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 1319 INfr. Bhown. We had an agreement; yes. ]\lr. Owens. Who was supposed to do that work when you did not ? Mr. Brown. I don't know tliat I can answer that question, because that Avas up to the employer. All I know is that our membership had an aoi-eement amou;2: (liemselves, written in the bylaws, that they would uot cross the picket line. Mr. Owens. You did not work, and they got somebody to work for thcui, di(hi't they? Did you have auy objection to the employers try- ing to protect themselves ? Afr. Brown. We objected to any machinist working behind the picket line. Mr. Owens. Did you have any objection on the part of the employer trying to keep his studio going? Mr. Brown. No, if an empkn^er could corral scabs that was up to him, but we do blame members of the trade. Mr. Owens. You understand you were talking about your own men before? Mr. Broavn. Former members, yes. Mr. Owens. There is a difference between the words "scab" and '"â– strikebreaker," isn't there? ]Mr. Brown. No. My definition of a scab is a member of a union who violates his oath of membership. Mr. Kearns. I never did like the teriji, so I don't like to use it. Mr. Brown. And deserts the fellows who he was obligated to stand by. Mr. Owens. And what is a strikebreaker ? Mr. Brown. And then crosses the picket line and comes to the rescue of that employer to defeat his buddies back of the picket line. That is the fellow I refer to with the term the chairman does not like. Mr. Owens. You mean even if he just drops out of your union and joins another one in order to keep up the work during the war period? Mv. Brown. Whether he joins one or a dozen he still is a member of the ci-aft. He obligates himself to stand by his fellow craftsman, tJien he turns yellow and goes across the picket line. Mr. Owens. So far you have absolved the employer with respect to that. That brought you to the agreement in October of 1945. Did you nudce yourself a party to that agreement, your union? Mr. Brown. Which agreement are you referring to? Mr. Owens. The Cincinnati meeting. ]\Ir. Brown. The unions involved in that dispute acquiesced in a directive by the executive council of the A. F. of L. Mr. Owens. That is, you agreed to be bound by that directive which would be issued by three arbitrators, am I correct ? iVIr. Brown. Yes. But it never was my understanding or belief that the arbitrators would violate their responsibility. Mr. Owens. Now before we get to that, you did agree to be bound by that arbitration agreement? ' Mr. Brown. I agreed to accept whatever settlement was made, but please recognize the fact that I think you would do the same thing; that if somebody is going to ])ass upon your problems you acquiesce with the idea tliat those people are going to be governed entirely by the facts and circumstances. Mr. Kearns. You mean like socializing law ?