Case 2:24-cv-01019-KJM-CSK Document 1 Filed 04/04/24 Page 1 of 34
`
`JUSTIN HEWGILL (259528)
`HEWGILL COBB & LOCKARD, APC
`1620 5th Avenue, Suite 325
`San Diego, CA 92101
`Phone: (619) 432-2520;
`Fax: (619) 488-6944
`contact@hcl-lawfirm.com
`Ben Travis (305641)
`BEN TRAVIS LAW, APC
`4660 La Jolla Village Drive, Suite 100
`San Diego, CA 92122
`Phone: (619) 353-7966
`ben@bentravislaw.com
`Attorneys for Plaintiffs Shannon Brown
`and Tami Okada
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
`
`
`
`
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`
`))
`
`
`
`
`SHANNON BROWN, an individual;
`TAMI OKADA, an individual, on
`behalf of themselves and all others
`similarly situated
`
`Plaintiffs,
`
`v.
`
`TESLA, INC. d/b/a TESLA
`MOTORS, INC.; and DOES 1
`through 10, Inclusive,
`
`Defendants.
`
`Case No.:
`
`CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
`
`DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
`
`CLASS ACTION
`
`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
`
`

`

`Case 2:24-cv-01019-KJM-CSK Document 1 Filed 04/04/24 Page 2 of 34
`
`Plaintiffs SHANNON BROWN and TAMI OKADA (“Plaintiffs”), by and
`through their attorneys, brings this class action on behalf of themselves, and all other
`similarly situated non-exempt employees who are or were employed in California by
`TESLA, INC. d/b/a TESLA MOTORS, INC. (“Tesla”) and DOES 1 through 10
`(collectively “Defendants”), inclusive between four years prior to the date of the filing
`of this action through the date of final disposition of this action. Plaintiffs hereby allege,
`on information and belief, except for information based on personal knowledge, which
`allegations are likely to have evidentiary support after further investigation and
`discovery, as follows:
`
`INTRODUCTION
`This California-based class action is brought on behalf of Plaintiffs and the
`1.
`Class 1 because of Defendants’ systematic mistreatment of their employees, in
`violation of California’s wage and hour laws.
`Defendant Tesla is a large car manufacturer which operates distribution
`2.
`center warehouses and assembly facilities throughout the state of California and
`employs numerous employees at those warehouses and assembly facilities.
`3.
`Plaintiff Shannon Brown worked as a non-exempt material handler at
`Defendants’ Fremont Boulevard warehouse in Fremont, California from in or around
`November 2022 through in or around February 2023.
`4.
`Plaintiff Tami Okada worked as a non-exempt production associate at
`Defendants’ Page Avenue and Fremont Boulevard warehouses in Fremont, California
`from in or around February 2022 through in or around March 2023.
`5.
`Defendants compensated Plaintiffs at an hourly rate of pay. Defendants
`also compensated Plaintiffs on a regular basis with bonuses.
`Plaintiffs worked five days a week during most weeks. Plaintiffs regularly
`6.
`worked more than eight hours a day and more than 40 hours a week.
`Defendants denied Plaintiffs and other non-exempt employees in
`7.
`
`1 The “Class” is defined in paragraphs 65-69.
`
`2
`CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
`
`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
`
`

