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.

2214 MOTION-PICTURE JURISDICTIONAL DISPUTES were to go back to the carpenters' work as in this sentence that "All employees shall return to work immediately"; that the carpenters did go back to their work and did occupy that work up to the December decision. ' Mr. Landis. But when they went back to work there were already some lA men in there that they had hired while the carpenters were out on strike ? Mr. Cobb. And they were taken out. Mr. Landis. Oh, they took them out? Mr. Cobb. They took them out. That is the point I am seeking to make clear. Mr. Kearns. The studios, though, did not fire them ; they gave them other assignments? Mr. Cobb. That is right, they took them out of the carpenters' work Mr. Kearns. That is as I understand it. Mr. Cobb. I think the record shows this clearly : They took them out of carpenters' work and kept them on salary pending the December decision, but not in carpenters' work. They did no carpenters' work during that period. Mr. Landis. What happened in 1946 after the directive ? Mr. Cobb. I want to come to the directive of '45. Mr. Landis. We have had that, haven't we? Mr. Cobb. Yes, but you haven't had this part of it, Mr. Landis. In the descision of December 26, 1945, the basis of the decision, the decision itself, the intent of the decision was to follow the historic division of work. Mr. Landis. What is the proof of that ? Mr. Cobb. The language of the decision itself. Mr. Landis. What part of the language ? Mr. Cobb. I will read it to you. Mr. Landis. Just that part. Mr. Cobb. Yes, sir. It reads in this way : An analysis disclosed that three possible methods of solution could be utilized that is: (a) strict adherence to a craft or vertical line of demarcation in the motion picture studies ; (&) establishment of an industrial or horizontal union throught the industry; (c) a division of work designations within the industry patterned after previous agi-eements negotiated mutually by the various crafts. After careful and thorovigh study the committee unanimously agreed that the latter plan is unquestionably the best method of approach. It is the committee's considered opinion that such procedure affords the only plausible solution to a most dlflBcult and complex problem. Accordingly this decision is based upon that premise. Mr. Landis. That is one of the three plans they had, and they recommend that one as being the best one of the three ? Mr. Cobb. Not only recommended it but unanimously adopted it. Mr. Landis. Weren't all three of them in there ? Mr. Cobb. No. They gave the alternatives of (a), (h) and (c),then they adopted (c). After careful and thorough study the committee unanimously agreed that the latter plan is unquestionably the best method of approach. It is the committee's considered opinion that such procedure affortls the only plausible solution to a most diflficult and complex problem. Mr, Landis. But they don't say they have to follow that?