Case 8:20-cv-00745 Document 1-1 Filed 04/15/20 Page 1 of 42 Page ID #:64
`Case 8:20-cv-00745 Document 1-1 Filed 04/15/20 Page 1 of 42 Page ID #:64
`
`EXHIBIT A
`EXHIBIT A
`
`
`
`

`

`Case 8:20-cv-00745 Document 1-1 Filed 04/15/20 Page 2 of 42 Page ID #:65
`
`3
`
`4
`
`·5
`
`1 AEGISLAWFIRM,-PC
`2 SAMUELA WONO,StateBarNo.217104
`KASHIF HAQUE, State Bar No. 218672
`JESSICA L CAMPBELL, State Bar No. 280626
`9811 Irvine Cenlm Drive, Saile 100
`. Irvine, Califumia 92618
`Telephone: (949) 379-6250.
`Faammlr.: (949) 379-6251
`Attmn.,'YB fu, l')mrtiffs Aaron Colonelli end David Mancera,
`individually end an behalf of all othem simiJe:d) silosted
`
`6
`
`7
`
`BY
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`SOPFJu.OR C011RT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
`
`COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO
`
`..
`
`AARON COLONBLU end DAVID
`12 MANCERA, individually and on·behalf of
`all ottm,,, simtlarly situated,
`
`11
`
`13
`
`)'Jajntjft;
`
`14
`
`15
`
`VB.
`
`16 PANASONICAVIONICS
`CORPORATION; ami DOES 1-100,
`inclusive,
`·
`
`17
`
`J1efmdHnts
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`CaseNo.CIV DS 2 00 ~ 2 8 4
`
`CLASS AC'l'ION COMPLAINT FOR:
`
`1. Faihm,.toPayMi11i11111111 Wages;
`2 Faihm, to Pay Overtime Wages;
`3. Faihm, to Pnmde Meal Periods;
`4. Faihm, to Pmiiit R e s t~
`5. Faihm, to Pay Wagi,s Upon Se101aliun <Jf
`Bmpioyment ami W-Jlhin the Requiied 'I'mw; .
`6. Faihm,toFumishAl»oaleWage
`Sfatnnen1B; and
`7. Violation nf CaJifumie Rnsiness mid
`Pmressiaos Code §§ 17200, et seq. .
`
`DEMAND FOR JORY TRIAL
`
`22 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - l
`•
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25 ·
`
`26 ·
`
`27
`
`28
`
`...
`. ~ACTION CO~
`
`copy
`
`EXHIBIT A, PAGE 13
`
`

`

`Case 8:20-cv-00745 Document 1-1 Filed 04/15/20 Page 3 of 42 Page ID #:66
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`Plaintiffs Aaron Colonelli and David Mancera, individually and on behalf of all others
`
`similarly situated, alleges as follows: ·
`
`NATURE OF ACTION AND INTRODUCTORY STATEMENT
`
`1.
`
`Plaintiffs Aaron Colonelli and David Mancera ( collectively "Plaintiffs") bring this
`
`putative class action against Panasonic Avionics Corporation and Does 1 through 100, inclusive
`
`( collectively "Defendants" or "Panasonic"), on behalf of themselves individually and on behalf of a
`
`class of California citizens who worked for Panasonic and were classified as non-exempt
`
`employees or misclassified as exempt employees.
`
`2.
`
`Defendants develop inflight entertainment and communications, . among other
`
`1 0
`
`avionics-related products and services.
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`3.
`
`Through this action, Plaintiffs are alleging that Defendants have engaged in a
`
`systematic pattern of wage and hour violations under the California Labor Code ("Labor Code"), all
`
`of which contribute to Defendants' deliberate unfair competition.
`
`4.
`
`Plaintiffs are informed and believes, and thereon alleges, during the relevant time
`
`period, Defendants had a consistent policy of violating state wage· and hour laws by, among other
`
`16
`
`things:
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`..
`26
`
`27
`
`(a) Misclassifying Plaintiffs and other employees as exempt employees;
`
`(b)
`
`( c)
`
`( d)
`
`( e)
`
`Failing to pay at least minimum wages for all hours worked
`
`Failing to pay overtime compensation for all overtime hours and at the
`
`correct overtime rate;
`
`Failing to provide meal periods or compensation in lieu thereof,
`
`Failing to authorize or permit rest breaks or provide compensation in lieu
`
`thereof;
`
`(f) Willfully
`
`failing
`
`to provide accurate semi-monthly
`
`itemized wage
`
`statements; and
`
`(g)
`
`Failing to pay all wages due upon separation of employment.
`
`5.
`
`Plaintiffs· bring this lawsuit seeking monetary relief against Defendants on behalf of
`
`28
`
`themselves and all others similarly situated to recover, among other things, unpaid wages and
`
`1
`
`CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
`
`EXHIBIT A, PAGE 14
`
`