`

`Case 2:24-cv-01019-KJM-CSK Document 1 Filed 04/04/24 Page 3 of 34
`
`
`
`California specific rights afforded to them under the California Labor Code, and the
`applicable Industrial Welfare Commission Wage Order (“IWC Wage Order”).
`Defendants failed to provide full timely uninterrupted meal breaks, and
`8.
`failed to provide a second meal break when Plaintiffs and similarly situated employees
`worked shifts of 10 or more hours. Plaintiffs and other Class members were required
`to clock out on time clocks for meal breaks but it took approximately 10 minutes to go
`each way to and from the cafeteria after clocking out. Accordingly, Plaintiffs and other
`Class members were provided with meal breaks of less than 30 minutes.
`Defendants failed to authorize and permit Plaintiffs and other Class
`9.
`members legally adequate rest breaks. They did this by failing to provide sufficient
`break time to allow Plaintiffs and other Class members to travel from the time clock to
`a break area or restroom (and return) and still have a full ten minute uninterrupted break
`relieved of all duty. Furthermore, Plaintiffs and other Class members were required to
`complete their processes, put their tools away, plug in their tuggers and make sure
`nothing was in the car they were working on before they could go on break. If they
`were in the middle of a process, they would need to finish it before going on break.
`This resulted in Plaintiffs and other Class members not taking full rest breaks, as all
`employees were required to take their rest breaks at the same time.
`10. Furthermore, despite Plaintiffs and other Class members regularly earning
`bonuses, Defendants did not properly include all those bonuses in the calculation of
`their regular rates of pay. Therefore, Defendants did not pay Plaintiffs and other Class
`members overtime pay, sick and vacation pay and meal and rest break premiums at the
`correct hourly rates.
`11. Additionally, Defendants required Plaintiffs and other Class members to
`work off-the-clock, including but not limited to, working through meal breaks or meal
`breaks being interrupted, working before their shifts including the time spent before
`shifts conducting checks on their equipment and replacing batteries to be ready on time.
`In addition, Plaintiffs and other Class members when they arrived at the warehouse,
`
`
`
`3
`CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
`
`
`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
`
`
`

`

`Case 2:24-cv-01019-KJM-CSK Document 1 Filed 04/04/24 Page 4 of 34
`
`
`
`were required to badge in, then go to a security desk where their badge was then
`checked, then badge in at another door, then walk through part of the warehouse, then
`badge through another door and then finally they reached a time clock where they
`would need to wait for others to clock in ahead of them. It took them approximately 15
`minutes just to get to the time clock from when they entered the facility. At the end of
`their shifts, Plaintiffs and other Class members needed to go through this process again
`after clocking out. Defendants did not pay Plaintiffs and other Class members for these
`hours worked.
`12. Defendants also required Plaintiffs and other Class members to purchase
`steel-toed boots for work purposes and did not reimburse them for those business
`expenses.
`13. Derivatively, Defendants failed to pay Plaintiffs and similarly situated
`employees all wages owed timely during employment and upon termination of
`employment and failed to and continues to fail to provide accurate wage statements
`and maintain accurate records as required by California law.
`14. Defendants also violated the California quota laws by failing to provide
`employees with written descriptions of each quota and any potential adverse
`employment action that could result from failure to meet the quota. Defendants also
`violated the quota laws by requiring employees to meet quotas that prevented
`compliance with meal and rest periods and use of bathroom facilities, including
`reasonable travel time to and from bathroom facilities, and by taking adverse
`employment actions against employees, including termination, for failure to meet a
`quota that did not allow them to take meal and rest periods and use the bathroom
`facilities, including reasonable travel time to and from bathroom facilities, and for
`failure to meet a quota that had never been disclosed to them.
`15. Finally, Defendants failed to provide places of employment that were safe
`and healthful, by forcing employees to work in the heat without air conditioning.
`16. Upon information and belief, the above practices are uniform at all
`
`
`
`4
`CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
`
`
`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
`
`
`

