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.

MOTION-PICTURE JURISDICTIONAL DISPUTES 1203 Mr. Kearns. You feel the industry would be in a different position today if the presidents were ri<^ht on the coast where the pictures are made, instead of being in New York in their offices? Mr. Perkins. Of course, our president is on the coast. Mr. Kearns. Yes, yours is. Mr. Perkins. I do not know that would make any difference. Mr. Kearns. You would have no opinion on that ? Mr. Perkins. No, sir. Mr. Kearns. You know of no meeting held by the presidents whereby it was agreed to have an agreement with one union to keep the studios open during this situation ? Mr. Perkins. No ; I am sure that at the meeting of September 11, there was discussion as to whether it would be possible to keep the studios going, if we decided that we would not kneel down to the ulti- matum the carpenters had given us. That naturally involved finding out what the other unions were going to do, but other than that I have nothing to say in answer to your question. Mr. Kearns. Do you have any questions? Mr. McCann. I have one other question. Mr. Owens. Just a moment. In view of the chairman's questions it biought a question to my mind. You are counsel as well as vice president of the company ? Mr. Perkins. I would say I was counsel and happen to be a vice 23resident. Mr. Owens. In other words, you are primarily counsel ? Mr. Perkins. Yes, sir. Mr. Owens. Then as such you would naturally advise the manage- ment with respect to legal matters, which would also involve labor relations legally ? Mr. Perkins. Yes, sir; but we have to advise management with respect to management matters, a good many of which are specialities. Just as I do not feel competent to give any final word on a tax problem, for instance—I am not a tax expert. We have antitrust matters, copy- right matters, and a great many things. One thing I have learned is that this particular field, labor rela- tions, is even more intricate than those I have mentioned. It is newer and to me it is much more complicated. Mr. Owens. Then you are not one of the counsel who advised either for or against using the amendment to the National Labor Relations Act that was recently passed ? Mr. Perkins. No, sir; I was not. Mr. Owens. So you really have had no part in this picture at all to speak of, have you ? Mr. Perkins. That is a fair statement. I was present at the meet- ing Mr. JMcCann questioned me about, representing Warner Brothers Pictures, but as I have said, the Warner problems in that phase are handled on the coast, not in New York. Mr. Owens. In other words, that meeting strikes me as one where you were trying to figure out how you could keep running with two unions striking you from each side? Mr. Perkins. Yes, sir; definitely. Mr. Owens. That is all.