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.

1014 MOTION-PICTURE JURISDICTIONAL DISPUTES Mr. Hays. Can I answer that? INIr. McCann. Not a permit union member. You could have about 16 different categories if you wanted to do it that way. A man getting into your union down in the cellar and he would never get to the top in a thousand years, until all the old folks had beards and died. Mr. Hats. That is another thing. We also had an agreement with the producers where, at the end of every 2 years we have to bring up our senior list so that they have competent and able people to perform the duties of make-up, hair styling and body make-up. If I went into one of their meetings, and they would say, "We are calling the union and the people you give us are not competent. We feel this is the time you should move up some people." We have to act. We have an agreement. You brought up before I came down here about body make-up, We had sort of a deal whereby a make-up man goes in and performs body make-up down to the neck and he is not allowed to hnish the body. Whoever advised you of that forgot to tell you it applies to women only. We have body make-up women, but they act on women only. I wanted to clarify that. Mr. McCann. I am glad to get that clear. I still want to get back to that $64 question. Why should you have two kinds of union members, senior and junior? Mr. Hats. You have heard of the railroad unions, haven't you? You know the railroad unions have had a senior clause ever since their existence. Mr. McCann. A seniority clause? Mr. Hays. That is what this is. Mr. McCann. Yes. But that is a different thing. When they get in there, they are full union members. Mr. Hats. These people are full union members, have all rights and privileges. Mr. McCann. They have all rights and privileges after the others have used up all the privileges, though, don't they? Mr. Hats. Not necessarily. Mr. McCann. As long as there is a senior member on the list. In other words, if you had 75 or 100 senior members Mr, Hats. That is right. Mr. McCann. And 25 junior members, you would never get a job for a junior member if there was one senior member out of work, would you? Mr. Hats. Yes. In a condition just like I cited here for him [indicating]. Mr. McCann. You would have to get down awfully low. Mr. Hats. That is right. Mr. McCann. In other words, the junior members are out on short grass and starvation diet for a long, long time. I mean that is the way it looks to me. Mr. Hats. That is not true. We have taken in 12 body make-up women in the past 3 years. They are all now carrying senior seniority. Every one of them. Mr, McCann. Here is something I want to ask you : Do you take 3'our apprentices that have only worked 3 years and make senior members of them, when they come in? Mr. Hats. We do.