Skip to main content

Drywall Tapers and Pointers of Greater New York Local Union 1974, Affiliated with International Union of Allied Painters and Allied Trades, AFL-CIO v. Tiger Contracting Corp.

S.D.N.Y.April 29, 2021No. 1:20-cv-10099
Plaintiff WinTiger Contracting Corp.$79,797.99 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: Labor/Mgt. Relations
Status — whether other courts must follow this ruling
Unknown
Procedural Posture — the stage the case had reached
summary judgment

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Claim Types

Breach of ContractDiscrimination

Outcome

The court granted petitioners' motion for summary judgment to confirm an arbitration award against Tiger Contracting Corp., requiring the company to pay $66,463.25 in benefits, $334.74 in wages for union member Michelle Black, and $13,000 in fines to the Joint Board.

What This Ruling Means

**Union vs. Tiger Contracting: A Labor Dispute** This case involved a disagreement between Drywall Tapers and Pointers Union Local 1974 and Tiger Contracting Corp. The union, which represents workers who tape and finish drywall in construction projects, had some kind of dispute with the contracting company about their working relationship. This type of conflict typically involves issues like wages, working conditions, contract terms, or the employer's treatment of union workers. Based on the available information, the specific outcome of this case is not clear. The court case was filed in April 2021 in New York's Southern District, but the final decision and any damages awarded are not reported in the available records. **What This Means for Workers:** Even without knowing the specific outcome, this case highlights an important right that workers have. Union members can take legal action when they believe their employer has violated labor agreements or treated them unfairly. Whether the dispute involves unpaid wages, unsafe working conditions, or violations of collective bargaining agreements, workers have legal options available. The fact that the union pursued this matter in federal court shows that workers don't have to accept unfair treatment quietly—they can fight back through proper legal channels.

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.