`

`Case 2:24-cv-01019-KJM-CSK Document 1 Filed 04/04/24 Page 5 of 34
`
`
`
`distribution facilities in the State of California and are still ongoing.
`In order to redress the harms suffered, Plaintiffs, on behalf of themselves
`17.
`and the Class, bring claims associated with Defendant’s violations of the California
`Labor Code and the applicable IWC Wage Order, including: (1) failure to pay all
`minimum, regular rate and overtime wages for off-the-clock work; (2) failure to pay
`all wages at legally sufficient rates; (3) failure to provide meal periods in violation of
`Labor Code §§226.7 and 512; (4) failure to provide rest periods in violation of Labor
`Code §226.7; (5) failure to reimburse for required business expenses; (6) failure to
`provide accurate wage statements in violation of Labor Code §226; (7) failure to timely
`pay wages when due at termination in violation of Labor Code §§201 and 202; (8)
`failure to comply with California quota laws in violation of Labor Code § 2100 et seq.;
`and (9) violation of the Unfair Competition Law (“UCL”) pursuant to Business &
`Professions Code §17200, et seq.
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`18. Thes Court has personal jurisdiction over Plaintiffs because their domiciles
`are in California.
`19. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendant because Defendant has
`conducted and continues to conduct substantial business in California, employs
`numerous individuals in California, and has intentionally availed itself of the laws and
`markets of California through the operation of its business in California.
`20. This court has subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to the Class Action
`Fairness Act, 28 U.S.C. 1332(d), as Plaintiffs (California) and Defendant Tesla
`(Delaware, Texas) are diverse, there are over 100 class members, and the amount in
`controversy exceeds $5 million.
`21. Venue is proper in this Court because Defendant Tesla employs
`numerous individuals in this District. Further, Plaintiffs reside in this District, and a
`substantial portion of the acts giving rise to this action occurred in this District.
`
`
`
`5
`CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
`
`
`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
`
`
`

`

`Case 2:24-cv-01019-KJM-CSK Document 1 Filed 04/04/24 Page 6 of 34
`
`
`
`PARTIES
`
`A. PLAINTIFF
`22. Plaintiff Brown is an individual over the age of eighteen years, and at all
`times relevant herein was and is, a resident of Sacramento County in the State of
`California.
`23. Plaintiff Okada is an individual over the age of eighteen years, and at all
`times relevant herein was and is, a resident of Sacramento County in the State of
`California.
`24. Plaintiffs each worked at Defendants’ facilities in San Joaquin County and
`Alameda County.
`B. DEFENDANTS
`25. Defendant Tesla is a Delaware Corporation with its principal place of
`business in Texas.
`26. On information and belief, Defendants operate assembly and distribution
`center warehouses throughout the State of California and employ numerous employees
`in those warehouses.
`27. Based on information and belief, Defendants had the authority to, directly
`or indirectly, or through an agent or other person, employ or exercise control over
`Plaintiffs’ and other Class members’ wages, hours, and working conditions.
`28. Based on information and belief, wage and hour policies, including those
`which caused violations of California law alleged in this Complaint, were drafted and
`administered centrally between the various Defendants. Additionally, Defendants,
`each, had knowledge of the wage-and-hour violations alleged herein and each
`defendant had the power to prevent the violations from occurring. Having knowledge
`of the wage-and-hour violations set forth in this Complaint, Defendants could have but
`failed to prevent the violations from occurring.
`29. Plaintiffs do not know the true names and capacities of defendants sued
`herein as DOES 1 through 10, and therefore sue these defendants by such fictitious
`
`
`
`6
`CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
`
`
`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
`
`
`

`

`Case 2:24-cv-01019-KJM-CSK Document 1 Filed 04/04/24 Page 7 of 34
`
`
`
`names. Plaintiffs will amend their Complaint to allege the true names and capacities
`when they are ascertained.
`30. Plaintiffs believe and thereon allege that each “Doe” Defendant is
`responsible in some manner for the occurrences herein alleged, and Plaintiffs’ injuries
`and damages as herein alleged are directly, proximately and/or legally caused by
`Defendants and their acts.
`31. Plaintiffs are informed and believes and thereon alleges that the
`aforementioned DOES are somehow responsible for the acts alleged herein as the
`agents, employers, representatives or employees of other named Defendants, and in
`doing the acts herein alleged were acting within the scope of their agency, employment
`or representative capacity of said named Defendants.
`32. The tortious acts and omissions alleged herein were performed by
`Defendants’ management level employees. Defendants allowed and/or condoned a
`continuing pattern of unlawful practices in violation of the California Labor Code, and
`have caused, and will continue to cause, Plaintiffs’ economic damage in an amount to
`be proven at trial.
`FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS COMMON TO ALL CLAIMS
`33. Defendants operate distribution center warehouses and assembly centers
`throughout the State of California. Workers at those warehouses are provided with
`pallet jacks or forklifts and are given assignments to complete. The assignments consist
`of moving their pallet jacks up and down aisles in enormous warehouses, taking items
`off the shelves and loading them onto pallets to be ultimately shipped to customers
`and/or retail stores, or delivered to assembly lines for assembly workers to assemble or
`otherwise work on. Assembly workers are required to work at a station and assemble
`parts which are delivered by warehouse workers to assembly lines.
`Off-the-clock Work
`34. Employees are also required to work time off-the-clock both before and
`after their shifts.
`
`
`
`7
`CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
`
`
`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
`
`
`

