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

Background

The petitioners were trustees of labor-management trust funds, trustees of a charitable organization, a New York-based not-for-profit corporation, and a labor organization. BAU Engineering Inc. was a corporation and employer under the Labor Management Relations Act. BAU Engineering signed agreements covering two project labor agreements. Those agreements required it to make contributions to the funds under a collective bargaining agreement and to provide books and records for audits.

An audit covering June 12, 2013, through March 31, 2015, found that BAU Engineering had not made required contributions. The collective bargaining agreement allowed disputes about payments to the funds to be submitted to arbitration. It also allowed recovery of unpaid contributions, interest, liquidated damages, costs, and reasonable attorneys’ fees.

The petitioners began arbitration in October 2017. BAU Engineering failed to appear at the January 25, 2018 hearing, although the opinion states that earlier hearings had been adjourned repeatedly at BAU Engineering’s request and that BAU Engineering had requested another adjournment shortly before the final hearing. On January 29, 2018, the arbitrator awarded $36,404.74, consisting of delinquent contributions, interest, audit costs, liquidated damages, several additional charges, costs, attorneys’ fees, and arbitrator’s fees. The award also provided for interest at 5.75% from the award date.

Court’s analysis

The petitioners sought confirmation of the award under Section 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act. The court explained that confirming an arbitration award is generally a summary proceeding that turns the award into a court judgment. Even when the petition is unopposed, however, the court must examine the submission to determine whether the petitioner has shown that no genuine dispute of material fact exists and that it is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.

The court treated the petition as akin to a motion for summary judgment and found that the petitioners met their burden. The arbitrator had considered testimony and evidence and determined that BAU Engineering was delinquent under the collective bargaining agreement. The court found that the award was within the authority granted by that agreement and was consistent with its provisions.

The court also reviewed the limited grounds for vacating an arbitration award, including fraud, arbitrator bias, specified misconduct, or an arbitrator’s exceeding the granted authority. It found no evidence that the award was unlawful, arbitrary, or beyond the arbitrator’s powers. Because BAU Engineering had not appeared or challenged the award, the court granted the unopposed petition to confirm all aspects of the award.

Additional amounts and disposition

The court granted the petitioners’ request for attorneys’ fees and costs incurred in bringing the court action. It relied on the collective bargaining agreement and collection policy, which permitted recovery of reasonable fees and costs when collecting delinquent funds. The court also granted post-judgment interest under 28 U.S.C. § 1961(a), calculated from the date judgment was entered.

Judge Paul G. Gardephe ordered the Clerk of Court to enter judgment confirming the $36,404.74 award, with interest at 5.75% from January 29, 2018, until entry of judgment. The judgment was also to include $3,000 in attorneys’ fees and $75 in costs, with statutory post-judgment interest on the entire amount. The Clerk was directed to close the case.