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

Background

The Petitioners sought confirmation of an arbitration award issued against Tiger Contracting Corporation under a collective bargaining agreement. The agreement required certain disputes to be submitted to the Joint Trade Board for final and binding decisions. After a dispute concerning alleged discrimination against a job steward and the failure to register a job for overtime work, the Joint Trade Board held a hearing on March 24, 2021, and issued its award on March 31, 2021.

The award found that Tiger violated the collective bargaining agreement and required it to pay $485.23 to the Local 1974 Benefit Funds, $980.97 to Oddette Lawrence, and $21,000 to the Joint Board of the Drywall Taping Industry. The Petitioners stated that Tiger did not comply with the award. Although Tiger was served with the petition, it did not oppose the petition or otherwise appear.

Legal standard

The court explained that courts give substantial deference to arbitration awards. Confirmation is generally a streamlined proceeding that converts a final arbitration award into a court judgment. A court must still review an unopposed petition rather than automatically grant it, and must determine whether the submitted materials show that no genuine dispute of material fact exists and that the petitioner is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.

The court also noted that an arbitration award may be vacated only in specific circumstances, such as corruption, fraud, misconduct, or an arbitrator exceeding the arbitrator’s authority. Courts generally may not reconsider the arbitrator’s decision on the merits, including alleged factual errors or disagreements about interpreting the parties’ agreement.

Analysis and ruling

The court found that the Joint Trade Board had reviewed the parties’ contentions and determined that Tiger violated the collective bargaining agreement in the two identified ways. The court further found that the award was within the authority granted to the Joint Trade Board by the agreement, which made the Board’s awards final and binding. Because Tiger made no objection and the record showed no basis for vacating the award, the court confirmed the arbitration award.

The Petitioners also requested attorney’s fees and costs. The court denied that request without prejudice because the Petitioners did not provide supporting documentation. The court stated that any application for attorney’s fees and costs should be submitted with appropriate documentation by November 28, 2023.