, companies are forced to focus on value instead of volume. What steps are required to make this possible? Sounds like going into reverse but the solution is to add more labor. But Canadian labor rates are among the highest in the wood world. So how is it viable when several factors make Canada a poor candidate for globalization?

Answer: set up a two-tiered labor structure. The original highlyskilled operators of the automation equipment do what they do best and stay at the high $30 hourly rate but the added value activity takes place in another company's plant that handles subcontracting at around $10 an hour. Higher value-added, higher productivity, but at less cost. It keeps the companies viable, but it also brings back indentured labor. What are the social consequences of such a twin-level society?

What are the other implications?. What is the next step? Will such operations follow the Japanese method where the main contractor, say Toyota, pays a high wage and benefit package to core employees, but out-source lower-skill jobs to sub-contractors who pay a considerably lower rate.

This has great potential for people in higher wage brackets. The new system allows the company to once more become economically viable, but on the backs of the lower paid, less-educated, unskilled employees. Few union members with more protected benefits offer stability and a secure future, but the smaller numbers reduce union strength.

It was believed that a high speed, high volume process was the answer. Now it appears that smaller volume with higher value-added input is the necessary road for the future.

What are the implications for towns with such an obvious chasm between different sets of workers established next door to one another? Could this be the new caste system of tomorrow?

* * *

< previous | chapter index | next >
back to Main Chapter Listing
back to Home Page