Preview
C4
Kane Moon (SBN 249834)
Original
H. Scott
Lilit
Leviant (SBN
Ter-Astvatsatryan
200834)
(SBN 320389) FILED of
_
California
Superior Court
MOON & YANG, APC of Los Angeles
County
1055 W. Seventh St., Suite 1880
Los Angeles,
Telephone:
California
(213) 232-3128
90017
AUG 14 2019
Facsimile: (213) 232-3125 Sherri R. Eyeeytive
Carter, Officer/Clerk
E-mail: kane: moon@moonyanglaw.com By ¢—_, Deputy
E-mail: scott.leviant@moonyanglaw.com ~ **" Steven Drew
E-mail: lilit@moonyanglaw.com
Attorneys for Plaintiff Jose Manuel Alday
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
10
11 JOSE MANUEL ALDAY, individually, and on Case No.: 1[9STCV14956
behalf of all others similarly situated,
12 FIRST AMENDED CLASS AND
Plaintiff, REPRESENTATIVE ACTION
13 COMPLAINT:
14 VS. 1. Failure to Pay Minimum and Regular Rate
Wages [Cal. Lab. Code §§ 204, 1194,
15 1194.2, and 1197];
FANTASY DYEING & FINISHING, INC., a 2. Failure to Pay Overtime Compensation
16 California corporation; and DOES 1 through 10, [Cal. Lab. Code §§ 1194 and 1198];
inclusive, 3. Failure to Provide Meal Periods [Cal. Lab.
17 Code §§ 226.7, 512];
Defendants 4. Failure to Authorize and Permit Rest
i Breaks [Cal. Lab. Code §§ 226.7];
5. Failure to Timely Pay Final Wages at
19 Termination [Cal. Lab. Code §§ 201-203];
6. Failure to Provide Accurate Itemized
20 Wage Statements [Cal. Lab. Code § 226];
and
21 7. Unfair Business Practices [Cal. Bus. &
Prof. Code §§ 17200, et seq.].
22 8. Civil Penalties Under PAGA [Cal. Lab.
Code § 2699, et seq.]
23
DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
24
25
26
27
28
FIRST AMENDED CLASS AND REPRESENTATIVE ACTION COMPLAINT
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION & PRELIMINARY STATEMENT .......cccccccccccessesseceseccsseeeseeeseeesseeseeeseesees
1
THE PARTIES ssssesssssnascassesntnse
racextomnssanasasesencisscdsvevnsassinartancasnaratesaennsndaneasanaconananeteseneneansnnnessnens?
3
A. Plaintiff. ccc esceceseesesseeseeseeeeeseesesecsecseesecsessesseseesaesecsecsecsecsecsecsecsecsecsecseesseassaseaeateas
3
B. Defendants... cece ececceseesesseeseeseesesseeseseesecsecsecsecsecsessessesaesacsecsessessecsecsecsesseesteacsessteaseass
3
ALLEGATIONS COMMON TO ALL CAUSES OF ACTION .........ccccccsscsssscstecstccstecsreesseeees
4
CLASS ACTION ALLEGATIONS 1.0.0...
.cccecceesceeseesseseseeeseceseesseceseeesaeseseesecessecseseseseseseseensteness
8
FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION 00...
iiecceccecceceeeeeeseeeeseeeseenseeeseesseecseeessesesesesseesuesesseesesesseeaeestens
12
SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION .....cecceecccccesesssesseeseeseeeseeseeseesseesseesesesceaeesseeseeseeseseasesseesesteas
13
10 THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION oo...
ceccecccceeeesseseessesseeeseeseceeeseeeesseesscssesssesecsesascseesesessesseseeeas
14
11 FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION ccs sssscsscssnssusasasescesaassssoiassnessasionensneanasnanesnensnnasnnasenanennetnnnnmnnens
15
12 FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION (00. ceceeecceneeeseeseaeesseeeeeeeeeeeseseseceseeesecessessseceseesseeeseceeeeeaeens
16
13 SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION 00.0...
cceccccecceesseeseeesesseeseeeseeseeseeeseeeseesessecsseessecsssseeesesseeaseaseatens
17
14 SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION .....ceccccceccccsessesseeseesesseeseesseeseeesecseessecssssessecasesesasessestensens
18
15 FIGHT CAUSE OF ACTION | cccscscevssisssevsssansssnasntnciacnnntnnemsmnnemenesmeamanemncesceaumenecs
21
16 PRAYER FOR RELIEF wu...
cccecceeecceeeseeseesseeseeesecseessecseesesseeseesseessseaeesaseaseseseueeaseseseaseseenaes
23
17 DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL 0...ecceccecccceeeccesecsseesseeesseesseeeseccsseesesessesseesecseeessesseesseesees
27
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
i
FIRST AMENDED CLASS AND REPRESENTATIVE ACTION COMPLAINT
Plaintiff Jose Manuel Alday (“Plaintiff”), based upon facts that either have evidentiary
support or are likely to have evidentiary support after a reasonable opportunity for further
investigation and discovery, alleges as follows:
INTRODUCTION & PRELIMINARY STATEMENT
1. Plaintiff brings this action against Defendant Fantasy Dyeing & Finishing, Inc. and
Does 1|through 10 (Fantasy Dyeing & Finishing, Inc. and Does 1|through 10 are collectively
referred to as “Defendants”) for California Labor Code violations and unfair business practices
stemming from Defendants’ failure to pay minimum and regular rate wages, failure to pay
overtime wages, failure to provide meal periods, failure to authorize and permit rest periods,
10 failure to maintain accurate records of hours worked and meal periods, failure to timely pay all
1 wages to terminated employees, and failure to furnish accurate wage statements.
12 2. Plaintiff brings the First through Seventh Causes of Action individually and as a class
13 action on behalf of himself and certain current and former employees of Defendants (hereinafter
14 collectively referred to as the “Class” or “Class Members” and defined more fully below). The
15 Class consists of Plaintiff and allother persons who have been employed by any Defendant in
16 California and classified as a non-exempt employee during the statute of limitations period
17 applicable to the claims pleaded here.
