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)

1476 MOTION-PICTURE JURISDICTIONAL DISPUTES Mr. Owens. You see, that mi^ht be very material. Perhaps not in this proceeding, but in some other proceeding. Mr. DoHERTY. Here it is. This is the introduction of testimony by Mr. Cambiano of the United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Join- ers of America. It was presented to us at the Hollywood hearings which our committee of three then vice presidents conducted. I quote this particular statement, and this is Cambiano talking: This submission is being made witli the understanding that no conclusions will be made by this arbitration board in Los Angeles, and that further evidence and data may be submitted and discussions will be held with the international president of the United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners prior to any final determination of this matter. This was submitted early in December. We had 30 days within which to work. I am positive that all the international presidents involved were invited to come to Hollywood in this terrible, chaotic jurisdictional battle or fight. I am positive of that. We invited them in good faith, sir. Mr. Kearns. How many were there, Mr. Doherty ? Mr. Doherty. All of the imions were represented. None of them h.ad any proviso such as this, except the carpenters'. All the other representatives were authorized to speak for their unions. There were seven involved. I might say for the edification of the committee and only in an at- tempt to be hel])fid, that there were several other unions who were not parties to the Cincinnati agreement whicli caused the directive to be handed down, who were claiming jurisdiction in the Hollywood motion picture studios and we did not liear them at all. Our specific charge covered only seven international unions. I think you Avill admit that was quite a job. Mr. Kearns. Was there any other international president of a union present, except Mr. Walsh ? Mr. Doherty. I do not recall any, but all of the other unions had absolute representation for their union. Mr. Landis. Mr. Chairman, do we have anything in the record where Mr. Knight, or anyone else on the committee, promised Mr. Hutcheson; do we have any written matter on that ? Mr, Owens. Now, right there that suggestion was made to you. What was the answer of the committee to that, Mr. Doherty? Mr. Doherty. Well, Congressman Owens, it says here: This submission is being made with the understanding that no conclusions will be made by this arbitration board in Los Angeles and that further evidence and data may be submitted. Mr. Owens. What was your interpretation of that? Mr. Doherty. Our interpretation of that was that it was an abridg- ment of the directive handed down by the executive council of the A. F. of L. in Cincinnati in October of 1945. Mr. Owens. Did you say anytliing to Mr. Cambiano about it? Mr. Kearns. He means, did Chairman Knight in any way reply to the authority of Mr. Cambiano's testimony ? Mr. Doherty. No; it was the opinion of the committee we should hear Mr. Cambiano, Mr. Skelton, and all other interested parties that were there on the scene and interested in this dispute. Mr. Kearns. There was no comment by committee members ?