`

`Case 8:20-cv-00745 Document 1-1 Filed 04/15/20 Page 4 of 42 Page ID #:67
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`benefits, interest, attorney's fees, costs and expenses and penalties pursuant to Labor Code§§ 201-
`
`203, 210, 226, 226.7, 510, 512, 1182.12, 1194, 1194.2, 1197, and 1198, and Code of California
`
`Civil Procedure§ 1021.5.
`
`6.
`
`Plaintiffs, on behalf of themselves and all class members, pursuant to Business and
`
`Professions Code sections 17200, et seq, also seeks injunctive relief and restitution for the unfair,
`
`unlawful, or fraudulent practices alleged in this Complaint
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`7.
`
`This is a class action, pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure § 382. The
`
`monetary damages and restitution sought by Plaintiffs exceed the minimal jurisdictional limits of
`
`the Superior Court and will be established according to proof at trial
`
`8.
`
`This Court has jurisdiction over this action pursuant to the California Constitution, ·
`
`12 Article VI, § 10, which grants the Superior Court original jurisdiction in all cases except those
`
`13
`
`given by statutes to other courts. The statutes under which this action is brought do not specify any
`
`14
`
`other basis for jurisdiction.
`
`15
`
`9.
`
`This Court has jurisdiction over all Defendants because, upon information and
`
`16
`
`belief, Defendants have sufficient minimum·contacts in California or otherwise intentionally avail·
`
`17
`
`themselves of the California market so as to render the exercise of jurisdiction over them by the
`
`18 California courts consistent with traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice.
`
`19
`
`10.
`
`Venue is proper in this Court because, upon information and belief, Defendants
`
`20
`
`transact business or have at least one facility in this county and the acts and omissions alleged
`
`21
`
`herein took place in this county.
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`THE PARTIES
`
`11.
`
`Plaintiff~ Aaron Colonelli and David Mancera are residents of California Plaintiffs
`
`were employed by Defendants during the relevant time period in California as alleged herein.
`
`Plaintiffs were misclassified as exempt employees and later reclassified as non-:exempt employees
`. . . . . -
`·-
`
`while working for Defendants.
`
`12.
`
`Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and thereon alleges, that Defendants at all times
`
`hereinafter mentioned, were and are employers as defined in and subject to the Labor Code and
`
`2
`
`CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
`
`EXHIBIT A, PAGE 15
`
`