18 3. Plaintiff brings the Eighth Cause of Action as a representative action under the
19 California Private Attorney General Act (“PAGA”) to recover civil penalties that are owed to
20 Plaintiffs, the State of California, and past and present employees of Defendants (hereinafter
21 referred to as the “Aggrieved Employees”).
22 4. Defendants own/owned and operate/operated an industry, business, and establishment
23 within the State of California, including Los Angeles County. As such, and based upon allthe
24 facts and circumstances incident to Defendants’ business in California, Defendants are subject to
25 the California Labor Code, Wage Orders issued by the Industrial Welfare Commission (“IWC”),
26 and the California Business & Professions Code.
27 5. Despite these requirements, throughout the statutory period Defendants maintained a
28 systematic, company-wide policy and practice of:
1
FIRST AMENDED CLASS AND REPRESENTATIVE ACTION COMPLAINT
(a) Failing to pay employees for all hours worked, including all minimum
wages, overtime wages, and double-time wages, in compliance with the
California Labor Code and IWC Wage Orders;
(b) Failing to maintain accurate records of the hours employees worked;
(c) Failing to provide employees with timely and duty-free meal periods in
compliance with the California Labor Code and IWC Wage Orders, failing
to maintain accurate records of all meal periods taken or missed, and
failing to pay an additional hour’s pay for each workday a meal period
violation occurred;
10 (d) Failing to authorize and permit employees to take timely and duty-free rest
11 periods in compliance with the California Labor Code and IWC Wage
12 Orders, and failing to pay an additional hour’s pay for each workday a rest
13 period violation occurred;
14 (e) Willfully failing to pay employees all minimum wages, overtime wages,
15 double-time wages, meal period premium wages, and rest period premium
16 wages due within the time period specified by California law when
17 employment terminates; and
18 (f) Failing to provide employees with accurate, itemized wage statements
19 containing all the information required by the California Labor Code and
20 IWC Wage Orders.
21 6. On information and belief, Defendants, and each of them were on actual and
22 constructive notice of the improprieties alleged herein and intentionally refused to rectify their
23 unlawful policies. Defendants’ violations, as alleged above, during all relevant times herein were
24 willful and deliberate.
25 7. At allrelevant times, Defendants were and are legally responsible for all of the
26 unlawful conduct, policies, practices, acts and omissions as described in each and all of the
27 foregoing paragraphs as the employer of Plaintiff and the Class. Further, Defendants are
28
2
FIRST AMENDED CLASS AND REPRESENTATIVE ACTION COMPLAINT
responsible for each of the unlawful acts or omissions complained of herein under the doctrine of
“respondeat superior”.
THE PARTIES
A. Plaintiff
8. Plaintiff is a California resident who worked for Defendants in Los Angeles County,
California as a machine operator from approximately May 2016 to October 2018.
9. Plaintiff reserves the right to seek leave to amend this complaint to add new plaintiffs,
ifnecessary, in order to establish suitable representative(s) pursuant to La Sala v. American
Savings and Loan Association (1971) 5 Cal.3d 864, 872, and other applicable law.
10 B. Defendants
11 10. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and based upon that information and belief alleges,
12 that Defendant Fantasy Dyeing & Finishing, Inc. is,and at all times herein mentioned, was:
13 (a) A California corporation with itscorporate headquarters and principal
14 place of business in Los Angeles, California.
15 (b) — A business entity conducting business in numerous counties throughout the
16 State of California, including in Los Angeles County; and,
17 (c) The former employer of Plaintiff, and the current and/or former employer
18 of the putative Class. Fantasy Dyeing & Finishing, Inc. suffered and
19 permitted Plaintiff and the Class to work, and/or controlled their wages,
20 hours, or working conditions.
21 11. Plaintiff does not know the true names or capacities of the persons or entities sued
22 herein as Does 1-10, inclusive, and therefore sues said Defendants by such fictitious names.
23 Each of the Doe Defendants was in some manner legally responsible for the damages suffered by
24 Plaintiff and the Class as alleged herein. Plaintiff will amend this complaint to set forth the true
25 names and capacities of these Defendants when they have been ascertained, together with
26 appropriate charging allegations, as may be necessary.
27 12. At alltimes mentioned herein, the Defendants named as Does 1-10, inclusive, and
28 each of them, were residents of, doing business in, availed themselves of the jurisdiction of,
3
FIRST AMENDED CLASS AND REPRESENTATIVE ACTION COMPLAINT
and/or injured a significant number of the Plaintiff and the Class in the State of California.
13. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that at all relevant times each
Defendant, directly or indirectly, or through agents or other persons, employed Plaintiff and the
other employees described in the class definitions below, and exercised control over their wages,
hours, and working conditions. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that, at all
relevant times, each Defendant was the principal, agent, partner, joint venturer, officer, director,
controlling shareholder, subsidiary, affiliate, parent corporation, successor in interest and/or
predecessor in interest of some or all of the other Defendants, and was engaged with some or all
of the other Defendants in a joint enterprise for profit, and bore such other relationships to some
10 or all of the other Defendants so as to be liable for their conduct with respect to the matters
11 alleged below. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that each Defendant acted
12 pursuant to and within the scope of the relationships alleged above, that each Defendant knew or
13 should have known about, and authorized, ratified, adopted, approved, controlled, aided and
14 abetted the conduct of allother Defendants.
15 ALLEGATIONS COMMON TO ALL CAUSES OF ACTION
16 14. Plaintiff Jose Manuel Alday worked for Defendants in Los Angeles County,
17 California as a machine operator from approximately May 2016 to October 2018. At alltimes
18 Defendants classified Plaintiff as non-exempt from California’s overtime requirements. During
19 the statutory time period, Plaintiff was typically scheduled to work 5 days in a workweek, and
20 typically 12 or more hours in a single workday.
