The Cine Technician (1943 - 1945)

Record Details:

Something wrong or inaccurate about this page? Let us Know!

Thanks for helping us continually improve the quality of the Lantern search engine for all of our users! We have millions of scanned pages, so user reports are incredibly helpful for us to identify places where we can improve and update the metadata.

Please describe the issue below, and click "Submit" to send your comments to our team! If you'd prefer, you can also send us an email to mhdl@commarts.wisc.edu with your comments.




We use Optical Character Recognition (OCR) during our scanning and processing workflow to make the content of each page searchable. You can view the automatically generated text below as well as copy and paste individual pieces of text to quote in your own work.

Text recognition is never 100% accurate. Many parts of the scanned page may not be reflected in the OCR text output, including: images, page layout, certain fonts or handwriting.

May— June, 1943 THE CINE-TECHNICIAN 61 eloquent appeal for the laboratory workers — the lowest paid section of the industry. Their present wages were totally inadequate. Only 17% of them were getting above the basic rate laid down in the Agreement signed before the war and their cost-of-living bonus was less than half that received in the Studios. The General Council had now made application for a substantial wage increase for these workers, and he appealed to the Studio workers to back this demand for all they were worth. Ken Gordon gave good news about the Newsreel Section which had now been reformed with a large influx of membership. Grievances were many, particularly in connection with conditions and insurance, and a draft agreement was being prepared for submission to the Newsreel Association who so far had always refused to treat with A.C.T. Bert Craik, whose untiring work as Organiser received the special appreciation of the meeting, dealt with a number of organisational questions. It was a happy sign of the growing part played in A.C.T. by the women members that the first resolution in the morning was moved by Miss Rosanne Hunter of Realist, who pleaded most eloquently for assistants, as such, to have special representation on the General Council. Ken Gordon, with all his customary gallantry to the ladies, nevertheless opposed on the grounds that it was unwise to create special sections, but appealed to the meeting to elect some of the younger members from their units to serve on the Council. The meeting shared his views and the motion was defeated. Sid Cole then moved a special motion for the General Council on Production Efficiency. He reminded the meeting of A.C.T. 's original Efficiency Eeport, of the all-union , committee that met the Producers, of the failure of the Producers to take any interest in the matter. Why do we want Production Committees? " he asked. " To gear the industry to the war effort and to its maximum contribution for victory." Such committees in the war industries received the official support of the Government and the T.U.C. Films were a weapon for war — for training, for propaganda, for sustaining morale. A. R. Cooper of Technicolor supported. ' We are willing to make any effort, however intense, to win the war," he said, " but when it is over we will not allow the employers to take advantage of the sacrifies we are making now." The resolution was carried unanimously, as also was a resolution moved by Jack Chambers for Paul Roth a Productions urging a pooling of technicians and equipment for all Government film production. The morning session closed with what everyone agreed was a model speech from the fraternal delegate, Mr. Llewellyn Rees, Secretary of British Actors' Equity Association. ;< Our two unions," he said, " have much in common as representatives of skilled workers in an industry. We must insist that as skilled workers we have more to s,i\ as to what use our work is put. The Employers are living in an age when they think that only the'j have any right to control the product of our labour. This out-of-date attitude we contest." His sincere and inspiring speech was heartily applauded by the entire meeting. After lunch, Ralph Bond moved an emergency resolution strongly opposing the proposals that: (1) production of quota films for the major American companies be monopolised by one group of companies, and (2) a private company, controlled by individuals associated with the same group of companies, operates to purchase the film rights of novels, original stories or screen plays, and to make work available to writers, members of the Scenario Institute. He produced a wealth of facts showing the extraordinary growth of J. Charlie Wheeler Llewellyn Rees Arthur Rank's monopoly of the British film industry, and of the tremendous profits that these companies were making. Control by Rank covered two large cinema circuits, and a host of subsidiaries, four studios, two news-reels, laboratories, equipment and furnishing companies, to mention but a few. Bond got roars of laughter bj quoting Rank's activities in the Odeon National Cinema Club for Boys and Girls where children took an oath to obey their parents and clean their teeth. He suggested that Rank was probably President of a toothbrush combine. The protest was full\ endorsed by the meeting, who carried the motion with acclamation. At this stage the President left the chair to speak against a section of the .-General Council's report concerning the action of the JVnham Works Committee, in connection with the film Demi-Paradise. Space forbids a full and ade