Let the contruction of the new refinery begin!!!!!
Friday, January 26, 2007
THE SHAWN GRAHAM GOVERNMENT SIGNS A DEAL WITH THE IRVINGS FOR A NEW REFINERY IN SAINT JOHN!!!!!
Every family household in the Saint John area < uncluding outline areas as far as 20 miles > will receive a dozen of these items per month for the next 25 years!!!!!
Let the contruction of the new refinery begin!!!!!
Let the contruction of the new refinery begin!!!!!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
59 comments:
As much as I disagree with large tax deals like the Irvings have received in the past, I must say that 5000 construction jobs and 1000 full time jobs when the refinery is completed is not to shabby for the citizens of Saint John who have been hurt in the past by the closure of the Shipyard and Lantic Sugar. Hopefully, the government will make sure that this refinery is as environmentally friendly as possible. I for one think this is a great thing for Saint John. Sorry I could not agree with ya on this one Charles!!
There is no deal in place and they are not starting the construction. GET YOUR FACTS RIGHT!!!
The only thing done is the application for the EIA (Environmental Impact Assessment) which Irving has to pay to get done.
take a deep breathe its going to be alright 11:45, relax, melow.
Construction jobs are temporary and lousy, remember to subtract the amount of unemployment when it concludes as well as the costs of those who are injured on the job. Likewise the number of actual employment varies who you talk to, people were saying the LNG terminal was going to create a hundred permanent jobs so Irving had to quickly burst that balloon and one report says it can be as little as eight.. Also, Irving is very hard on workers, just ask the people from the strike of 96.
Also, this means that it will be incredibly difficult to get new investment. Knowledge workers are in demand and have a lot more power over where they work, there's no way an investment office or service provider is going to go anywhere near Saint John, and I have a feeling that lots of small businessess will pack up and leave. The air in Saint John is already horrible and the Irvings regularly break environmental laws, to think that this one is going to be different is the ultimate in rose colouring your glasses.
A company like RIM won't go anywhere near a place like that, and they are currently hiring far more than will work at the refinery in a lot better paying positions. Another finacial services provider is setting up a backoffice which will also provide more jobs than a refinery. New Brunswick is quickly becoming a 'zone of sacrifice', type that phrase into your search engine to see what that means.
This is like the crack addict who pays for his next fix. By creating a small oppportunity now, it is ruining any chances for bigger things in the future. It's quite obvious the liberals aren't interested in the 'self sufficiency' idea for 2025 but are only worried about the next election. People will have short term work, but in the end it will hurt the city as it becomes increasing difficult to get any other investors. Irvings are well known to be very expensive investments.
My mistake.....your right there is no deal in place right now and no construction has begun. Honestly though Mr Anonymous do you think that the deal is not going to happen and there is going to be no construction? You might want to screw your head on a little tighter. This deal will happen and the work will begin. We may not all agree with it but it is going to happen!! In the future maybe leave a name not anonymous. As per the strike of 1996....well that was the unions getting a little greedy. Irving pays quite well to their employees and when workers get a little greedy when it comes to wages I don't blame them coming down with an iron ball. I am all for fair wages but sometimes people take things a little to far. By no means do I work for nor do I endorse any Irving Group company I just believe that occassionally people blame it all on the Irvings.
12:33 lets get the facts straight if it is a construction job, how long are they suppose to last for? It is building and creating something so why would the job last for a long time? Also if you don't want to work for the Irvings then don't show up to work there. They are the boss and if you don't like it don't go there. And how do you know how the wages will be, are you the foreman? Get the facts straight.
Construction jobs are temporary and lousy
tell that to the construction workers. pompous fool.
I have to say. I don't think we're in a position where we're turning away potential employers who want to come here yet are we? any new jobs that are not walmart or call centre jobs are great news. hate to say it, but unless wages rise or new jobs come, for a lot of people my age (mid 20s), the future may lie elsewhere at least if i want to pay down my student loan ever. I know that people in Toronto in my profession with equivalent education are making 2-3 times what I am making here.
Construction workers already know it. Not only do they have the highest incidents of accidents, they also have the highest on site mortality rate. They have almost no job security, and go to workers comp and ask some of those invalid workers just how well they are treated when they are hurt on the job. That it is temporary is obvious. There are also next to no government inspections of job sites to ensure companies are making job sites safe. And now they are going into High Schools to recruit workers.
Irvings do not pay workers that well. They pay comparible salaries to other companies...sometimes. At the strike of 96, workers were certainly not being greedy, go talk to one them to get your facts you pompous fool, they'll do what should be done and punch you in the *&^damn head.
Right after that strike every union knew how to behave, and the stevedores new contract was much much worse than similar jobs at other ports.
The media of course always says workers are 'getting greedy'. Far from it, as every New Brunswicker with a job knows how well they've got it. In the chipman lumber strike Irvings media reported that 'workers walked off the job' because they were being unreasonable. In reality they were locked out and Irving was telling them they want a THIRTY percent wage cut and higher productivity. Gee, how greedy is that, work harder for a little over half your salary? Again, go talk to those guys to see how 'greedy' they were. I know many of them and they would rightfully kick the living *&^% out of you for saying it.
People have families to feed and this isn't about 'working for Irving or not working for Irving'. The Irvings money is in Bermuda, if they want a refinery there that's their business and more profit to them. Last month the CBC had a picture of cleaning all the pollution off the roof of Harbour Station. This is about people wanting to make New Brunswick a place where there are good jobs and the province isn't a ()*(&^amn cesspool.
As for being anonymous, just post your name and address and I'll come to your house and show you my face-and my fist you rude *&^%.
"A company like RIM won't go anywhere near a place like that"
Halifax has an oil refinery...
anonymous 2:26 is a fine example of what can happen when you have no facts, no common sense, no ability to understand economics and a computer. But what would you expect from someone that posts threats anyway. From simple minds comes simple and sometimes disturbed thoughts.
2:26 to your reply, I am not upset how Irving handles there business. They own there own PRIVATE company and they can DO WHAT THEY WANT. If people don't like how they are being treated then they can go and find another company to work for. It can't be that bad as they employ thousands of people and hundreds retire every year.
As for construction workers, it is not only the employer that has to have a safe place to work but also the employee has to demonstrate these practices as well. Wages are always average with the Irvings and tell those people from the lumber yards that they were making more money then they should of and a cut had to be made to make it feesable.
And to threaten me with my point of view shows everybody that your not a very confident person but leave your email and i will contact you privately.
Halifax has an oil refinery, what it doesn't have is two and a pulp mill. This is about another Oil refinery, not just about Irving, but the fact that they regularly break unions and environmental regulations simply adds into it.
Forestry workers work their asses off, like I said, go talk to them and tell them they are being greedy. Far from it. Unions have been telling foresters like Irving and UPN that they have to modernize to value added products for over a decade but they refused to. And why would they, when the government will come up with a quarter billion dollar package to pay for it for them.
