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)

Record Details:

Title:
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
Date:
1948
Publisher:
Washington : U.S. Govt. Print. Off.
Volume:
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 (Eightieth Congress)
Leaf #:
000274
Language:
English
Collection:
Government & Law and Books
Format:
Books
Contributor:
Boston Public Library
Sponsor:
Kahle/Austin Foundation and Omidyar Network
Coordinator:
Media History Digital Library
Date Added:
July 19, 2022
Something wrong or inaccurate about this page? Let us Know!

Thanks for helping us continually improve the quality of the Lantern search engine for all of our users! We have millions of scanned pages, so user reports are incredibly helpful for us to identify places where we can improve and update the metadata.

Please describe the issue below, and click "Submit" to send your comments to our team! If you'd prefer, you can also send us an email to mhdl@commarts.wisc.edu with your comments.




We use Optical Character Recognition (OCR) during our scanning and processing workflow to make the content of each page searchable. You can view the automatically generated text below as well as copy and paste individual pieces of text to quote in your own work.

Text recognition is never 100% accurate. Many parts of the scanned page may not be reflected in the OCR text output, including: images, page layout, certain fonts or handwriting.

252 MOTIOX-PICTURE JURISDTCTIOXAL DISPUTES diction." Is that wordage incorporated in tho memorandum you have before you V Mr. Birthright. The rightful jurisdiction of the "United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners shall include all carpentei' work in construction of mills, all work in carpenter shops, all permancMit construction, and all construction on external sets. Mr. TiNSDALE. But what I am inquiring into, Mr. Birthright, is this memorandum you have before you, does it have tliis language which I just read? Mr. BiuTiiRiGHT. Well, now, read it again. Mr. Tinsdatj:. "Jurisdiction over sets on stages was awarded to the lATSE" — is that before you? Mr. KiKTHRTGiiT. Erectiou of sets on stages, except as provided in section 1; do you follow me? Mr. Tix\sDALE. Yes: I follow you there. Mr. Birthright. "Erecting all sets, exterior and interior ; erection of platforms for lamp operators and cameramen on stages." (Voice became inaudiable to reporter.) Mr. Muui'HV. Mr. Birthright, this is George Murphy. I think tliat we are discussing a lot of things here. What we actually want to know — -what we are trying to find out — is what exactly you meant in your directive. I just want to say, you meant your tii'st directive to be the one that is final and binding; is that true? Mr. Birthright. The directive I have handed down December 26, 1945, will serve. Mr. Eeagan. This is Ronald Reagan again. I know it sounds like we are going around and around, but I think you know our problem, so I would like to repeat one thing, apropos of what George said. You did not intend the clarification in any way to alter the fact that your decision was based on the 1926 agreement, is that right? Mr. Birthright. That is right. Mr. Reagan. You did not intend your clarification to change the fact that your decision was based on the 1926 agreement; is that right? Mr. Birthright. Yes. Mr. Reagan. That is the basis for what you intended the decision on division of work to be? Mr. Birthright. That's right. Mr. Reagan. Based on the 1926 agreement? Mr. Birthright. That's right. Mr. Reagan. May I ask you this — maybe you won't want to answer it, but may I ask you this : Mr. Hutcheson said in Chicago that you gentlemen wrote two clarifications before he would accept one. He said in one clarification you mentioned the 1926 agreement and he wouldn't go for that; is that right? Mr. Birthright. It is in the 1926 original terms. (Voice became inaudible.) Mr. Rhagan. Again I want to ask you one last thing, Mr. Knight and Mr. Birthright. You have been very patient and very nice Mr. Sorrell. Don't turn it off yet, we have more questions. Mr. TiNSDALE. I have some questions to ask, too. Mr. Reagan. I am not going to turn it off. I want to ask this one more question. You say he did not like the agreement from the first. Now, what I am trying to get at is, was there any word or was there any idea that your decision of December should be changed rather than clarified? Mr. Birthright. No. Mr. Reagan. In other words, was there some misunderstanding of the meaning on the part of the carpenters ; or did they want it changed because they knew what it meant and didn't like it? Mr. Birthright. They didn't like it, of course. But they recognized the so-called 1926 agreement. Mr. TiNSDALE. Mr. Birthright, this is Tinsdale again. I am sorry to keep interrupting and coming back to the same item, but in this copy of August 16, 1946, memorandum, which we have received here, there is one paragraph which starts as follows: "Jurisdiction over erection of sets on stages was awarded to the lATSE." Is that paragraph in the memorandum you have before you? Mr. Birthright. No. How does it read following that line? Mr. Tinsdale. Well, Mr. Birthright, in this same memorandum you have this: "The word 'erection' is construed to mean assemblage of such sets on stages and locations."