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:

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.

254 MOTION-PICTURE JURISDICTIONAL DISPUTES Mv. TiNSDAi.K. We have all been sitting here looking at two different items, the language of which is not identical. The language which I have read has come from the memorandum before us. Mr. SoRREix. We are definitely concerned with the language of the memorandum which arrived in Hollywood, which caused all this furor. Mr. Birthright. Who wrote it? Mr. SoRKELL. It came out of Green's office, is all I know. Mr. Keixy. Brother Birthright, tliis is Brother Kelly. Mr. Birthright. How are you. Brother Kelly V Mr. KELT.Y. I am fine, Brother Birthright. I wonder if you can explain to me — because I am an amateur in these things — if you will clear up something I understood you to say in Chicago Mr. Birthright. 1 will if I can. Mr. Kelly. Just explain to me if you can, do you mean by erection of sets for the lATSE, that any set built on a stage should be built and constructed by the lATSE? Mr. Birthright. As the directive is understood ; yes. Mr. Kelly. In other words, any building on a stage outside of millwork and trim work, goes to the lATSE? Mr. Birthright. Yes. Mr. Kexly. In otlier words, any set that is built, erected, or constructed on a stage should be done by the lA — except trim and mill work — is that right? Mr. Birthright. Yes. The directive said erection of sets on stages, except as provided in section 1, that all trim and mill work on .set stages belongs to the carpenters. Mr. Kelly. In other words, the clarification does not negate the fact that construction of sets on stages belongs to the lATSE, with the exception of trim and mill work? Mr. Birthright. Sure. That is the committee's directive. Carpenters do all mill and trim work on sets on stages. Mr. Keixy. But what I want to know definitely, and I think this is the crux of the situation — let's forget terminology a moment. Mr. Birthright. Okay. Mr. Kexly. If sets are going to be built and erected on a stage, who should do it? Mr. Birthright. According to the directive, the lA. Mr. Kelly. Outside of mill and trim work? Mr. Birthright. Yes. Mr. Kelly. Does that make it clear? Mr. SORRELL. Well, I want to know about the wording wherein they say erection means assemblage. Mr. Arnold. This is Eddie Arnold. Did you people write that directive with the words "erection and assemblage" in it for clarification? Mr. Birthright. Well, I will tell you, Mr. Arnold. I don't find it here. Mr. Arnold. You haven't it? Mr. Birthright. No. Mr. Arnold. In other words, you didn't write it? Mr. Birthright. I don't find it. I will read the order of 1946, word for word and comma for comma. Mr. Arnold. You read your directive written on August 16? Mr. Birthright. Yes. Mr. Sorrell. Then will you read for the record again your exact wording of August 16, 1946? Mr. Birthright. This is dated August 16, 1946 : "Hollywood jurisdiction committee comes to the decision that the United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America * * * as set forth in the committee's directive of December 26, 194.5, * * * and we affirm this previous decision. The committee took cognizance of the allegations in the communications sent to President Green by Organizer Flannagan under date of August 9, 1946. According to the statements thei-ein, carpenters' local No. 946 of the United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America alleges that this violation continued on the carpentei's' jurisdicticm as set forth in the directive. Therefore your committee reiterates and omi)hasizos that the board's decision set forth in the directive shall he adhered to by all i)Mrti('s cnncernod. * * * The jurisdiction which was given to the United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America and the lATSE on February 5, 192."> — and known as the 1926 agreement— remains in full force and effect. Division of work by the United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America, section 1: All trim and millwork