Union Agreement Covered More than One Employee Even Though Employer Had no Idea
- Unilateral misunderstanding won’t get you out from contract responsibilities.
- Don’t complain about scanty proof if you haven’t kept required records.
- The appeals clock ticks despite open attorney fee requests.
A recent case from Massachusetts went up to the US Supreme Court to clear up all these points.
FACTS The Ray Haluch Gravel Company signed a five year Union collective bargaining agreement for all sand and gravel operations but didn’t understand it applied to all work done by its employees. The company believed it only had to make union payments for the hours worked by one employee.
The Union audited its contractors and determined that many of the company employee’s hours were spent on work requiring pension funds contributions. The gravel company challenged the demand but after a three day Federal trial the court found the company owed the union $26,897.41 under the collective bargaining agreement.
The employer had not kept records of hours worked by employees it (wrongly) thought were not covered by the agreement.
Unambiguous contract terms trump signer’s ignorance of impact. The employer had to pay and the judge promised a separate memorandum on attorney’s fees – to follow. The Unions had requested an award of attorney’s fees of $143,600.44 under the contract. Six weeks later, the Court awarded attorneys’ fees for the plaintiffs of $34,688.15. Both sides claimed an appeal but only after the fee award.
ISSUE I What presumptions arise from failing to keep required records?
HOLDING I – A presumption works against such employers.
REASON – An employer who doesn’t keep required records, the appeals court said should not “be heard to complain that the damages lack the exactness and precision of measurement that would be possible had he kept records”.
ISSUE II – When is the deadline for an appeal if attorney’s fees are decided later?
HOLDING II – Clock Ticks on Deadline for Claiming an Appeal Even Though Attorney Fees Are To Be Determined Later
REASON – Only final judgments are appealable and the US Supreme Court decided that a judgment can be final for appeal purposes – even if the question of attorney’s fees was still open. Justice Kennedy for a unanimous Court said predictability and operational consistency support the rule – a judgment becomes final despite unresolved attorney’s fees.
Ray Haluch Gravel Co. v Central Pension Fund of the International Union of Operating Engineers