Nobody is being forced to work for Irving, that doesn't enter into it because they are forced to breathe the air, they are forced to live there. And workers do not have any power to refuse bosses orders because they will be fired and poor. That's like blaming coal miners because they got lung cancer.
The threat was a bit much and I'm sorry for that, but go read the comments and see who were being rude pricks. If you want to leave your email I'll gladly oblige you.
Saying 'this is going to happen' is no reason not to complain about it, whats the point of free speech if nobody ever uses it. People might as well shut down their blogs because 'things happen anyway'. That's not political reality, but it is a political manouver and Irvings media often stresses that to New Brunswickers that "there's nothing you can do", that's been programmed into your head, that people are powerless and so shouldn't waste their time with things like politics and the decisions that affect virtually every facet of their lives.
We hear that often against the natural gas pipeline people, but its strange we don't hear it nearly as much about the protestors at Passamaquoddy Bay. That is also 'going to happen', but nobody ever comments that this group is wasting its time, in fact many are trying to get the federal government involved.
If anybody has any real arguments by all means post them, just making insults doesn't exactly add to your point of view.
I have flip flopped on this issue and am now in favour of a 2nd refinery. I will welcome the 5000 workers, and when my property value skyrockets, I will sell my house and move to Fredericton so I don't die of lung cancer in this stink-hole of a city. F**k the Irvings!
Refineries are creating a national public health crisis.
* For years, a vast majority of the nation's refineries have evaded regulatory scrutiny, including compliance with basic provisions of environmental laws.
* Many refineries are concentrated in heavily populated urban areas and disproportionately impact low-income and minority communities.
* Refineries are the nation's major source of tons of toxic volatile organic compounds, like cancer-causing benzene, and chemicals which cause asthma and childhood development problems.
* Most refinery toxic air pollution is from product leaks in equipment not smokestacks. Technology to prevent these leaks has been widely available for decades, but oil companies refuse to invest in cleaner technologies.
* Refineries are also a source of large chemical releases during fires, explosions, upsets and spills. During these accidents, many thousands of pounds of dangerous chemicals can be released in a short period of time. These dangerous spills often dump chemicals into the communities around refineries causing health problems.
Firstly anonymous 7:02 had best look closely at whom is doing the insulting. Is your memory that short or just your learned opinion that you can make threats as long as you apologize after wards? As to real arguments where exactly are yours? Irving bashing isn't an argument, nor are ill defined suggestions of poorly paid workers. Where are your alternatives, tell us what your solutions are, then there might be something worth considering. Maybe you think we should shut down those mills, that would teach those filthy Irving's. Of course then they would have to send the mill workers home..and the woods workers...and the truckers...I doubt you would know a woods worker if one ran a skidder over you. So please feel free to enlighten us all in how things really should be done. In a way that doesn't involve coming to someone's door and punching them out that is.
Information from New Brunswick's Environment Department suggests the Irving Oil refinery's record on sulphur dioxide emissions is improving.
The number of hours that emissions have exceeded government guidelines so far this year is down significantly from last year, according to new statistics.
Sulphur dioxide emissions from the refinery in East Saint John were a big problem in 2005, leading Brenda Fowlie, the environment minister at the time, to order Irving to deal with the problem.
Recent statistics from the Department of Environment suggest the order is working.
In the period from September 2004 to September 2005, sulphur dioxide emissions exceeded government guidelines for 165 hours
rving must pay for letting oil run low
By DAVID GRAM
BW Exclusives
* McDonald's 24/7
* Running Your Retirement Numbers
* Caremark Charged with Breach of Duty
* Nintendo Storms the Gaming World
* Inside Oil's Wild Ride
Story Tools
* order a reprint
* digg this
* save to del.icio.us
MONTPELIER, Vt.
One of the region's biggest heating oil dealers, Irving Oil Corp., must pay $100 each to 155 customers in the Barre area whose oil supplies were allowed to run low in late 2005, the attorney general's office said.
"Irving's customers in the Barre area were understandably upset during the holiday season in 2005 when their tanks were getting very low, and they were unable to get the company to respond to their questions and concerns," Attorney General William Sorrell said in a statement Thursday.
"With this settlement we want to alert the industry that we will hold them to their promises to consumers, including their promise to provide consumers with "peace of mind" through automatic delivery," Sorrell said.
Irving, which admitted no wrongdoing in the matter, ends up having to pay customers $15,500 in total and an additional $20,000 to cover the attorney general's costs in doing the investigation.
Assistant Attorney General Julie Brill said "one or two" customers ran completely out of oil. Many of the 155 saw their oil tank gauges drop below 10 percent full.
"It's pretty clear that going below 10 percent is a concern and should not happen," Brill said
Air pollution, aeroallergens and cardiorespiratory emergency department visits in Saint John, Canada.
* Stieb DM,
* Beveridge RC,
* Brook JR,
* Smith-Doiron M,
* Burnett RT,
* Dales RE,
* Beaulieu S,
* Judek S,
* Mamedov A.
Environmental Health Directorate, Health Canada, Ottawa, ON. dave_stieb@hc-sc.gc.ca
In this study, we considered a wide variety of respiratory and cardiac conditions and an extensive set of pollutants and aeroallergens, and utilized prospectively collected information on possible effect modifiers which would not normally be available from purely administrative data.
In single-pollutant models, positive effects of all pollutants but NO2 and COH were observed on asthma visits, and positive effects on all respiratory diagnosis groups were observed for O3, SO2, PM10, PM2.5, and SO4(2-).
Among cardiac conditions, only dysrhythmia visits were positively associated with all measures of particulate matter.
In the final year-round multipollutant models, a 20.9% increase in cardiac ED visits was attributed to the combination of O3 (16.0%, 95% CI 2.8-30.9) and SO2 (4.9%, 95%CI 1.7-8.2) at the mean concentration of each pollutant. In the final multipollutant model for respiratory visits, O3 accounted for 3.9% of visits (95% CI 0.8-7.2), and SO2 for 3.7% (95% CI 1.5-6.0), whereas a weak, negative association was observed with NO2.
In conclusion, we observed a significant influence of the air pollution mix on cardiac and respiratory ED visits. Although in single-pollutant models, positive associations were noted between ED visits and some measures of particulate matter, in multipollutant models, pollutant gases, particularly ozone, exhibited more consistent effects. Aeroallergens were also significantly associated with warm season asthma ED visits.
Assessing diagnostic classification in an emergency department: implications for daily time series studies of air pollution.
* Stieb DM,
* Beveridge RC,
* Rowe BH,
* Walter SD,
* Judek S.
Air Quality Health Effects Research Section, Health Canada, Ottawa, Ontario.
