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.
1162 MOTION-PICTURE JURISDICTIONAL DISPUTES those differences, then our committee was to go in there and settle it for them. Our findings were to be final and binding on all parties. May I say that all the unions I read into the record here this after- noon were a party of that agreement, the carpenters, the stagehands, and all of the seven unions involved were a party to that agreement, that our findings would be final and binding. Mr. Owens. When were your final and binding findings considered to be final in nature? Mr. DoHERTY. Shortly after we handed down our directive, with- in several months, I would say. There was some immediate resent- ment to the directive right after we handed it down. It appears that some 350 carpenters had been displaced by other employees in the motion-picture studios. That was, in my estimation, the crux of the situation which started the new trouble out there. Mr. Owens. When did you consider your decision a final decision? Mr. DoHERTY. December 26, 1945. We thought then our work was completed. Mr. Owens. Can you tell me anything to show that it was not com- pleted? Mr. DoHERTY. Except that the executive council, which is the governing body of the American Federation of Labor, some 8 or 9 months later instructed us to bring in a clarification. Mr. Owens. Then is it correct that your decision as finally made would have no finality at all even through the years? They could change it every 6 months or every year as they wished; isn't that true? Mr. DoHERTY. That is the way it worked out, Mr. Congressman. Mr. Owens. You are not in accord with that, are you ? Mr. DoHERTY. Absolutely not. I really worked in good faith and thought that our decision of December 26,1945, was the final and bind- ing decision upon all the parties involved in that dispute. Mr. Owens. There is nothing more for me to inquire about. I have heard everything. Mr. Kea'rns. Mr. Smith. Mr. Smith. Mr. Dougherty, I was interested in your observation about efficiency experts. Haven't we got too much efficiency in a lot of our labor negotiations? Mr. Doherty. I wouldn't say too much efficiency. Congressman. We have too many efficiency experts. There isn't enough efficiency because we have so many efficiency experts. Mr. Smith. The point I am thinking about is the classification and trying to determine a job by a slide rule and figure out its exact job content. Isn't that what they are trying to do ? Mr. Doherty. That is correct, Congressman. In most instances the rule of common sense is completely ignored. Mr. Smith. In other words, men who have grown up with the indus- try are better able to judge what particular job should be classified according to the old custom than some efficiency expert coming into a new group ? Mr. Doherty. I think that is a very fair and a very true statement. Mr. Smith. That is all. Mr. Landis. I would like to ask one more question. I thank the gentleman for his frankness and explanation. I am sorry I did not get all the details in California.