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)

632 MOTION-PICTURE JURISDICTIONAL DISPUTES am only questioning you as to the unity of action by the representatives of the producers on that occasion. Tliey agreed to this program, did they not? Mr. Mannix. I agreed to the program and put it into effect. ]\Ir. McCann. And you put it into effect on the 23d ? Mr. Manxix. Yes, sir. Mr. ]V1cCaxx. Any questions, Mr. Chairman ? Mr. Kearns. Mr. Mannix, as I understand, this is an investigation, not a triaL There are certain things that we must clear for the record. You probably have noticed my comments. I intend to find out. while I am here, whether the movie industry is run by management on the grounds or absentee management. To me it is an important factor whether or not these carpenters were told to get out by men who were running a job here in Hollywood, or told to get out by men in New York, becau-:e the testimony this morning which, to me, is very important, was definitely established here that Twentieth Century-Fox is absolutely bona fide local management. When this situation arose, the man who was locally in charge here of Twentieth Centurj^-Fox had an opinion from his attorney regarding the ultimatum handed in by the carpenters, so the attorney gave him his opinion. He told these men, the carpenters, that if they would not Avork on sets assigned to them, that they would have to leave the lot. They would be paid off. Now, it is quite obvious from your testimony here that Metro-Goldwjai-Mayer is in a little different position than Twentieth CenturyFox. You stated here, Mr. Mannix, that your president doesn't call you as much as you call him ; is that correct? Mr. Mannix. Yes, sir. Mr. Kearns. In other words, you then are really running MetroGoldwyn-Mayer and you are located in Hollywood? Mr. Mannix. Yes, sir. I say, "Yes, sir." My location — I will answer your question more thoroughly. Mr". Kearns. I would take it, then, your president of JNIetro-Goldwyn-Mayer relies entirely upon your judgment as to the operation, and you make designations then such as you did in this case, where you felt that inasmuch as the carpenters had served your company with this ultimatum that, in your good judgment, the thing to do was to operate without them if they didn't want to work on jobs assigned to them, regardless of their principles or the regulations of their union, and then you notified your president of your decision, and then he said to you, as vice president in charge of operations, "You use your own judgment. If that is what you decree, that is the thing to do" ? Ml". Mannix. Yes. May I add to that in this res])ect : I mj'self was aided by legal counsel in my decision, I mean by — in advising Mr. Schenck I told him I had discussed it with counsel. In fact, counsel was present at the meeting we had. Mr. Kearns. You have counsel? Mr. Mannix. Counsel was present at our labor meeting. We didn't act without counsel. Mr. Kearns. Did your counsel advise that the carpenters were in violation of the Wagner Act when they did this? Mr. Mannix. I don't know whether the Wagner Act played a part in this particular situation of the strike. Mr. Kearns. Well, they threatened to quit work, didn't they ?