Seven independent assessments of diagnosis were obtained for 92 records of nontrauma emergency department visits in Saint John, New Brunswick, Canada, in 1994. The hospital database was 1.18 times as likely (p < 0.05) as six external physician raters to classify visits as cardiorespiratory, which was consistent for high- and low-pollution days. Kappa was 0.70 (95 percent confidence interval (CI) 0.68-0.73). Kappajs were: asthma, 0.69 (95% CI 0.64-0.73); chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, 0.78 (95% CI 0.74-0.83); respiratory infections, 0.53 (95% CI 0.49-0.57); cardiac, 0.84 (95% CI 0.79-0.88); and other, 0.66 (95% CI 0.62-0.71).
Association between ozone and asthma emergency department visits in Saint John, New Brunswick, Canada.
* Stieb DM,
* Burnett RT,
* Beveridge RC,
* Brook JR.
Air Quality Health Effects Research Section, Health Canada, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
This study examines the relationship of asthma emergency department (ED) visits to daily concentrations of ozone and other air pollutants in Saint John, New Brunswick, Canada.
Air pollution variables included ozone, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen dioxide, sulfate, and total suspended particulate (TSP); weather variables included temperature, humidex, dewpoint, and relative humidity. Daily ED visit frequencies were filtered to remove day of the week and long wave trends, and filtered values were regressed on air pollution and weather variables for the same day and the 3 previous days.
The mean daily 1-hr maximum ozone concentration during the study period was 41.6 ppb. A positive, statistically significant (p < 0.05) association was observed between ozone and asthma ED visits 2 days later, and the strength of the association was greater in nonlinear models. The frequency of asthma ED visits was 33% higher (95% CI, 10-56%) when the daily 1-hr maximum ozone concentration exceeded 75 ppb (the 95th percentile). The ozone effect was not significantly influenced by the addition of weather or other pollutant variables into the model or by the exclusion of repeat ED visits. However, given the limited number of sampling days for sulfate and TSP, a particulate effect could not be ruled out. We detected a significant association between ozone and asthma ED visits, despite the vast majority of sampling days being below current U.S. and Canadian standards.
Just for interest, not to do with Saint John:
Chemicals, birth defects and stillbirths in New Brunswick: associations with agricultural activity.
* White FM,
* Cohen FG,
* Sherman G,
* McCurdy R.
Department of Community Health and Epidemiology, Dalhousie University, Halifax.
We describe a series of investigations that were conducted in support of the Task Force on Chemicals in the Environment and Human Reproductive Problems in New Brunswick. Geographic and temporal analyses and case-control studies, with the use of vital statistics, hospital records, the Canadian Congenital Anomalies Surveillance System and chemical databases, revealed no association between pesticides used in forestry and reproductive problems. Evidence of an association between the potential exposure to agricultural chemicals and three major anomalies combined as well as spina bifida without hydrocephalus was found. More plausible was an association between stillbirths and such exposure during the second trimester of pregnancy. This finding, along with the cyclic patterns of stillbirth in the agricultural Saint John River basin and the somewhat higher stillbirth rates in New Brunswick than in adjacent provinces or in Canada as a whole, suggests that further attention should focus on possible associations between agricultural activity and stillbirths.
Firefighters battle fire after explosion at Ontario oil refinery
Dec 14, 2006 | Chicago Tribune
Firefighters were working Thursday to extinguish a blaze following an early morning explosion at an oil refinery in the border city of Sarnia, Ontario.
Let's see the strike in 1996...workers getting paid about $27/hour and wanting more?? Makes no sense to me. I can see why the Irvings said no way to anymore money. So any of those workers that wanted more were GREEDY. So if they have to go punch someone in the head because a person agrees with that reasoning so be it. Cry babies is what they were and the Irvings did not allow them to get anymore money then they deserved. If you ask me they should have lowered there wages to about $10/hour like the real people in the world who are barely getting by but not whining about it demanding more!! Shame on you for defending the workers who were crying for more and getting top dollar as it was.
Benzene
Benzene is a chemical that can be found practically in gasoline and other products, such as glues, paints, cleaners, degreasers, detergents and other industrial chemicals. It is also a known human carcinogen that is a cause of leukemia, including , including acute myelogenous leukemia (AML), acute lymphocytic leukemia (ALL), chronic myelogenous leukemia (CML), chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) and hairy cell leukemia (HCL).
Scientists have also linked non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL), Hodgkin's disease, multiple myeloma, myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS), aplastic anemia, pancytopenia, cytopenias, myelofibrosis, and polycythemia vera to Benzene.
Also known as benzol, benzene is a clear, sweet-smelling, highly flammable liquid chemical used mainly in making rubber, plastics, dyes, paints, rubber, resins, detergents, and lubricants. It is a naturally occurring compound of gasoline and crude oil..
In 1996, benzene was classified as a Class A carcinogen by the Environmental Protection Agency, and has been linked to cancer and other serious health problems. Benzene-related diseases can develop as late as 29 years after exposure. The effects of benzene on the body vary with the amount and duration of exposure. Exposure of low to moderate levels of benzene can cause headaches, drowsiness, dizziness, rapid heart rate, vomiting, tremors, confusion, and unconsciousness. Exposure to very high levels can cause death.
Workers most at risk of suffering adverse health effects from benzene exposure include:
* Workers in petroleum refineries
* Gasoline distribution workers
* Painters
* Rubber tire manufacturers
* Laboratory technicians
* Shoe / leather workers
* Printers
* Newspaper press workers
* Paper and pulp manufacturing workers
* Pesticides manufacturing workers
Workers exposed to high levels of benzene are at the greatest risk of suffering leukemia, including acute myelogenous leukemia (AML), acute lymphocytic leukemia (ALL), chronic myelogenous leukemia (CML), chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) and hairy cell leukemia (HCL)
Benzene Exposure Risks
More than three million workers experience benzene exposure every year. The use of benzene as a solvent has been banned in the US for more than 20 years, but unfortunately, there is still benzene in most petroleum solvents. Workers may inhale vapors from the solvent or absorb vapors through their skin.
The EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) estimates that 50% of the US population has experience benzene exposure through industrial sources such as oil refineries and chemical plants.
Benzene exposure risks if you work in:
* chemical laboratories
* pharmaceuticals manufacturing
* industrial plants that manufacture or use benzene
* oil refineries
* chemical and petrochemical plants (including some offshore installations)
* pesticide (herbicide & insecticide) manufacturing
* printing
* gasoline distribution
* pulp and paper manufacturing
* wood stain and varnish manufacturing
* synthetic rubber production
* adhesive production
* shoe and leather manufacturing
Occupational cancer - burdens of the past or actual threat?]
[Article in German]
* Bolt HM,
* Golka K.
Institut fur Arbeitsphysiologie an der Universitat Dortmund.
It is estimated that about 4-10% of malignancies in the male population world-wide are caused by occupational factors. In Germany, official statistics of malignancies compensated as occupational disease point next to asbestos to aromatic amines, hardwood dust and benzene as occupational carcinogens of quantitative importance. Because of long latency times, which may be 30 years and more, it is important for the medical practitioner to consider possible previous exposures and to obtain the complete medical history from patients diseased with a malignancy of possible occupational origin.
