throbber
Case: 1:21-cv-01236 Document #: 1 Filed: 03/04/21 Page 1 of 12 PageID #:1
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS
`EASTERN DIVISION
`
`
`
`JESSICA PATRICK, Individually and on
`Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated
`
`
`vs.
`
`
`COMCAST CABLE COMMUNICATIONS
`MANAGEMENT, LLC
`
`
`
`
`
` No. 1:21-cv-1236
`
`PLAINTIFF
`
`DEFENDANT
`
`
`ORIGINAL COMPLAINT—COLLECTIVE ACTION
`
`
`
`
`
`COMES NOW Plaintiff Jessica Patrick (“Plaintiff”), individually and on behalf of all
`
`others similarly situated, by and through her attorney Josh Sanford of Sanford Law Firm,
`
`PLLC, and for her Original Complaint—Collective Action (“Complaint”) against Defendant
`
`Comcast Cable Communications Management, LLC (“Defendant”), she states and
`
`alleges as follows:
`
`I.
`
`PRELIMINARY STATEMENTS
`
`1.
`
`This is a collective action brought by Plaintiff, individually and on behalf of
`
`all others similarly situated, against Defendant for violations of the overtime provisions of
`
`the Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C. § 201, et seq. (“FLSA”), and overtime provisions
`
`of the Illinois Minimum Wage Law, 820 ILCS 105/1, et seq. (“IMWL”).
`
`2.
`
`Plaintiff seeks a declaratory judgment, monetary damages, liquidated
`
`damages, prejudgment interest, and a reasonable attorney’s fee and costs as a result of
`
`Defendant’s failure to pay proper overtime compensation under the FLSA and the IMWL.
`
`
`
`
`
`Page 1 of 12
`Jessica Patrick, et al. v. Comcast Cable Communications Management, LLC
`U.S.D.C. (N.D. Ill.) No. 1:21-cv-1236
`Original Complaint—Collective Action
`
`

`

`Case: 1:21-cv-01236 Document #: 1 Filed: 03/04/21 Page 2 of 12 PageID #:2
`
`II.
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`3.
`
`The United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois has
`
`subject matter jurisdiction over this suit under the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 1331 because
`
`this suit raises federal questions under the FLSA.
`
`4.
`
`This Complaint also alleges IMWL violations, which arise out of the same
`
`set of operative facts as the federal cause of action; accordingly, this Court has
`
`supplemental jurisdiction over Plaintiff’s IMWL claims pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367(a).
`
`5.
`
`The acts complained of herein were committed and had their principal effect
`
`against Plaintiff within the Eastern Division of the Northern District of Illinois; therefore,
`
`venue is proper within this District pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391.
`
`III.
`
`THE PARTIES
`
`Plaintiff is an individual and resident of Lake County.
`
`Defendant is a foreign limited liability company.
`
`Defendant’s registered agent for service of process is The Corporation
`
`6.
`
`7.
`
`8.
`
`Company, at 600 South Second Street, Suite 104, Springfield, Illinois 62704.
`
`9.
`
`Defendant maintains a website at https://corporate.comcast.com/.
`
`IV.
`
`FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
`
`10. Plaintiff repeats and re-alleges all the preceding paragraphs of this
`
`Complaint as if fully set forth in this section.
`
`11. Defendant acted as the employer of Plaintiff and is and has been engaged
`
`in interstate commerce as that term is defined under the FLSA.
`
`12. Defendant employs two or more individuals who engage in interstate
`
`commerce or business transactions, or who produce goods to be transported or sold in
`
`Page 2 of 12
`Jessica Patrick, et al. v. Comcast Cable Communications Management, LLC
`U.S.D.C. (N.D. Ill.) No. 1:21-cv-1236
`Original Complaint—Collective Action
`
`

