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)

370 MOTION-PICTURE JURISDICTIONAL DISPUTES Mr. DojiERTY. Wliicli contract are you referring to? Mr. McCaxn. I think it is exhibit 6. Mr. DoiiKKTY. May I have my material back, Mr. Chairman ? Mr. Keaijns. Yes. Mr. Knkjiit. Ma}' I ask if it is the contract tliat was consuiiniiated between tlie ^rips and the carpenters in the 30-day period that was provided for in tlie directive before we entered into it ? Mr. McCann. That is correct. Mr. Knight. I didn't read it, because it was settled, and we were not concerned, if that is the one j'ou are referring to. Mr. IMcCann. "Well, I am glad to have you say that, sir. Mr. Knight. That is my recollection. Mr. McCann. I would like to read from this copy the authority that was given under this contract or agreement to the Motion Picture Studio Grips' Local 80. That contract reads as follows : That Motion Pictnro Studio Grips' Local 80 shall have jurisdiction over — The handling of all sets and units from tlie mill to the staj^e. from stage to stage, from stage to scene dock, from scene dock to mill, and from scene dock to stage. The handling and maintenance of all grip equipment. The erection and liaiidling of all fold-and-hold cut-outs. The construction, maintenance, and handling of all diffusing frames, with the exception of heavy construction on wooden frames. The building, erection, and dismantling of all tubular steel scaffolding. This is not to include luiderpinning. The construction of aU phitfornis, including underpiiniing. for use exclusively by camera, lighting equipment, and for supportini; dolly tracks. The agreement reflected in the setting forth of the above jurisdictional points is not intended by either party to reflect the full purisdiction of these locals in the studios, but does reflect the agreement Mdiich has been reached between the representatives of local 946 of the United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America, and Motion Picture Studio Grips' Local SO, of the lATSE, on the jurisdictional points which -were at issue between these two local unions. It is further recognized that some of the juri.sdictional points to vphich local 80 has agreed are at issue between the carpenters' local 946 and other local unions of the lATSE, and this agreement is not intended to reflect an agreement to these points for any lATSE local, with the exception of grips' local 80. Now, I would like to ask whether or not you did read that. Mr. Doherty. Mr. Doherty. I now answer definitely no, for the simple reason, as I testified on previous occasions, that was an agreement that had been entered into by two local unions in the studio industry, and the committee as a whole thought that the millenium had been reached — that at long last two local unions in the studios got together — the lATSE and the carpenters — and we took that in good faith, and. of course, we did not then move into that ])articular scope of the investigation. Mr. McCann. I will ask you if that contract provides that the grip's shall do set erection. Mr. Doherty. Which contract are von referring to? Mr. McCann. The one I have just read to you. Mr. DoirERTY. I would not be able to say, except from what I have heard, which you just read out now. We had nothing whatsoever. to do wnth that contract. It was not a jiart of our scojie of investigation. Mr. McCann. Do you realize, Mr. Dolierty. that the decision which you made on December 2(), 1945, varied substantially the contract which had been entered into between the gi-ijjs and the carpenters? Mr. DoiiERTV. Aj)j)arently that is a correct statement.