Trustees of the District Council No. 9 Painting Industry Insurance Fund v…

Background

The trustees of the District Council No. 9 Painting Industry Insurance Fund and District Council No. 9 Annuity Fund, together with the District Council No. 9 International Union of Painters and Allied Trades, A.F.L.-C.I.O., petitioned to confirm an arbitration award against Choice of Colors, Inc. The petition arose under a collective bargaining agreement and Section 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act.

The agreement required Choice of Colors to submit weekly reports to the funds identifying covered employees, hours worked, and benefit contributions. It also authorized fines of at least $1,000 for each missing report and required disputes under the agreement to be submitted to final, binding arbitration. The union charged that Choice of Colors had failed to submit 23 reports since about January 2021. It requested a fine of $500 per missing report, totaling $11,500.

The Joint Trade Committee held a hearing on July 6, 2021, but Choice of Colors did not appear. On July 23, 2021, the committee found Choice of Colors responsible for failing to submit the reports and awarded $11,500 against it, payable within 10 days. Choice of Colors did not pay the award. The petitioners filed this case on November 2, 2021, and later moved for summary judgment. Choice of Colors did not respond to the petition or motion and did not otherwise appear.

Court’s Analysis

The court explained that a petition to confirm an arbitration award is treated similarly to a motion for summary judgment. Even when the opposing party does not respond, the court must examine the petitioners’ evidence and determine whether they showed that no genuine dispute of material fact exists and that they are entitled to judgment as a matter of law.

The court determined that the award was within the powers granted to the Joint Trade Committee by the collective bargaining agreement. That agreement empowered the committee and the Joint Trade Board to decide disputes concerning the agreement and to impose remedies, damages, and penalties for violations. The court found no evidence that the committee’s decision was unlawful, arbitrary, or beyond its authority.

Disposition

The court granted the petitioners’ motion for summary judgment and confirmed the $11,500 arbitration award. The court denied the petitioners’ request for attorneys’ fees and costs without prejudice because their papers did not identify the amount requested or include supporting documentation. The court stated that any application for fees and costs was to be submitted by September 28, 2022, with appropriate documentation.