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 1247 Mr. Owens. "What is wrong with that? Don't they have a right to do that? Aren't they the employers? Don't they have a right to do what they please ? Mr. SoRRELL, Why, certainly, they have a right to hire anyone they please, so long as he is a machinist and has a union card. Mr. Owens. Didn't they do that? Mr. SoRRELL. No. They hire people who signed their name on some other card, some A. F. of L. Federal charter, or something. They got a Federal charter from the A. F. of L. If George Meany was here, he would tell you they did not issue it for the studios. They tried to get it in the name of the Senate technicians, but he would not issue it to them. He only issued them Federal charter number so and so, for the county of Los Angeles, so they hired these outsiders. Now, that was the first break. I mean to tell you, that was the first break. You wanted to know how the lATSE and the conference of studio unions lived together Mr. Owens. You were not representing the International Asso- ciation of Machinists, were you? Mr. SoRRELL. The International Association of Machinists Local 1185 was one of the members of the conference of studio unions, which I was president of. Mr. Owens. I see. Mr. SoRRELL. Now, this went on for a little while, then all of a sudden—the machinists decided not to do anything about it. The worker does not want to do anything until he is forced. The other unions, the lATSE came to, I think, Warner Bros, and stopped production on a set where technicolor camera was being used and an lAM machinist was taking care of the camera. Now, get this: This man had been doing the job for years. So they stopped work and said, "You will have to get one of the Federal charter men to do the work or we won't shoot." That came from the officials. Mr. 0^^^:NS. When was that, Mr. Sorrell ? Mr. Sorrell. I believe that was in April of 1946. On hearing that, I detest a man trying to throw another man out of his job, so I called a meeting of the painters. We decided we would not paint any sets for technicolor unless our brother machinists were continued to be employed. Mr. Owens. Well, did they discharge him at that time ? Mr. Sorrell. They discharged him. Mr. Owens. You mean when that complaint was made the com- pany discharged him ? ]Sir. Sorrell. The company does anything the lATSE asks them to; they discharged him; yes. So we decided we would not paint any sets there if the lAM machin- ist was not good enough to do the job, the painter was not good enough to paint the set, and technicolor needs painters. Consequently, the painters were fired. Now, had these painters not cared which organization they paid dues to, or if they did not know anything more about this than you do at the present time, they would say, "Well, we will just pay dues to the lA."