Drywall Tapers and Pointers of Greater New York Local Union 1974 v. MAIA MP…

Background

The petitioners were the Drywall Tapers and Pointers of Greater New York Local Union 1974, affiliated with the International Union of Allied Painters and Allied Trades, AFL-CIO, and the Trustees of the Drywall Tapers and Pointers Local Union No. 1974 Benefit Funds. The respondent was MAIA MP Construction, Inc., also known as MAIA MP Constructions, Inc. The opinion states that MAIA was a party to a collective bargaining agreement with the Union.

A dispute arose in 2019. The petitioners alleged that MAIA hired a non-union taper, discriminated against a job steward, and failed to pay benefits to Union members. They claimed that this conduct violated specified provisions of the collective bargaining agreement. The Union demanded arbitration before the Joint Trade Board, which the agreement authorized to decide covered complaints. The agreement stated that the Board's awards, including fines or penalties, would be final and binding and that judgment could be entered on an award in a court with jurisdiction.

The Joint Trade Board held a hearing on July 15, 2019, and ruled that MAIA violated the agreement. It awarded $21,500 in fines to the Joint Trade Board, $334.74 in wages to the Union on behalf of Luis Ramos, $334.74 in wages to the Union on behalf of Jaykel Pasquier, and $3,137.12 in benefits to the Funds as contributions on behalf of Laura Lopez and David Acuna. The petitioners notified MAIA of the award and later demanded payment. The opinion states that MAIA had not complied with the award.

Court's Analysis

The petitioners filed the action to confirm the award and requested judgment for $25,306.60. MAIA did not oppose the petition. The court explained that confirming an arbitration award generally converts the award into a court judgment. It also explained that an unanswered petition to confirm an award is treated as an unopposed motion for summary judgment, but the court must still review the petitioner's evidence to determine whether any genuine dispute over a material fact remains.

The court found that the petitioners submitted undisputed evidence that arbitration was authorized, that MAIA received notice of the hearing, and that the Joint Trade Board issued an award under the agreement's provisions. The petitioners also notified MAIA of the award and demanded payment. Nothing before the court suggested that the monetary calculations were incorrect. Applying the deferential standard for reviewing arbitration awards, the court concluded that the petitioners had shown that no material fact required a trial and that the award had at least a minimally valid basis for enforcement.

The opinion notes an apparent citation inconsistency: the petitioners' papers and the Joint Trade Board's decision referred to Article XII, Section 11, while the submitted agreement appeared to identify Article XIII, Section 6, as the relevant provision.

Ruling

Judge Ronnie Abrams granted the petition to confirm the arbitration award. The Clerk of Court was directed to enter judgment in the amount of $25,306.60 and close the case. The petitioners had not requested attorney's fees or costs in the petition and supporting papers; the opinion stated that any later request would require contemporaneous time records for the court's review.