Skip to main content

Locals 302 and 612 of the International Union of Operating Engineers Construction Industry Health & Security Fund v. Yelm Property Development LLC

W.D. Wash.November 13, 2024No. 2:24-cv-00127
Plaintiff WinYelm Property Development LLC$363,808.11 awarded
Facing something similar at work?Check your rights — free, private, no sign-up

Case Details

Nature of Suit — the legal category of the dispute
Labor: E.R.I.S.A.
Status — whether other courts must follow this ruling
Unknown
Procedural Posture — the stage the case had reached
default judgment

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Claim Types

Breach of Contract

Outcome

Court granted plaintiff trust funds' motion for default judgment against Yelm Property Development LLC for failure to appear and defend, awarding $363,808.11 in delinquent fringe benefit contributions, liquidated damages, interest, attorney's fees, and costs.

What This Ruling Means

**Union Health Fund Sues Construction Company Over Missing Contributions** This case involved a dispute between union health and security funds and Yelm Property Development, a construction company. The unions alleged that Yelm failed to make required contributions to worker health and security funds as required under their collective bargaining agreement. These contributions are typically used to provide healthcare benefits and other protections for union construction workers. The unions claimed Yelm violated federal ERISA laws (which govern employee benefit plans), breached their collective bargaining agreement, and failed to meet their obligations to contribute to the health and security fund. However, the court case appears to have reached an unresolvable outcome, meaning the dispute was not definitively settled through this particular legal action. **What This Means for Workers:** This case highlights the ongoing challenges workers face in ensuring employers honor their commitments to benefit funds. When construction companies fail to make required contributions to health and security funds, it can jeopardize workers' access to healthcare and other vital benefits. While this particular case didn't reach a clear resolution, it demonstrates that unions actively pursue legal action to protect workers' benefit rights and hold employers accountable for their contractual obligations.

This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.

Browse Related

Facing something similar at work?

Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 2 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.

This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. Case outcomes, claim types, and summaries are extracted using AI analysis and may be incomplete or inaccurate. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.

See something wrong, or named in this ruling and want it corrected or redacted? Request a correction.