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 1265 Mr. ]\fcCAXN. I am callino- attention to the fact that this appears to be the original basic agreement, signed by all the organizations, with the rules of procedure attached. Mr. OwKNs. That is why I said it should be marked by an exhibit number; then we will not become puzzled about it. They should be marked so that when they are reproduced we will not get the wrong document in the record at this point. Mr. McC.^ANX. That is the complete basic agreement, is it not, Mr. Boren? I\Ir. BoREN. Right. Mr. ]McCaxx. I think we can trust the court reporter to reproduce it. It consists of four printed pages and will be reproduced at this point in the record. (This agreement was reproduced earlier in the record. See p. 1262.) Mr. BoRKx. I am not insisting on that, because I thought the rules of procedure were on that. ]Mr. McCax^x. I regret very much, Mr. Boren, but this was what was sent to me as the basic agreement. ]Mr. Kkarxs. You ought to know your own basic agreement. Mr. ^NIcCaxx". Xow was there anything in the basic agreement or in any other contract that was entered into between the carpenters, the painters or an}^ of the other people who executed this basic agree- ment, which prevented any of them from honoring a picket line by any other union? Mr. BoREX'. I don't believe so. They could withdraw from the basic agreement at any time. I think there was a 10-day notice in there. I am not too familiar with the whole basic agreement. Mr. McCax'^x^. Well, it was not even required that they withdraw from the basic agreement. In case they had any labor ctispute with 3'ou they were free to strike themselves? ]Mr. BoREX'. You must understand in the basic agreement we had very harmonious relationships with these people. They were under open-shop conditions and we did not have the fight for jurisdiction which we sometimes find when we have closed-shop conditions. ^Vhat entered into the minds of those men back in 1926 was certainly not followed in 1915. Mr. McCax-^x. Mr. Boren, was there ever anything in these basic agreements or modifications that obligated a union to refuse to go through a picket line in case of a strike ^ Mr. BoREX. The strength of those basic agreements was that the international presidents honored the contract, and we did not think in those days, as I am told, that anyone could take the liberty to violate a contract and walk off the job. Mr. ]M('Cax'X'. I do not think you had it happen either, did you? Mr. BoREX'. No, because it was made upon faith and honest rela- tionshi])s between men. Mr. ]\I('Caxx^. Now, will you state whether or not you were present at the time of the references which we have made to the meetings of the 11th and 12th of September 1916, when Mr. Cambiano came to the meeting. Were you there? ^Ir. BoREX. I was. Mr. McCax'X'. At that time vou represented Paramount, did you not?