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 1397 Counci] discussed the matter in d(>tail. "Vice President Bates called attention to tlie motion which was ijendins before the council at the last meeting and is now up for consideration and reads as follows: "It was regularly moved that the chairman convey to Eric Johnston the charges made by tlie carpenters that the personnel and directors of the studios are dis- placing the carpenters and giving the carpenters' work to members of the lATSE, contrai-y to the decision made by the committee that was appointed to settle this dispute and that he had agreed to see that the decision of the commitee was carried out by the studios and requests hira to investigate the matter and carry out the decision and see that it is done." It was decided to let the matter rest until tomorrow morning then take it up for consideration. Wednesday Morning, May 26, 1946. Vice President Hutcheson offered a motion that the council comply with the request of the United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America by declaring that they recognize the jurisdiction of the United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America as l)eing set forth in the constitution of the brotherhood and the proceedings of the various conventions of the American Federation of Labor. After some further discussion, an amendment was offered to the motion to provide: Further, that this action does not interfere with the decision handed down by the Hollywood jurisdiction committee. It was regu- larly moved and seconded that the request be held over until the next meeting of the council and that in the meantime the president be instructed to investigate the entire situation and report to the next council meeting. That latter, Mr. Chairman, is a repetition of the minutes inserted in the August meeting. I just discovered that. afternoon session Thursday, August 16, 1946. The council resumed discussion of the carpenters' protest against the decision of the Hollywood jurisdiction committee. Vice President Dougherty requested that the amendment which he offei-ed to the motion be considered, that this action does not interfere with the decision handed down by the Hollywood jurisdiction committee. Vice President Hutcheson contended that this amendment is passed because the brotherhood has not accepted the directive. He stated the international has not accepted, and does not intend to accept it for reasons that had previously been stated and are in the record. The council discussed this question at some length. Vice President Knight expressed the opinion that this amendment is in order. He called attention to tlie fact that the council went back to the record of the last meeting of the council when this question was under discussion and took from the minutes of that meeting a motion that was made, and that is the motion to be acted on here. He contended that the amendment was made at the time, and there were no objections raised to it and no question of its propriety, legal- ity, or constitutionality raised, and he stated if we are to take one from the meeting, he did not see how we could avoid the other. After considerable discussion, Vice President Hutcheson stated if the com- mittee would give to the council a clarification of its intent as set forth in the discussion, he would consider withdrawal of his motion. Secretary Meany called attention to the fact that on March 14, Chairman Knight of the committee wrote to the busine.ss agent of the electrical workers clarifying the decision on the question of running repairs. Mr. Zoux. Excuse me. ]\ray the record show—this is not criticism, but simply for the record—Mr. Hutcheson, the statements made after the statement he quoted from which appears at page 784: and 785 of the record in this proceeding, in which Vice President Knight took certain decisions with respect to the decision of the three-man com- mittee.