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)

1102 MOTION-PICTURE JURISDICTIONAL DISPUTES Mr. GwiNN. And to try to prevent them from working in friendly relationship with the stage union workers, they resorted to mass picketing, violence, and threats? Mr. Ratiivoic. They did and went on strike while the matter was still pending before the National Labor Relations Board. Mr. GwiNN. I hope we get a little more of the story from the labor- union side. Mr. RATin^ON. We have had a very clear picture from the labor union that sat in the position of watching this thing, a few moments ago, from Mr. Dullzell, of the screen-actors union. The screen actors, members of the A. F. of L., at all times during this strike tried to take a leadership in getting a settlement, in other words, at the level of the labor movement itself. They had no love for the producers and no part of the producers' effort to settle this thing. They went about it in their own way and tried very hard. Before you came in here this afternoon we had a very clear picture of this thing from the point of view of a union who sat in and tried to settle this strike, which was given by Mr. Dullzell. Mr. GwiNN. Here was a case where you did not have a question of hours, wages, or conditions of labor? Mr. Rathvon. That is correct, sir. Mr. GwiNN. The fight is purely between the labor unions them- selves, all of whom were members of the A. F. of L., is that correct? Mr. Rathvon. That is correct. They had drifted into two associa- tions. You see, the lATSE is an association of studio crafts. The Conference of Studio Unions is another association of studio crafts, both including mainly A. F. of L. unions, although I believe some independent unions have been in the conference from time to time. In addition to those groups at the time the strike started, there were certain unions, including the carpenters at that time, who be- longed to neither association. We called them the basic unions. We had there really three groups to deal with. The strike broke out between the lA group and the carpenters' group, with the carpenters independent and supporting the confer- ence. It is a very involved situation, sir. Mr. GwiNN. Some of us are anxious to find out whether or not we can tolerate under any conditions a total monopoly. Mr. Rathvon. I know you are. Mr. GwiNN. It looks as if total monopolies restrict production, re- strict men, and prevent the free movement of men and materials in labor, just as it did in industry and ultimately destroys any free commerce at all. Mr. Rathvon. Here you have an example which I am sure will be a historical one of a jurisdictional fight where management at no time was involved from the point of view of having a contract in dispute. The questions were entirely jurisdictional where no one benefited; where the producers suffered great losses; where the members of the striking union suffered great losses. To my knowledge it is an example I have never seen equalled of waste, all growing out of a more or less predatory fight between labor leadership. I would like to say to you, sir, because you were not here earlier, that I, as one of the officers of one of these motion-picture companies, came here on a subpena this morning expecting that I might contribute in