Minutes of evidence taken before the Departmental Committee on Cinematograph Films (1936)

152 COMMITTEE ON CINEMATOGRAPH FILMS 7 July, 1936.] Mr. T. O'Brien and Mr. J. Rogers. [Continued. My understanding of some of the evidence that has been given to us is that they actually employ a larger proportion of men such as would be in your union per thousand pounds than an ordinary film such as you suggest, hecause there are no stars to pay, and therefore the proportion of money actually spent on the ordinary ruck of employees is proportionately higher? — That would be a very interesting point to develop in a discussion. I would reply guardedly by stating that from our observations shorts and newsreels, as we understand them, do not employ a great number of people at all. For instance, a short can easily be a one reel picture of the Lake District, but the net or the total number of people employed would be about three technicians. 1687. I .wish to make only this point, that if that film cost 10s. a foot, 7s. 6d. might well be labour, and that a film may cost two pounds a foot ami not more than 10s. may be labour? — 1 would agree there. 1688. From the point of view purely of employment there is a practical aspect of the newsreel film and the documentary and the short which cannot he ignored? — We would not attempt to, but, as I say, it is safe to say from our standpoint that a number of shorts and newsreels are and can be produced merely by the employment of about two or three technicians and no more. I am not, of course, including the labour involved in cutting and copying and duplicating, which has to bve done with all films irrespective of what they are. 1689. Has there been any development, to your knowledge, in this country in the past ten years of the actual making of the film from the photographic point of view, the making of the actual negative, the development in this country, the preparation of the negative in this country? — No. As a matter of fact, from the knowledge in my possession, this country is hopelessly behind in regard to that in the manufacture and making of the celluloid negative itself. I do not know of any British film company or any subsidiary company which is engaged on the making of the celluloid negative. 1690. Are there no firms ? — One firm has, I believe, a factory where they are trying to do something in that way, but most of their negative stuff comes from America. 1691. That does not directly concern your Union? — No, not directly. 1692. Are you concerned with the stripping of the films to get the silver nitrate? — We are, indirectly. 1693. Have you had any complaints in that matter in regard to the working conditions? — There are very, very serious grievances which have been brought to our notice and brought to the notice of one of our colleagues in one of our other organisations in regard to the general working conditions in the laboratories of this country, both those attached to the film industry and those not attached to it, because it is the practice of a number of film producing companies to let out their developing to outside people. Some film companies will very soon have their own laboratories and general cutting apparatus, but generally speaking the conditions operating in the laboratories of this country in connection with the film industry have very much to be desired. 1694. This does not directly arise under our Terms of Reference, but it is obvious that if we are asked by an industry to give them a further measure of protection for the manufacture of films in this country, the tendency will be not merely to import blank negatives from America but to make them here? — Yes. L695. There are practical technical advantages in making their films and having them fresh and new? —Yes. 1696. Which will mean an extension of the maim facture of the celluloid? — Yes. 1697. And of the stripping of the celluloid? — Yes. 1698. Your memorandum makes no reference to industrial conditions ?— No, we have not made any 'iience to the industrial conditions, because generally, as I have told you, tin industrial conditions are very favourable in the film studios, with the exception of certain grades, such as laboratory grades and one or two general sections. 1699. Are they outside your Union? — The majority are unorganised. 1700. They are not in any other Union ? — No ; there are quite a few in another Union but the majority of those grades are unorganised. 1701. I have been told that conditions in certain laboratories dealing with the films are unsatisfactory.— Yes. 1702. Has that any relation to the organisation of the industry as a whole? You suggest that some of these film companies wall shortly start up their own laboratories, and to that extent we may safely assume that the conditions will be improved? — Yes. we have the control there. Our industrial strength in the studio itself is sufficiently strong to impose upon the reluctant firms a remedy for such bad conditions. I am not suggesting for one moment they would adopt them. 1703. Are they structural remedies? — What do you mean by structural remedies? 1704. Cubic capacity, light, air, ventilation? — Yes. 1705. Are you satisfied that the Home Office Factories Department have got all the powers they require in such matters? — Oh, yes, and there are adequate provisions for refreshments and meals, and so on. 17C6. Then how is it that these unsatisfactory conditions to which you refer have not been brought to the notice of the Factories Department of the Home Office?— Well, largely due to the fact that the employees are unorganised. You see. you must keep in mind the fact that the film industry has developed in one way very quickly in this country. This last three years especially have seen studios growing up around and about London, and we have had a great deal to do to keep in touch with the industrial conditions and to improve them as we go along, with negotiations with various producers — incidentally with whom our relations are very cordial. There is a very good feeling between the leading film producing companies and our Union. There are certain sections, such as the laboratories, which owing to their unorganised state cannot conscientiously expect the Union to interest itself on their behalf, but at the present time we are turning our attention to the unorganised employees. 1707. But within your knowledge there have been several fatal accidents in film stripping factories involving loss of life? — I cannot recall at the moment any fatal accidents in the film stripping side. There have been fatal accidents on the erecting side, and also in regard to the performance of .stunts in the shooting of the pictures. 1708. No, I mean pure stripping of waste films? — I cannot recall any specific accident, although there was an explosion the other day where two people lost their lives. 1709. As far as you are concerned the Factory Acts are working and the Home Office have ii>>t full powers? — As far as our position is concerned, yes. (Mr. Rogers): I am inclined to answer that in this way. that the Factory Act Inspectors are not using the powers that they have to the extent that we would like them to do. because quite recently a big firm of picture makers brought two Iull American experts into the laboratories and the conditions were bad before these two men came, but they are very much worse to-day. In small rooms where ejrls were working they actually had to squeeze them up a bit to make room for another, and the girls bad already complained about not having enough space to work iii. I have worked in these laboratories myself and