`

`I
`1 •
`' I
`'
`
`Case 8:20-cv-00745 Document 1-1 Filed 04/15/20 Page 5 of 42 Page ID #:68
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`IWC Wage Orders, whose employees were an~ are engaged throughout this county and the State of
`
`California.
`
`13.
`
`Plaintiffs are unaware of the true names or capacities of the defendants sued herein
`
`under the fictitious names DOES I through 100, but will seek leave of this Court to amend this
`
`Complaint and serve such fictitiously named defendants once their names and capacities become
`
`known.
`
`14.
`
`Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and' thereon alleges, that each defendant acted in
`
`all respects pertinent to this action as the agent of the other defondant, carried out a joint scheme,
`
`business plan or policy in all respects pertinent hereto, and the acts of each defendant are legally
`
`attributable to the other defendant Furthermore, defendants in all respects acted as the employer
`
`and/or joint employer of Plaintiffs and the class members.
`
`15.
`
`. Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and thereon allege, that each and all of the acts
`
`and omissions alleged herein were performed by, or are attributable to, Defendants and/or DOES I
`
`through 100, acting as the agent or alter ego for the other, with legal authority to· act on the other's
`
`behalf. The acts of any and all Defendants were in accordance with, and represent, the official
`
`policy of Defendants.
`
`16.
`
`· At all relevant times, Defendants, and each of them, acted within the scope of such
`
`agency or employment, or ratified each and every act or omission complained of herein. At all
`
`relevant times, Defendants, and each of them, aided and abetted the acts and omissions of each and
`
`all the other Defendants in proximately causing the damages herein alleged
`
`17.
`
`Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and thereon allege, that each of said Defendants
`
`is in some manner intentionally, negligently or otherwise responsible for the acts, omissions,.
`
`occurrences and transactions alleged herein.
`
`CLASS ACTION ALLEGATIONS
`
`18.
`
`Plaintiffs bring this action .under Code of Civil Procedure § 382 on behalf of
`
`themselves and all other members of the general public similariy situated who were affected by
`
`Defendants' Labor Code, Business and Professions Code §§ 17200 and IWC Wage Order
`
`violations.
`
`3
`
`CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
`
`EXHIBIT A, PAGE 16
`
`

`

`Case 8:20-cv-00745 Document 1-1 Filed 04/15/20 Page 6 of 42 Page ID #:69
`
`19.
`
`All claims alleged herein arise under California law for which Plaintiffs seek relief
`
`authorized by California law.
`
`20.
`
`Plaintiffs' proposed Class consists of and is defined as follows:
`
`Class
`
`All California citizens currently or formerly working for Defendants as
`non-exempt employees, including those misclassified by Defendants as
`exempt employees whose job duties and/or salary did not meet the test for
`exempt classification, within four years prior to the filing of the Complaint
`to the date the Class is certified.
`
`21.
`
`Plaintiffs also seek to certify the following Subclass:
`
`Waiting Time Subclass
`
`All Class .members who separated their employment with Defendants at
`any time within three years prior to the filing of this action to the date the
`Subclass is certified.
`
`22.
`
`Members of the Class and Subclass described above will collectively be referred to .
`
`as "class members." Plaintiffs reserve the right to establish other or additional subclasses, or
`
`I
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14 modify any Class or Subclass definition, as appropriate based on investigation, discovery and
`
`15
`
`specific theories of liability.
`
`23.
`
`This action has been brought and may properly be maintained as a class action under
`
`the California Code of Civil Procedure§ 382 because.there are common questions oflaw and fact
`
`as to the Class that predominate over questions affecting only individual members including, but
`
`not limited to:
`
`a
`
`b.
`
`C.
`
`Whether Defendants misclassified Plaintiffs and class members as exempt
`
`employees rather than non-exempt employees;
`
`Whether Defendants failed to pay at least minimum wage for all hours
`
`worked by Plaintiffs and class members;
`
`Whether Defendants required Plaintiffs and class members to work over 8
`
`hours per day, over ·12 hours per day and/or over 40 .hours per week and
`
`failed to pay them overtime compensation at the proper rate;
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`4
`
`CLASS· ACTION COMPLAINT
`
`EXHIBIT A, PAGE 17
`
`

