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)

1486 MOTION-PICTURE JURISDICTIONAL DISPUTES So they put on the car maker, Brother Knight; the barber, Brother Birthright; and the letter carrier, Brother Doherty. Again the point came up about Brother Birthright. He was a barber and there was a little dispute between the barbers' organization and the lATSE about who was going to dress the hair of the stars out there and whether that jurisdiction belonged to the barbers or whether it belonged to the lATSE who had organized it several years ago. Somebody said to me, "That will be bad if you have the barber on there, because he will give you a bum decision." I made a few inquiries and I found out the barber was a pretty honest sort of fellow, so we said, "All right, let the committee go ahead. As far as we are concerned we have nothing to say about it anyhow, so the committee can go to work on it." Everybody went back to work. Tlien there was a problem with the employer: Did he have the right to use these replacements which wpi had taken off the job in case he needed them ? The contention was that he did not have the right. There was quite a little controversy about that. So much so that the producers and myself had to fly back to Washington, D. C, to have a conference with President Green, of the American Federation of Labor, and George Meany, of the American Federation of Labor. At that time it was decided the employer had the right to hire anybody, whether it waa the people who went back on the job as strikers, or whether it was the people who were off the jobs because they were replacements—if they needed them. But that strikers had the right to their jobs as of March 12. Now if there were any new jobs and they felt like putting the re- placements on, they had the right to do it. So that was decided. Tbpn we went back to Hollywood again and started to work. Mr. Kearns. You approved of that? Mr. Walsh. Yes, sir. It never was put into effect, I assure you of that, because the employer was afraid if he did that he would have another strike. I know he had jobs he could have filled with replace- ments, but he did not fill them because they were replacements and he was afraid to use them. In fact, they took some of our replacements that had kept these studios open for 8 or 9 months, and herded them over onto one stage in the studio and put ]:)ro]3S on the four doors to guard them so they couldn't get out. I don't know whether it was so that they couldn't get out or whether somebody couldn't get in after them. I nevpr did find out which it was. However, they guarded them, and it was like a concentration camp out there. I only tell you this story because of the second strike. We learned from the first one. Now, in the 30 days in which the organization shut down to see if they couldn't adjust their differences, I want to assure you that each of the organizations out there had this attitude: "AVe don't care whether it is adjusted or not. the committee will straighten it out." I personally went out there and sat down with some of the organiza- tions; tried to make adjustments. Their attitude was anything but that of trying to adjust. We had been working with the plumbers for quite a long time. We had an agreement drawn up which we thought was satisfactory to