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)

Record Details:

Something wrong or inaccurate about this page? Let us Know!

Thanks for helping us continually improve the quality of the Lantern search engine for all of our users! We have millions of scanned pages, so user reports are incredibly helpful for us to identify places where we can improve and update the metadata.

Please describe the issue below, and click "Submit" to send your comments to our team! If you'd prefer, you can also send us an email to mhdl@commarts.wisc.edu with your comments.




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.

2060 MOTION-PICTURE JURISDICTIONAL DISPUTES That was what brought on the Cincinnati agreement. After the Cincinnati agreement Avas reached, I didn't feel completely satisfied that everytliing was all right, but I am the kind of a guy who looks at things as they are. I said to everyone I spoke to, "I believe the rest of the differences can be patched up." I soon found that they couldn't be i)atched up so easil}^ because in the first place the very first move of the producers was to keep the people on the pay roll and advertise that they were keeping the people on the pay rol] for a couple of months because Mr. Walsh said they had to. But why did they insist on keeping people on the pay roll who were not members of Mr. Walsh's union? They kept office workers and people who had never joined the I A union on the pay roll also, not only for the 2 months, but they kept those people on the pay roll until we were forced out on September 23, 1946. They did no work, but they continued to come and get paid. I was talking to ArthurUnger during this period when our people were working. I said, "Arthur, you haven't given us very good publicity; I haven't had time to see you and ask you about it, but it seems to me that you are letting me down a little bit." He said, "No, no ; 1 go along with you all I can." He said, "After all, you know I've got a business that I've got to run." I said, "You didn't think we'd win that, did you ?" He said. "You didn't win anything. You don't know it, but you didn't win anything, That is just a temporary lull." I talked to Ralph Roddy who was the reporter for Unger, and asked him, "Does Unger put the pressure on you not to give the news exactly straight?" Ancl he said, "Unger thinks it is only a matter of time until they will destroy your unions anyhow." I would like to get Unger on the stand under oath and ask him some very embarrassing questions, and believe me, it isn't because I want to hurt Arthur Unger, because I like Arthur Uhger because of the stand he took against Bioff. Later, Ralph Roddy had to quit the Variety. If this thing goes further it will be very interesting to have Mr. Roddy on the stand and ask him some questions about what he knows about the conspiracy betw^een the producers and the lATSE. Mr. Landis. Who was he? Mr. SoRRELL. Ralph Roddy was a reporter for the Variety. He is now working for the central labor council putting out this Los Angeles Citizen that Bizzell used to put out. Now, the next move that was made has been brought out here by the machinists. In spit of the sanctity of the award that was written, the first local to be destroyed was the office workers, which didn't mean so much to us and didn't throw us out. because they had to be transferred anyhow from the painters to the office workers' new international. The next move was to destroy the machinists. I called Eric Johnston. I had talked to Eric Johnston before and I had come to like Eric Johnston because he has ideas according to mine, the same as mine, about labor relations. I think I should drop back and mention that in 1945 just before the Cincinnati agreement, Johnston and I had many hours of talk together. I felt that there was a new era in labor relations coming in when Johnston came in, and I feel that today if any honest man