`

`Case 2:24-cv-01019-KJM-CSK Document 1 Filed 04/04/24 Page 8 of 34
`
`
`
`35. Defendants required Plaintiffs and other Class members to work off-the-
`clock, including but not limited to, working through meal breaks or meal breaks being
`interrupted.
`36. Additionally, Plaintiffs and other Class members are required to be ready
`to start their assignments at the starting time of their shift. If they are not ready, they
`are disciplined by Defendants. Accordingly, Plaintiffs and other Class members
`worked before their shifts including the time spent before shifts conducting checks on
`their equipment and replacing batteries to be ready on time.
`In addition, Plaintiffs and other Class members when they arrived at the
`37.
`warehouse, were required to badge in, then go to a security desk where their badge was
`then checked, then badge in at another door, then walk through part of the warehouse,
`then badge through another door and then finally they reached a time clock where they
`would need to wait for others to clock in ahead of them. It took them approximately 15
`minutes just to get to the time clock from when they entered the facility. At the end of
`their shifts, Plaintiffs and other Class members needed to go through this process again
`after clocking out.
`38. Defendants did not pay Plaintiffs and other Class members for these hours
`worked.
`Failure to Accurately Calculate the Regular Rate of Pay and Therefore Failure to
`Pay all Wages at Legally Required Rates
`39. Defendants regularly paid various types of bonuses.
`40. However, Defendants failed to incorporate those bonuses into the
`appropriate calculations of the regular rate of pay for: overtime premium wages; missed
`meal and rest period wages; sick leave wages; and vacation wages.
`Meal Breaks
`41. Defendants required employees to take a 30 minute meal break within a 35
`or 45 minute period, but the time clocks are not in the break areas, rather employees
`clock out and then walk several minutes to the break areas, and then walk several
`
`
`
`8
`CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
`
`
`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
`
`
`

`

`Case 2:24-cv-01019-KJM-CSK Document 1 Filed 04/04/24 Page 9 of 34
`
`
`
`minutes back to the clock at the end of breaks. This results in breaks being less than 30
`minutes.
`42. Plaintiffs and Class members are owed premiums for all of these missed
`meal periods.
`Rest Breaks
`43. Defendant only provides Plaintiffs and other Class members 10 minutes
`for rest breaks, but with both warehouse and assembly workers there are tools that have
`to be put away and stored and then the employee has to walk to the break area. As such,
`it is not possible for employees to get full 10 minute breaks.
`44. Plaintiffs and other Class members are owed premiums for those missed
`rest periods.
`Paid Sick Leave and COVID-19 Supplemental Paid Sick Leave
`45. California Healthy Workplaces Healthy Families Act, ARTICLE 1.5. ‘Paid
`Sick Days’ [sections §§ 245-249] requires employers to provide paid sick leave and
`COVID-19 supplemental paid sick leave to employees.
`46. Defendants failed to provide paid sick leave to Plaintiff and other Class
`members in accordance with California law.
`In failing to provide paid sick leave and COVID-19 supplemental paid sick
`47.
`leave, Defendants also violated the requirement under Labor Code § 246(i) to provide
`with the employee wage statements the number of hours earned and used at the
`appropriate and accurate rates.
`48. Alternatively, Defendants failed to pay sick leave at the correct rate
`required by law, and failed to provide accurate notices of accrued benefits as required
`by law.
`Unreimbursed Expenses
`49. Defendants also require employees to purchase steel-toed boots which they
`must use when working in the warehouses. Defendants do not reimburse them for the
`cost of these items.
`
`
`
`9
`CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
`
`
`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
`
`
`

