The Cine Technician (1943 - 1945)

58 THE CINE-TECHNICIAN Mav — June, 1943 A.C.T. v. British Movietonews Important Arbitration Award A dispute affecting a principle of great importance to newsreel technicians arose between A.C.T. and British Movietonews when the latter diemissed A.C.T. member A. A. Tunwell, owing to failure to reach agreement on the question of adequate insurance for a hazardous assignment. A.C.T. failed to obtain satisfaction either from the company or the Newsreel Association. Consequently the dispute was referred to an independent arbitrator under the Industrial Courts Act, 1919. The result was a complete victory for the Association and a vindication of the action of Mr. Tunwell in insisting upon adequate insurance before commencing his assignment. The following is the full award of Sir Charles Doughty, K.C., who was appointed as arbitrator by the Ministry of Labour. INDUSTRIAL COUETS ACT, 1919 Association of Cine-Technicians and British Movietonews Limited 1 . A difference arose between the above-named Association and British Movietonews Limited and the Minister of Labour and National Service duly appointed me, Sir Charles Doughty, K.C., to act as arbitrator to determine this difference. 2. The terms of reference were: — " To determine the claim of the Association of Cine-Technicians that Mr. A. A. Tunwell should be reinstated in the employ of Messrs. British Movietonews Ltd." 3. I accordingly having accepted the burden and duty of determining this difference sat at the Ministry of Labour, St. James Square, London, on Monday, May 3rd, 1943. and heard Mr. Elvin Mr. Cole and Mr. Tunwell on behalf of Mr. Tunwell and the Association of Cine-Technicians and Sir Gordon Craig on behalf of British Movietonews Ltd. 4. Mr. Tunwell has been employed for fourteen years by British Movietonews Ltd. as a first-class cameraman and no question as to his character or competence has ever been or is raised, and he was in 1943 paid a wage of £16 a week. He was at the time of his dismissal working under a contract made in July 1939 under which he had agreed to work wherever required. 5. The Ministries of the Fighting Services and the Ministry of Information attach importance to the recording by cinematography of battle scenes and other incidents of the war. The Newsreel Companies (of which British Movietonews is one) have endeavoured to take and make such films and I am satisfied that this work is an important war effort. This involves the necessity of cameramen carrying on their work in situations that may be very dangerous and there have been casualties amongst such men. though no-one employed by British Movietonews has been hurt. 6. All Cinematograph Companies insure their cameramen when they are exposed to risk of death or injury by enemy action whilst performing such duties. By agreements between the Association of Cine-Technicians and the British Film Producers' Association, and with the Association of Short Film Producers, technicians earning more than €10 a week are insured for £5,000. The Association of Cine-Technicians have no agreement with British Movietonews Ltd. 7. British Movietones s do as a matter of practice insure their cameramen for £2.000, and in case of short and extra hazardous employment increase this cover up to £5,000. 8. On May 20th, 1940, Sir Victor Warrender speaking for the Admiralty informed Mr. G. C. Amnion, M.P., that an agreement had been made between the Admiralty, the Ministry of Information and the five Newsreel Companies that cameramen are all to be " properly " insured by the Companies against death, injury or loss incurred while in the camera unit. 9. On February 1st, 1943, Mr. Tunwell was informed that he was to join one of His Majesty's ships in the Western Mediterranean. He saw Sir Gordon Craig on the morning of February 2nd and was informed that he would serve on the flagship which would almost certainly be a battleship. He pressed Sir Gordon to insure him for £5,000 and pointed out that £2,000 would provide but a meagre pittance for his widow if he were killed. The interview was very short and Sir Gordon refused this request, and desired an immediate answer as to Mr. Tunwell's readiness to go upon the Company's conditions. 10. On February 8th. or 9th, Mr. Tunwell . xpressed his readiness to go but only on condition that his insurance was raised to £5. 000. 11. Sir Gordon then promptly, and 1 think without sufficient consideration or explanation of all the circumstances, paid Mr. Tunwell one month's wages and dismissed hini from the Company's services.