International projectionist (Jan-Dec 1936)

February 1936 INTERNATIONAL PROJECTIONIST 13 made by the double-reel sponsors to secure an official expression of opinion from the Alliance on the project. Instead, the plan of contacting individual Local Unions on a purely local basis was adopted (oddly reminiscent of the mess made of the standard aperture several years ago) pressure being exerted in localities where the projectionist units were known to be definitely antagonistic toward the longer reel. This was the situation which provoked the bitter scorn of I. P. on the score of craft disorganization on technical matters, when producer-distributor agents entered one city and mopped up all around through obtaining the approval of the I. A. unit, the while another I. A. unit only a few miles away was exerting every effort in opposition to the proposed standard. The organized craft obviously was not blameless in this situation, and it richly merited the bricks thrown in its direction therefor. However, this fact in no wise excuses the negligence of the double-reel proponents in failing to go direct to the top for Alliance approval. While all this localized palavering was going on, difficulties started to pile up in the path of the double-reel: continuing distributor opposition, the necessity for changing local ordinances, and complaints from theatres in which were old Powers projectors with magazines that would not accommodate the longer reel. With trouble piling upon trouble, the sponsors of the double-reel began to feel the least bit dubious about its ultimate success, thus inviting consideration of a possible "out" in the event of failure. Then occurred the crowning blast: localized projectionist opposition suddenly assumed national proportions when the I. A., through its Official Bulletin, expressed emphatic disapproval of the double-reel and instructed all affiliated units to exert every effort to prevent its adoption and use. This blast rocked the house so carefully constructed by the reel's sponsors; but it also provided the much-needed "out" and made the Alliance the scapegoat in the entire proceeding— the exact situation which I. P. foresaw and sought futility, it appears, to keep from developing. And so it is that today "the Unions" stand convicted of having slaughtered the double-reel — despite the fact that the reel's sponsors are equally guilty, if not more so, in having worked over the proposition on a purely local basis rather than through a centralized authority. With incredible ineptness the handlers of the double-reel project invited precisely the results obtained. I. P. repeats its original suggestion. Let the sponsors of the double-reel go direct to President George E. Browne of the I. A. and lay the proposition on the line in some such fashion as this: "Mr. Browne, we are interested in having adopted on nationally a standard release reel of not more than 2000 and not less than 1750 feet. We feel that this standard represents a substantial advance in the art through decreased costs and improved projection. We should like to have an opinion from you as to the attitude of your organization on this proposed standard." Craft Attitude Important This much having been done, President Browne could answer either "Yes" or "No," as he preferred; but in either event the double-reel adherents would know exactly where they stood with respect to the organized craft. Eliminated at one full swoop would be the necessity for main-line and side-line junkets into this, that and the other city or town, with the accompanying necessity for pulling, tugging and hauling on Local Union officials, petty politicians and fire authorities. It doesn't necessarily follow that upon President Browne's answer would, depend entirely the introduction of the new reel standard, which might be put through irrespective of the attitude of the Alliance. But it does follow as a matter of reason that the success of the reel as a standard is largely dependent upon the reception accorded it by the thousands of projectionists who daily handle thousands of reels of films in theatres and elsewhere and their attitude will naturally reflect that of their parent body, the Alliance. Apart from all these considerations, however, let there be an end to this aimless stewing around that has marked this project to date, and let there be at least a show of direct, positive action. The very worst the double-reel sponsors can do is to get a "No" from President Browne, but even this situation will be not worse, but actually a great deal better, than the spot in which they now find themselves. If the Unions are to be charged with killing the double reel, let's make it official. — J. J. F. Electrics Make Drastic Rate Slash to Combat Union Service; Defense Cited INDICATIVE of the terrific pressure being exerted by projectionist organization servicing activities is news from San Francisco that Local 162 has just lost a circuit of theatres heretofore on Union's service list, as a result of the sound company making a deal whereby the theatres are given full service at an extremely low price, plus all necessary parts absolutely free of charge! Many projectionist organizations, including San Francisco, consider this as a new tack by the electrics, in an effort to block Union servicing; but I. P. sees it only as a modification of the existing flat-rate-per-week Repair & Replacement contract used by Erpi, which included full service. Obviously, under this plan the electrics operated at a loss during some weeks of the year, either for actual service work or for parts supplied. Overall, however, the 52-week average on both items worked out to the electrics' advantage — however much hooey is inherent in such a plan. The R. & R. plan is attractive to theatre owners not because of any inherent advantages but only by contrast with the old exorbitant service charges. A man caught by his arms and legs in a trap would be glad to have at least his arms freed. In reporting this incident to I. P., San Francisco supplied the answer as to how to combat such activity by the electrics. First, the theatre was enabled to gain such a deal, and the sound company was forced to offer it, only because of the existence of Union servicing! In other words, the Union itself drove the price of servicing and parts down to a level where the electric was forced in desperation to slaughter rates. Second, and finally, it is highly questionable whether the theatre circuit involved will effect any saving through the deal, because the electric's servicemen still can not work except in the presence of a L. U. 162 man, probably at overtime rates! Here again is concrete evidence of how a Local's rigid adherence to Alliance rules operates to protect it at every turn. Of course, what the theatre circuit overlooked entirely was the fact that the slash in the electric's terms was effected only because of the existence of a Union servicing department, thus providing the strongest possible argument in favor of a continuance and expansion of such service throughout the country. Slashed service charges are the surest indication that the Alliance is moving in the right direction on servicing and that the electrics are panicky. There remains now the job of chasing them completely from the sound system servicing field.