Greater St. Louis Const. Laborers Welfare Fund v. B.F.W. Contracting, LLC, No. 22-2138 (8th Cir. 2023)
Annotate this Case
Four employee benefit funds and their Boards of Trustees, as well as two labor unions (collectively, “Boards”), sued B.F.W. Contracting, LLC and B.F.W. Contractors, LLC (collectively, “Contractors”) to compel an audit and recover money damages pursuant to a collective bargaining agreement (CBA) signed onto by Contractors. The district court granted summary judgment for the Boards and found damages in the amount of $48,568.76.
The Eighth Circuit reversed. The court explained that the Boards argued that the Contractors forfeited the argument about supplemental dues because they failed to raise it before the district court. The court concluded that the Boards are incorrect. The Contractors made this argument in their Response to the Statement of Material Facts by Plaintiff, as well as in their Supplemental Reply Memorandum. The court found that this was enough to avoid forfeiture and allowed the court to consider the issue on appeal.
Additionally, the Boards argue that failure to pay the supplemental dues resulted in a breach of the CBA provision, which authorized the dues under the Labor Management Relations Act, 29 U.S.C. Section 186(c)(2). However, as the plain language of the CBA makes clear, there is no violation of that provision if the Contractors never received the employee authorization cards as required by both the CBA and 29 -6- U.S.C. Section 186(c)(4). Without a breach of this subsection of the CBA, these statutory provisions are inapplicable.
Court Description: [Smith, Author, with Stras and Kobes, Circuit Judges] Civil case - Labor Law. In this action for unpaid contributions to benefit funds under a collective bargaining agreement, the district court erred in granting the union Boards' motion for summary judgment and awarding unpaid contributions, liquidated damages, costs, and attorneys' fees, as there was a genuine issue of fact as to whether the Boards had supplied the contractors with the required signature cards and whether the contractors thus had a duty to pay supplemental dues under the Collective Bargaining Agreement.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.