The film daily year book of motion pictures (1933)

the place of one, but required that he be in the booth at all times. The exhibitors complied with this rule for a while by employing one union operator at each theater, paying the union scale and working with him in the booth. This arrangement was not satisfactory to the exhibitors. They claimed that their business would not justify the employment of two operators, and offered to employ one union operator and pay the union scale if he would work alone. This was refused, and no adjustment of the matter being reached, picketing was immediately commenced. This picketing consisted of one picket being posted at the entrance of each theater who patrolled back and forth in front of said entrance carrying a banner or sash bearing the inscription, "Unfair to organized labor." Since then the work of operating the machines has been done by one non-union operator at each theater, and he has been paid $45 per week. The picketing was at all times peaceable and at no time accompanied with threat of physical injury or violence. After the picketing had gone on for about eight months, the exhibitors each applied for an injunction against it. The trial judge decided in favor of the union and the exhibitors appealed to the Supreme Court of Oregon. The Appellate Court said "In conducting their theaters, these plaintiffs were transacting a lawful business. The right to transact such business is a property right, the exercise of which without unlawful injury or interference by others is protected both by the Federal Constitution and by the Constitution of this state. * * * * * * The injury resulting to the business of these plaintiffs from the picketing complained of is a material, constant, repeated, and continuing loss of patronage, and hence the damage is irreparable, and entitles plaintiff to an injunction, unless the picketing was and is lawful. * * * * * * in the absence of some actual bona fide dispute existing at the time concerning terms or conditions of employment, picketing, whether peaceful or otherwise, is unlawful. * * * * * * There was only one union employee at each theater, and he had either been discharged or had quit of his own accord before this picketing was commenced. In the absence of contract for a specified term of employment, plaintiffs had a right to discharge the union operators, and the operators likewise had a right to quit their services whenever they pleased. Every employer has the right to discharge a union man and employ a non-union man, and, where but one man is employed, and he a union man, no lawful right to strike in such a case could arise, and, if it was attempted, there could be no legal justification for it, for no one's rights could be prejudiced. A strike is a combination to obtain higher wages, shorter hours of employment, better working conditions, or some other concession from their employer by the employees stopping work at a preconcerted time. It involves a combination of persons and not a single individual. Before either striking or picketing can become lawful, the motive for calling the strike or ordering the picketing must be lawful. No such motive could or did exist in this case." New York Refuses to Restrain Operators From Picketing Theater which Contracts to Employ Members of Rival Union In Stillwell Theater vs. Kaplan, (tried with similar cases of two other exhibitors against the same defendant, as president of a labor union), (259 N. E. 405. 182 N. E. 63 — Court of Appeals of New York, July 19, 1932), the exhibitor had made a contract with the defendant fa union of stage employes and film projectionists affiliated with the American Federation of Labor) to employ only members of that union as projectionists. That contract expired on August 31, 1931. The exhibitor thereupon contracted with another union called the Empire State Motion Picture Operators (unaffiliated with any other labor union or body), to employ only its projectionists for the following year. The defendant (Local 306), thereupon began peaceful picketing of the exhibitor's theater with truthful signs which read "Owners of this theater refuse to employ members of Motion Picture Machine Operators' Union, Local 306, affiliated witli the American Federation of Labor." The trial judge decided that the picketing was illegal and enjoined it because its purpose was to cause a breach of the contract between the exhibitor and the rival union. The defendant appealed to the Appellate Division which unanimously upheld the trial judge. The defendant then appealed to the Court of Appeals, which reversed the judgments of the lower courts and dismissed the exhibitor's complaint. It said "The Court of Appeals has for many years been disposed to leave the parties to peaceful labor disputes unmolested when economic rather than legal questions were involved. * * * * * * The interests of capital and labor are at times inimical and the courts may not decide controversies between 531