Jurisdictional disputes in the motion-picture Industry : hearings before a special subcommittee of the Committee on Education and Labor, House of Representatives, Eightieth Congress, first-session, pursuant to H. Res. 111 (1948)

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.

t) MOTION-PICTURE JURISDICTIOXAL DISPUTES It is sometimes asked why jui'isdiction;il disputes occur so much more frequently and seriously in the motion-picture industry than in most other industries. There are at least two fundamental reasons. The first is the nature of the operations of a studio. In a manufacturing establishment turning out its product on an assembly line, an operation may develop which is on the border line of the jurisdiction of two unions. But if the dispute over its performance is once settled, either by agreement, arbitration, or economic action, the settlement has an element of permanence. Today's operation is repeated, unchanged, tomorrow and indefinitely. On the other hand, the motion-picture studios cannot operate on an assembly-line basis. Each set, each mechanical or other device designed to produce an illusion, presents a separate problem. While it is possible to prepare general lornudas for allocation of work, the application of those formulas to specific operations presents a continuous series of problems, many of whicli will never again recur. The second reason for the prevalance of jurisdictional disputes in the motion-picture industry is inherent in the structure of the unions with which the industry deals. The motion-picture industry is highly unionized. Substantially all employees are represented by labor organizations, including actors, writers, directors, and other artistic and creative employees. The producers regularly deal with more than 40 separate guilds and unions. Most of the contracts are either closed-sho]i or union-shop contracts. All but a few independent unions are affiliated with the A.F.ofL. The International Alliance of Theatrical Stage Employees — hereinafter referred to as the lATSE — is an industrial horizontal labor organization within the A. F, of L. Within its membership are included the employees who work on or about the sets and locations in preparation for and in the photographing and recording of motion pictures, who manufacture props, miniatures, special effects, costumes, and certain sets photographed in motion pictures, and who develop and cut the motion-picture film. The cameramen who photograph the motion pictures, the sound technicians who record the sound, the grips who perform the work of stagehands, the property men who manufactuie and operate props and special effects, the electricians who light the sets, the costumers who manufacture the costumes, the first-aid men and women who render first-aid, the laborers, the laboratory technicians who develop and print the photographed film, the film editors who cut and assemble the photographed film, and the projectionists who project the film in the theaters, are all members of the lATSE performing services pursuant to the provisions of closed-shop contracts between the lATSE and the motion -picture producers. The work performed by members of the lATSE cuts across traditional AFL craft lines. For example, the manufacturing of cabinets ami furniture is, in other industries, ordinarily claimed to be within the jurisdiction of the carpenters' union. In the motion-picture studios such work is done by the lATSE prop makers, though not always without protest from the carpenters' union. The grips use carpenters' tools and perform work on the stages which could be claimed, and has been claimed, to be within the jurisdiction of the carpenters' union. The lATSE electricians perform Avork in connection with the light