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)

468 MOTION-PICTURE JURISDICTIONAL DISPUTES Boats "We have had several disputes about building of boats and sections of boats as to whether or not they are action props or whether they are sets. It is the claim of local 44 that boats are action props. We have always built them with carpenters because we claim that they are used as sets. On the picture "Till the Clouds Roll By" we had a show boat built for the theater stage. The prop makers were given this work because it was a setting behind the proscenium arch, although there were a number of items in dispute such as the underpinning and deck and walls that were cari^enter's work. Howevei-, there were a lot of hand rails and a lot of cut-outs involved in the set. In order to avoid splitting the work up between two crews the whole set was Iniilt in the prop shop. The carijenters threatened to strike and the only way we could stall it was to have the carpenters duplicate the hull and deck. I offered to pay the carpenter crew for the amount of work to be done and save the material, but this they refused and insisted on building the entire hull and deck which was never used. Railivay cars We have had many disputes on railway cars and sections thereof. Carpenters have always built them. We claim that they are sets and local 44 claims they are action props. In one picture we were required to build the vet^tilnile ends of several old-fashioned railway passenger cars in which the couplings and other incidental fittings were of wood simulating metal but the vestibule rails were of metal. This work had always lieen done by carpenters but the prop makers refu.sed to service it unless they were permitted to put on the metal rails, the couplings, and bumpers. This was settled by giving the work to the prop makers. Prior to the 1945 strike every time we Iniilt a railway car the practice had been to build the frame and install all the seats with carpenters, and the hand rails and hardware and incidental trim was put on by the prop makers. We would build the railway car with carpenters with the exception of the installation of the bell cords and any siiecial effects. Through gradual encroachment by the prop makers the following evolution in our construction practice, as far as related to the construction of railway cars, has taken place. First, the hardware and baggage racks went to the prop makers, next they took over the seats, and presently they have taken ovei the entire construction of the railway cars. This evolution" took place over a number of years and under a constant threat of the prop makers to refuse to service the set unless they got the work. Signs Ordinary painted signs have always been made by carpenters, frames for the signs. Local 44 claims the making of all signs (frames) because they are used as set dressings. They concede only those signs which are built into permanent structures such as signs over doorways of permanent buildings where we simulate stone work with carving on a building such as a guardian bank or post office or such building as that. Trim and mill work In February of 1946 a dispute arose under the directive as to who would change shingles on a" roof of a liouse tliat was being erected on the stage. The carpenters claimed that the shingles were trim. The set erectors claimed it was carpenter work done on a stage. The matter was arbitrated liy Pat Casey who ruled it was set erectors" woi-k. The set erectors required us to remove the carpenters crew and put on their own people although there was only about 2 hours' work ior two men left on the project. Unless we did this, they threatened to strike. Bunks On the picture "Anchors Aweigh," a set simulating a bunk room of an aircraft carrier had been built. Tlie scene required the installation of steel bunks which fold up against tlie InUkhead. Everyone agreed the installation of the bunks was work of the prop makers. However, the dispute arose over who should bore the 52 holes in the bulkhead through which the bulk clamps would be inserted. The carpenters claimed that the work was the carpenters; the prop makers claimed the work was incidental to installing props. After 2 days of argument in which the prop makers threatened to strike if the carpenters did the work, the carpenters threatened a sti-ike if the prop makers did the work, even though management offered to pay both crews and have a third craft