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)

MOTION-PICTURjE JURISDICTIONAL DISPUTES 493 a dispute arose between local 44 — property men and local 46<S — set erectors as to wiietlier or not this was a set. Local 44— property men claimed it represented outside sceneiy and as such belonged to them. The studio believed it was a set and referred the dispute to Vice President Brewer, who, the following day, ruled it wtis a set. Local 468 supplied the replacements. 9. June 10, 1947— Work scaffold In constructing the set covered by item No. 6 above, it was necessary to erect work scaffold so that plasterers could apply their skins to the framework and so that painters could follow and complete the set. Plasterers applied their skins from the floor as high up as they could reach. The studio then assigned local 468, replacement carpenters, to Iniild wood work scaffold so that plasterers could applj" a second strake of skins. This process was repeated until the entire framework of about 30 feet high was covered. While the plasterers were on the second and third strakes, a dispute arose between local 80, grips, and local 468, carpenters, on the one hand and the studio on the other hand. The two lA locals claimed local 80 should Imild the scaffold because the plasterers' skins were applied liefore the work scaffold was constructed. The studio argued that the work scaffold was in the jurisdiction of tlie 946 carpenters and, therefore, rei^lacement carpenters had been assigned, but stated to both unions that if the lA international representative wished to redivide the work between the lA locals during the period of strike, we would probably not object. It was immediately referred to the international's Mr. Brewer who, the following day, ruled that work scaffold built from the floor up was in the jurisdiction of local 468, set erectors and carpenters, except tubular scaffolding which was local 80, grips. He ruled that if the scaffolding was hung from above it was in the jurisdiction of local 80, grips. However, in response to an inquii-y from the studio several days later he modified his ruling to state that if work scaffold was required by propmakers or miniature makers in their work, local 44 was to build the scaffold. There was a slow-down of work created by the argument above covered lasting over a li/^-hour period. There was actually no work stoppage, however. 10. August 1), 1946 — Staircase behind proscenium a/rcJi A circular staii'case was constructed in the mill by replacement carpenters and the studio ordered 468, set erectors, to place it in position in the set which was behind a proscenium arch. Local 80, grips, claimed the work of setting the staircase. The work was completed without work stoppage and the studio referred the matter by letter to Brewer to decide between the two lA locals. No answer has ever been forthcoming. PART II. DISPUTE INVOLVING AN lA LOCAL AND A UNION OTHER THAN lA 11. July 11, 1944 — Operation of pump for water filter A water pump was in use to circulate water through a filter for use in a miniature tank. Tlie studio assigned an lA Local 44 special-effects man in accordance with what it believed was its past practice. Local '0, IBEW, immediately claimed jurisdiction. Shortly thereafter, DuVal, business agent of local 44, phoned to ask Avhat tbe controversy was about regarding removing his man. He was advised the man was not being removed, but that local 44 was protesting. The studio requested by letter to the two unions that the dispute be referred to the internationals for settlement. Al Speeds for local 40 wrote the international on July 21, 1944. On or about August 15, 1944, Republic's representative ascertained in a telephone conversation with Carl Cooper, lA vice president, that DuVal apparently had not referred the matter to the international. Republic then phoned advising Cooper that it had a similar problem arising on August 18, 1944, and that to bring it to a head with DuVal, the studio intended to assign a local 40 man and immediately DuVal objected. Republic told DuVal it had requested settlement of the dispute at the international which DuVal agreed was proper practice. However, DuVal requested the studio on August IS. 1944, to make a survey of past practices at Republic which he felt would show that local 44 had been doing the work. Republic made such a survey and on August 22, 1944, drafted letters which it intended to send to local 44 and local 40 advising them of tlie result of the survey and to say that thereafter and until the international settled the dispute. Republic would assign local 44 men to operate pumps in similar instances since that was the past practice. Republic's representative read the draft of this letter to Mr. Frank Carothers, international representative for the basic agreement unions, including local 40. Mr. Carothers