District Council No. 9 International Union of Painters and Allied Trades v…

Background

The Union asked the court to confirm, or turn into a court judgment, an arbitration award against City Newark Glass Co. under Section 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act. Newark Glass was a member of the Window and Plate Glass Dealers Association and was party to the Garden State collective bargaining agreement, which incorporated other agreements governing the parties’ relationship.

On March 17, 2023, a Union representative visited a job site that Newark Glass had not registered with the Union. He observed non-union workers performing work that the governing memorandum of agreement reserved for Union labor. The Union then demanded arbitration, alleging that Newark Glass had failed to register the job and had failed to pay wages and benefits required for the covered work.

A Joint Trade Committee held an arbitration hearing on June 1, 2023. The Union appeared through its representative, but Newark Glass did not appear. The committee found Newark Glass liable for both violations and imposed $1,500 for failure to submit wages and benefits, $4,000 in liquidated damages, and one day’s pay—$325.85 in wages and $374.29 in benefits—as a fine. Newark Glass did not pay the award.

Court’s analysis

The court explained that its review of a labor arbitration award is very limited. It does not reconsider the arbitrator’s factual or legal conclusions. Instead, it asks whether the arbitrator acted within the authority granted by the collective bargaining agreements and whether the award was based on those agreements. The court also noted that an unopposed confirmation petition is treated similarly to an unopposed summary-judgment motion, meaning the record must still show that the petitioner is legally entitled to judgment.

The court found no indication that the award was obtained through fraud or dishonesty, that the arbitration committee acted outside its authority, or that it disregarded the governing agreements. The record showed that the committee based its decision on evidence that Newark Glass failed to register the job site and used non-union workers in violation of the memorandum of agreement. The court therefore found no reason not to confirm the award.

Attorneys’ fees and costs

The Union also requested attorneys’ fees and costs. The court explained that Section 301 does not ordinarily authorize such an award, but a court may award fees under its equitable powers when the opposing party acts in bad faith or refuses to comply with an arbitration decision without justification.

The court found an award justified because Newark Glass did not participate in the arbitration, did not pay any part of the award, and did not oppose the Union’s petition. The Union requested $3,600 in attorneys’ fees for 12 hours of work at $300 per hour and $587 in costs. The court found the documentation, hours, and hourly rate reasonable and awarded $4,187.00 in attorneys’ fees and costs.

Disposition

The court directed the Clerk to enter judgment for the Union against Newark Glass in the amount of $6,200.14, plus $4,187.00 in attorneys’ fees. Post-judgment interest will accrue under 28 U.S.C. § 1961, and the Clerk was directed to close the case.