Trustees for The Mason Tenders District Council Welfare Fund v. High Tech…

Background

The petitioners included the Mason Tenders District Council Welfare Fund, Pension Fund, Annuity Fund, and Training Program Fund (the Funds), along with the Mason Tenders District Council of Greater New York (the Union), John J. Virga in his fiduciary capacity as director, and Robert Bonanza as Business Manager of the Union. The Funds are employee benefit plans under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act. High Tech Masons is a masonry contractor that employed workers affiliated with the petitioners.

In July 2011, High Tech Masons recognized the Union as the exclusive bargaining agent for employees performing work covered by the collective bargaining agreement. That agreement required High Tech Masons to make contributions to the Funds, permitted record inspections, and established procedures for collecting delinquent amounts. It also included arbitration provisions. The Trust Agreements gave the Funds’ trustees authority to decide whether to begin arbitration against an employer that owed contributions.

The Funds determined, based on union shop steward records, that High Tech Masons had failed to pay required contributions for work performed from November 1 through December 31, 2012. The Funds began arbitration before Joseph Harris and served High Tech Masons with notice. Harris also sent notice of the hearing by certified mail. High Tech Masons did not attend the October 9, 2013 hearing, and Harris found the company in default.

The Funds presented the collective bargaining agreement, union shop steward reports, and a deficiency report. On October 25, 2013, Harris awarded the petitioners $7,216.68: $4,527.00 in delinquent fringe contributions, $361.80 in delinquent dues and political-action-committee contributions, $122.48 in current interest, $905.40 in Employee Retirement Income Security Act damages, $500.00 in legal fees, and $800.00 in prorated arbitrator fees.

High Tech Masons did not pay the award, move to vacate or modify it, appear in this case, or respond to the petitioners’ motion to confirm and enforce the award.

Legal standard

The court explained that confirming an arbitration award is ordinarily a streamlined proceeding that turns the award into a court judgment. Judicial review is very limited. A court generally must confirm the award unless it is vacated, modified, or corrected. An unanswered petition to confirm an arbitration award is treated as an unopposed motion for summary judgment, meaning the court must still review the record and determine whether the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.

The court stated that an arbitration award should be enforced if the record provides even a barely colorable justification for the arbitrator’s result. The court does not replace the arbitrator’s decision with its own judgment merely because it might disagree with the result.

Court’s analysis

The court reviewed the arbitration agreement and the award. It found that the parties’ agreements allowed the Funds to begin arbitration against a delinquent employer and allowed the arbitrator to hold a hearing without one party present after notice. The agreements also made the arbitrator’s decision final and binding.

The court found no indication that the arbitrator acted arbitrarily, exceeded the authority granted by the agreements, or acted contrary to law. The arbitrator had received evidence supporting the finding that High Tech Masons was delinquent. Because the record showed no disputed material fact and the award had a sufficient basis, the court determined that the award should be confirmed.

Ruling

Judge Edgardo Ramos granted the petitioners’ motion. The court confirmed the arbitration award and directed the Clerk of Court to enter judgment for the petitioners in the amount of $7,216.68 against High Tech Masons of Long Island, Inc. The judgment accrues post-judgment interest as required by 28 U.S.C. § 1961. The Clerk was directed to terminate the motion and close the case.