Air pollution induced asthma and alterations in cytokine patterns.
* Ebtekar M.
Department of Immunology, School of Medicine, Tarbiat Modares University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran. ebtekarm@modares.ac.ir
In recent decades, clinicians and scientists have witnessed a significant increase in the prevalence of allergic rhinitis and asthma. The factors underlying this phenomenon are clearly complex; however, this rapid increase in the burden of atopic disease has occurred in parallel with rapid industrialization and urbanization in many parts of the world. Consequently, more people are exposed to air pollutants than at any point in human history. Worldwide increases in allergic respiratory disease have mainly been observed in urban communities. Epidemiologic and clinical investigations have suggested a strong link between particulate air pollution and detrimental health effects, including cardiopulmonary morbidity and mortality.
From Wikipedia
"The result of this integration is seen in the city of Saint John, where the economic welfare of the city has been tied to the economic well-being of the Irving family of companies. This is further exacerbated by the fact that New Brunswick's three major newspapers are wholly owned and operated by an Irving company. This has resulted in several well-founded accusations of suspect journalistic integrity[1].
Irving Oil has also come under fire for its negotiation with the City of Saint John in regards to the Canaport LNG terminal and a behind-closed-doors tax deal negotiated with city mayor Norm MacFarlane.[2] This deal perpetuated feelings among some in the community that Irving was more powerful than elected officials. This was only compounded when it was proposed that the LNG pipeline be constructed through a major municipal park, which poses a potential threat to local residents.
There have also been accusations of political patronage, notably involving Allan Rock and Claudette Bradshaw of the Liberal Party of Canada[3]. This has also contributed to cynicism among concerned citizens. Despite public suspicion and general feelings of distrust toward the Irvings, the majority of New Brunswickers are closely tied to the company, as they are the largest employer in the region. Despite their anti-competitive actions, poor relations with organized labour, questionable environmental record and lack of transparency, they continue to grow and assert their economic dominance on the area."
"The strike at the Irving Oil Refinery in Saint John, New Brunswick, illustrates this point and was a sign of the changing labour relations climate in North America and globally. The strike began as a result of Irving Oil Ltd.'s efforts to mimic the flexibility and restructuring of labour seen in the southern U.S. and elsewhere as part of the changing face of global commerce. The strike was protracted and painful for New Brunswickers and working people to witness. It involved two years on the picket line, while the company sought to undermine the bargaining process by laying off workers, and negotiating away from the table. Throughout the strike the provincial government sided with the company by refusing to intervene, and ignored opportunities to pursue "anti-scab" legislation. The appointed mediator, Innis Christie, was bullied by the company management, who were uncooperative participants in the bargaining process and who refused to appear at the Inquiry hearings. Christie ultimately succumbed to the company's strong arm tactics and declared the strike a loss for the union. At the strike's conclusion, a humiliating and restrictive final contract was imposed by the company that included the dismissal of the union executive, and a mandatory ideological re-education programme for returning workers."
"Saint John is both an Irving town, as well as a union town, and it contains the only provincial riding which elected a New Democrat in two successive elections. Our description of the Irving Group indicates how many central enterprises are located in the city. The Irving Group is omnipresent there. But Saint John also has a strong tradition of industrial militancy more than any other part of English New Brunswick. In cultural terms, Saint John is both socially conservative and economically social democratic. It is a very Roman-Catholic City (and contains the seat of New Brunswick's one English Catholic diocese), which is no doubt both cause and result of the economic and social values just mentioned. Saint Johners are suspicious of the Irvings (they're Presbyterians), but they are prepared to live with them. They respect the rights of an employer, the top of the hierarchy, but they want their share of the production. It is in this context that the Irving Group and their employees interact. Labour Relations in the Irving Group
The Irving ethos has clear implications for labour relations in the group, and the Irving attitude toward trade unions. Canada has a large literature on labour history, but the New Brunswick experience is largely absent from it. One can imagine, based on the above discussion, that K.C. Irving and his successors prefer to work without unions. Trade unions represent everything the Irvings have worked against. Instead of individualism, unions represent collectivism; they establish rules and restrict decision makers rather than allowing wide-open discretion; from the Irving perspective, to the extent that unions regulate the shop floor, they undermine flexibility and limit the commitment of workers to the firm. The various biographers of K.C. Irving and the Irving Group note, at best, an ambivalence toward unions. Douglas How and Ralph Costello, the authors of the authorized biography of K.C., claim that K.C. actually encouraged the creation of a union of Irving Pulp and Paper in Saint John in 1946,9 yet they concede that K.C. proposed "what amounted to a company union" at Irving Oil's bulk storage facility at Courtenay Bay in 1948.10 As John DeMont has noted, the warmth K.C. felt toward the working man had its limits. His clashes with organized labour over the years were legendary. He wasn't exactly against unions: "When they are well led they are excellent for labour and management both," he said. Trouble was, the way he saw things, they were rarely well led.11 "
Of course if somebody thinks everybody should be paid poverty wages except the Irvings then all arguments are fruitless. But here's more...
"There has been a long history of labour strife at many of Irving's operations, especially its largest ones, including the Refinery. These include the Canada Veneers strike and its relocation to Ontario; the Irving Oil Courtenay Bay strike; the 1963-64 refinery strike; the 1991 Pulp and Paper strike; and the more recent "low intensity" tactics employed against Irving truck drivers and the workers at Kent Homes.
The most relevant strike is the 1963-64 refinery strike, which shows the long-standing nature of the Irving priorities at the bargaining table. On September 16th, 1963, the workers at the Irving Refinery Ltd. oil refinery went on strike, one that would last almost six months, yielding few positive results for the workers. The major players were from an earlier era but the issues bear a striking, even eerie, resemblance to those of the more recent strike. In its early days the oil refinery was owned by Irving Refinery Ltd., a legally separate entity from Irving Oil Company, and K. C. was at the height of his power and control.12 (Irving Oil Company and Irving Refinery Ltd. were amalgamated in Irving Oil Ltd. in 1973.) The workers were represented by Local 9-691 of the Oil, Chemical and Atomic Workers' International Union (OCAW). In the pre-strike negotiation, the workers asked for changes on 19 items, including promotion, wage increases, length of the normal work week, over-time, call-in provisions, sick and bereavement leave and so on. The key issue, however, was the question of conformity to the wage scale of national competitors, which in later years would be referred to as the National Bargaining Pattern. The Irvings said that they could not afford to meet national refinery pay standards, though they would offer modest pay increases, largely in the form of a merit pay scheme.13 "
"During a public speech, Mr. K. C. Irving made the claim, which would be repeated again in the 1994-96 strike, that the refinery is "operating since the beginning of the strike by non-union personnel better than ever before, with more experienced persons doing the same job in half the previous man hours."17
Oh, boy, can't wait for that 'Irving job security'.