`

`Case 8:20-cv-00745 Document 1-1 Filed 04/15/20 Page 7 of 42 Page ID #:70
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`cl.
`
`e.
`
`f.
`
`g.
`
`h.
`
`Whether Defendants deprived Plaintiffs and class members of timely meal
`
`periods or required Plaintiffs and class members to work through meal
`
`periods without compensation;
`
`Whether Defendants deprived Plaintiffs and class members of rest breaks or
`
`required Plaintiffs and class members to work through rest breaks without
`
`compensation;
`
`Whether Defendants failed to timely pay Plaintiffs and class members all
`
`earned wages during their employment;
`
`Whether Defendants failed to timely pay Plaintiffs and Waiting Time
`
`Subclass members all wages due upon termination or within 72 hours of
`
`resignation;
`
`Whether Defendants· failed to furnish Plaintiffs and class members with
`
`• accurate wage statements;
`
`Whether Defendants' conduct was willful or reckless; and
`
`. J.
`
`Whether Defendants engaged in unfair business practices in violation of
`
`· Business & Professions Code§§ 17200, et seq.
`
`24.
`
`There is a well-defined community of interest in the litigation and the Class is
`
`18
`
`readily ascertainable.
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`(a)
`
`Numerosity: The members of the Class are so numerous that joinder of all
`
`members is impractical. Although the members of the Class are unknown to
`
`Plaintiffs at this time, on information and belief, the Class is estimated to be
`greater than 100 individuals. The identity of the class members are readily
`ascertainable by inspection of Defendants' employment and payroll records.
`
`(b)
`
`Typicality: The claims (or defenses, if any) of Plaintiffs are typical of the
`
`claims (or defenses, if any) of the Class because Defendants' failure to
`
`comply with the provisions of California wage and hour laws entitled each
`
`class member to similar pay, benefits and other relief. The injuries sustained
`
`by Plaintiffs are also typical of the injuries sustained by the Class because
`
`5
`
`CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
`
`EXHIBIT A, PAGE 18
`
`

`

`Case 8:20-cv-00745 Document 1-1 Filed 04/15/20 Page 8 of 42 Page ID #:71
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`they arise out of and are caused by Defendants' common course of conduct
`
`as alleged herein.
`
`(c)
`
`Adequacy: Plaintiffs are qualified to, and will fairly and adequately represent
`
`and protect the interests of all members of the Class because it is in her best
`
`interests to prosecute the claims alleged herein to obtain full compensation
`
`and penalties due her and the Class. Plaintiffs' attorneys, as proposed class
`
`counsel, are competent and experienced in litigating large employment class
`
`actions and are versed in the rules governing class action discovery,
`
`certification and settlement Plaintiffs have incurred and, throughout the
`
`duration of this action, will continue to incur attorneys' fees and costs that
`
`have been and will be necessarily expended for the prosecution of this action
`
`for the substantial benefit of each class member.
`
`(d)
`
`Superiority: The nature of this action makes the use of class· action
`
`adjudication superior to other methods. A class action will achieve
`
`economies of time, effort and expense as compared with separate lawsuits,
`
`and· will avoid inconsistent outcomes because the same issues can be
`
`adjudicated in the same manner and at the same time for each Class. If
`
`appropriate this Court can, and is empowered to, fashion methods to
`
`efficiently manage this case as a class and/or collective action.
`
`(e)
`
`Public Policy Considerations:· Employers in the State of California and other
`
`states violate employment and labor laws every day. Current employees are
`
`often afraid to assert their rights out of fear of direct or indirect retaliation.
`
`Former employees are fearful of bringing actions because they believe their
`
`former employers might damage their. future endeavors through negative
`
`references and/or other means. Class actions provide the class members who
`
`are not named in the complaint with a type of anonymity thai allo~s for the
`
`vindication of their rights at the same time as affording them privacy
`
`protections.
`
`6
`
`CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
`
`EXHIBIT A, PAGE 19
`
`