21 15. Throughout the statutory period, Defendants failed to pay Plaintiff for allhours
22 worked (including minimum wages, overtime, and double-time compensation), failed to provide
23 Plaintiff with uninterrupted meal periods, failed to authorize and permit Plaintiff to take
24 uninterrupted rest periods, failed to maintain accurate records of the hours Plaintiff worked,
25 failed to timely pay all final wages to Plaintiff when Defendants terminated Plaintiff's
26 employment, and failed to furnish accurate wage statements to Plaintiff. As discussed below,
27 Plaintiff's experience working for Defendants was typical and illustrative.
28
4
FIRST AMENDED CLASS AND REPRESENTATIVE ACTION COMPLAINT
16. Throughout the statutory period, Defendants maintained a policy and practice of
failing to pay Plaintiff and the Class for all hours worked, including overtime. Defendants
regularly used a system of time rounding in a manner that resulted, over a period of time, in
failing to compensate Plaintiff and the Class properly for all the time they actually worked, even
though the realities of Defendants’ operations are such that itis possible, practical, and feasible
to count and pay for work time to the minute. Accordingly, Defendants frequently paid Plaintiff
and the Class less than all their work time. Some of this unpaid work also should have been paid
at the overtime or double-time rate. In maintaining a practice of time rounding, Defendants
failed to maintain accurate records of the hours Plaintiff and the Class worked.
10 17. Additionally, Plaintiff and the Class were required to work off-the-clock each
11 workday. For example, Plaintiff and the Class were required to arrive approximately 30 minutes
12 prior to their scheduled shifts so that they could do the following: (1) wait in line to provide their
13 names and vehicle license plate numbers to the security guard before entering the premises; (2) to
14 change into their uniforms (uniform, boots, pants, shirt, apron, gloves, goggles) prior to clocking
15 into work; and (3) waiting in line to actually clock into work. Similarly, Plaintiff and the Class
16 were required to work approximately 30 minutes after clocking out of work each workday so that
17 they could do the following: (1) change out of their uniforms; and (2) waiting in line tobe
18 searched by security, whereby security searched the employees’ and their vehicles. Accordingly,
19 Plaintiff and the Class were required to work off the clock, without compensation.
20 18. Throughout the statutory period, Defendants have wrongfully failed to provide
21 Plaintiff and the Class with legally compliant meal periods. Defendants regularly, but not
22 always, required Plaintiff and the Class to work in excess of five consecutive hours a day without
23 providing a 30-minute, continuous and uninterrupted, duty-free meal period for every five hours
24 of work, or without compensating Plaintiff and the Class for meal periods that were not provided
25 by the end of the fifth hour of work or tenth hour of work. Defendants did not adequately inform
26 Plaintiff and the Class of their right to take a meal period by the end of the fifthhour of work, or,
27 for shifts greater than 10 hours, by the end of the tenth hour of work. For example, Defendants
28 maintained a policy of only providing 1 meal period per workday, despite Plaintiff and the Class
5
FIRST AMENDED CLASS AND REPRESENTATIVE ACTION COMPLAINT
working in excess of 12 hours each workday. Moreover, Defendants did not have adequate
written policies or practices providing meal periods for Plaintiff and the Class, nor did
Defendants have adequate policies or practices regarding the timing of meal periods. Defendants
also did not have adequate policies or practices to document and verify whether Plaintiff and the
Class were taking their required meal periods. Accordingly, Defendants’ policy and practice was
to not provide meal periods to Plaintiff and the Class in compliance with California law.
19. Throughout the statutory period, Defendants have wrongfully failed to authorize and
permit Plaintiff and the Class to take timely and duty-free rest periods. Defendants regularly, but
not always, required Plaintiff and the Class to work in excess of four consecutive hours a day
10 without Defendants authorizing and permitting them to take a 10-minute, continuous and
11 uninterrupted, rest period for every four hours of work (or major fraction of four hours), or
12 without compensating Plaintiff and the Class for rest periods that were not authorized or
13 permitted. Further, Plaintiff and the Class were not authorized to take a third restperiod in those
14 instances where they worked in excess of 10 hours per workday. Accordingly, Defendants’
15 policy and practice was to not authorize and permit Plaintiff and the Class to take rest periods in
16 compliance with California law.
i 20. Throughout the statutory period, Defendants willfully failed and refused to timely pay
18 Plaintiff and the Class atthe conclusion of their employment allwages, including overtime
19 wages, double-time wages, meal period premium wages, and rest period premium wages.
20 21. Throughout the statutory period, Defendants failed to furnish Plaintiff and the Class
21 with accurate, itemized wage statements showing all applicable hourly rates, and all gross and
22 net wages earned (including correct hours worked, correct wages earned for hours worked,
23 correct overtime hours worked, correct wages for meal periods that were not provided in
24 accordance with California law, and correct wages for rest periods that were not authorized and
25 permitted to take in accordance with California law). As a result of these violations of California
26 Labor Code § 226(a), Plaintiff and the Class suffered injury because, among other things:
27 (a) the violations led them to believe that they were not entitled to be paid
28 minimum wages, overtime wages, meal period premium wages, and rest
6
FIRST AMENDED CLASS AND REPRESENTATIVE ACTION COMPLAINT
period premium wages to which they were entitled, even though they were
entitled;
(b) the violations led them to believe that they had been paid the minimum,
overtime, meal period premium, and restperiod premium wages to which
they were entitled, even though they had not been;
(c) the violations led them to believe they were not entitled to be paid
minimum, overtime, meal period premium, and rest period premium wages
at the correct California rate even though they were;
(d) the violations led them to believe they had been paid minimum, overtime,
10 meal period premium, and rest period premium wages at the correct
H California rate even though they had not been;
12 (e) the violations hindered them from determining the amounts of minimum,
13 overtime, meal period premium, and restperiod premium owed to them;
14 (f) in connection with their employment before and during this action, and in
15 connection with prosecuting this action, the violations caused them to have
16 to perform mathematical computations to determine the amounts of wages
17 owed to them, computations they would not have to make if the wage
18 statements contained the required accurate information;
19 (g) by understating the wages truly due them, the violations caused them to
20 lose entitlement and/or accrual of the full amount of Social Security,
21 disability, unemployment, and other governmental benefits;
22 (h) the wage statements inaccurately understated the wages, hours, and wage
23 rates to which Plaintiff and the Class were entitled, and Plaintiff and the
24 Class were paid less than the wages and wage rates to which they were
25 entitled.
