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)

1304 MOTION-PICTURE JURISDICTIONAL DISPUTES Now in the contract we have with lA we recognize the right of an operator to take down those machines and replace them because there are no machinists working in a motion-picture theater. In Hollywood in every instance prior to that decision we took down the machines; we installed the machines; we did all the repairing in the booths except temporary repairs, and I emphasize the term "tem- porary" emergency running repairs. But as a result of this decision a dispute developed in every studio over work in those booths, a dispute that did not exist but a dispute that Avas created by the arbitration committee. The A. F. of L. arbitration committee turned its back on the one and only dispute between the I. A. of M. and the lATSE and then to further aggravate the relationship between the I. A. of M. and the lATSE they ruled that provisions of the above-mentioned 1929 agree- ment shall be placed in full force and etfect wherever members of the I. A. of M. are employed in moving-picture studios in the Hollywood area. Instead of settling the jurisdictional dispute in one small ma- chine shop, the A. F. of L. arbitration committee created additional disputes unintentionally, however, in every studio in the Hollywood area. I believe it will interest your committee to know that on or about February 1, 1939, representatives of local union No. 37, lATSE and local union No. 1185 of I, A. of M. did agree upon provisions to be embodied in an agreement to settle the dispute in the above referred to M-G-M machine shop. There was a conference held, presided over by Mr. Aubrey Blair, member of another union, acting as impartial chairman. Those participating were Lew C. G. Blix. business repre- sentative, and Joseph M. Carpenter, chairman of the board of gover- nors, local union No. 37, lATSE, and business representative D. T. Wayne, local union No. 1185,1. A. of M. Language for an agreement was finally agreed to read as follows: Jurisdictional agreement between T. A. of M. Cinema Lodge No. 1185 and Studio Technicians Local No. 37, lATSE and MPMO. Where a studio has a bona fide machine shop installed and employs regular machinists, the jurisdiction shall be under the control of Cinema Lodge of Machinists Union Local No. 1185. But where no shop is so installed and it be- comes necessary for a prop maker to work on machine work which would be incidental to the completed prop then a prop maker of local No. 37, lATSE, nuiy be employed on such work. D. T. Wayne, Business Representative, No. 1185, I. A. of M. The above agreement was approved by the board of governors of local No. 37, lATSE under date of February 14, 1939, at a special meeting of that body at which time it was agreed by a 10 to 4 majority that the chairman of said board should sign for and on behalf of Studio Technicians local No. 37, lATSE and MPMO. .TosEPH W. Carpenter, Chairman of Board of Governors. Unfortunately, this agreement was not applied obviously because some authority higher than the above-mentioned board of governors representing the lATSE local unions involved would not agree to the terms of the proposed agreement. It is my information that at a later date local union No. 37 lATSE was divided into several separate local unions and our people were then told to forget about the agreement as local union No. 37 was no longer in existence.