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.

MOTION-PICTURE JURISDICTIONAL DISPUTES 491 that tlie inside fittings were liis. Mr. Victor Clark visited the lot and awarded Jklr. Dn Val's local 44 baggage racks and bell cords but the carpenters put in the seats. 2. On another occasion Mr. Du Val claimed cut-out pieces on This is the Army and also claimed the action of big guns which the carpenters built. There was a stoppage of work but the cut-outs and guns were built by the carpenters ■and the guns operated by the grips. 3. In a case of wild seats and seats along the wall in a cafe set, Mr. Du "Val refused to permit his upholsterers to work on them. They were held up several .days before he yielded. There was no actual interference with shooting. 4. In another incident; in a set that was a small eating place, carpenters built both booths and tables that were hooked to the wall. Mr. Du Val did not permit his men to dress this until Mr. Casey visited the lot and told us to stand pat. Mr. Du Val finally agreed to let his men dress it. 5. On Mildred Pierce there was an interior of a drive-in restaurant on which the carpenters had built seats and booths tliat were fastened to the wall. When the grips made the walls and the back of the seats wild the seats then became free standing ; and Mr. Du Val claimed these seats and complained they should have been built by his union. 6. On Silver River, a recent production, set erectors built a boat at our ranch. Although local 44 claimed the boat we continued to have set erectors build it. However, later on -when this boat was duplicated for process, 44 built the duplicate. 7. Shortly after the directive was put into effect in 1946, carpenters refused to trim a set which lATSE set erectors had erected. 8. Following the announcement by the central council that A. F. of L. unions have a right to refuse to work on equipment serviced by non-A. F. of L. unions, there were two main incidents : One, where a local 399 driver refused to drive a car serviced by an 1185 machinist. On another occasion, painters refused to -work on sets to be used in a Technicolor picture because lATSE machinists (AFL) had sei'viced the cameras. During the filming of the picture Life "With Father there was an actual stoppage of shooting just prior to the lunch hour. June 6. 1940. This was caused by Mr. Cooper, international representative of the lATSE, who protested the servicing of Technicolor cameras by non-A. F. of L. technicians in line with the letter published by the Central Labor Council. Shooting was resumed shortly after lunch. There was a total loss of approximately V2 hour. J^OTES Regarding Some of the JtiBiSDiCTioNAL Disputes Occurring at Republic Studios During the Last 3 Years Date of this report, August 16, 1947 part i. disputes involving two or more I. A. unions 1. June 23, lOU—Sharlows Branches, pieces of opaque material and other objects when moved within a beam of light to cast shadows on a set have been claimed both by local SO, grips, and by local 44. special effects men. The dispute was referred by letter to :both local SO and local 44 with the request they refer it to the international for settlement. On August 29, 1944, the studio was requested to make and furnish a report on a survey of Republic's past practice which was done and a report made to both locals and Mr. Cooper, vice president, by letter. On September 2, 1944. the studio wrote Dick Walsh to give Republic's views as an employer on the problem presented. This letter was acknowledged by Mr. Walsh on September 7, 1944, with thanks and the request that the studio feel free to proceed in similar manner in other jurisdictional disputes if it felt its comments would be helpful to the international. The dispute, except as to shadows cast b.v means of glass shots (item No. 5 :above). was settled by the I. A. International Union agreement of December 14, 1947 and there have been no further problems. 2. July 31, 1945 — Swinging gate A set behild a proscenium arch had a foreground piece consisting of a fence with a swinging gate. It was intended actors would hang on the gate while swinging. The studio assigned the work of constructing the gate and fence to