法院判决将为承包商节省720万美元的工资，用于在哈德逊河上的新塔潘Zee桥项目上工作。

A two-judge federal appeals court panel in New York City affirmed on October 20tha 2014 arbitrator’s decision, clearing the way to the big savings. The arbitrator ruled that formwork for pile and pier caps and main span columns over the water should be performed at a $22-per-hour lower pay rate for carpenters’ union members rather than at a dockworkers’ higher pay scale.

The dockworkers’ and carpenters’ locals, both part of the carpenters’ international union, had resolved between them that the dockworkers, who are paid $92.47 an hour in wages and benefits, would perform the work instead of the carpenters, who are paid $70.11 an hour.

The ruling, first reported by the Journal News newspaper, apparently ends more than a year of a convoluted legal dispute.

所涉及的工会也有复杂的历史。它涉及码头工人联盟的隶属关系，其成员于2012年投票通过纽约市木匠区委员会有隶属关系，而不是与竞争的联盟（合并的木匠和木匠联盟）的隶属关系。

两法官的上诉小组写道，Tappan Zee构造师最初将模板分为三类。承包商将码头工人的模板分配到和包括桩帽和木匠模板，并从桩顶的顶部和包括码头盖在内，以及包括主跨度塔式在内的所有柱子的模板。

The bridge dispute arrived in federal court last year, when the national union, the United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America, sued in May in federal district court in New York on behalf of dockbuilders’ Local 1556 and carpenters’ Local 279. The union sought to block Tappan Zee Constructors from abiding by an arbitrator’s decision in the dispute. The arbitrator had revised his preliminary ruling, made in May, 2014, in favor of the union’s stand to have the work performed by the dockworkers’ union.

初步决定逆转

Nine days after issuing his preliminary ruling, the arbitrator instead ruled in favor of the contractor.

According to the contractors’ answer to the unions’ initial lawsuit, the carpenters and dockworkers “manufactured a dispute over which union was entitled to perform the work and then entered into a back-room ‘settlement agreement’ whereby the Carpenters would agree to have the work done by the Dockbuilders” at the higher cost.

塔潘·泽（Tappan Zee）的建筑商还声称“木匠实际上会做这项工作”。

In the carpenters’ lawsuit to block enforcement of the arbitration decision in favor of Tappan Zee Constructors, the union did not cite the Project Labor Agreement (PLA) covering the project or its provisions covering preliminary and final arbitration decisions. Tappan Zee Constructors considered the omission of any mention of the PLA especially troubling, according to its lawsuit.

无法联系为木匠工会工作的律师发表评论。