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)

MOTION-PICTURE JURISDICTIONAL DISPUTES 1213 ute to the effect that the War Labor Board had no authority when there were other means of settlement or adjustment such as the Na- tional Labor Relations Board, and as a matter of policy regulations were issued subsequently which made that very clear. Mr. Owens. That was why I was so interested in knowing why the War Labor Board insisted upon being in there which they knew they shoukl not be. Mr. ZoRN. Yes. Simply because they moved very rapidly I think. They saw a strike and I think some of their subordinate agents thought they had that authority, but under the statute and under the Executive order in my opinion they had no such authority. After this order came down in essence the arbitrator held: First, it is an innnediate proposition that the studios should recognize local 1421 of the painters union, but he suggested the matter was really a representation issue and though there be an interim recogni- tion of the painters union, that the parties proceed to have the matter determined by the National Labor Relations Board, the agency that was set up to determine questions of jurisdiction. Mr. Oavexs. They made a temporary determination of somethhig that belonged to the Xational Labor Relations Board? Mr. ZoKX. That is exactly right. This decision came down some- time in February, this arbitrator's award, sometime in FebruaiT of 1945. The lx\TSE immediately notified the producers that the War Labor Board was without jurisdiction; that the arbitration award handed down was a nullity and that if we recognized local 1421 they threatened forms of economic sanction. Counsel for the ])roducers analyzed the problem. It was discussed. V\^e agreed that the War Labor Board had no jurisdiction but that the matter had to be settled and settled quickh^ so we did two things. We filed an immediate apjjeal from the arbitrator's decision to the War Labor Board and at the same time we filed an employer's repre- sentation petition with the National Labor Relations Board. ^Ir. OwEXS. When you say "we," whom do you mean ^ Mr. ZoKX. The studios, the employers. The employers filed a peti- tion before the National Labor Relations Board to determine the issue of representation. ^Nly recollection is that as of that time the LAlTSE advised us that tlie National Labor Relations Board was the proper agency and that they would go along with and abide by any determination made in the representation proceeding before the Na- tional Labor Relations Board. Mr. OwEXS. Who did they inform that of? Mr. Zoux. They advised the producers. Mr. OwEXs. Did they say that by letter? ^Ir. ZoHX. I believe there is a letter in the record, either a telegram oi- a letter to the effect tliat they would abide by tlie National Labor Relations Board's determination. Pursuant to the petition wliich we, the producers, the employers, filed, the National Labor Relations Board started hearings on the representation issue early in March of 1945. On March 12,1945, while the proceedings were still ))ending and the hearings were going on on +his representation issue, the painters union, local 1421, withdrew from the hearings and immediately called a strike. 67383—48—vol. 2 12