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.

608 MOTION-PICTURE JURISDICTIONAL DISPUTES Mr. INIeyer. "Wliicli men do yon mean ? Mr. McCann. With the men of the barofaininp; committee. Mr. Meyer. Yon mean the producers' labor connnitte-e? Mr. McCann. Yes. Mr. Meyer. Oh, yes ; we had many meetings after that. Mr. McCann. Was it discussed what they shonkl do? Was tlnit discussed at all of those meetings between that time and the 23d? Mr. Meyer. I don't know that the 23d ever came into the picture. As a matter of fact, I can't recall now the interlapse between what Mr. Price states was the 11th and the 23d. The only thing we discussed was that in order to keep operation going we liad no alternative but to operate as best we could and request the men to leave the premises for failure to perform work as assigned, as, if, and when they refused to perform that work. Mr. McCann. Did you have any conferences with Mr. Walsh, the president of the lATSE ? Mr. Meyer. I had a lot of conferences with him. Mr. McCann. During that period ? Mr, Meyer. I don't think so. I don't believe he was here at that time. I don't remember. Mr. McCann. AVell. I am trying to o;et at, with whom did you consult with respect to what yon would do when you let the carpenters go? Was that with IVIr. Brewer or ]\Ir. Walsh or with whom? Mr. Meyer. I didn't contact Mr. Brewer about it, I didn't contact Mr. Walsh about that. That was the studio policy. The only backing I needed was that of Mr. Joseph Schenck, who is the executive head of the studio, other than Mr. Skouras, the president in New York, and who certainly was not familiar with the actual physical problems confronting us here. Mr. McCann. Did you talk with him about that at all ? Mr. Meyer. Oh, yes. Mr. McCann. During that period you discussed that with him ? Mr. Meyer. I believe so. Mr. McCann. And he left that in your hands to decide what to do ? Mr. Meyer. He did. Mr. McCann. Was there a particular day, a particular conference, at which unanimity of mind was reached between the producers as to the policy which they should follow ? Mr. Meyer. I can't recall the day. Mr. McCann. Well, was there a day at which unanimity of mind and a definite policy was established as to what you would do? Mr. Meyer. Yes! Mr. McCann. Do you think that was 2 or 3 days, or how long before the 23d of September? Mr. Meyer. I wouldn't want to venture a guess. Mr. McCann. You can only say it was between the 11th and the 23d ? Mr. Meyer. No ; I can't even say that. It was sometime subsequent to the 11th. I still am trying to' be just as honest and truthful as I know how, and I still can't for the world of me understand and recall the significance of that date of September 23d, miless that happened to be the day when the carpenters refused en masse to perform work assigned. That is the only significance September 23d has in my mind. INIr. McCann. Well, that is the significance which has been testified