About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

12 ESLJ [1] (2014)

handle is hein.journals/entersport12 and id is 1 raw text is: Contents Abstract i Empoyee in a Cage? Olvia De 1. IntroductionEm lye aOii 2. The Politics of Hollywood Studio Havilland, Warner Bros. System Talent Contracts De Havilland's Contract and Petition for Pictures, and the 'Limit Case' Decaratory judqment The Superior Court Decision of Star Employment. 3. The Apoelate Court's Decision in De Haviland First Theme: A ublic interest in work Matt Stahl Second Theme: Seven years and no Associate Professor Tomre A Faculty of Information and Media Studies Third Theme: An inalienable right 4. Apoellate Court's Silence on/and the University of Western Ontario Politics of Employment London, Ontario, Canada N6A 5B7 Parallel Cases 5. Star Employment, Peonage, and Routine Employment 6. Conclusion it is the transferability of rights that is the basis of the mass marketing of the human image and the human voice in the communications industries (Gaines 1991, p. 155) Abstract In 1944, two California courts agreed with actor Olivia De Havilland's claim that the state's seven year limit on the enforceability of employment contracts applied to her 1936 contract with Warner Bros. Pictures, and refused to enforce the contract beyond its seventh anniversary. This article revisits the well-known De Haviland v. Warner Bros. Pictures (1944) Appellate Court decision, and its lesser-known, lower court antecedent, in order to explore the decisions' related but distinct assumptions about employment, employers, and employees. Both courts agreed (1) that employees need protection from excesses of employee power, (2) that employment is a public, social phenomenon, and (3) that protection may (and must) be afforded by the police powers of the state; this article analyses illuminating differences in the courts' rationales. Examining the politics of star employment is worthwhile for more than just historical reasons: star employment constitutes a limit case of employment, illuminating in its extremes features that are central to but generally obscure in the run of daily working life. The limit case, in this instance, re-injects controversy into what appears to be a settled institution of modern life. Revisiting episodes of struggle over the terms of star employment makes available a set of critical concepts useful in contesting (neo)liberal common sense about employment as a strictly private affair. De Havilland's two cases and decisions-fascinating and compelling in what they contribute to our knowledge of Hollywood's labour history-bequeath intellectual tools useful in the dissection of the politics of employment today. Keywords Hollywood, talent contract, politics of employment, liberalism, film history, critique

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most