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 1309 macliine shop. Everybody connected with the Hollywood situation knows tliat. Mr. Keakxs. That is one thing-1 am particularly interested in with respect to unions. I have never approved of this business of carrying two or three cards. Mr. 15uowN. I say God speed the day when that damnable practice may be abolished. Mr. JNIc^Cann. Mr. Chairman. I want to say the stationary engineers have representatives here. As I understand it, they said they were going to furiush affidavits to us that some of their men in the studios have been required to carry four cards. They want to be heard here briefly when this is over. There is one thing you did not make clear to us which I thought you were going to do; you heard Mr. Doherty's testimony to the effect ]Mr. Browx. I Avas not here. Mr. McCanx. AYell. Mr. Doherty made the statement that they did ^ Mr. Kearxs. Are you quoting the actual statement? Mr. McCaxx. Not exactly. Mr. Keakxs. Well, if we are going to go into that, quote the actual statement of Mr. Doherty. Mr. McCaxx. I do not have the record here. I will leave out the statement entirely. Mr. Kearxs. Leave out his name then. It will be your own question. ^Ir. McCaxx. All right. Did the three-man committee treat the I. A. of M. the same way that it did the other unions in their decision, and did it give work to the I, A. of M. in that decision? Mr. OwExs. Mr. Chairman, is not that a double question? The first calls ^^or a conclusion, and the second calls for a fact. ]\Ir. McCaxx. If he does know, I think he will give us the facts. We heard testimony on this subject the other day. I do not have the record with me. ]\Ir. Kearxs. The directive plainly shows that the I. A. of M. was included. Mr. McCaxx. But did they spell it out and give the I. A. of M. the benefits that they gave to other unions ? That is what I am trying to find out. Mr. Browx. No; they did not; and I will tell you why. It is my understanding tlie arbitration committee endeavored to dispose of the differences between the carpenters of the lA and the painters of the lA on the basis of their understanding of the facts where a dispute existed. In our case the only dispute that existed was the M-G-M machine shop. They never touched that, but they issued an order to apply a work practice that disrupted a work practice, vrhere there was no dis- agieement between the lA and the I. A. of M. Mr. Kearxs. Your contention is they should have dealt with the one instance? Mr. Brov.x. The one and one oidy. I say in an arbitration meeting when they are confined to a jurisdictional dispute they should conhno themselves to that dispute and they have no right to go beyond that. 67383—48—vol. 2 18