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.

504 MOTION-PICTURE JURISDICTIONAL DISPUTES tional door, change in location of windows, the repair of platforms and steps, and repair of the flooring. An argument ensued between locals No. 44 and No. 946, with the result that work was indefinitely suspended. 11. Electric vnnd machines {when used for purpose of iinnxl effect). — Locals No. 40 and No. 44 were in dispute recently over the operation of the electricwind machines for wind effects. Under the directive, local No. 40 does the work in question. 12. Railiray or railroad stage. — We have a railroad stage, which is used as such, but right after the termination of the first strike locals No. 946 and No. 644 claimed the structure was not a stage, but a "train-shed," and a bitter argument ensued between these two locals and local No. 468. The local No. 644 refused to paint the sets, and work was stopped for 4 days. It was ruled a stage and subsequently over 19 pictures have had shooting sequences filmed inside the structure. Universal Pictures Co., Inc., Pacific Coast Studios, Universal City, Calif., August 16, 19-'f7. Mr. Charles Boren, Motion Picture Producers Association, Hollywood, Calif. Deak Charlie : As requested at the meeting yesterday, I am enclosing memorandum of some of the jurisdictional disputes which I can recall. Very truly yours, A. H. McCausland. Memorandum Regarding Jurisdictional Disputes On May 20, 1946, jurisdictional dispute between Carpenters Local 946 and Propmakers Local 44 as to who would revamp a railroad coach. Proceeding with the work was delayed until Mr. Casey came out to studio with representatives of the two unions. Mr. Casey ruled that the application of the molding, tongue and groove on the side of the car was trim and should be done by the carpenters. Local 44, lATSE, was given the installation of the interior seats and equipment. Several disputes arose between local 44 and sheet-metal workers as to who should build the tin smokestacks used to carry smoke from the firebox when fireplaces were practical. Studio took position that these should be built and erected by the tinsmiths and not by local 44 as they had nothing whatever to do with the lire effect. On several instances had jurisdictional disputes between the carpenters and local 44 with respect to the building and hanging of signs. One instance I recall particularly was the sign on a western street attached to the roof, claimed by both unions, awarded to carpenters. In April 1946 dispute between carpenters and local 44, propmakers regarding a double telephone booth which had to be revamped for use in a picture. As booth was free standing and not attached to set, awarded work to local 44. February 28, 1946, Painters' Local 644 would not paint a bar if the glass put in the bar was installed by propmakers instead of carpenters. Painters took position tliat all glazing originally belonged to them but was given to carpenters, but if carpenters were not going to do the work they wanted the jurisdiction returned to them. Glass was installed by the carpenters. Jurisdictional dispute February 27, 1946, between machinists and projectionists. Machinists claimed jurisdiction over machine that was being assembled outside of projection booth but in the projection department. As there was no machinist work being done in the assembling, awarded work to projectionists. April 13, 1946, dispute between carpenters and local 44, propmakers, over the building of cut-outs. Had several incidents of this nature arise, but always awarded work to carpenters to build. On May 29, 1946, Teamsters Local 399 made a bus hot as it had been serviced by automotive mechanics, members of machinists' local. Teamsters refused to allow their men to drive bus. Studio had to employ outside equipment to take people to nearby location. Several disputes arose between carpenters and local 44 over the building and setting of counters and bars. One particular instance in the spring of 3946 of counter in an airport caused stoppage of work for 2 or 3 days. Mr. Pelton came