"On May 12, 1994, at 4:30 p.m., members of Local 691 of the Communications, Energy and Paperworkers (CEP) union at the Irving Oil Refinery Ltd., in Saint John, New Brunswick, went on legal strike. Management took over the refinery with plans to run it, and Refinery Manager Bob Chalmers commented that without union concessions, the Saint John facility might join the 25 North American oil refineries that have shut down since 1970. Larry Washburn, president of Local 691, said the Irving company was mostly interested in trying to lengthen the work week without paying overtime rates."
"By August and September, with still no bargaining, the union and its allies held a rally and announced their province-wide boycott. On October 19, after complaints by local residents, Mr. Washburn stated that the refinery should never have been allowed to break normal pollution limits. The week before, the provincial government allowed the refinery to go over emission levels during periods of equipment maintenance, and Environment Minister Marcelle Mersereau said she did not expect the levels to be so high. Mr. Washburn said the problems were due to the inexperience of non-union people running the refinery."
"By March 1995 the conflict took on more explicitly political overtones. During that month Local 691 filed unfair labour practices charges against management arguing that Irving Oil was bargaining in bad faith. Larry Washburn said the union has been trying to meet with management ever since Bob Chalmers wrote a November 21 letter saying the company was prepared to meet with the union at any time. In the Legislative Assembly, pressure was growing for the government to do something. Elizabeth Weir, the province's lone NDP MLA, introduced Bill 21, which proposed to ban the use of replacement workers during a strike. This provision had been part of the provincial Liberal Party platform, but it had never been introduced into legislation. The bill passed first and second reading and then was sent to the Law Amendments Committee for hearings. Advanced Education and Labour Minister Camille Theriault said he would not ban the use of replacement workers during strikes."
" By November 1995, management brought a new package to the table. Surprisingly, it contained a list of 86 striking workers that the company wanted to terminate, along with other demands. The workers rejected this by a 90% vote, and the New Brunswick government took the unusual step of appointing an Industrial Inquiry Commission, composed in this case by Mr. Innis Christie, a prominent Nova Scotia labour lawyer and law professor. Christie announced that he would hold public hearings in Saint John in February 1996, at the same time that management was sending termination notices to 54 striking workers. Before the hearings took place, the Irvings tried to quash the authority of Christie and limit his mandate. The hearings began, but Bob Chalmers, the refinery manager, did not appear despite his summons. A warrant was issued for his arrest, but the process was stalled until late March while the Irvings made four unsuccessful bids to quash the summons and the warrant. Mr. Justice Michel Bastarache of the New Brunswick Court of Appeals (now of the Supreme Court of Canada) threw out the Irving appeals and ordered Chalmers to attend or go to jail.
Despite the pressure generated by the public hearings, the Irvings appeared to be too big to lose."
"In his final report, Christie told the workers they lost, and they should settle for the best deal they could get. Finally, on August 16, 1996, after 27 months, a majority of Local 691 voted in favour of a new contract, which still provided for significant concessions on seniority, flexibility, and for the termination of 37 workers (of roughly 150 left on strike), including all of the union executive."
" Among the required reading for the course was American psychologist Judith Bardwick's book, Danger in the Comfort Zone: How to break the entitlement habit that's killing American Business. A "must-read" book for corporate managers, this work describes the phenomenon of a "culture of entitlement" whereby workers are apparently pre-occupied with their rewards rather than their responsibilities. Returning workers at the refinery say that in reality the reorientation program combined a "bitterness test" and "attitude alteration" exercise. Workers have been told about how they were misled by their union President, Larry Washburn, and to doubt the credibility of the executives of their national and local union.
Bob Hicks, President of the New Brunswick Federation of Labour, has stated that "[s]ome people are describing it as de-cleansing of their souls for sins they've done by going on strike. Others have described it as a brain washing session." It seems clear that this strike was a test case for the Irving Group of Companies and for industries throughout the country, which were gauging their ability to rollback labour rights and increase corporate power. What the Irvings wanted in a New Refinery Contract "
"Throughout the 1994-96 Refinery strike, the Irvings insisted that for the refinery to remain competitive, there had to be changes in the collective agreement. Workers would have to take pay cuts and work more hours on "straight time" rather than overtime rates. The company justified this by pointing to the fact that this was a highly-paid workforce, in which the average worker received gross income of $70,000 per year. Most importantly, the company said that there was a need for greater flexibility in the work force. This meant that rules in the collective agreement defining what a worker could and could not do would have to be changed, and further, the principle of seniority would have to be altered to allow management to make judgements about which worker should be trained to work on new equipment, or be promoted, and so on. Presumably, given the outcome of the strike, management also wanted the ability to terminate employees based on a principle other than "last hired, first fired." The read
Clearly though, the issue of "competitiveness" was the key issue, since the demand for "flexibility" was really based on a claim that to be competitive, the work processes at the refinery had to be changed. As a privately-owned corporation, Irving Oil Ltd. is understandably secretive about its operations. Since it is not traded publicly and since no one outside the Irvings own shares, the company does not have to answer to anyone. However, material that is publicly available casts doubt on whether the drive for competitiveness really required the concessions that the Irvings demanded. Rather, given the strong competitive position in the region of Irving Oil, it seems more likely that the strike was about increasing profitability and imposing the Irving Group ethos rather than simply keeping the company's head above water. "
Interesting to note that Irvings are out west advertising to bring people home. Yet in the oil field workers recieve for more than the amount that Irving broke the union for.
However, there should be considerable doubt whether the 27 month strike at the Irving refinery was necessary to maintain and improve competitiveness. The seeds of doubt are, in the first instance, sewn not by the Communications, Energy and Paperworkers Union, but by the Canadian oil industry and the Canadian government! First, numerous publications are quick to note that in the fifteen years since 1980, the oil refining industry went through cost cutting and rationalization having nothing to do with long strikes. A helpful "sectoral study" produced by Industry Canada in 1996 notes that Canada has moved from 40 refineries in the early 1980s to 21 in 1995.27 In the four Atlantic provinces, there are now two domestic-market refineries (the second is located in Dartmouth, NS), down from four in the late 1970s. The Canadian Petroleum Products Institute (CPPI) notes in its 1993 Annual Report that
CPPI members have announced the closure of three refineries for 1993. These shut-downs will improve the industry's competitiveness by reducing operating costs and possibly increasing the efficiency and production utilization levels of the remaining refineries.28
In the last ten years, the industry has also cut costs by 18%, and only 10,900 workers are employed in the oil "manufacturing sector," compared to 22,500 in 1985.29 A recent report, written by a Select Committee of the New Brunswick Legislative Assembly, noted that in New Brunswick, the cost of refining and delivery oil to gas stations declined from 12.3 cents per litre in 1991 to 7.5 cents per litre in 1995.30 Canada has twice the number of service stations relative to the U.S., and the number of service stations is dropping. Yet one gets the sense, from advertizing of franschise opportunities in regional newspapers, that the Irvings are still expanding their number of stations.31 Oil refining is a very capital intensive industry, perhaps the most of any manufacturing industry. The average worker at a Canadian oil refinery produces $186,000 in value, compared to the manufacturing average of $55,000. Yet the industry is profitable, since industry-wide annual final profits were $1 billion. Return on capital invested was 6.6% in 1994, which is acceptable for an industry facing "competitive challenges." Though the five refineries in QuÈbec and the Maritimes are, as a group, less profitable than the Canadian average,32 these figures do not account for oil profits realized offshore as the result of transfer pricing, in which profits are accounted for in the lowest tax jurisdiction. In fact, according to Industry Canada, a refinery operating at 85% of capacity will maintain "adequate profitability." In fact, the eastern Canadian refineries as a group ran at 93-94% capacity in 1995 and 1996, and the Industry Canada consultants anticipate that this will increase to 96% by 2000 and 97% by 2005.33 Perhaps this anticipated growth in the industry explains the Irving's announcement of an $800 million expansion and upgrade of their refinery, as well as the recent interest of a private-sector firm in establishing a synthetic oil refinery at a cost of $600 million in the port of Belledune, in northern New Brunswick.34 In any event, the Industry Canada report sums up the situation by saying that: "In the past decade, the petroleum products industry has managed to improve its productivity..."35
"It is important to note that nowhere in this government report, which is designed to help the industry remain competitive, do the authors point to "rigidities in the labour force," or excessive employee compensation, as in any way connected to the challenges that the industry does face. In the mean and lean 1990s, there should be no doubt that the Government of Canada would recommend "restructuring" of the work force if it was in fact "necessary"."