26 Thus, Plaintiff and the Class are owed the amounts provided for in California Labor Code §
27 226(e).
28
7
FIRST AMENDED CLASS AND REPRESENTATIVE ACTION COMPLAINT
CLASS ACTION ALLEGATIONS
22. Plaintiff brings certain claims individually, as well as on behalf of each and allother
persons similarly situated, and thus, seeks class certification under California Code of Civil
Procedure § 382.
23. All claims alleged herein arise under California law for which Plaintiff seeks relief
authorized by California law.
24. The proposed Class consists of and is defined as:
All persons who worked for any Defendants in California as an hourly-paid,
non-exempt employee at any time during the period beginning four years before
the filing of the initialcomplaint in this action and ending when notice to the
10 Class is sent.
11 25. At all material times, Plaintiff was a member of the Class.
12 26. Plaintiff undertakes this concerted activity to improve the wages and working
13 conditions of all Class Members.
14 27. There is a well-defined community of interest in the litigation and the Class isreadily
ascertainable:
15
16 (a) Numerosity: The members of the Class (and each subclass, if any) are so
17 numerous that joinder of allmembers would be unfeasible and impractical.
18 The membership of the entire Class is unknown to Plaintiff at this time,
19 however, the Class is estimated to be greater than 100 individuals and the
20 identity of such membership is readily ascertainable by inspection of
21 Defendants’ records.
22 (b) Typicality: Plaintiff is qualified to, and will, fairly and adequately protect
23 the interests of each Class Member with whom there is a shared, well-
24 defined community of interest, and Plaintiff's claims (or defenses, if any)
25 are typical of all Class Members’ claims as demonstrated herein.
26 (c) Adequacy: Plaintiff is qualified to, and will, fairly and adequately protect
27 the interests of each Class Member with whom there is a shared, well-
28 defined community of interest and typicality of claims, as demonstrated
8
FIRST AMENDED CLASS AND REPRESENTATIVE ACTION COMPLAINT
herein. Plaintiff has no conflicts with or interests antagonistic to any Class
Member. Plaintiff's attorneys, the proposed class counsel, are versed in
the rules governing class action discovery, certification, and settlement.
ww
Plaintiff has incurred, and throughout the duration of this action, will
continue to incur costs and attorneys’ fees that have been, are, and will be
necessarily expended for the prosecution of this action for the substantial
BD
benefit of each class member.
nN
(d) Superiority: A Class Action issuperior to other available methods for the
fair and efficient adjudication of the controversy, including consideration
10 of:
11 1) The interests of the members of the Class in individually
12 controlling the prosecution or defense of separate actions;
13 2) The extent and nature of any litigation concerning the controversy
14 already commenced by or against members of the Class;
15 3) The desirability or undesirability of concentrating the litigation of
16 the claims in the particular forum; and
17 4) The difficulties likely to be encountered in the management of a
18 class action.
19 (e) Public Policy Considerations: The public policy of the State of California
20 is to resolve the California Labor Code claims of many employees through
21 a class action. Indeed, current employees are often afraid to assert their
2 rights out of fear of direct or indirect retaliation. Former employees are
v3 also fearful of bringing actions because they believe their former
24 employers might damage their future endeavors through negative
20 references and/or other means. Class actions provide the class members
26 who are not named in the complaint with a type of anonymity that allows
27 for the vindication of their rights at the same time as their privacy is
28 protected.
9
FIRST AMENDED CLASS AND REPRESENTATIVE ACTION COMPLAINT
28. There are common questions of law and fact as to the Class (and each subclass, if any)
that predominate over questions affecting only individual members, including without limitation,
whether, as alleged herein, Defendants have:
(a) Failed to pay Class Members for all hours worked, including minimum
wages, overtime wages, and double-time wages;
(b) Failed to provide meal periods and pay meal period premium wages to
Class Members;
(c) Failed to authorize and permit rest periods and pay rest period premium
wages to Class Members;
10 (d) Failed to promptly pay all wages due to Class Members upon their
11 discharge or resignation;
12 (e) Failed to provide Class Members with accurate wages statements;
13 (f) Failed to maintain accurate records of all hours Class Members worked,
14 and all meal periods Class Members took or missed; and
15 (g) Violated California Business & Professions Code §§ 17200 et. seq. as a
16 result of their illegal conduct as described above.
17 29. This Court should permit this action to be maintained as a class action pursuant to
18 California Code of Civil Procedure § 382 because:
19 (a) The questions of law and fact common to the Class predominate over any
20 question affecting only individual members;
21 (b) A class action is superior to any other available method for the fair and
22 efficient adjudication of the claims of the members of the Class;
23 (c) The members of the Class are so numerous that it isimpractical to bring all
24 members of the class before the Court;
25 (d) Plaintiff, and the other members of the Class, will not be able to obtain
26 effective and economic legal redress unless the action ismaintained as a
27 class action;
28 (e) There isa community of interest in obtaining appropriate legal and
10
FIRST AMENDED CLASS AND REPRESENTATIVE ACTION COMPLAINT
equitable relief for the statutory violations, and in obtaining adequate
compensation for the damages and injuries for which Defendants are
responsible in an amount sufficient to adequately compensate the members
of the Class for the injuries sustained;
(f) Without class certification, the prosecution of separate actions by
individual members of the class would create a risk of:
1) Inconsistent or varying adjudications with respect to individual
members of the Class which would establish incompatible standards
of conduct for Defendants; and/or
10 2) Adjudications with respect to the individual members which would,
11 as a practical matter, be dispositive of the interests of other
12 members not parties to the adjudications, or would substantially
13 impair or impede their ability to protect their interests, including but
14 not limited tothe potential for exhausting the funds available from
15 those parties who are, or may be, responsible Defendants; and,
16 (g) Defendants have acted or refused to act on grounds generally applicable to
17 the Class, thereby making final injunctive relief appropriate with respect to
18 the class as a whole.
