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)

106 MOTION-PICTURE JURISDICTIONAL DISPUTES was a strike which started from the fact that the company would not either substitute the painters in the contract which the society had or declare that contract null and void, because of the fear which companies had of the lATSE strike. Is that correct? Mr. Freeman. I think at that point, Mr. McCann, the position of the employers was that there were steps that were beino; taken before the National Labor Relations Board, and decisions hadn't been final. It was pendinc; those decisions that the strike was called by local 14'21. The producers — I think the case was in Washington at the time — the only thing the producers had not done was to take the decision of a fellow by the name of Tongue, who was the arbitrator appointed by the AVar Labor Board, and thej^ appealed from it. Mr. McCaxx. Just a minute right there, sir. Isn't it a fact you had a contract with this society that, in the event they became identified with some other union, you would either substitute that union in the conract or that you would declare the contract existing with the society null and void? Mr. Freeman. There was a contract with the society in existence carrying that clause ; yes. Mr. McCann. You didn't do either one? Mr. Freeman. No; we didn't do either one because at the time that was taken up and the demand was made by 1421 that they be substituted as the bargaining agent there were many things that happened along in there that were pending and we were awaiting decisions on. Let's say we had a strike, I think, by 1421 in October 1944, which lasted only 4 or 5 days. They went back to work, as I recall it, at the request of the War Labor Board — the set decorators did. There were so many things happening in between that the producers didn't have the slightest idea what was happening to the employer. We were trying to find decisions and get decisions that would help us know where we stood. We did not cancel the contract. Whether if we had canceled it there would have been an action by the Conference of Studio Unions, I don't know. Whether if we had canceled it or substituted local 1421 as bargaining — I am sure there would have been action by the lATSE, because we were told that. Mr. McCax^n. All right. You heard me read excerpts from the address of Mr. Walsh at the Chicago convention of the lATSE, where he gave a narrative of what had taken place when they had a strike in ld?>o, and they lost all of their membership in the movie colony, except about 200. Mr. Freeman. Yes. Mr. McCann. And then how they had started a strike of the theaters in Chicago and forced the movie people to give back their positions in Hollywood, and their jurisdiction over certain labor activities here. Was that accurate? Was that correct? Mr. Freeman. I wasn't here, Mr. McCann, in 1933. Mr. McCann. Do you know from your personal knowledge that that statement of Mr. Walsh is substantially correct? Mr. Freeman. No; I wasn't here. I had no connection with the industry. Mr. McCann. It is obvious from the statement Mr. Walsh made to that convention that at the time the lATSE did go on a strike in Hollywood it was very disastrous to them.