`

`Case: 1:21-cv-01236 Document #: 1 Filed: 03/04/21 Page 3 of 12 PageID #:3
`
`interstate commerce, or who handle, sell, or otherwise work with goods or materials that
`
`have been moved in or produced for interstate commerce, such as computers and office
`
`equipment.
`
`13.
`
` Defendant’s annual gross volume of sales made or business done is not
`
`less than $500,000.00 (exclusive of excise taxes at the retail level that are separately
`
`stated) in each of the three years preceding the filing of the Original Complaint.
`
`14. Defendant operates a call center for Comcast customers.
`
`15. Defendant has locations throughout the United States.
`
`16. At all times material herein, Plaintiff has been entitled to the rights,
`
`protections, and benefits provided under the FLSA and the IMWL.
`
`17. At all times material herein, Plaintiff was classified by Defendant as non-
`
`exempt from the overtime requirements of the FLSA and the IMWL and was paid an hourly
`
`wage.
`
`18. Defendant employed Plaintiff within the three years preceding the filing of
`
`this lawsuit.
`
`19. Specifically, Defendant employed Plaintiff as an hourly-paid Customer
`
`Service Representative from July of 2005 until January of 2021.
`
`20. Plaintiff worked at Defendant’s location in Tinley Park.
`
`21. Defendant also employed other hourly-paid Customer Service
`
`Representatives.
`
`22. Plaintiff was primarily responsible for receiving calls, communicating with
`
`customers, and making sales for cable, internet, phone, and/or home security services.
`
`Page 3 of 12
`Jessica Patrick, et al. v. Comcast Cable Communications Management, LLC
`U.S.D.C. (N.D. Ill.) No. 1:21-cv-1236
`Original Complaint—Collective Action
`
`

`

`Case: 1:21-cv-01236 Document #: 1 Filed: 03/04/21 Page 4 of 12 PageID #:4
`
`23. Other Customer Service Representatives had the same or similar duties as
`
`Plaintiff.
`
`24. Defendant directly hired Plaintiff and other Customer Service
`
`Representatives, controlled their work schedules, duties, protocols, applications,
`
`assignments and employment conditions, and kept at least some records regarding their
`
`employment.
`
`25.
`
`In addition to her hourly wage, Plaintiff received monthly commissions
`
`based on sales she made, although, upon information and belief, she did not always
`
`receive all of the commissions she earned.
`
`26. Other Customer Service Representatives also received commissions based
`
`on sales they made.
`
`27.
`
`In addition to her hourly wage, Plaintiff also received quarterly bonuses
`
`based on company revenue and other company metrics.
`
`28. Other Customer Service Representatives also received quarterly bonuses
`
`based on company revenue and other company metrics.
`
`29.
`
`These bonuses were nondiscretionary because Defendant informed
`
`Customer Service Representatives of the bonuses upon hiring, the Customer Service
`
`Representatives expected to receive these bonuses and did in fact receive the bonuses
`
`on a regular basis.
`
`30. Upon information and belief, all or most Customer Service Representatives
`
`receive quarterly bonuses.
`
`31. Plaintiff and other Customer Service Representatives regularly worked in
`
`excess of forty hours per week throughout their tenure with Defendant.
`
`Page 4 of 12
`Jessica Patrick, et al. v. Comcast Cable Communications Management, LLC
`U.S.D.C. (N.D. Ill.) No. 1:21-cv-1236
`Original Complaint—Collective Action
`
`

`

`Case: 1:21-cv-01236 Document #: 1 Filed: 03/04/21 Page 5 of 12 PageID #:5
`
`32. Defendant paid Plaintiff and other Customer Service Representatives 1.5x
`
`times their base hourly rate for the hours they worked over 40 in a workweek.
`
`33. However, Defendant did not include the commissions and bonuses that
`
`were paid to Plaintiff and other Customer Service Representatives in their regular rates
`
`when calculating their overtime pay even though Plaintiff and other Customer Service
`
`Representatives received commissions and bonuses in pay periods in which they also
`
`worked in excess of forty hours per week.
`
`34. Section 778.117 of Title 29 of the Code of Federal Regulations states that
`
`commissions “are payments for hours worked and must be included in the regular rate,”
`
`regardless of the basis for them or their frequency.
`
`35. Section 778.208 of Title 29 of the Code of Federal Regulations requires that
`
`all forms of compensation, such as nondiscretionary bonuses, “must be totaled in with
`
`other earnings to determine the regular rate on which overtime pay must be based.”
`
`36. Defendant violated the FLSA and IMWL by not including all forms of
`
`compensation, such as the non-discretionary bonuses of Plaintiff and other Customer
`
`Service Representatives, in their regular rate when calculating their overtime pay.
`
`37. Upon information and belief, Defendant’s pay practices were the same for
`
`all Customer Service Representatives who received commissions.
`
`38. Upon information and belief, the pay practices that violate the FLSA and
`
`IMWL alleged herein were the same at all of Defendant’s facilities because the policy was
`
`a centralized human resources policy implemented uniformly from the corporate
`
`headquarters.
`
`Page 5 of 12
`Jessica Patrick, et al. v. Comcast Cable Communications Management, LLC
`U.S.D.C. (N.D. Ill.) No. 1:21-cv-1236
`Original Complaint—Collective Action
`
`