But of course what one can say about an industry is not necessarily true about an individual operation. In fact, there is reason to believe that the the Irving refinery is probably in a better position than the industry average. We can conclude this in part from the limited information that Irving Oil does give out. The fact that it is the largest refinery in the country suggests that it would benefit from economies of scale, in which its size allows it to produce its product at lower cost than smaller operations. We know that the refinery is the largest "and most advanced" in Canada, with a capacity to process 250,000 barrels of oil per day, and that the upgrading to this capacity took place in the mid-1970s. The refinery operates 24 hours per day, 365 days per year. "The refinery can handle a wide variety of crude oil types and has the capability to produce high-octane gasolines, jet fuels, diesel fuels, home heating oil, propane, kerosene and asphalt."36
The crisis of competiveness is also undermined by the vertical integration of the Irving Group. Apart from anything else, because of its strong retail position in the Maritime provinces, Irving Oil has a captive market for its product. Along with Imperial Oil, it controls 60% of the gas outlets in New Brunswick (there were 683 in early 1997), and this figure probably understates the market share of sales that these two companies enjoys. Irving Oil, along with Imperial, counts the Government of New Brunswick, including its schools, hospitals and municipalities, as major customers.40 The other advantage enjoyed by Irving Oil is that the rest of the Irving Group, and probably most of its 25,000 employees, consume Irving gasoline, propane, diesel and home heating fuel. Irving Oil is the price leader in the province, a province in which gas prices in the city of Saint John are consistently higher than prices in other major Canadian centres.41 Also, Irving Oil swaps oil in the region with its competitors in exchange for the same quantity of oil produced by its competitors in another province, such as Nova Scotia or QuÈbec.42 In addition, Irving's retail expansion into New England also creates a ready-made market for Irving products, since those stations will only sell Irving gas and oil. According to John DeMont, by 1991 Irving Oil controlled 25% of the Maine retail gasoline market.43
Admittedly, the Irving Group is one of the least globalized conglomerates for its size that one is likely to find. While Irving buys its crude oil from its own "middle-man" offshore company, thus giving it the ability to transfer profits to the lowest tax jurisdiction,47 it is otherwise geographically concentrated rather than dispersed. The vast majority of Irving operations occur in one country, Canada, with a workforce located largely in the three Maritime provinces. But surplus capacity and the globalization of production are important background explanations for how the Irvings were able to get away with putting its refinery workers on the picket lines for 27 months. The Irvings asked for concessions at the refinery that could only be obtained in an era of high unemployment. High unemployment of labour, one of the major consequences of surplus capacity, depresses wages and salaries, because management can put pressure on workers by contracting out work or simply by pointing to all of the unemployed workers who would "love to have your jobs." Further, in an era of high unemployment it is incredibly easy to find replacement workers. The strike lasted 27 months because the Irvings were able to run the refinery at a sufficiently high level to meet its obligations. Without high unemployment, Irving might have had trouble finding the sufficiently skilled workers to go into the refinery to work in unpleasant circumstances.
The consequence of this strike extends beyond the lives of the refinery workers in Saint John. It can be seen as the first step in a move toward rollback of labour and democratic bargaining rights that may be increasingly eroded. Shortly after this strike was settled, the much larger work force at Saint John Shipbuilding Ltd. agreed to concession-filled contracts with the Irvings. In addition the parallel legitimization of this rollback, internally through the ideological re-education program, and externally through the media, not only obscures our understanding of this particular labour issue, but it serves to endorse a defeatist mentality in the face of corporate and governmental intimidation.
...a defeatist mentality, sound familiar?
So....are you trying to say that a new refinery would be is a bad thing?
"Oil refineries, like many types of industrial facilities, use and release toxic chemicals that can harm human health and the environment. The carcinogen benzene, for example, is both contained in crude oil and created by refineries. An average-sized refinery releases over 10,000 gallons of oily waste daily to air, water, and land.
Although oil refineries represent less than 1% of all the facilities that submit reports, they account for over 10% of the total wastes created. "
"A demographic analysis was completed for areas around refineries in Philadelphia, PA and Delaware City, DE. The locations of the refineries were taken from the EPA Sector Facility Indexing Project (SFIP). Tract–level Census information from 1970, 1980, 1990, and 2000 was used to investigate demographic changes over time. Census data from earlier years were fit into the 2000 tracts by Geolytics to allow for easy comparisons.
The results indicate that demographic changes in areas around refineries vary by location. The two locations yield two different stories.
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
People are moving away from areas adjacent to and upwind of refineries, but whites are moving away faster resulting in the Census tracts becoming more black.
Delaware City, Delaware
People are moving away from areas adjacent to and upwind of the refinery, but blacks are moving away faster resulting in the Census tracts becoming more white."
People are increasingly moving away from areas with high levels of pollution, no doubt why Graham is moving the department of energy down there, hopefully trying to show investors that 'its not as bad as it seems' as well as using government to shore up the population and bring more government spending there.
charlie for gods sake please stop posting this spam. he is clogging up the blog with his endless c&p.
so my friends in the construction trades that are making $25+ an hour make starvation wages? someone better tell them. hahaha just because irving fired you is no reason to get your panties in a knot guy. and i cannot say i have seen many starving mill or refinery workers here.
That's not spam, just read it. It's just lots and lots and lots of evidence. None of them are about construction by the way. There aren't that many people making $52,000 a year in NB, the average is $38,000. Go check the census and that's pretty obvious. Plus no job security, hazardous work and no benefits. Feel free to post some outside sources for any opposing views...if you can find any.
