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 1473 Mr. Landis. He claims that before the decision was to be made, the international president was to give full information, that his fnll case of the carpenters was not presented to the committee. Mr. DoiiERTY. Your committee, Mr. Chairman, has all of the testimony that was submitted by the carpenters' union through Messrs. Cambiano and Skelton at Hollywood during December of 1945. In the record it states very definitely in the carpenters' presentation that the international president of the carpenters reserved the right to submit either additional testimony or to review the work that our connnittee was doing. Chairman Knight of our committee did send the identical notifica- tion to all seven international presidents involved in this Hollywood jurisdictional dispute. I think they were all afforded equal oppor- tunity to come there. We had a definite job to do, Mr. Chairman, and members of the connnittee. We had 30 days within which to baud down our decision. Mr. Hutcheson could not be there for reasons known to himself. I think he notified Chairman Knight he could not be there, and he sent someone in to represent him, Cambiano and Skelton. If all the organizations involved had put that same stifiulation on their presentation, we never would have handed down the decision in 30 days. Mr. Laxdis. Was he notified after the two carpenter witnesses had testified, that he was to have a certain length of time to furnish addi- tional evidence? Mr. DoiiERTY. Let me put it this way, Mr, Chairman: All the unions involved were notified of the original directive handed down b}^ the A. F. of L. Mr. Hutcheson, like myself, was a party to the original directive, in that we were to go there as a com- mittee of three vice presidents and hand down a decision within 30 days. In other words, the unions themselves had 30 days to settle their own dispute. At the expiration of that 30 days, if there was any part of a dispute left unsolved, we Avere to move in and try to settle the jurisdictional dispute. All of them had that same notification. As a matter of fact, Mr. Hutcheson and myself were a party to that executive council directive. Mr. Landis. You were to move in after 30 days, notice of which had been given; that their Avitnesses should be there and they could furnish additional evidence in those 30 days? Mr. DoHER'n'. That was a part of the directive handed down at Ciucinnati in October 10-15, yes, sir. I think I have it here. It has been put in the record many times, however. Here it is. This is the directive handed down during October 1945 at Cincinnati, Ohio, by the executive council. All members of the executive council were in complete agreement on it. It was the unanimous decision of the executive council. Tlie fifth point in the directive reads thusly: That all parties concerned— and it names the seven unions— That all parties concerned accept as final and binding snch decisions and deter- minations as the executive council committee of tlu-ee may finally render.