`

`Case 2:24-cv-01019-KJM-CSK Document 1 Filed 04/04/24 Page 10 of 34
`
`
`
`Violation of Quota Laws
`50. On information and belief, at the distribution facility and assembly line in
`which Plaintiffs worked for Defendants, Defendants employed or exercised control
`over the wages, hours, or working conditions of 100 or more employees at any given
`point in time, during the Class period, and therefore, Defendants fall under California’s
`law regulating the use of quotas at distribution facilities.
`51. Defendants did not provide a written description of each quota to which
`Plaintiffs and Class members were subject, including the quantified number of tasks to
`be performed or materials to be produced or handled, within the defined time period,
`and any potential adverse employment action that could result from failure to meet the
`quota.
`52. Defendants also required Plaintiffs and Class members to meet a quota that
`prevents compliance with meal or rest periods and use of bathroom facilities, including
`reasonable travel time to and from bathroom facilities.
`53. Defendant also took adverse employment action against Class members for
`failure to meet such quotas.
`54. Plaintiffs are informed and believes that all of the above practices they
`experienced were not unique to them but rather were companywide policies and
`practices at all distribution facilities in the State of California and were suffered by all
`non-exempt employees.
`Failure to Provide a Safe and Healthful Workplace
`55. Defendants operate using a quota system, which is illegal and can and
`should be enjoined under Labor Code seq. § 2100. This quota, because it denies proper
`access to rest breaks and bathroom time, causes employees to have to work at speeds
`beyond those which are safe and without proper periods of rest, causing unnecessary
`injuries. Plaintiffs suffered one of those such injuries.
`56. Additionally, California Code of Regulations, Title 8 § 3364 (b) states
`“Toilet facilities shall be kept clean, maintained in good working order and be
`
`
`
`10
`CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
`
`
`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
`
`
`

`

`Case 2:24-cv-01019-KJM-CSK Document 1 Filed 04/04/24 Page 11 of 34
`
`
`
`accessible to the employees at all times. Where practicable, toilet facilities should be
`within 200 feet of locations at which workers are regularly employed and should not
`be more than one floor-to-floor flight of stairs from working areas.”
`57. Defendants failed to provide places of employment that were safe and
`healthful for the employees therein, in violation of the Cal/OSHA requirements found
`within Title 8 of the California Code of Regulations and the aforementioned California
`Labor Code sections, by not providing toilet facilities that are accessible to employees
`at all times.
`58. Additionally IWC Order 15 requires facilities to be kept at safe
`temperatures. Defendants have and do fail to maintain safe temperatures at its
`distribution center warehouses and assembly facilities.
`Wage Statements
`59. Because of Defendants’ failure to record all hours worked and failure to
`pay all wages and premiums owed, the wage statements it issues to employees are
`incorrect.
`60. The wage statements also do not accurately state the name and address of
`the employer.
`Termination of Employment
`61. When Plaintiffs’ employment with Defendants ended, respectively,
`Defendants failed to pay each of them all money that they were owed, as a result of not
`paying them for off-the-clock work, not paying wages at legally required rates and not
`paying meal and rest break premiums as alleged above.
`62. Plaintiffs are informed and believe that the above practices they
`experienced were not unique to them but rather were companywide policies and
`practices at all distribution facilities in the State of California and were suffered by all
`non-exempt employees.
`63. Plaintiffs are informed and believe that the unlawful wage and hour
`policies described in this action are set centrally and are applicable through-out
`
`
`
`11
`CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
`
`
`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
`
`
`