`

`Case 8:20-cv-00745 Document 1-1 Filed 04/15/20 Page 9 of 42 Page ID #:72
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`.5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`GENERAL ALLEGATIONS
`
`25.
`
`Defendants misclassified Plaintiffs and other non-exempt employees as exempt
`
`employees at Defendants' California business location(s).
`
`26.
`
`Defendants continue to employ Plaintiffs and class members within California as
`
`non-exempt employees.
`
`27.
`
`Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and thereon allege, that at all times mentioned
`
`herein, Defendants were advised by skilled lawyers, employees and other professionals who were
`
`knowledgeable about California wage and hour law, employment and personnel practices and the
`
`. 9
`
`requirements of California.
`
`10
`
`11
`
`28.
`
`Through this action, Plaintiffs allege that Defendants have engaged in a systematic
`
`pattern of wage and hour violations under the California Labor Code and IWC Wage Orders, all of
`
`12 which contribute to Defendants' deliberate unfair competition.
`
`13
`
`29.
`
`Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and thereon allege, that Defendants knew or
`
`14
`
`should have known that Plaintiffs and class members were entitled to receive at least minimum
`
`15 wage and that they were not receiving at least minimum wage for work that was required to be
`
`16
`
`performed. In violation of the Labor Code and IWC Wage Orders, ~laintiffs and class members·
`
`17 were not paid at least minimum wage for all hours worked.
`
`18
`
`19
`
`30.
`
`Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and thereon allege, that Defendants knew or
`
`should have known that Plaintiffs and class meID;bers were entitled to receive certain wages for
`
`20
`
`overtime compensation. In violation of the Labor Code and IWC Wage Orders, Plaintiffs and class
`
`21 members were not paid overtime for all overtime hours worked at the correct overtime rate.
`
`22
`
`23
`
`31.
`
`Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and thereon allege, that Defendants knew or
`
`should ·have known ·that Plaintiffs and class members were entitled to receive all meal periods or
`
`24
`
`payment of one (I) additional hour of pay at Plaintiffs' and class members' regular rate of pay
`
`-25 when they did not receive a timely, uninterrupted meal period. In violation of the Labor Code and
`
`26
`
`IWC Wage Orders, Plaintiffs and class members did not receive all meal periods or payment of one
`
`27
`
`(!) additional hour of pay at Plaintiffs' and class members' regular rate of pay whe_n they did not
`
`28
`
`7
`
`CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
`
`EXHIBIT A, PAGE 20
`
`

`

`Case 8:20-cv-00745 Document 1-1 Filed 04/15/20 Page 10 of 42 Page ID #:73
`
`I
`
`receive a timely, uninterrupted meal period when working more than five hours and a second
`
`2
`
`· timely, uninterrupted meal period when working more than ten (10) hours ..
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`32.
`
`Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and thereon allege, that Defendants knew or
`
`should have known that Plaintiffs and. class members were entitled to receive all rest breaks or
`
`payment of one (1) additional hour of pay at Plaintiffs' and class members' regular rate of pay
`
`6 when a rest break was missed. In violation of the Labor Code and IWC Wage Orders, Plaintiffs
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`and class members did not receive all rest breaks or payment of one (1) additional hour of pay at
`
`Plaintiffs' and class members' regular rate of pay when a rest break was missed.
`
`3 3.
`
`Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and thereon allege, that Defendants knew or
`
`1 O
`
`should have known that Plaintiffs and class members were entitled to timely payment of wages
`
`11
`
`during their employment In violation of the California Labor Code, Plaintiffs and class members
`
`12
`
`did not receive payment of all wages within permissible time periods.
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`· 34.
`
`Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and thereon allege, that Defendants knew or
`
`should have known that Plaintiffs and Waiting Time Subclass members were entitled to timely
`
`payment of wages upon separation of employment In violation of the California Labor Code,
`
`16 Plaintiffs and Waiting Time Subclass·members did not receive payment of all wages including, but
`
`17
`
`18
`
`not limited tci, minimum wages and overtime wages within permissible time periods.
`
`35.
`
`Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and thereon allege, that Defendants knew or
`
`19
`
`should have known that Plaintiffs and class members were entitled to receive complete and
`
`20
`
`accurate wage statements in accordance with California law. In violation of the California Labor
`
`21 Code, Plaintiffs and class members were not furnished with complete and accurate wage statements
`
`22
`
`showing their total hours worked, number of hours worked at each hourly rate and gross and net
`
`23 wages, among other things.
`
`24
`
`36.
`
`Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and thereon allege, that at all times mentioned
`
`. 25
`
`herein, Defendants knew or should have known that it had a duty to compensate Plaintiffs and class
`
`26 members, and that Defendants had the financial ability to pay such compensation but willfully,
`
`27
`
`knowingly and intentionally failed to do so, all in order to increase Defendants' profits.
`
`28
`
`8
`
`. CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
`
`EXHIBIT A, PAGE 21
`
`