Its a darn fine cut and paste job though. You have to hand it to anonymous he sure knows how to do that well. I liked it better when they just said "Damn Dirty Irvings"..It didn't take as long to read.
Well mr high and mighty. since you seem to care. i make between 20,000 and 30,000 and life if pretty damn good here. not sure how much you need to make for you extravagant tastes but i'm quite happy and my kids are doing quite good thanks. i do not work for irving but i'd jump at the chance. i have friends who do and it would be a big jump in pay. you must be from away originally. it is the only explanation for the fact you are clueless in how good things really are here in the real hub of NB in SAINT JOHN. this is not the us or upper canada or western canada. my dollar goes a lot farther here and i'm living quite well. all i want to know is where do i sign up for classes to work at the new refinery when its built?
None of those studies from above are about economics. Everybody knows that 5000 jobs in construction is better than no jobs in construction, its also not as good at 10,000 jobs. $25 an hour is obviously better than 20 or 15 but not as good as 30. A job is better than no job, but obviously a job with security (which you won't get at Irving) is better than a job with no security, which is what contract work is. It means you can't speak out about anything because your job depends on you keeping your mouth shut. If you see environmental degradation or worker abuse then workers will keep their mouth shut because speaking out means they will be labelled 'troublemakers'.
Likewise you can look at the LNG terminal, forget the whole issue of whether their should be one at all and all the potential security risks that the province will have to pay to cover (or ignore).
I can guarantee there are plenty of people like the above that would love the chance for guaranteed work for however long it takes to build. Not only that, but IF the economy of Saint John were that important, the ideal setup would be to help the people who live there. There is EASILY 5000 people in Saint John who would beg for that job.
Trouble is, they CAN"T. The can't do it for a variety of reasons, or they are not 'desirable candidates'. For example, if the Irvings took the meagre and cheap step of providing an on site day care they could probably get 5000 WOMEN and single mothers to show up. Some construction jobs are extremely specialized, but most aren't, in fact most refinery jobs aren't.
Another group are those with disabilities and addictions. That's trickier, but even that can be done. Anybody who pays even the remotest attention to politics in the province knows that if Irving told the city they want to have a methadone clinic onsite, and have a dedicated bus service it would be done in a flash.
Those are things they CAN do, but as many will point out, they are not a charity and that's true. They are doing what every business does, which is find the cheapest, easiest way to do business. So they are advertising out west to bring people in.
The 5000 jobs though are temporary, just like the jobs at the confederation bridge-once the work is done, the people are gone and its back to square one.
So clearly they do not care about Saint Johners, and of course why would they? Economically they COULD do wonderful things for the city, a nice one would have been paying the same taxes everybody else is expected to pay.
And the real debate is about economics. The government has come out and admitted that they knew about all the toxins in Belledune, anywhere else we'd see a massive lawsuit, but the people there are poor and it takes a lot of work and money to launch lawsuits, especially in NB which doesn't even allow class action lawsuits.
So let's look at numbers. 5000 will benefit over the short term, but then will leave. 1000 will be retained permamently-so they say, however, Irving doesn't tell anybody how many people work there or what the pay scale is, so studies can't even be made.
What does that do for Saint Johners? Well, for 1000 is does wonderful things, they'll have a better or just a, job. Most of those people at this point don't even live in the city, so for Saint Johners right now that number is lower. It doesn't do anything for poverty, it doesn't even attempt to address poverty, in fact they are advertising for workers more out west than they are here.
But what does that do for the other 120,000 people? Well, as you can see from the above studies it places their LIFE in danger. It may KILL them. That's a far cry from being an inconvenience or costing them more tax dollars, it means CANCER and other debilitating diseases.
And of course the cost of that has to be picked up by the province for health care costs-and of course drug companies will no doubt love the idea, it means more customers.
So that is simply a 'cost benefit analysis'. Even giving the benefit of the doubt we can only add maybe another 1000 for associated jobs, many of these other industries though are owned by Irving who are well known to employ as few people as possible.
As for cost of living, the main savings are in real estate, but that depends where you are. In Oromocto, housing prices are equivalent with places out west. Housing prices are increasing rapidly in Moncton. Plus, while housing is more expensive in southern ontario and ottawa, it is also worth more. That adds to a persons line of credit and borrowing power if they should need it. In other words, they have much more equity than somebody living in a $80,000 house (which will still be a pretty shitty house)
Gas prices are typically at least 3 cents more per litre in New Brunswick than, say, Ontario, and with so much rural living in NB and with Moncton and Saint John being so large, thats a huge expense. A city like Hamilton has most industry within an hours WALK. Not to mention an excellent public transit system. Toronto and Ottawa are the exceptions in Ontario, most people live within a ten minute drive from their work.
Many more families are dependant on oil heat, which is highly volitile and routinely gets very expensive. One family said they converted to oil and their heating bill was over $300 in winter. In ontario most homes are hooked up to natural gas, which is much cheaper, especially when hooked into central heating.
Automobiles are the same price in general, and insurance in New Brunswick is still much higher than the national average.
Property taxes are virtually identical, as is public transit, which is usually worse in service.
Food prices can occasionally be cheaper, but not often. Loblaws and Sobeys own most of the market now and print their flyers nationally. Food can even be more expensive as much of it is shipped from Ontario, and even local produce like potatoes are shipped in such quantities that they are the same price, and of course virtually every city in Canada is close to a local supplier of produce.
So the cost of living balances out fairly equally, that's why when the province meets ex-patriates or tries to recruit investment, it talks about low wages for investors, and 'quality of life' for ex-pats.
And it will be hard to sell either investors or ex patriates on 'quality of life' in Saint John, a city so heavily polluted they literally have to scrub it off of buildings and cars.
And that doesn't even take into account that the average income in ontario is $20,000 more. So that increase easily covers a higher mortgage payment, which again, is building much higher equity for retirement.
Keep in mind also that no doubt there will be another tax deal forthcoming on the land for the refinery. It was very seldom reported but Irving took it all the way to the supreme court that they shouldn't have to pay ANYTHING for the land where their storage tanks were because it "is not considered part of the refining process".
Not being an Irving Employee I can't speak with any accuracy as to how "secure" a job in the Irving empire might be. I do have more than a few acquaintances that have worked for the Irving's many for a long time. Are they happy? Are they satisfied with their wages, their working conditions? I really never asked and they haven't complained any more than the next man but they are happy enough to stay and regardless of the suggestion by some in here they do have a choice. Now of course this is just anecdotal evidence but I am still willing to bet that its a considerably more secure place than say a call centre job and at least on par with any other large business in this province.
