It is clear that Catalyst is framing the issue of closing mills against
the classic Prisoner's Dilemma: two people engaged in a crime are
arrested; both face some prison time if convicted, but one implicating
the other gets a lighter sentence while the one that does not confess
gets the heaviest sentence of all.  Game theorists will tell you that
the "rational" decision for one is to implicate the other (i.e.,
"defect").  Catalyst has framed it such that the the cities and unions
that agree to Catalyst's demands of reduced wages and revenue will get
to keep their mills open, while those that hold fast will face the
heaviest penalty of all, that of mill closure.  Under these conditions,
it is only a matter of time before a city and union agree to Catalyst's
demands, such as Campbell River is considering.

What the game theorists tend to omit is that there are other allowable
actions.  It turns out lying is one of those actions (such as omitting
that one could lie instead).  The other action doesn't really have a
name, but it can be described as "keep your word or I'll seek
retribution."  Perhaps the one that implicates the other gets a lighter
sentence, but finds family and loved ones experiencing unpleasant
events.  This approach is surprisingly effective in achieving the
greatest collective outcome, which should not be a mystery to unions who for
better or worse can engage in retribution to keep the line strong.

If Port Alberni and the other cities wish to escape the harshest of
penalties, the city managements and unions within need to stop
negotiating with Catalyst and start negotiating with each other and
among themselves as a solid movement.  Since lying is not allowed in
legal contracts, draw up legal contracts wherein the cities and unions
agree that if they defect to Catalyst, they will pay out to other
members a sizeable amount in compensation.

The unions need to negotiate from the position of future owners of
Catalyst, and the cities need to negotiate from the position of
investing in local ownership.  Recall that Catalyst is a publicly owned
corporation, and can face hostile takeover.  A unified front that shows
greater penalty within for cooperating with Catalyst will convince
shareholders that Catalyst is unlikely to win this battle.  It is unwise
to hold stock in a company with a failed business model and no hope of
survival.  When Catalyst's stock price has reached a level in which
ownership levels can be purchased, the unions need to offer pennies on
the dollar for worthless stock.  Once the unions own Catalyst, they can
make good on the negotiated deals with the cities.  Without the overhead
of high management salaries, and with the reduced tax assessments from
the cities as well as some re-alignment to match 21st century market
realities, the new company should be viable.

Agreeing to Catalyst's false dichotomy of cut or close will result in
fewer jobs and less revenue for all except those that own Catalyst stock
or receive bonuses from them.  There is another option, that of local
ownership and cooperative management.  It is the best overall collective
outcome, except Catalyst doesn't want you to know this.

Tim Kelly
owner, Pacific Coast Environmental Metrics
Malahat, B.C.