Trustees Of The New York City District Council Of Carpenters Pension Fund v…

Background

The petitioners—employee benefit funds, a charitable organization, and a New York not-for-profit corporation—asked the court to confirm an arbitration award against Franco’s Blinds & Shades Inc., also identified as Franco Blinds & Shades, Inc. The petition arose under Section 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act and was based on a collective bargaining agreement between the New York City District Council of Carpenters and the respondent.

The agreement and related collection policy required the respondent to make contributions to the funds and allowed disputes over unpaid contributions to be handled through arbitration. An audit covering September 26, 2020, through December 31, 2021, found that the respondent had not paid $5,635.62 in required contributions. The respondent did not appear at the arbitration hearing, did not appear in the federal case, and did not oppose confirmation of the award.

Arbitration Award

On April 18, 2023, Arbitrator Steven Kasarda found that the respondent violated the collective bargaining agreement by failing to remit accurate contributions. He ordered payment of $17,770.21, consisting of unpaid contributions, interest, liquidated damages, promotional fund contributions, court costs, attorneys’ fees, the arbitrator’s fee, audit costs, a pre-audit collective-bargaining-agreement rate differential, and interest on that differential. The award also provided for 6.75% interest from the date of issuance.

Court’s Analysis

The court explained that review of a labor arbitration award is highly deferential. A court generally must confirm an award if the arbitrator was at least arguably interpreting and applying the collective bargaining agreement, acted within the authority granted by that agreement, and did not disregard its plain language. Because the petition was unopposed, it was treated similarly to a motion for summary judgment, meaning the record still had to show that the petitioners were entitled to judgment as a matter of law.

The court found no genuine dispute preventing confirmation. The record showed that the respondent was bound by the collective bargaining agreement and collection policy, which authorized arbitration. The court found that Arbitrator Kasarda had authority to act, received evidence concerning the audit and auditor testimony, applied the agreement, and provided at least a minimally sufficient justification for the award. The court therefore confirmed the damages awarded.

Interest, Fees, and Costs

The court awarded 6.75% interest on the arbitration award from April 18, 2023, through the date judgment was entered. It also awarded attorneys’ fees and costs for the federal confirmation proceeding under the collective bargaining agreement and collection policy. The court reduced the requested attorney hourly rates from $310 to $275, approved the legal assistants’ $155 hourly rate, and awarded $3,808.50 in attorneys’ fees plus $201.88 in service-related costs.

The court also ordered post-judgment interest at the statutory rate beginning on the date judgment was entered.

Disposition

District Judge Jessica G. L. Clarke granted the petition to confirm the arbitration award. The Clerk was directed to enter judgment for $17,770.21, plus 6.75% interest from April 18, 2023, through entry of judgment; $4,010.38 in attorneys’ fees and costs; and statutory post-judgment interest. The court also directed the Clerk to terminate the summary-judgment motion listed as ECF No. 13.