19 30. Plaintiff contemplates the eventual issuance of notice to the proposed members of the
20 Class that would set forth the subject and nature of the instant action. The Defendants’ own
21 business records may be utilized for assistance in the preparation and issuance of the
22 contemplated notices. To the extent that any further notices may be required, Plaintiff would
Preview
C4 Kane Moon (SBN 249834) Original H. Scott Lilit Leviant (SBN Ter-Astvatsatryan 200834) (SBN 320389) FILED of _ California Superior Court MOON & YANG, APC of Los Angeles County 1055 W. Seventh St., Suite 1880 Los Angeles, Telephone: California (213) 232-3128 90017 AUG 14 2019 Facsimile: (213) 232-3125 Sherri R. Eyeeytive Carter, Officer/Clerk E-mail: kane: moon@moonyanglaw.com By ¢—_, Deputy E-mail: scott.leviant@moonyanglaw.com ~ **" Steven Drew E-mail: lilit@moonyanglaw.com Attorneys for Plaintiff Jose Manuel Alday SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES 10 11 JOSE MANUEL ALDAY, individually, and on Case No.: 1[9STCV14956 behalf of all others similarly situated, 12 FIRST AMENDED CLASS AND Plaintiff, REPRESENTATIVE ACTION 13 COMPLAINT: 14 VS. 1. Failure to Pay Minimum and Regular Rate Wages [Cal. Lab. Code §§ 204, 1194, 15 1194.2, and 1197]; FANTASY DYEING & FINISHING, INC., a 2. Failure to Pay Overtime Compensation 16 California corporation; and DOES 1 through 10, [Cal. Lab. Code §§ 1194 and 1198]; inclusive, 3. Failure to Provide Meal Periods [Cal. Lab. 17 Code §§ 226.7, 512]; Defendants 4. Failure to Authorize and Permit Rest i Breaks [Cal. Lab. Code §§ 226.7]; 5. Failure to Timely Pay Final Wages at 19 Termination [Cal. Lab. Code §§ 201-203]; 6. Failure to Provide Accurate Itemized 20 Wage Statements [Cal. Lab. Code § 226]; and 21 7. Unfair Business Practices [Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code §§ 17200, et seq.]. 22 8. Civil Penalties Under PAGA [Cal. Lab. Code § 2699, et seq.] 23 DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL 24 25 26 27 28 FIRST AMENDED CLASS AND REPRESENTATIVE ACTION COMPLAINT TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION & PRELIMINARY STATEMENT .......cccccccccccessesseceseccsseeeseeeseeesseeseeeseesees 1 THE PARTIES ssssesssssnascassesntnse racextomnssanasasesencisscdsvevnsassinartancasnaratesaennsndaneasanaconananeteseneneansnnnessnens? 3 A. Plaintiff. ccc esceceseesesseeseeseeeeeseesesecsecseesecsessesseseesaesecsecsecsecsecsecsecsecsecsecseesseassaseaeateas 3 B. Defendants... cece ececceseesesseeseeseesesseeseseesecsecsecsecsecsessessesaesacsecsessessecsecsecsesseesteacsessteaseass 3 ALLEGATIONS COMMON TO ALL CAUSES OF ACTION .........ccccccsscsssscstecstccstecsreesseeees 4 CLASS ACTION ALLEGATIONS 1.0.0... .cccecceesceeseesseseseeeseceseesseceseeesaeseseesecessecseseseseseseseensteness 8 FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION 00... iiecceccecceceeeeeeseeeeseeeseenseeeseesseecseeessesesesesseesuesesseesesesseeaeestens 12 SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION .....cecceecccccesesssesseeseeseeeseeseeseesseesseesesesceaeesseeseeseeseseasesseesesteas 13 10 THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION oo... ceccecccceeeesseseessesseeeseeseceeeseeeesseesscssesssesecsesascseesesessesseseeeas 14 11 FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION ccs sssscsscssnssusasasescesaassssoiassnessasionensneanasnanesnensnnasnnasenanennetnnnnmnnens 15 12 FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION (00. ceceeecceneeeseeseaeesseeeeeeeeeeeseseseceseeesecessessseceseesseeeseceeeeeaeens 16 13 SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION 00.0... cceccccecceesseeseeesesseeseeeseeseeseeeseeeseesessecsseessecsssseeesesseeaseaseatens 17 14 SEVENTH CAUSE OF ACTION .....ceccccceccccsessesseeseesesseeseesseeseeesecseessecssssessecasesesasessestensens 18 15 FIGHT CAUSE OF ACTION | cccscscevssisssevsssansssnasntnciacnnntnnemsmnnemenesmeamanemncesceaumenecs 21 16 PRAYER FOR RELIEF wu... cccecceeecceeeseeseesseeseeesecseessecseesesseeseesseessseaeesaseaseseseueeaseseseaseseenaes 23 17 DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL 0...ecceccecccceeeccesecsseesseeesseesseeeseccsseesesessesseesecseeessesseesseesees 27 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 i FIRST AMENDED CLASS AND REPRESENTATIVE ACTION COMPLAINT Plaintiff Jose Manuel Alday (“Plaintiff”), based upon facts that either have evidentiary support or are likely to have evidentiary support after a reasonable opportunity for further investigation and discovery, alleges as follows: INTRODUCTION & PRELIMINARY STATEMENT 1. Plaintiff brings this action against Defendant Fantasy Dyeing & Finishing, Inc. and Does 1|through 10 (Fantasy Dyeing & Finishing, Inc. and Does 1|through 10 are collectively referred to as “Defendants”) for California Labor Code violations and unfair business practices stemming from Defendants’ failure to pay minimum and regular rate wages, failure to pay overtime wages, failure to provide meal periods, failure to authorize and permit rest periods, 10 failure to maintain accurate records of hours worked and meal periods, failure to timely pay all 1 wages to terminated employees, and failure to furnish accurate wage statements. 12 2. Plaintiff brings the First through Seventh Causes of Action individually and as a class 13 action on behalf of himself and certain current and former employees of Defendants (hereinafter 14 collectively referred to as the “Class” or “Class Members” and defined more fully below). The 15 Class consists of Plaintiff and allother persons who have been employed by any Defendant in 16 California and classified as a non-exempt employee during the statute of limitations period 17 applicable to the claims pleaded here. 18 3. Plaintiff brings the Eighth Cause of Action as a representative action under the 19 California Private Attorney General Act (“PAGA”) to recover civil penalties that are owed to 20 Plaintiffs, the State of California, and past and present employees of Defendants (hereinafter 21 referred to as the “Aggrieved Employees”). 