Screen Guilds Magazine (April 1935)

8 The Screen Guilds’ Magazine Consolidation and Arbitration Commission ... My Seton Miller R ECENTLY a number of writers ex¬ pressed the opinion that the general membership is not well enough informed as to the functions of the Conciliation Commission, and the scope of its work. A resume of the Commis¬ sion's activities during the first year was printed in the Bulletin last April and in the period since that time a large number of new members have joined the Guild. For their information the rules of the Commission, as set up in the Guild Code, are appended to this report. Several writers have been told by pro¬ ducers that all cases for conciliation must be submitted through the Acad¬ emy, as the Guild is not officially recog¬ nized. The experience of the Commis¬ sion has been decidedly otherwise. It has always been able to contact the pro¬ ducers promptly and in every case the producers have accorded the conciliators a hearing and have helped willingly in reaching amicable settlements. In two cases producers reported unethical con¬ duct on the part of writers to the Guild. Both cases were of decided interest to the Commission as they were the first examples of the fact that the Guild Code protects the producers' rights in their agreements with the writers as much as it protects the writers themselves against encroachment on their rights by pro¬ ducers. The findings of the Commission and its final rulings were satisfactory to the studios in both cases. In one, a writer walked out on a verbal agree¬ ment with a studio and took another as¬ signment at better money He returned to the studio and fulfilled his obliga¬ tion. In the second case, a writer was paid in advance and then disappeared. None of the work he had contracted to do was sent to the studio. The Com¬ mission located the writer and he repaid the money to the studio. During its first year of operation, the Commission handled and finalized thir¬ ty-seven cases, and in the past year forty-seven. About two hundred cases in all were received but a large number of these were quickly finalized through the Guild office and did not reach the Commission. Many of them consisted in aiding members to recover scripts and material from studios and agents and assisting the District Attorney’s office on investigations in connection with bogus literary brokers and scenario schools. During the current year the Executive Board passed a ruling that the Commis¬ sion could only accept cases from mem¬ bers in good standing. There have been a number of examples of writers who have consistently neglected or refused to pay their dues and have shown little or no interest in the Guild, yet who rushed to it the moment they had any trouble with a studio and expected the Guild to take up their cases promptly and settle them (needless to say, in their favor). As a report of the current year’s work, the cases have been summarized as follows: 1. Obtaining salary due to writers for material, work, or in lieu of a week’s notice —12 cases. The money w T as obtained in 6 cases. In the 7th both money and screen credit were obtained for the writer involved. In 3 eases the writers had no just claim under their agreements or under the week's notice rule. In another ease there was so much contradictory evidence, all verbal, that the matter was referred to a civil court action, where it is now under ad¬ visement. One case is pending. 2. Recovery of material and/or legal releases of material —3 cases. Obtained in all eases. 3. Plagiarism —5 cases. In the first, financial settlement was obtained. In 2 cases, writers withdrew their cases after a hearing. In the 4th, there was no basis of claim. In the 5th, the writer involved was exonerated. 4. Unfair advertising —4 cases. 3 were settled to the satisfaction of all parties; in the 4th, the charge was not substantiated. 5. Credits —17 cases. In 7 cases, credit was obtained. In 9 eases, credit was not merited. I case pending. 6. Failure to inform other writers work¬ ing on same material —1 case. The charges were dismissed. The second group of writers had under¬ stood that the first group had finished their work on the assignment. 7. Theft of title —1 case. Charges were not substantiated. 8. Discipline of writers —2 cases. Reviewed above. 9. Legal assistance —2 cases. The legal difficulties of contracts concerned in both cases were straight¬ ened out by Mr. Bielensen. The majority of cases brought before the Commission involve credits. Dur¬ ing the year a number of these com¬ plaints were presented after the nega¬ tives of the pictures concerned had been shipped East and the prints struck off. Under these circumstances the Commis¬ sion was unable to help. A great deal of credit trouble would be obviated if writers would have a definite under¬ standing with producers in regard to screen credit while the pictures are shooting. In case of failure to reach an agreement with producers or other writ¬ ers, complaints should be submitted promptly. The Commission consists of twelve members and is controlled by a Chief Commissioner apointed by the President of the Guild and subject to confirmation by the Executive Board. Any member or other person includ¬ ing a motion picture producer, may file a complaint against any member. The complaint shall specify the article and clause which it claims have been violat¬ ed and shall contain a brief statement of the facts constituting the violation. All four copies of such complaint shall be signed by any officer of the Guild by order of the Executive Board of the Guild. If the complaint be against any ex¬ ecutive, supervisor or director for vio¬ lation of any of the rules of conduct specified in Article XV of the Screen Writers’ Guild Code, it shall contain the following: “The undersigned agrees to submit the foregoing controversy to arbitration under any form of arbitra¬ tion contract approved by the Commis¬ sion and in accordance with the laws of the State of California. Answers to complaint. If the com¬ plaint be against a member, the com¬ plaint shall be transmitted to the mem¬ ber by registered mail, and the member shall have seven days to reply. Procedure for Conciliation. Upon the filing of any complaint, the Chief Com¬ missioner, either before or after answer, if he deems the matter one for concilia¬ tion, shall appoint one member of the Conciliation Commission as a concilia¬ tor and thereupon said conciliator shall attempt to settle such dispute by con¬ ciliation. Hearing of Complaint against mem¬ bers. If the Chief Commissioner shall not deem the controversy one for con¬ ciliation, or if the conciliator shall re¬ port that it cannot be settled by con¬ ciliation, the Chief Commissioner shall designate three commissioners to hear the matter. Such Commissioners shall hold a hearing at the office of the Guild at a time to be fixed by them and shall give the parties at least five days’ writ¬ ten notice by registered mail at their address as shown on the books of the Guild of the time and place of such hearing. At such hearing the parties shall produce such evidence as they may