`

`Case 8:20-cv-00745 Document 1-1 Filed 04/15/20 Page 11 of 42 Page ID #:74
`
`l
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`37.
`
`Therefore, Plaintiffs bring this lawsuit seeking monetary and injunctive relief
`
`against Defendants on behalf of themselves and all class members to recover, among other things,
`
`unpaid wages, interest, attorneys' fees, penalties, costs and expenses.
`
`FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
`
`FAILURETOPAYMINIMUMWAGES
`
`(Violation of Labor Code§§ 1182.12, 1194, 1194.2, and 1197; Violation ofIWC Wage Order)
`
`38.
`
`Plaintiffs hereby re-allege and incorporate by reference all paragraphs above as
`
`though fully set forth herein.
`
`39.
`
`Labor Code§§ 1194 and 1197 provide that the minimum wage for employees fixed
`
`l O by the IWC is the minimum wage to be paid to employees, and the payment of a lesser wage than
`
`11
`
`the minimum so fixed is unlawful.
`
`12
`
`13
`
`40.
`
`During the relevant time period, Defendants paid Plaintiffs and class members less
`
`than minimum wage when they failed to pay compensation for all hours worked, such as during
`
`14 missed and/or interrupted meal periods or other unpaid hours.
`
`15
`
`41.
`
`During the relevant time period, Defendants regularly failed to pay at least minimum
`
`16 wage to Plaintiffs and class members for all hours worked pursuant to Labor Code § § 1194 and
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`1197.
`
`42.
`
`Defendants' failure to pay Plaintiffs and class members the minimum wage as
`
`required violates Labor Code §§ 1194 and I 197. Pursuant to these sections, Plaintiffs and class
`
`20 members are entitled to recover the unpaid balance of their minimum wage compensation as well
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`as interest, costs and attorney's fees.
`
`43.
`
`Pursuant to Labor Code § 1194.2, Plaintiffs and class members are entitled to
`
`recover liquidated damages in an amount equal to the wages unlawfully unpaid and interest
`
`24
`
`thereon.
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`II I
`
`II I
`
`Ill
`
`Ill
`
`9
`
`CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
`
`EXHIBIT A, PAGE 22
`
`

`

`Case 8:20-cv-00745 Document 1-1 Filed 04/15/20 Page 12 of 42 Page ID #:75
`
`1
`
`-2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
`
`FAILURE TO PAY OVERTIME WAGES
`
`(Violation of Labor Code§§ S10, 1194, and 1198; Violation ofIWC Wage Order)
`
`44.
`
`Plaintiffs hereby re-allege and incorporate by reference the previous paragraphs, as
`
`though fully set forth herein.
`
`45.
`
`California Labor Code § 1198 and the applicable IWC Wage Order provide that it is
`
`· unlawful to employ persons without compensating them at a rate of pay either one and one-half or
`
`two-times that person's regular rate of pay, depending on the number of hours worked by the
`
`person on a daily or weekly basis.
`
`46.
`
`Specifically, the applicable IWC Wage Order provides that Defendants are and were
`
`required to pay Plaintiffs and class members employed by Defendants, at the rate of one and one(cid:173)
`
`half times their regular rate of pay for all hours worked in excess of 8 hours in a day or 40 hours in
`
`a workweek.
`
`47.
`
`The applicable IWC Wage Order further provides that Defendants are and were
`
`required to pay Plaintiffs and class members employed by Defendants, at" a rate of double their
`
`regular rate of pay for all hours worked in excess of 12 in a·day or in excess of 8 hours in a.day on
`
`the seventh consecutive day of work.
`
`18.
`
`California Labor Code § 510 codi.fiC!l the right to overtime compell!lUtion at one and
`
`one-half times the regular hourly rate for hours worked in excess of 8 hours in a day or 40 hours in
`
`a week or for the first 8 hours worked on the seventh day of work, and to overtime compensation at
`
`twice the regular hourly rate for hours worked in excess of 12 hours in a day or in excess of 8 hours
`
`in a day on the seventh consecutive day of work.
`
`49.
`
`During the relevant time period, Plaintiffs and class members worked in excess of 8
`
`hours in a day, in excess o_f 12 hours in a day and/or in excess of 40 hours in a week.
`
`50.
`
`During the relevant time period, Plaintiffs and class members were not paid proper
`
`overtime compensation for all the hours they worked in excess of 8 hours in a day, in excess of 12
`
`hours in a day and/or in excess of 40 hours in a week. For example, Defendants failed to properly
`
`28
`
`pay Plaintiffs and class members for overtime hours worked while off-the-clock.
`
`10
`
`CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
`
`EXHIBIT A, PAGE 23
`
`