22 4. Defendants own/owned and operate/operated an industry, business, and establishment 23 within the State of California, including Los Angeles County. As such, and based upon allthe 24 facts and circumstances incident to Defendants’ business in California, Defendants are subject to 25 the California Labor Code, Wage Orders issued by the Industrial Welfare Commission (“IWC”), 26 and the California Business & Professions Code. 27 5. Despite these requirements, throughout the statutory period Defendants maintained a 28 systematic, company-wide policy and practice of: 1 FIRST AMENDED CLASS AND REPRESENTATIVE ACTION COMPLAINT (a) Failing to pay employees for all hours worked, including all minimum wages, overtime wages, and double-time wages, in compliance with the California Labor Code and IWC Wage Orders; (b) Failing to maintain accurate records of the hours employees worked; (c) Failing to provide employees with timely and duty-free meal periods in compliance with the California Labor Code and IWC Wage Orders, failing to maintain accurate records of all meal periods taken or missed, and failing to pay an additional hour’s pay for each workday a meal period violation occurred; 10 (d) Failing to authorize and permit employees to take timely and duty-free rest 11 periods in compliance with the California Labor Code and IWC Wage 12 Orders, and failing to pay an additional hour’s pay for each workday a rest 13 period violation occurred; 14 (e) Willfully failing to pay employees all minimum wages, overtime wages, 15 double-time wages, meal period premium wages, and rest period premium 16 wages due within the time period specified by California law when 17 employment terminates; and 18 (f) Failing to provide employees with accurate, itemized wage statements 19 containing all the information required by the California Labor Code and 20 IWC Wage Orders. 21 6. On information and belief, Defendants, and each of them were on actual and 22 constructive notice of the improprieties alleged herein and intentionally refused to rectify their 23 unlawful policies. Defendants’ violations, as alleged above, during all relevant times herein were 24 willful and deliberate. 25 7. At allrelevant times, Defendants were and are legally responsible for all of the 26 unlawful conduct, policies, practices, acts and omissions as described in each and all of the 27 foregoing paragraphs as the employer of Plaintiff and the Class. Further, Defendants are 28 2 FIRST AMENDED CLASS AND REPRESENTATIVE ACTION COMPLAINT responsible for each of the unlawful acts or omissions complained of herein under the doctrine of “respondeat superior”. THE PARTIES A. Plaintiff 8. Plaintiff is a California resident who worked for Defendants in Los Angeles County, California as a machine operator from approximately May 2016 to October 2018. 9. Plaintiff reserves the right to seek leave to amend this complaint to add new plaintiffs, ifnecessary, in order to establish suitable representative(s) pursuant to La Sala v. American Savings and Loan Association (1971) 5 Cal.3d 864, 872, and other applicable law. 10 B. Defendants 11 10. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and based upon that information and belief alleges, 12 that Defendant Fantasy Dyeing & Finishing, Inc. is,and at all times herein mentioned, was: 13 (a) A California corporation with itscorporate headquarters and principal 14 place of business in Los Angeles, California. 15 (b) — A business entity conducting business in numerous counties throughout the 16 State of California, including in Los Angeles County; and, 17 (c) The former employer of Plaintiff, and the current and/or former employer 18 of the putative Class. Fantasy Dyeing & Finishing, Inc. suffered and 19 permitted Plaintiff and the Class to work, and/or controlled their wages, 20 hours, or working conditions. 21 11. Plaintiff does not know the true names or capacities of the persons or entities sued 22 herein as Does 1-10, inclusive, and therefore sues said Defendants by such fictitious names. 23 Each of the Doe Defendants was in some manner legally responsible for the damages suffered by 24 Plaintiff and the Class as alleged herein. Plaintiff will amend this complaint to set forth the true 25 names and capacities of these Defendants when they have been ascertained, together with 26 appropriate charging allegations, as may be necessary. 27 12. At alltimes mentioned herein, the Defendants named as Does 1-10, inclusive, and 28 each of them, were residents of, doing business in, availed themselves of the jurisdiction of, 3 FIRST AMENDED CLASS AND REPRESENTATIVE ACTION COMPLAINT and/or injured a significant number of the Plaintiff and the Class in the State of California. 13. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that at all relevant times each Defendant, directly or indirectly, or through agents or other persons, employed Plaintiff and the other employees described in the class definitions below, and exercised control over their wages, hours, and working conditions. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that, at all relevant times, each Defendant was the principal, agent, partner, joint venturer, officer, director, controlling shareholder, subsidiary, affiliate, parent corporation, successor in interest and/or predecessor in interest of some or all of the other Defendants, and was engaged with some or all of the other Defendants in a joint enterprise for profit, and bore such other relationships to some 10 or all of the other Defendants so as to be liable for their conduct with respect to the matters 11 alleged below. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that each Defendant acted 12 pursuant to and within the scope of the relationships alleged above, that each Defendant knew or 13 should have known about, and authorized, ratified, adopted, approved, controlled, aided and 14 abetted the conduct of allother Defendants. 15 ALLEGATIONS COMMON TO ALL CAUSES OF ACTION 16 14. Plaintiff Jose Manuel Alday worked for Defendants in Los Angeles County, 17 California as a machine operator from approximately May 2016 to October 2018. At alltimes 18 Defendants classified Plaintiff as non-exempt from California’s overtime requirements. During 19 the statutory time period, Plaintiff was typically scheduled to work 5 days in a workweek, and 20 typically 12 or more hours in a single workday. 21 15. Throughout the statutory period, Defendants failed to pay Plaintiff for allhours 22 worked (including minimum wages, overtime, and double-time compensation), failed to provide 23 Plaintiff with uninterrupted meal periods, failed to authorize and permit Plaintiff to take 24 uninterrupted rest periods, failed to maintain accurate records of the hours Plaintiff worked, 25 failed to timely pay all final wages to Plaintiff when Defendants terminated Plaintiff's 26 employment, and failed to furnish accurate wage statements to Plaintiff. As discussed below, 27 Plaintiff's experience working for Defendants was typical and illustrative. 