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)

1976 MOTION-PICTURE JURISDICTIONAL DISPUTES Then it says : Special meeting October 26, 1947. ( Excerpt from the business agent's report, p. 2, par. 4 : ) Brother Sorrell then yielded the floor to Brother Frank Spector, who spoke against the proposal to cease penalizing those who go back, advocated calling off the strike officially to get as many members in as possible and fight on from inside. Vernon K. Mangold, Recording Secretary. Mr. Sorrell. Maybe I had better explain that. Yon brought in a proposal to the union that after a certain date — and I don't know if the date is there — October 25, 1947 — we ceased to penalize any more of our members. In other words, we allow them to work wherever they want. If they want to go back to the studios, let them go back to the studios, and without any penalty. That was suggested to me because it was being said that the thing that was holding our members out was myself and the officers of the organization, that it was the will of the people to go back to work. Now, it was brought out very clearly that I considered a man who walked through a picket line as an undesirable, but that those who were so hungry that they had to go back to work, if they had stayed out over 13 months, I considered that they had shown themselves to be union members, and if they felt that they could stand the stigma of passing a brother's picket line at that stage or if they had to go back for any reason, they shouldn't be penalized by the union. The Communist bloc that I recognized as the Comnuuiist bloc — • at least, I know one man now, Spector— oh, he didn't want that at all. That would be a terrible thing. His arguments were that we should now say that all of the members 'are released to go back to work and we "expect you to go back to your job." Well, of course, the question came up about carpenters. The carpenters would still be on the picket line. And I am not positive, but one of the fellows — and I think it was Frank Spector — said, "I would love to pass a carpenters' picket line." Now, I had a hard job getting a majority of the union to follow my suggestion. Sometimes I am defeated in my attempts to do things, and I always go along with the rule of the majority. At this time, I think the vote was — I am quoting from memory — about 280 to 260, something like that. It was only 15 or 20 votes, even though I advocated that we abolish further fines. I know that our boys who did go in since then have only gone in for a very short time, I mean, most of them, for a day or two; then they are disgusted, and they come on out, and they tell me they wouldn't work any more, and they talk among our other boys, and they don't get our people back. It hasn't caused any inroads. We had lost about 100 men up to that time, possibly 102 or 10P>, who had gone in — most of them had worked only a day or two — ^but who had been thrown out of the union. After that time, I think I am sorry in saying that there have been less than 60 people of our organization going in, and without exception they are dissatisfied, and without exception they will all back us to get back legally with 644 as their union. They went back to 8 hours a day instead of 6 at straight time. Mr. Landis. Wliat was the penalty? Was it expulsion?