`

`Case: 1:21-cv-01236 Document #: 1 Filed: 03/04/21 Page 6 of 12 PageID #:6
`
`39. Because of the volume of work required to perform their jobs, Plaintiff and
`
`other Customer Service Representatives consistently worked in excess of forty hours per
`
`week.
`
`40. Defendant knew, or showed reckless disregard for whether, the way it paid
`
`Plaintiff and other Customer Service Representatives violated the FLSA and IMWL.
`
`V.
`
`REPRESENTATIVE ACTION ALLEGATIONS
`
`41. Plaintiff repeats and re-alleges all previous paragraphs of this Complaint as
`
`though fully incorporated in this section.
`
`42. Plaintiff brings this claim for relief for violation of the FLSA as a collective
`
`action pursuant to Section 16(b) of the FLSA, 29 U.S.C. § 216(b), on behalf of all persons
`
`similarly situated as Customer Service Representatives who were, are, or will be
`
`employed by Defendant within the applicable statute of limitations period, who are entitled
`
`to payment of the following types of damages:
`
`A.
`
`B.
`
`Overtime premiums for all hours worked over forty in any week;
`
`Liquidated damages; and
`
`C.
`
`Attorneys’ fees and costs.
`
`43. Plaintiff proposes the following class under the FLSA:
`
`All Customer Service Representatives who received a commission
`and/or bonus in connection with work performed in at least one week
`in which they worked over forty hours within the past three years.
`
`In conformity with the requirements of FLSA Section 16(b), Plaintiff has filed
`
`44.
`
`or will soon file a written Consent to Join this lawsuit.
`
`45.
`
`The relevant time period dates back three years from the date on which
`
`Plaintiff’s Original Complaint—Collective Action was filed herein and continues forward
`
`Page 6 of 12
`Jessica Patrick, et al. v. Comcast Cable Communications Management, LLC
`U.S.D.C. (N.D. Ill.) No. 1:21-cv-1236
`Original Complaint—Collective Action
`
`

`

`Case: 1:21-cv-01236 Document #: 1 Filed: 03/04/21 Page 7 of 12 PageID #:7
`
`through the date of judgment pursuant to 29 U.S.C. § 255(a), except as set forth herein
`
`below.
`
`46.
`
`The members of the proposed FLSA class are similarly situated in that they
`
`share these traits:
`
`A.
`
`B.
`
`They were paid hourly;
`
`They received commissions;
`
`C.
`
`They were eligible for and received nondiscretionary bonuses;
`
`D.
`
`They worked over forty hours in at least one week in which they performed
`
`work related to a commission and/or bonus;
`
`E.
`
`They were subject to Defendant’s common policy of failing to pay a proper
`
`overtime rate for hours worked over forty in a week; and
`
`F.
`
`They had the same or substantially similar job duties and requirements.
`
`47. Plaintiff is unable to state the exact number of the class but believes that
`
`the class exceeds six hundred (600) persons.
`
`48. Defendant can readily identify the members of the collective, who are a
`
`certain portion of the current and former employees of Defendant.
`
`49.
`
`The names and physical and mailing addresses of the probable FLSA
`
`collective action plaintiffs are available from Defendant.
`
`50.
`
`The email addresses of many of the probable FLSA collective action
`
`plaintiffs are available from Defendant.
`
`FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF
`VI.
`(Individual Claim for Violation of the FLSA)
`
`51. Plaintiff repeats and re-alleges all previous paragraphs of this Complaint as
`
`though fully set forth herein.
`
`Page 7 of 12
`Jessica Patrick, et al. v. Comcast Cable Communications Management, LLC
`U.S.D.C. (N.D. Ill.) No. 1:21-cv-1236
`Original Complaint—Collective Action
`
`

`

`Case: 1:21-cv-01236 Document #: 1 Filed: 03/04/21 Page 8 of 12 PageID #:8
`
`52. Plaintiff asserts this claim for damages and declaratory relief pursuant to
`
`the FLSA, 29 U.S.C. § 201, et seq.
`
`53. At all relevant times, Defendant has been, and continues to be, an
`
`enterprise engaged in commerce within the meaning of the FLSA, 29 U.S.C. § 203.
`
`54.
`
`29 U.S.C. §§ 206 and 207 require any enterprise engaged in commerce to
`
`pay a minimum wage for all hours worked up to 40 each week and to pay 1.5x their regular
`
`wages for all hours worked over 40, unless an employee meets certain exemption
`
`requirements of 29 U.S.C. § 213 and all accompanying DOL regulations.
`
`55. Defendant classified Plaintiff as non-exempt from the requirements of the
`
`FLSA.
`
`56. Despite Plaintiff’s entitlement to overtime payments under the FLSA,
`
`Defendant failed to pay Plaintiff 1.5x her regular rate for all hours worked in excess of 40
`
`per week.
`
`57. Defendant knew or should have known that its actions violated the FLSA.
`
`58. Defendant’s conduct and practices, as described above, were willful.
`
`59. By reason of the unlawful acts alleged herein, Defendant is liable to Plaintiff
`
`for monetary damages, liquidated damages and costs, including reasonable attorneys’
`
`fees provided by the FLSA for all violations which occurred beginning at least three years
`
`preceding the filing of Plaintiff’s initial complaint, plus periods of equitable tolling.
`
`60. Defendant has not acted in good faith nor with reasonable grounds to
`
`believe its actions and omissions were not a violation of the FLSA, and, as a result thereof,
`
`Plaintiff is entitled to recover an award of liquidated damages in an amount equal to the
`
`Page 8 of 12
`Jessica Patrick, et al. v. Comcast Cable Communications Management, LLC
`U.S.D.C. (N.D. Ill.) No. 1:21-cv-1236
`Original Complaint—Collective Action
`
`

