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.
2224 MOTION-PICTURE JURISDICTIONAL DISPUTES
Mr. Kearns. What is the historic division of the Beverly Hills contract, have you read that ?
Mr. Landis. No ; I have not. I am just saying they do not agree with the directive up to the date of the contract; they go out on a 2-day strike. Then was the time to settle it. If they settled it and went back to work I could not understand what disturbed it except the clarification. If there had not been a clarification I am just wondering if there would have been any trouble after that.
Mr, Cobb. Mr. Landis, just let me get this one thing clear.
Mr. Landis. All right.
Mr. Cobb. Don't say the December decision. Please think in the terms of the company and I A interpretation of the December decision.
Mr. Landis. I agree that is what the carpenters did not like and that is what caused the 2-day strike in July. They went out, then I thought they came back and settled that part of it.
Mr. Cobb. The carpenters have never yielded that the December decision gave anything to the lA that belonged to the carpenters. The July agreement did not waive anything.
Mr. Landis. Didn't they sign the July agreement ?
Mr. Cobb. Yes, but that does not waive their proper construction of the December decision. That is what I am perfectly willing to let the court determine. I am perfectly willing to let a court put the proper interpretation on the December decision.
It was not the December decision that caused them to take carpenters' work and give it to the lA, it was a misinterpretation of the December decision.
Mr. Landis. Do you have the Beverly Hills contract there?
Mr. Cobb. Yes, sir ; I have it before me right here.
Mr. Landis. Read something from that which says where the set erectors go.
Mr. Cobb. I do not find anything in the July 1946 contract referring to set erectors.
Mr. Landis. That was over the machinists ?
Mr. Cobb. There isn't anything in the Beverly Hills agreement that affects the proper construction of the December decision.
Mr. Landis. The carpenters signed it, did they not ?
Mr. Cobb. But they signed it under the true interpretation of the December decision, as shown by the clarification. They never signed their rights to carpenters' work away.
]\Ir. Landis. Did they know there was going to be a clarification at that time ?
Mr. Cobb. They had been striving for it for all these months and they anticipated that there would be, of course.
Now let us come to the breach of contract.
Reading from the minutes of September 11 :
Cambiano stated he bad copies of tbe directive's interpretation and letter from Green stating copies bad been sent to Jobnston for the industry's information and that he was here to ask that it be put into effect on the first shift Thursday morning. Skelton stated he understands construction to include laying out of sets, laying flooring, cutting flooring, plumbing sets, et cetera. Assembly he thinks is same as prior to March 5, 1945, done by laborers and lA setting up a line.
Now I ask the committee to draw a contrast between the August 22 threat of Mr. Walsh that all work would be stopped in the studios,