`

`Case 2:24-cv-01019-KJM-CSK Document 1 Filed 04/04/24 Page 12 of 34
`
`
`
`California.
`64. Plaintiffs are informed and believes that the unlawful wage and hour
`policies described in this action are still ongoing.
`CLASS ACTION ALLEGATIONS
`65. Plaintiffs bring this class action pursuant to Rule 23(a) and (b)(3) of the
`Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, on behalf of the following Class:
`All Non-Exempt current and former employees of Defendant
`who were employed at a warehouse in California during the
`Class Period.
`66. “Non-Exempt” means employees that are not exempt from California wage
`and hour laws pursuant to Labor Code §515(a); 8 Cal. C. Regs. §11010, et seq.
`67. “Class Period” means the period from four years prior to the filing of this
`action through the date of final disposition of this action.
`68. “Warehouse” means a facility in which goods are warehoused and
`distributed from, as well as assembly and manufacturing facilities.
`69. Excluded from the Class are Defendants, their officers and directors,
`families and legal representatives, heirs, successors, or assigns and any entity in which
`Defendants have a controlling interest, and any Judge assigned to this case and their
`immediate families.
`70. Plaintiffs reserve the right to amend or modify the definition of the Class
`to provide greater specificity and/or further division into subclasses or limitation to
`particular issues.
`71. Numerosity: The members of the Class are so numerous that joinder of all
`members is impracticable. The exact number or identification of class members is
`presently unknown, but it is believed that there are several thousand class members in
`the Class. The identity of the Class Members is ascertainable and can be determined
`based on records maintained by Defendants.
`72. Predominance of Common Questions: There are multiple questions of
`
`
`
`12
`CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
`
`
`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
`
`
`

`

`Case 2:24-cv-01019-KJM-CSK Document 1 Filed 04/04/24 Page 13 of 34
`
`
`
`law and fact common to the Class that will predominate over questions affecting only
`individual class members. The questions of fact that are common to the Class members
`and predominate over questions that may affect individual Class members, include,
`whether Defendants:
`a) Failed to pay Plaintiffs and members of the Class all of their earned wages
`and compensation;
`b) Failed to authorize and permit Plaintiffs and members of the Class to take
`all rest periods to which they were entitled by the applicable laws;
`c) Failed to provide Plaintiffs and members of the Class the opportunity to
`take all meal periods to which they were entitled by the applicable laws;
`d) Failed to track Class members’ meal periods;
`e) Failed to pay Plaintiffs and members of the Class one hour of pay at their
`regular rate of compensation for each earned rest period not permitted
`and/or each earned meal period not provided;
`f) Failed to timely pay Plaintiffs and members of the Class all their earned
`wages and compensation;
`g) Failed to furnish to Plaintiffs and members of the Class accurate, itemized
`wage statements compliant with Labor Code §226;
`h) Failed to timely pay Plaintiffs and members of the Class all of their earned
`wages, compensation and benefits immediately upon termination of their
`employment or within seventy-two hours of them quitting;
`i) Failed to reimburse employees for the purchase of steel-toed boots; and/or
`j) Failed to comply with California quota laws.
`73. The questions of law that are common to the Class members and
`predominate over questions that may affect individual Class members, include:
`a) Whether the provisions of the Labor Code include the employer’s
`obligation to pay all earned wages and to pay all such earned wages at the
`time of the termination of a member of the Class’s employment;
`
`
`
`13
`CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
`
`
`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
`
`
`