28 4 FIRST AMENDED CLASS AND REPRESENTATIVE ACTION COMPLAINT 16. Throughout the statutory period, Defendants maintained a policy and practice of failing to pay Plaintiff and the Class for all hours worked, including overtime. Defendants regularly used a system of time rounding in a manner that resulted, over a period of time, in failing to compensate Plaintiff and the Class properly for all the time they actually worked, even though the realities of Defendants’ operations are such that itis possible, practical, and feasible to count and pay for work time to the minute. Accordingly, Defendants frequently paid Plaintiff and the Class less than all their work time. Some of this unpaid work also should have been paid at the overtime or double-time rate. In maintaining a practice of time rounding, Defendants failed to maintain accurate records of the hours Plaintiff and the Class worked. 10 17. Additionally, Plaintiff and the Class were required to work off-the-clock each 11 workday. For example, Plaintiff and the Class were required to arrive approximately 30 minutes 12 prior to their scheduled shifts so that they could do the following: (1) wait in line to provide their 13 names and vehicle license plate numbers to the security guard before entering the premises; (2) to 14 change into their uniforms (uniform, boots, pants, shirt, apron, gloves, goggles) prior to clocking 15 into work; and (3) waiting in line to actually clock into work. Similarly, Plaintiff and the Class 16 were required to work approximately 30 minutes after clocking out of work each workday so that 17 they could do the following: (1) change out of their uniforms; and (2) waiting in line tobe 18 searched by security, whereby security searched the employees’ and their vehicles. Accordingly, 19 Plaintiff and the Class were required to work off the clock, without compensation. 20 18. Throughout the statutory period, Defendants have wrongfully failed to provide 21 Plaintiff and the Class with legally compliant meal periods. Defendants regularly, but not 22 always, required Plaintiff and the Class to work in excess of five consecutive hours a day without 23 providing a 30-minute, continuous and uninterrupted, duty-free meal period for every five hours 24 of work, or without compensating Plaintiff and the Class for meal periods that were not provided 25 by the end of the fifth hour of work or tenth hour of work. Defendants did not adequately inform 26 Plaintiff and the Class of their right to take a meal period by the end of the fifthhour of work, or, 27 for shifts greater than 10 hours, by the end of the tenth hour of work. For example, Defendants 28 maintained a policy of only providing 1 meal period per workday, despite Plaintiff and the Class 5 FIRST AMENDED CLASS AND REPRESENTATIVE ACTION COMPLAINT working in excess of 12 hours each workday. Moreover, Defendants did not have adequate written policies or practices providing meal periods for Plaintiff and the Class, nor did Defendants have adequate policies or practices regarding the timing of meal periods. Defendants also did not have adequate policies or practices to document and verify whether Plaintiff and the Class were taking their required meal periods. Accordingly, Defendants’ policy and practice was to not provide meal periods to Plaintiff and the Class in compliance with California law. 19. Throughout the statutory period, Defendants have wrongfully failed to authorize and permit Plaintiff and the Class to take timely and duty-free rest periods. Defendants regularly, but not always, required Plaintiff and the Class to work in excess of four consecutive hours a day 10 without Defendants authorizing and permitting them to take a 10-minute, continuous and 11 uninterrupted, rest period for every four hours of work (or major fraction of four hours), or 12 without compensating Plaintiff and the Class for rest periods that were not authorized or 13 permitted. Further, Plaintiff and the Class were not authorized to take a third restperiod in those 14 instances where they worked in excess of 10 hours per workday. Accordingly, Defendants’ 15 policy and practice was to not authorize and permit Plaintiff and the Class to take rest periods in 16 compliance with California law. i 20. Throughout the statutory period, Defendants willfully failed and refused to timely pay 18 Plaintiff and the Class atthe conclusion of their employment allwages, including overtime 19 wages, double-time wages, meal period premium wages, and rest period premium wages. 20 21. Throughout the statutory period, Defendants failed to furnish Plaintiff and the Class 21 with accurate, itemized wage statements showing all applicable hourly rates, and all gross and 22 net wages earned (including correct hours worked, correct wages earned for hours worked, 23 correct overtime hours worked, correct wages for meal periods that were not provided in 24 accordance with California law, and correct wages for rest periods that were not authorized and 25 permitted to take in accordance with California law). As a result of these violations of California 26 Labor Code § 226(a), Plaintiff and the Class suffered injury because, among other things: 27 (a) the violations led them to believe that they were not entitled to be paid 28 minimum wages, overtime wages, meal period premium wages, and rest 6 FIRST AMENDED CLASS AND REPRESENTATIVE ACTION COMPLAINT period premium wages to which they were entitled, even though they were entitled; (b) the violations led them to believe that they had been paid the minimum, overtime, meal period premium, and restperiod premium wages to which they were entitled, even though they had not been; (c) the violations led them to believe they were not entitled to be paid minimum, overtime, meal period premium, and rest period premium wages at the correct California rate even though they were; (d) the violations led them to believe they had been paid minimum, overtime, 10 meal period premium, and rest period premium wages at the correct H California rate even though they had not been; 12 (e) the violations hindered them from determining the amounts of minimum, 13 overtime, meal period premium, and restperiod premium owed to them; 14 (f) in connection with their employment before and during this action, and in 15 connection with prosecuting this action, the violations caused them to have 16 to perform mathematical computations to determine the amounts of wages 17 owed to them, computations they would not have to make if the wage 18 statements contained the required accurate information; 19 (g) by understating the wages truly due them, the violations caused them to 20 lose entitlement and/or accrual of the full amount of Social Security, 21 disability, unemployment, and other governmental benefits; 22 (h) the wage statements inaccurately understated the wages, hours, and wage 23 rates to which Plaintiff and the Class were entitled, and Plaintiff and the 24 Class were paid less than the wages and wage rates to which they were 25 entitled. 