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)

MOTION-PICTURE JURISDICTIONAL DISPUTES 1521 I note with particular interest what you say in reference to the controversy over the set dressers who have affiliated with the interior decorators. Our mutual friend Herb Sorrell called me on tlie telephone some weeks ago in i-eference to the matter and asked me to contact Bill Green, which I did, but as you state there was nothing Bill could do in reference to the matter. Following that Cambiano and Skelton, representing our organization, were informed tliat if the decorators went on strike our members were to recognize the picket line. You, Pat, know as well as I that for some time there has been a contention over prop making — meaning that the lATSE was doing the prop making and the carpenters wanted it. It had nothing to do with decorators or set dressing— and we, representing the brotherhood, have contended that the making of props Avas work that should be done by our members, and the thing has dragged along for a considerable length of time and I know of no reason why there should not be a final solution to the matter arrived at. I will come back to that in a moment, but I want to quote it here in view of the contention made by the carpenters that it was the 1921 agreement that should take effect, and not the 1925-26 agreement, Mr. Hutcheson has made this interesting statement, and I quote it verbatim : As far as going back to the understanding which you quote as having been entered into in 1921 is concerned, the time for that in my opinion has long since passed. I would suggest that you not deduct anything from the wages due our member.s— Mr. Casey had stated that if your members don't work we will deduct wages — because if you do and they resent it by taking a vacation I shall not interfere in the matter. This was during wartime when there was a manpower shortage. Sincerely yours, WiLxiAM L. Hutcheson, General President. Now I have before me a printed letter dated February 6, 1945, issued by Studio Carpenters Local Union, No. 946 in Los Angeles, Calif., signed by J. W. Vamp, recording secretary, of Mr. Hutcheson's local out there. From this letter, which I should like to have incorporated in the record, it will appear that in February of 1945 the carpenters were preparing for the strike which they felt was going to take place sometime in the early part of 1945 in the studio situation in Hollywood. I asked a question through Mr. McCann, who was courteous enough to ask the question of Mr. Hutcheson : What financial support did Mr. Hutcheson or his organization give to the painters' strike in 1945 ? Mr. Hutcheson stated it was none of the gentleman's business, and probably it isn't my personal business. But I should suppose that it is the business of any tribunal which is making an investigation of the causes of the Hollywood jurisdictional strife. I leave that to the conunittee. One other factor to indicate that the 1945 strike was not a set decorators' recognition strike, although that was the ostensible reason for it, was that Mr. Walsh, to my personal knowledge, made a definite agreement that the set decorators' situation could be resolved by an election before the proper tribunal, the National Labor Relations Board. That agreement was made in March of 1945.