Equally to suggest that Irving set up methadone clinics on construction sites to allow them to employ addicts is a bit bizarre. If anonymous had ever spent any amount of time working on a construction site he would soon realize how foolish that sounds. An industrial construction site is a dangerous and busy place and I doubt anyone would feel comfortable with the thought that someone they are relying on for their safety either just recieved a methadone injection or even worse, just missed one. The fact is construction jobs are dangerous and unlike what anonymous suggests they do require a lot of skill. That extends from the top right down to the skilled labourers. To suggest otherwise shows a lack of knowledge and respect for those that work at these jobs for a living.
"As to the number of jobs being created full time or otherwise just what are you trying to argue? That 1000 full time jobs aren't good enough? That 5000 people who work in the construction industry don't deserve a few years work? Are you suggesting St. John just wait until some great job fairy shows up with 1000, or 5000 full time environmentally safe jobs especially designed to employ single mothers, drug addicts or any other group you happen to think of at the time? While you might not like the thoughts of having a refinery in your back yard..(if indeed it is even your back yard) it will in fact bring lots of well paying and well needed jobs.
No one can argue that the refinery will not pollute. That's a given and something we all should be concerned about. But it is wrong and grossly misleading to suggest that it will be the cause of the deaths of the population of St. John. I am sure from all your research on the topic you know full well that 90% of the pollution in the area comes from else ware. Now that doesn't mean the refinery should be allowed to dump its toxins with impunity it is unfair to suggest it will be responsible for eliminating the cities population. There would be a far greater chance of no jobs being the cause of that.
Your assessment of the cost of living is equally off the mark. Did you even look at the cost of a 3 bedroom bungalow in southern Ontario, Alberta or B.C.? Now I don't mean northern Ontario where the unemployment rate is no better then here but in those places where people from here find themselves. I darn nice home in Oromocto lists for $125,000 where they don't even show up on the radar in the Golden Triangle for under $400,000 and a good hours drive to work. The average wage in Ontario might well be only $20,000 more but that's misleading when the jobs people are looking for are almost exclusively in that area around Toronto where prices are considerably higher and even more out of proportion in B.C. and Alberta. That's the trouble with quoting averages. The bottom line is people are leaving here looking for JOBS and given the chance a good many would come back and many more would stay if they could find work here. That includes 1000 refinery jobs and even those 5000 temporary construction jobs.
Good comments, and at least the debate is becoming more civil.
The central point here is that this is NOT 'the job fairy' people think it is. Go read my posts under the Spinks thread about Irving, I'm not going to repeat it all.
The above comment simply takes the view that pollution is ineveitable, and that jobs are the main focus, and not just any jobs but these jobs. But look at construction in southern ontario-its in homes and offices and warehouses. Those are construction jobs, and good ones as well. Similar ones are going on in Moncton, and to a lesser extent Fredericton. So construction go onto any industry, not just a refinery.
The point is that pollution kills, that's not even debateable, we KNOW that. So to say it is just stating the obvious. I mentioned the many cases that are linked to refineries, which pollute in a very specific way, unlike pulp mills, which pollute in a different way.
So for example, take a look at the states. No refineries have been built there for almost thirty years. Go do some research on them, they were typically set up in urban areas, usually poor, and just go look at what happens. Investment dries up, industry and workers flee from the area and for good reason.
But that is the point. Go read Davidwcampbell.com on a daily basis and you'll see there is no such thing as a 'job fairy'. It takes work and policies to get investment. Nova Scotia met with the head of RIM while he was IN Moncton and talked him into providing over 1000 jobs in Nova Scotia. Those are high paying jobs which will employ construction workers to build the buildings and the homes for the people to live in.
For work security there is a difference. RIM laid off people five years ago because they were in a lawsuit. That's been settled but at the very least the type of employment and training they provide is easily transferable to another employer, which means its more likely more companies will locate there because the hardest thing for knowledge companies to find is workers. Most importantly, that company doesn't kill the people in the surrounding area.
As for the construction remarks, it WAS a bizarre suggestion, in fact it would be 'state of the art', in fact it would be a program that New Brunswick would get international press over, and have social scientists of all stripes coming to the province to study it. That's teh point.
I've worked construction many times, and I know the field well. There's a reason that it has the highest mortality of any industry in the country. A person on methadone functions just as well as any other person-that's the whole reason for methadone clinics and why they are recognized all over the world as one of the most effective treatments for addicts.
Likewise, that's completely WRONG to say that construction jobs are ALL dangerous. Many of the jobs aren't dangerous at all, and most jobs can be made not dangerous at all with proper training and following labour code practices-something I can tell you is virtually NEVER done in that industry.
I've seen workers come to work drunk, and I've seen them doing drugs on the job, I've seen employers demand they do things that break every safety code in the book, and proper safety training is only offered in VERY dangerous fields. Even something like roofing has people given very little training. I can't count the number of times I've seen roofers working without being properly secured, they're just walking around.
Also, if that's a worry then you should be really concerned, because construction companies are hiring younger and younger people, even doing Co-ops with Moncton high school. They work cheap, which keeps labour costs down, and they don't care about safety because they think they are immortal. I worked in the landscaping business and bosses would have kids scamper up trees and start cutting branches with nothing holding them up there. This happens ALL the time. For kids its all fun, unless of course you fall.
As for costs of living, the fastest growth isn't in Toronto but the surrounding areas. But some more research is in order and you should to to www.mls.ca In Oromocto a decent three bedroom home is more like $160-$170. That's about $100,000 less than a comparable home in southern ontario, but once again, a higher valued home builds much more equity. You pay $100 grand more, but you get $100 grand more value. That helps with getting other loans, saving for retirement (at retirement you'd be selling a home of far more value as housing pricing increase more in high growth areas).
There is no doubt that more of your monthly budget is going to mortgage, but it is like saving, and as mentioned, that cost could well be covered by decreased utilities.
In fact, one option is to build right off the grid, something very expensive in New Brunswick because there are few companies that focus on that.
And of course that doesn't even take into account the potential exhorbitant cost that costs more than money-and that's respiratory disease or cancer.
So the question isn't 'this or nothing' for jobs, its a question of "how bad can we *&^% up our environment before it becomes impossible to get ANY new jobs because the city is a pariah?"
If Irving was a most wonderful benefactor who everybody had implicit trust in to do whats best for everyone, that would be one thing, but its virtually the opposite. We know they are massively greedy and private and will take advantage of every opportunity to lower their costs, even at the cost of society.
Which means, once other industries pack up and leave, THEN suddenly we find that there aren't 1000 jobs there at all (as mentioned in the other thread, during the strike management ran it themselves and said they were doing great, so potentially it could run with NO workers)
For those of you concerned about "temporary" construction jobs, consider these megaprojects on slate for the Saint John area:
1. LNG terminal
2. Refinery part deux
3. Lepreau refurbishment
4. Lepreau II
Workers will be able to roll from one to the next ... this will be a big boom for the city.
Considering the "baby boomers" are starting to retire, there will be big opportunities for skilled tradespersons. (The keyword here is "SKILLED". Those who are not skilled will continue to whine about not making $26/hour.) So if you have sons or daughters it would be wise to encourage them to study a trade!
Post a Comment