Trustees for The Mason Tenders District Council Welfare Fund v. S & S Kings…

Background

The Funds and Robert Bonanza, acting in his fiduciary capacity as Business Manager of the Mason Tenders District Council of Greater New York, petitioned to confirm an arbitration award against S&S Kings Corp. Anna Gutsin was also named as a petitioner in her fiduciary capacity as Funds Director. The dispute arose under a Project Labor Agreement and the Funds’ Trust Agreements.

The petitioners alleged that S&S Kings failed to make required payments for covered employees during two work periods: April 1, 2015, through June 30, 2015, and July 1, 2018, through September 30, 2018. The opinion’s payment breakdown identifies the first period as April 1, 2015, through June 1, 2015. The claimed amounts included benefit contributions, dues and political action committee contributions, and interest. The Funds also alleged that S&S Kings failed to open its books and records for examination as required by the Trust Agreements.

The Funds served a notice and demand for arbitration on May 31, 2019. The arbitrator scheduled a hearing for June 24, 2019, and proceeded after finding that S&S Kings had received sufficient notice. No representative for S&S Kings appeared. On August 16, 2019, the arbitrator issued an award requiring S&S Kings to pay $37,248.83, including delinquent contributions, dues and political action committee contributions, interest, liquidated damages described in the opinion as an ERISA penalty, attorneys’ fees, and arbitrator fees. The arbitrator also ordered S&S Kings to cooperate with a payroll audit. After the award, S&S Kings made some payments toward the 2015 shop steward period, leaving an outstanding balance of $23,570.00, but it continued to refuse the books-and-records examination.

Court’s Analysis

The petitioners moved for summary judgment, a procedure allowing judgment without a trial when there is no genuine dispute about a material fact and the moving party is entitled to judgment under the law. S&S Kings filed no opposition and did not appear.

The court explained that federal courts give substantial deference to labor arbitration awards. Review is limited, and an award generally must be enforced if the arbitrator was interpreting the agreement and acted within the authority granted by it. The court may refuse enforcement if the arbitrator exceeded that authority or issued an award that does not draw its substance from the collective bargaining agreement.

The court found that the arbitrator’s award was supported by the record. The evidence included testimony from the Funds’ delinquency manager, shop steward reports, and deficiency reports detailing the unpaid amounts. The court also found that the Project Labor Agreement and Trust Agreements permitted the Union to pursue arbitration over an employer’s failure to make required payments to the Funds. The court identified no basis for setting aside the award.

Disposition

The court held that the arbitrator provided more than the required colorable justification for the $37,248.83 award. Judge Katherine Polk Failla granted the petition and the related summary judgment motion in the petitioners’ favor. The court ordered the petitioners to submit a proposed final judgment by April 30, 2021.