Gciu-Employer Ret. Fund & Bd. of Trs. of the Gciu Emp'r Ret. Fund v. Quad/Graphics, Inc.

302 F. Supp. 3d 1124
CourtDistrict Court, C.D. California
DecidedMarch 9, 2018
DocketCase No. 2:16–CV–00100–ODW–AFM
StatusPublished

This text of 302 F. Supp. 3d 1124 (Gciu-Employer Ret. Fund & Bd. of Trs. of the Gciu Emp'r Ret. Fund v. Quad/Graphics, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, C.D. California primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Gciu-Employer Ret. Fund & Bd. of Trs. of the Gciu Emp'r Ret. Fund v. Quad/Graphics, Inc., 302 F. Supp. 3d 1124 (C.D. Cal. 2018).

Opinion

OTIS D. WRIGHT, II, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

I. INTRODUCTION

On September 27 and 28, 2017, the Court held a bench trial on a bifurcated issue in this ERISA action. (ECF Nos. 139, 140.) Plaintiffs (collectively "ERF") filed this lawsuit alleging that Defendant ("Quad") failed to make required pension contributions to ERF under various collective bargaining agreements ("CBAs").

ERF and Quad defined the issue at trial as:

Whether [ERF] ha[s] satisfied their burden of proof in showing that [Quad] is obligated under its CBAs and [ERF]'s Trust Agreement to make any contributions, and if so, under which terms, in what amount, and for what period of time.

(Pretrial Order, ECF No. 120-1.) At the final pretrial conference on September 22, 2017, the Court bifurcated the trial. (See Min. Order, ECF No. 133.) The first phase addressed whether ERF could support its claim of contribution damages as shown in ERF's Exhibit 81 ("Exhibit 81"). (Id. ) ERF purports that Exhibit 81 is a summary of contributions Quad owes ERF for vacation entitlements in 2011 under the relevant CBAs at facilities in Dickson, Tennessee ("Dickson"), Fernley, Nevada ("Fernley"), Waukee, Iowa ("Waukee"), and Versailles, Kentucky ("Versailles").

Also pending before the Court are Defendant's Motions in Limine Nos. 3 & 4, which seek to exclude Exhibit 81.

At phase one of the bifurcated bench trial, the parties elicited testimony from:

• Teresa Roberts, a former Quad employee;
• Jane Downs, a Quad employee;
• Judith Knore, assistant administrator of the GCIU-Employer Retirement Fund;
• Carl Coates, an auditor retained by ERF.

Following trial, the parties submitted briefing.1 (ECF Nos. 147, 148.) Having carefully reviewed and considered the evidence and the arguments of counsel as presented at trial and in their written submissions, the Court issues the following findings of fact and conclusions of law pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 52(a). To the extent that any finding of fact constitutes a conclusion of law, it is adopted as such, and vice versa.

*1126II. FINDINGS OF FACT

A. The Parties

1. Plaintiff GCIU-Employer Retirement Fund (the "Fund") is a multiemployer pension plan within the meaning of 29 U.S.C. §§ 1002(37) and 1301(a)(3).
2. Plaintiff Board of Trustees of the GCIU-Employer Retirement Fund includes the present trustees who are the named fiduciaries of the Fund within the meaning of 29 U.S.C. § 1102(a), and is the plan sponsor of the Fund within the meaning of 29 U.S.C. §§ 1002(16)(B)(iii) and 1301(a)(10).
3. The Board of Trustees is authorized, as a named fiduciary, to bring this action on behalf of the Fund, its participants, and beneficiaries for the purpose of collecting delinquent benefit contributions.
4. The Fund is also authorized to bring this action in its own name pursuant to a provision contained within Article VII, Section 18 of the Fund's Trust Agreement, which permits all legal actions to be prosecuted in the name of the Fund.
5. Quad is a Wisconsin corporation, with its headquarters and principal place of business in Sussex, Wisconsin. Quad is engaged in the commercial printing business.
6. In July 2010, Quad acquired World Color (USA), formerly Quebecor World (USA), Inc. ("Quebecor"). Quebecor was a party to various CBAs covering its facilities at Versailles, Dickson, Waukee, and Fernley.

B. The Claims

7. Quad was bound by CBAs under which it was obligated to make contributions to ERF on behalf of certain employees. This obligation included the reporting and payments of contributions to ERF for vacation and, as to Versailles, also personal time.
8. Quad was also bound to comply with the terms of ERF's Trust Agreement.
9. The CBAs at issue in this action include those covered at Quad's facilities at Versailles (effective November 5, 2017); Dickson (effective June 10, 2008); Waukee (effective January 11, 2009); and Fernley (effective December 18, 2006).
10. Quad and the union representing ERF participants at Dickson entered into the "Agreement Supplementing and Modifying the Current Collective Bargaining Agreement," on December 22, 2010 (the "December 2010 Dickson Agreement"). Quad and the union representing ERF participants at Waukee entered into the "Agreement Supplementing and Modifying the Current Collective Bargaining Agreement," on December 21, 2010 (the "December 2010 Waukee Agreement"). Quad's predecessor and the union representing ERF participants at Fernley entered into the "Agreement Between World Color Printing (USA Corp.) and Local 715C Graphic Communications Conference International Brotherhood of Teamsters," on November 30, 2009 (the "November 2009 Fernley Agreement").
11. ERF received copies of the Versailles CBA on January 29, 2008; the Dickson CBA on August 15, 2008; the Waukee CBA on May 14, 2009; the Fernley CBA on April 20, 2007; the December 2010 Dickson Agreement on December 27, 2010; the December 2010 Waukee Agreement on December 27, 2010; and the November 2009 Fernley Agreement on November 30, 2009.
12. The National Labor Relations Board Certifications of Results of *1127Election, dated December 27, 2010 and February 1, 2011, certified, respectively, the Versailles and Fernley facilities de-certifications. ERF received a copy of the Certification of Results in letters dated, respectively, January 10, 2011 and February 3, 2011.
13. On April 15, 2011, ERF gave notice of its intent to audit Quad's Versailles, Dickson, Waukee, and Fernley facilities.
14. ERF claims that Quad owes delinquent contributions under the obligations set forth under the relevant CBAs requiring Quad to remit contributions to the Fund and pursuant to the terms of ERF's Trust Agreement.
15. Under the terms of the CBAs for all four of Quad's locations, contributions were owed for all hours worked or paid, which included vacation time. Entitlement to vacation time was based on an employee's length of employment, and the number of hours they worked in a given year.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
302 F. Supp. 3d 1124, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gciu-employer-ret-fund-bd-of-trs-of-the-gciu-empr-ret-fund-v-cacd-2018.