`

`Case 2:24-cv-01019-KJM-CSK Document 1 Filed 04/04/24 Page 14 of 34
`
`b) Defendants’ legal obligation to permit members of the Class to take paid
`rest periods of ten (10) consecutive, uninterrupted minutes for shifts of at
`least four hours or major fraction thereof and a second rest period for shifts
`in excess of six hours;
`c) Defendants’ legal obligation to provide members of the Class the
`opportunity to take meal periods of thirty (30) consecutive, uninterrupted
`minutes for shifts in excess of five hours and a second meal period for
`shifts in excess of ten hours;
`d) The Class members’ entitlement to one hour of pay at the members’
`regular rate of compensation for each paid ten (10) consecutive minute,
`uninterrupted, rest period that Defendants did not permit the Class
`members to take;
`e) The Class members’ entitlement to one hour of pay at his/her regular rate
`of compensation for each thirty (30) consecutive minute, uninterrupted,
`meal period that Defendants did not provide;
`f) The requirements for a wage statement to be compliant with Labor Code
`§226; and/or
`g) What remedies, including restitution, compensatory damages, statutory
`and civil penalties, additional wages and disgorgement of revenue, are
`available under California law to members of the Class who were not paid
`all earned wages, compensation and benefits; were not timely paid all
`earned minimum, regular and overtime wages, compensation and
`benefits; were not paid all wages and premium compensation earned at
`the time of the termination of their employment relationship with
`Defendant; were not provided lawful wage statements; were not permitted
`to take earned ten (10) minute rest periods; were not provided earned thirty
`(30) minute meal periods;
`74. Typicality: Plaintiffs’ claims are typical of the claims of the Class because
`
`14
`CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
`
`
`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
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`Case 2:24-cv-01019-KJM-CSK Document 1 Filed 04/04/24 Page 15 of 34
`
`
`
`Plaintiffs and all putative Class members were subject to, and affected by, Defendants’
`systemic policies and practices alleged herein.
`75. Adequacy: Plaintiffs are adequate representatives of the Class because
`they are members of the Class and their interests do not conflict with the interests of
`the members of the Class they seek to represent. Plaintiffs are represented by
`experienced and competent Class Counsel. Class Counsel have litigated numerous
`class actions. Class Counsel intend to prosecute this action vigorously for the benefit
`of everyone in the Class. Plaintiffs and Class Counsel can fairly and adequately protect
`the interests of all of the Members of the Class.
`76. Superiority: The class action is superior to other available methods for
`fairly and efficiently adjudicating this controversy because individual litigation of
`Class members’ claims would be impracticable and individual litigation would be
`unduly burdensome to the courts. Without the class action vehicle, the Class would
`have no reasonable remedy and would continue to suffer losses. Further, individual
`litigation has the potential to result in inconsistent or contradictory judgments. There
`is no foreseeable difficulty in managing this action as a class action and it provides the
`benefits of single adjudication, economies of scale, and comprehensive supervision by
`a single court.
`
`FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
`Failure to Pay all Regular and Overtime Wages (Off-the-Clock Work)
`[Cal. Labor Code §§ 200, 204, 510, 1194 & 1198]
`77. Plaintiffs re-allege and incorporate by reference each and every allegation
`contained in the preceding and subsequent paragraphs as though fully set forth herein.
`78. Labor Code section 1194(a) states “Notwithstanding any agreement to
`work for a lesser wage, any employee receiving less than the legal minimum wage or
`the legal overtime compensation applicable to the employee is entitled to recover in a
`civil action the unpaid balance of the full amount of this minimum wage or overtime
`compensation, including interest thereon, reasonable attorney's fees and costs of suit.”
`
`
`
`15
`CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
`
`
`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
`
`
`

`

`Case 2:24-cv-01019-KJM-CSK Document 1 Filed 04/04/24 Page 16 of 34
`
`
`
`Liquidated damages in an amount equal to the wages unlawfully unpaid and interest
`thereon are provided for under Labor Code section 1194.2.
`79. Labor Code section 1197 states “The minimum wage for employees fixed
`by the commission or by any applicable state or local law, is the minimum wage to be
`paid to employees, and the payment of a lower wage than the minimum so fixed is
`unlawful.”
`80. Labor Code section 1197.1 (a) states “Any employer or other person acting
`either individually or as an officer, agent, or employee of another person, who pays or
`causes to be paid to any employee a wage less than the minimum fixed by an applicable
`state or local law, or by an order of the commission shall be subject to a civil penalty,
`restitution of wages, liquidated damages payable to the employee, and any applicable
`penalties imposed pursuant to Labor Code §203...”
` As provided for in Section 1197.1(a)(1), for any initial violation that is
`81.
`intentionally committed, one hundred dollars ($100) for each underpaid employee for
`each pay period for which the employee is underpaid. For each subsequent violation
`for the same specific offense, two hundred fifty dollars ($250) for each underpaid
`employee for each pay period for which the employee is underpaid regardless of
`whether the initial violation is intentionally committed.
`82. Labor Code section 1198 states “The maximum hours of work and the
`standard conditions of labor fixed by the commission shall be the maximum hours of
`work and the standard conditions of l