The Cine Technician (1943 - 1945)

July— August, 1944 THE CINE TE CHNICI AN laboratories. Wages are lower than in any other section of the industry, and laboratory workers represent practically half of our membership. Sid Bremson gave some startling figures. A j night staff of ten people can process up to 40,000 I feet a night, the receipts from which show approximately £125 profit, because the silver recovered from the negative is sufficient to meet the cost of running the department. If ever a resolution should receive support, Ronnie Neame said, this one should. Laboratories are vitally important to the success of our pictures on the screen and we must take care of them. The voting showed how unanimously members agreed with him. The only employers who have not so far con' eluded an agreement with the A.C.T. are the Newsreel Association. The Chairman said they had indulged in every form of reactionary antics to break down negotiations. They had even had the impudence to declare that newsreelers should receive lower wages than other technicians, because they joined newsreels for glamour and adventure ! Only the approach of the Second Front • had prevented the General Council from taking strong action, since the national importance of newsreels for public morale was weightier than A.C.T. 's demands for an agreement. The main debate of the day was on the General Council's motion on the present position and prospects of the industry. It was moved by Ralph Bond in his usual forthright and well-argued way. The old conception of a Trade Union as being only concerned with immediate issues of wages and conditions had gone with the wind, to be replaced by a newer conception which held that there was no one better situated to plan and organise an industry than those working in it. During the past year, the General Council had dra \vn up two documents — a memorandum on Post-War Reconstruction submitted to the Board of Trade and the Films Council and a special memorandum on Documentary and Educational Films. These documents crystallised A.C.T. 's conclusions about the future of our industry and members should arm themselves with them as weaf. Keiiy. of Riverside studio> pons in the struggle ahead. Frank Sainsbury 61 Many bad conditions of the past had gone, but there was no guarantee they would not return. Meanwhile, a new disquieting factor had emerged — monopoly. Bond denied vigorously that it offers a panacea for all the troubles and grievances that have affected the industry. A much better cure for these ills lies in measures of immediate public control, leading eventually to full public ownership. There should be a films credit bank. There should be Government studios and laboratories. If necessary, there should be a Government distributing organisation. Documentary had expanded tremendously in wartime — 5,000 shows, for example, are given by the M.O.I, every month to an audience of between eighteen and twenty million people. This organisation must not be thrown away after the war. There are dozens of films which will be needed to help post-war reconstruction. And the making of them must not be left to unfettered private enterprise . Something will also have to be done about the scandalous position of teaching by films in this country. Before the war, only 2,000 schools were equipped as against 10,000, for example, in France. Here again monopoly thrusts in its hand. Rank is opposed to the State being interested in making films, even for the schools of this country. Sidney Cole, seconding, gave some startling examples of the ruthless way in which monopoly worked and warned technicians against being deluded by temporary good conditions offered by the monopoly. They must reflect what their position and that of the A.C.T. would be in an industry in which monopoly was dominant and in which Rank could, if necessary, shut down British studios for six months in order to defeat the Unions. Ivor Montagu foresaw an enormous post-war boom in films in this country. With the shrinking of our invisible exports during war time, the Treasury could not permit the continuance of a situation in which twenty million pounds went out of this country to America every year for films. We should need immense Government assistance. It would be intolerable that that assistance should be given to a monopoly. There was some spirited defence of Rank from the floor, though not one of the defenders ex