`

`Case 8:20-cv-00745 Document 1-1 Filed 04/15/20 Page 13 of 42 Page ID #:76
`
`I
`
`51.
`
`During the relevant time period, Defendants willfully failed to pay all overtime
`
`2 wages owed to Plaintiffs and class members.
`
`3
`
`4
`
`52.
`
`Defendants' failure to pay Plaintiffs and class members the unpaid balance of
`
`overtime compensation, as required by California law, violates the provisions of California Labor
`
`5 Code § § 510 and 1198, and is therefore unlawful.
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`53.
`
`Pursuant to California Labor Code§ 1194, Plaintiffs and class members are entitled
`
`to recover their unpaid balance of the full amount of unpaid overtime compensation, as well as
`
`interest, costs and attorneys' fees.
`
`54.
`
`In committing the violations as herein alleged, Defendants have knowingly and
`
`10 willfully refused to perform their obligations to compensate Plaintiffs and class members for all
`
`11 wages earned. As a direct result, Plaintiffs and class members have suffered and continue to suffer
`
`12
`
`substantial losses relating to the use and enjoyment of such compensation, wages, lost interest on
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`such monies and expenses and attorneys' fees in seeking to compel Defendants to fully perform
`
`their obligations under state law, all to their respective damage in amounts according to proof at
`
`trial ..
`
`THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION
`
`FAILURE TO PROVIDE MEAL PERIODS
`
`(Violations of Labor Code§§ 226.7 and 512; Violation ofIWC Wage Order)
`
`55.
`
`Plaintiffs hereby re-allege and incorporate by reference the previous paragraphs, as
`
`20
`
`though fully set forth herein.
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`56.
`
`Labor Code § 226.7 provides that no employer shall require an employee to work
`
`during any meal period mandated by the IWC Wage Orders.
`
`57.
`
`Section 11 of the applicable IWC Wage Order states, "no employer shall employ any
`
`24
`
`person for a work period of more than five (5) hours without a meal period of not less than thirty
`
`25
`
`(30) minutes, except that when a work period of not more than six (6) hours will complete the day's
`
`26 work the meal period may be waived by mutual consent of the employer and the employee."
`
`27
`
`58.
`
`Labor Code§ 512(a) provides that an employer may not require, cause or permit an
`
`28
`
`employee to work for a period of more than five (5) hours per day without providing the employee
`
`11
`
`CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
`
`EXHIBIT A, PAGE 24
`
`