`

`Case: 1:21-cv-01236 Document #: 1 Filed: 03/04/21 Page 9 of 12 PageID #:9
`
`amount of unpaid overtime premium pay described above pursuant to Section 16(b) of
`
`the FLSA, 29 U.S.C. § 216(b).
`
`61. Alternatively, should the Court find that Defendant acted in good faith in
`
`failing to pay Plaintiff as provided by the FLSA, Plaintiff is entitled to an award of
`
`prejudgment interest at the applicable legal rate.
`
`VII. SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF
`(Collective Action Claim for Violation of the FLSA)
`
`62. Plaintiff repeats and re-alleges all previous paragraphs of this Complaint as
`
`though fully set forth herein.
`
`63. Plaintiff asserts this claim for damages and declaratory relief on behalf of all
`
`similarly situated employees pursuant to the FLSA, 29 U.S.C. § 201, et seq.
`
`64. At all relevant times, Defendant has been, and continues to be, an
`
`enterprise engaged in commerce within the meaning of the FLSA, 29 U.S.C. § 203.
`
`65.
`
`29 U.S.C. §§ 206 and 207 require any enterprise engaged in commerce to
`
`pay all employees a minimum wage for all hours worked up to 40 each week and to pay
`
`1.5x their regular wages for all hours worked over 40 each week, unless an employee
`
`meets certain exemption requirements of 29 U.S.C. § 213 and all accompanying
`
`Department of Labor regulations.
`
`66. Defendant classified Plaintiff and other similarly situated employees as non-
`
`exempt from the overtime provisions of the FLSA.
`
`67. Defendant failed to pay Plaintiff and similarly situated employees 1.5x their
`
`regular rate for all hours worked in excess of 40 per week.
`
`68. Defendant deprived Plaintiff and similarly situated employees of
`
`compensation for all of the hours worked over forty per week, in violation of the FLSA.
`
`Page 9 of 12
`Jessica Patrick, et al. v. Comcast Cable Communications Management, LLC
`U.S.D.C. (N.D. Ill.) No. 1:21-cv-1236
`Original Complaint—Collective Action
`
`

`

`Case: 1:21-cv-01236 Document #: 1 Filed: 03/04/21 Page 10 of 12 PageID #:10
`
`69. Defendant knew or should have known that its actions violated the FLSA.
`
`70. Defendant’s conduct and practices, as described above, were willful.
`
`71. By reason of the unlawful acts alleged herein, Defendant is liable to Plaintiff
`
`and all similarly situated employees for monetary damages, liquidated damages and
`
`costs, including reasonable attorney’s fees provided by the FLSA for all violations which
`
`occurred beginning at least three years preceding the filing of Plaintiff’s initial complaint,
`
`plus periods of equitable tolling.
`
`72. Defendant has not acted in good faith nor with reasonable grounds to
`
`believe its actions and omissions were not a violation of the FLSA, and, as a result thereof,
`
`Plaintiff and similarly situated employees are entitled to recover an award of liquidated
`
`damages in an amount equal to the amount of unpaid overtime premium pay described
`
`above pursuant to Section 16(b) of the FLSA, 29 U.S.C. § 216(b).
`
`73. Alternatively, should the Court find that Defendant acted in good faith in
`
`failing to pay Plaintiff and the collective members as provided by the FLSA, they are
`
`entitled to an award of prejudgment interest at the applicable legal rate.
`
`VIII. THIRD CLAIM FOR RELIEF
`(Individual Claim for Violation of the IMWL)
`
`74. Plaintiff repeats and re-alleges all previous paragraphs of this Complaint as
`
`though fully set forth herein.
`
`75. Plaintiff asserts this claim for damages and declaratory relief pursuant to
`
`the IMWL, 820 ILCS 105/1, et seq.
`
`76. At all relevant times, Defendant was Plaintiff’s “employer” within the
`
`meaning of the IMWL, 820 ILCS 105/3.
`
`Page 10 of 12
`Jessica Patrick, et al. v. Comcast Cable Communications Management, LLC
`U.S.D.C. (N.D. Ill.) No. 1:21-cv-1236
`Original Complaint—Collective Action
`
`

