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.
MOTION-PICTURE JURISDICTIONAL DISPUTES 383
Mr. DoHERTY. I said on other occasions at these hearings or investigations, or whatever it might be, that when the committee knew full well that the moment we dotted an "i" or crossed a "t" in the original directive, we would then be at least indirectly admitting there was some imperfection in the original document, and for that reason we were reluctant, as the minutes of the executive council will show, reluctant to hand down any type of a clarification. But the argument in favor of a clarification was so overwhelming and the threats of an additional strike out here were coming in to us from all sides, that we thought that we might be doing something that would be helpful to the working people out here Avho are involved. We are not too concerned about tlie leaders of the various unions. We looked upon them as our colleagues, as we do now.
It is the fellow who has to go out on strike and the person who doesn't want to go through a picket line that is involved.
With that spirit we approached the subject of the clarification in the hope that it would bring peace and harmony in the film industry.
That is my answer to your question.
Mr. McCann. Well, now, I am not challenging that, Mr. Doherty. There is just one question that I am asking as a lawyer to a man who knows labor settlements and labor procedures. When you issued your original directive, were you through, or did you have powers that go with you for tlie rest of your life?
Mr. Doherty. Now, Mr. Chairman, earlier in the afternoon, as a matter of fact, since we were on this stand, we have answered that question at least once and perhaps twice.
Mr. McCaxn. Would you mind doing it once more, sir, and I will leave it.
]\Ir. Doherty. We will be very happy, in fact, delighted to answer the counsel's question again, that, so far as we are concerned, the decision we handed down on December 26, 1945, concluded our Avork in connection with the Hollywood jurisdictional dispute.
Mr. McCann. Thank you very much.
Mr. Ke.\rns. I recall, Mr. Counsel, that has been stated before twice.
Mr. McCann. Well, I was not sure that it had been stated twice. I think that it was stated once, but I wanted to make sure that it was in the record, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Kearns. We are going to recess for 10 minutes.
(Short recess taken.)
Mr. Kearns. The hearing will please come to order.
Mr. McCann. Mr. Chairman, I wonder if it would be agreeable at this time — it won't take us but about 5 minutes, I think — to have Mr. Flanagan take the stand and introduce his letter in evidence.
Mr. Kearns. Well, no. I have promised Mr. Doherty that he can leave, and I don't want in riij way to jeopardize his schedule of departure.
Mr. McCann. All right, sir.
Mr. Kearns. And since Mr. Knight will be here, I think it would be better to finish up with Mr. Doherty.
]N[r. McCann. We will have to keep Mr. Flanagan here then. Now, I have one more question for Mr. Luddy. The lATSE does not have a member on the executive council of the A. F. of L., does it 2