`

`Case 8:20-cv-00745 Document 1-1 Filed 04/15/20 Page 14 of 42 Page ID #:77
`
`I with an uninterrupted meal period of not less than thirty (30) minutes, except that if the total work
`
`2
`
`period per day of the employee is not more than six (6) hours, 'the meal period may be waived by
`
`3 mutual consent of both the employer and the employee.
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`59.
`
`Labor Code § 512(a) also provides that an employer may not employ an employee
`
`for a work period of more than ten (I 0) hours per day without providing the employee with a
`
`second meal period of not less than thirty (30) minutes, except that if the total hours worked is no
`
`7 more than twelve (12) hours, the second meal period may be waived by mutual consent of the
`
`8 _ employer and the employee only if the first meal period was not waived.
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`60.
`
`During the relevant time period, Plaintiffs and class members did not receive
`
`compliant meal periods for working more than five (5) and/or ten (10) hours per day because their
`
`meal.periods were missed, late, short, and/or they were not permitted to take a second meal period.
`
`61.
`
`Labor Code§ 226.7(b) and section 11.ofthe applicable IWC Wage Order requires
`
`an employer to pay an employee one additional hour of pay at the employee's regular rate of
`
`compensation for each work day that the meal period is not provided.
`
`62.
`
`At all relevant times, Defendants failed to pay Plaintiffs and class members the full
`
`meal period premium for missed and untimely·meal periods pursuant to Labor Code§ 226.7(b) and
`
`section 11 of the applicable IWC Wage Order.
`
`63.
`
`As a result of Defendants' failure to pay Plaintiffs and class members an additional
`
`hour of pay for each day a meal period was not provided, Plaintiffs and class members suffered and
`
`20
`
`continue to suffer a loss of wages and compensation.
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION
`
`FAil,URE TO PERMIT REST BREAKS
`
`(Violation of Labor Code§ 226. 7; Violation of IWC Wage Order)
`
`64.
`
`Plaintiffs hereby re-allege and incorporate by reference all paragraphs above as
`
`25
`
`though fully set forth herein.
`
`65.
`
`Labor Code § 226. 7(a) provides that no employer shall require an employee to work
`
`during any rest period mandated by the IWC Wage Orders.
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`12
`
`CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
`
`EXHIBIT A, PAGE 25
`
`

`

`Case 8:20-cv-00745 Document 1-1 Filed 04/15/20 Page 15 of 42 Page ID #:78
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`66.
`
`Section 12 of the applicable IWC Wage Order states "every employer shall
`
`authorize and permit all employees to take rest periods, which insofar as practicable shall be in the
`
`middle of each work period" and the "authorized rest period time shall be based on the total hours
`
`worked daily at the rate of ten (10) minutes net rest time per four ( 4) hours or major fraction
`
`thereof' unless the total daily·work time is less than three and one-half (3½) hours.
`
`67.
`
`During the relevant time period, Plaiotiffs and class members did not receive a ten
`
`(10) minute net rest period for every four (4) hours or major fraction thereof worked because they
`
`were required to work through their daily rest periods and/or were not authorized to take their rest
`
`periods.
`
`68.
`
`Labor Code§ 226.7(b) and section 12 of the applicable IWC Wage Order requires
`
`an employer to pay an employee one additional hour of pay at the employee's regular rate of
`
`compensation for each work day that the rest period is not provided.
`
`69.
`
`At all relevant times, Defendants failed to pay Plaiotiffs and class members the full
`
`rest period premium for missed or interrupted rest periods pursuant to Labor Code § 226. 7(b) and
`
`section 12 of the applicable IWC Wage Order.
`
`70.
`
`As a result of Defendants' failure to pay Plaiotiffs and class members an additioruil
`
`hour of pay for each day a rest period was not provided, Plaiotiffs and class members suffered and
`
`continue to suffer a loss of wages and compensation.
`
`F'J.F'IH CAUSE OF ACTION
`
`FAILURE TO PAY WAGES UPON SEPARATION
`
`OF EMPLOYMENT AND WITHIN THE REQUIRED TIME
`
`(Violations of Labor Code§§ 201,202,203 and 210; Violation oflWC Wage Order)
`
`71.
`
`Plaiotiffs hereby re-allege and incorporate by reference the previous paragraphs, as
`
`though fully set forth herein.
`
`72.
`
`California Labor Code §§ 201 and 202 provide that if an employer discharges an
`
`employee, the wages earned and unpaid at the time of discharge are due and payable immediately,
`
`and that if an employee voluntarily leaves his or her employment, his or her wages shall become
`
`due and payable not later than seventy-two (72) hours thereafter, unless the employee has given
`
`13
`
`CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
`
`. '
`
`EXHIBIT A, PAGE 26
`
`

`

`Case 8:20-cv-00745 Document 1-1 Filed 04/15/20 Page 16 of 42 Page ID #:79
`
`I
`
`·2
`
`3
`
`seventy-two (72) hours previous notice of his or her intention to quit, in which case the employee is
`
`entitled to his or her wages at the time of quitting.
`
`73.
`
`During the relevant time period, Defendants willfully failed to pay Plaintiffs and
`
`4 Waiting Time Subclass Members all their earned wages upon terminatio