Drywall Tapers and Pointers of Greater New York Local Union 1974 v. Jimenez

Background

The Union sought confirmation of a March 5, 2021, arbitration award under the Federal Arbitration Act and the Labor Management Relations Act. Respondent had entered into a collective bargaining agreement with the Union. The agreement required payment of wages and benefits for covered work and provided for final, binding arbitration of disputes. It also allowed the arbitration hearing to proceed if a party failed to appear after receiving notice.

A dispute arose over Respondent’s failure to pay wages and benefits to Union member Steven Moncada for work covered by the agreement. The Union notified Respondent on February 10, 2021, that it intended to arbitrate and that a hearing would take place on February 24, 2021. Respondent did not appear at the hearing. The Joint Trade Board found Respondent guilty of violating the agreement and awarded $956.40 in wages and $6,851.64 in benefits. The benefits portion had already been satisfied when the Union filed this case; the Union sought enforcement of the unpaid wage portion.

Respondent was served with the court petition and summons on July 1, 2021, but did not appear or respond.

Legal standard

The Federal Arbitration Act generally requires a court to confirm an arbitration award unless the award is vacated, modified, or corrected. For an unanswered petition to confirm an award, the court generally applies the summary-judgment standard, meaning it considers whether the record shows any genuine dispute over facts that would require a trial.

Review of a labor arbitration award is narrowly limited. The court does not reconsider the arbitrator’s decision on the merits. Instead, it asks whether the arbitrator acted within the authority granted by the collective bargaining agreement and whether the award is grounded in that agreement.

Ruling

Judge Schofield granted the Petition because the record showed no genuine dispute over material facts. The agreement authorized arbitration and allowed the proceeding to continue when a party failed to appear after notice. The Board applied the agreement and acted within the scope of its authority. Respondent’s failure to participate in the arbitration did not provide a reason to reject the award, particularly because the agreement permitted the hearing to proceed in Respondent’s absence and authorized monetary damages.

The court therefore confirmed the award and awarded the Union $956.40 in damages. The Clerk of Court was directed to close the case.