26 Thus, Plaintiff and the Class are owed the amounts provided for in California Labor Code § 27 226(e). 28 7 FIRST AMENDED CLASS AND REPRESENTATIVE ACTION COMPLAINT CLASS ACTION ALLEGATIONS 22. Plaintiff brings certain claims individually, as well as on behalf of each and allother persons similarly situated, and thus, seeks class certification under California Code of Civil Procedure § 382. 23. All claims alleged herein arise under California law for which Plaintiff seeks relief authorized by California law. 24. The proposed Class consists of and is defined as: All persons who worked for any Defendants in California as an hourly-paid, non-exempt employee at any time during the period beginning four years before the filing of the initialcomplaint in this action and ending when notice to the 10 Class is sent. 11 25. At all material times, Plaintiff was a member of the Class. 12 26. Plaintiff undertakes this concerted activity to improve the wages and working 13 conditions of all Class Members. 14 27. There is a well-defined community of interest in the litigation and the Class isreadily ascertainable: 15 16 (a) Numerosity: The members of the Class (and each subclass, if any) are so 17 numerous that joinder of allmembers would be unfeasible and impractical. 18 The membership of the entire Class is unknown to Plaintiff at this time, 19 however, the Class is estimated to be greater than 100 individuals and the 20 identity of such membership is readily ascertainable by inspection of 21 Defendants’ records. 22 (b) Typicality: Plaintiff is qualified to, and will, fairly and adequately protect 23 the interests of each Class Member with whom there is a shared, well- 24 defined community of interest, and Plaintiff's claims (or defenses, if any) 25 are typical of all Class Members’ claims as demonstrated herein. 26 (c) Adequacy: Plaintiff is qualified to, and will, fairly and adequately protect 27 the interests of each Class Member with whom there is a shared, well- 28 defined community of interest and typicality of claims, as demonstrated 8 FIRST AMENDED CLASS AND REPRESENTATIVE ACTION COMPLAINT herein. Plaintiff has no conflicts with or interests antagonistic to any Class Member. Plaintiff's attorneys, the proposed class counsel, are versed in the rules governing class action discovery, certification, and settlement. ww Plaintiff has incurred, and throughout the duration of this action, will continue to incur costs and attorneys’ fees that have been, are, and will be necessarily expended for the prosecution of this action for the substantial BD benefit of each class member. nN (d) Superiority: A Class Action issuperior to other available methods for the fair and efficient adjudication of the controversy, including consideration 10 of: 11 1) The interests of the members of the Class in individually 12 controlling the prosecution or defense of separate actions; 13 2) The extent and nature of any litigation concerning the controversy 14 already commenced by or against members of the Class; 15 3) The desirability or undesirability of concentrating the litigation of 16 the claims in the particular forum; and 17 4) The difficulties likely to be encountered in the management of a 18 class action. 19 (e) Public Policy Considerations: The public policy of the State of California 20 is to resolve the California Labor Code claims of many employees through 21 a class action. Indeed, current employees are often afraid to assert their 2 rights out of fear of direct or indirect retaliation. Former employees are v3 also fearful of bringing actions because they believe their former 24 employers might damage their future endeavors through negative 20 references and/or other means. Class actions provide the class members 26 who are not named in the complaint with a type of anonymity that allows 27 for the vindication of their rights at the same time as their privacy is 28 protected. 9 FIRST AMENDED CLASS AND REPRESENTATIVE ACTION COMPLAINT 28. There are common questions of law and fact as to the Class (and each subclass, if any) that predominate over questions affecting only individual members, including without limitation, whether, as alleged herein, Defendants have: (a) Failed to pay Class Members for all hours worked, including minimum wages, overtime wages, and double-time wages; (b) Failed to provide meal periods and pay meal period premium wages to Class Members; (c) Failed to authorize and permit rest periods and pay rest period premium wages to Class Members; 10 (d) Failed to promptly pay all wages due to Class Members upon their 11 discharge or resignation; 12 (e) Failed to provide Class Members with accurate wages statements; 13 (f) Failed to maintain accurate records of all hours Class Members worked, 14 and all meal periods Class Members took or missed; and 15 (g) Violated California Business & Professions Code §§ 17200 et. seq. as a 16 result of their illegal conduct as described above. 17 29. This Court should permit this action to be maintained as a class action pursuant to 18 California Code of Civil Procedure § 382 because: 19 (a) The questions of law and fact common to the Class predominate over any 20 question affecting only individual members; 21 (b) A class action is superior to any other available method for the fair and 22 efficient adjudication of the claims of the members of the Class; 23 (c) The members of the Class are so numerous that it isimpractical to bring all 24 members of the class before the Court; 25 (d) Plaintiff, and the other members of the Class, will not be able to obtain 26 effective and economic legal redress unless the action ismaintained as a 27 class action; 28 (e) There isa community of interest in obtaining appropriate legal and 10 FIRST AMENDED CLASS AND REPRESENTATIVE ACTION COMPLAINT equitable relief for the statutory violations, and in obtaining adequate compensation for the damages and injuries for which Defendants are responsible in an amount sufficient to adequately compensate the members of the Class for the injuries sustained; (f) Without class certification, the prosecution of separate actions by individual members of the class would create a risk of: 1) