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.

1008 MOTION-PICTURE JURISDICTIONAL DISPUTES Mr. McCann. Mr. Chairman, one of the quotes with respect to Mr. Wright is embodied in one of these paragraphs, and I am going to have to continue to skim slowly. Mr. Kearns. All right. Take your time, until we find it. Mr. McCann. In the minutes of September 23, 1946, I find the following statement : Alfred Wright stated the studios cannot morally or legally assign maintenance men who never have vi^orked as journeymen on sets to set work. Do you recall that? Mr. Wright. Well, I recall opposing that course of action. I can't say that I said those words. But I was opposed to doing that. Mr. Kearns. Did you say words to that effect ? Mr. Wright. I think I did, yes. I don't know whether I said "morally and legally," or whether I said I would not do it that way. I was opposed to that procedure. There was a difference of opinion between us. Mr. Kearns. You were opposed to the collective procedure there ? Mr. Wright. I was opposed to putting the maintenance men on sets, yes. I don't know whether I was opposed to doing it collectively so much as I was of following that course of procedure. I didn't think it should be done. I was overruled. That was purely my opinion. Mr. McCann. Do you recall, sir, that in the early reports that came to you from the mass discharges of September 23 and the discharges that had been going on since the meetings earlier in the week, or the week previous, that it had been decided to take all the carpenters on the 23d and assign them to carpenter work, whether they had done any carpenter work or not for years, and to take all the painters, whether they were actually journeymen painters Mr. Wright. I don't recall that. Mr. McCann. You don't recall that? Mr. Wright. No, I don't. May I explain ? I didn't have reports of the mass discharges. The only time I ever heard about these matters was when I went to a meeting where there may have been some discussion. I didn't receive reports from the studios about what was going on from day to day. Mr. MoCann. But when you attended these meetings, they discussed what was going on in the studios, obviously. Mr. Wright. Oh, yes. Mr. McCann. And they had the reports on the procedure which was being followed by the different production companies ? Mr. Wright. Yes, I think they did. I think I recall Mr. McCann. Otherwise, you wouldn't have made such a statement as you did, in substance, make to them ? Mr. Wright. I knew generally what was going on. Mr. McCann. Mr. Chairman, I think that will be adequate. Mr. Kearns. Thank you, Mr. Wright. Mr. Wright. Thank you, sir. Mr. Kearns. I want to recess for 5 minutes. , Mr. McCann. All right, sir. (Short recess taken.) Mr. Kearns. Will the hearing please come to order ? Mr. McCann, One further question of Mr. Wright.