`

`Case: 1:21-cv-01236 Document #: 1 Filed: 03/04/21 Page 11 of 12 PageID #:11
`
`77.
`
` IMWL, 820 ILCS 105/4a(1) requires employers to pay all employees 1.5x
`
`regular wages for all hours worked over 40 hours in a week, unless an employee meets
`
`the exemption requirements of 820 ILCS 104/4a(2).
`
`78. Defendant failed to pay Plaintiff a sufficient overtime premium for all hours
`
`worked over forty each week.
`
`79. Defendant’s conduct and practices, as described above, were willful,
`
`intentional, unreasonable, arbitrary and in bad faith.
`
`80. By reason of the unlawful acts alleged in this Complaint, Defendant is liable
`
`to Plaintiff for monetary damages, liquidated damages, damages of 5% of the amount of
`
`underpayment for each month following the date of payment during which such
`
`underpayments remain unpaid, costs, and a reasonable attorney’s fee provided by the
`
`IMWL for all violations which occurred within the three years preceding the filing of
`
`Plaintiff’s initial complaint, plus periods of equitable tolling. 820 ILCS 105/12.
`
`81. Alternatively, should the Court find that Defendant acted in good faith in
`
`failing to pay Plaintiff as provided by the IMWL, Plaintiff is entitled to an award of
`
`prejudgment interest at the applicable legal rate.
`
`IX.
`
`PRAYER FOR RELIEF
`
`WHEREFORE, premises considered, Plaintiff Jessica Patrick, individually and on
`
`behalf of all others similarly situated, respectfully prays that Defendant be summoned to
`
`appear and to answer this Complaint and for declaratory relief and damages as follows:
`
`A.
`
`Declaratory judgment that Defendant’s practices alleged in this Complaint
`
`violate the FLSA, the IMWL and their related regulations;
`
`Page 11 of 12
`Jessica Patrick, et al. v. Comcast Cable Communications Management, LLC
`U.S.D.C. (N.D. Ill.) No. 1:21-cv-1236
`Original Complaint—Collective Action
`
`

`

`Case: 1:21-cv-01236 Document #: 1 Filed: 03/04/21 Page 12 of 12 PageID #:12
`
`B.
`
`Certification of a collective under Section 216 of the FLSA of all individuals
`
`similarly situated, as further defined in any motion for the same;
`
`C.
`
`Judgment for damages suffered by Plaintiff and others similarly situated for
`
`all unpaid overtime wages under the FLSA, the IMWL and their related regulations;
`
`D.
`
`Judgment for liquidated damages owed to Plaintiff and all others similarly
`
`situated pursuant to the FLSA, the IMWL and their related regulations;
`
`E.
`
`An order directing Defendant to pay Plaintiff and all others similarly situated
`
`interest, a reasonable attorney’s fee and all costs connected with this action; and
`
`F.
`
`Such other and further relief as this Court may deem just and proper.
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`JESSICA PATRICK, Individually
`and on Behalf of All Others
`Similarly Situated, PLAINTIFF
`
`SANFORD LAW FIRM, PLLC
`Kirkpatrick Plaza
`10800 Financial Centre Pkwy, Suite 510
`Little Rock, Arkansas 72211
`Telephone: (800) 615-4946
`Facsimile: (888) 787-2040
`
`/s/ Josh Sanford
`Josh Sanford
`Ark. Bar No. 2001037
`josh@sanfordlawfirm.com
`
`
`
`Page 12 of 12
`Jessica Patrick, et al. v. Comcast Cable Communications Management, LLC
`U.S.D.C. (N.D. Ill.) No. 1:21-cv-1236
`Original Complaint—Collective Action
`
`

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

Still Working On It

This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.

Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.

throbber

A few More Minutes ... Still Working

It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.

Thank you for your continued patience.

This document could not be displayed.

We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

Set your membership status to view this document.

With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll get a whole lot more, including:

  • Up-to-date information for this case.
  • Email alerts whenever there is an update.
  • Full text search for other cases.
  • Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.

Become a Member

One Moment Please

The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.

Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.

Your document is on its way!

If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.

Sealed Document

We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.

If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.


Access Government Site

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket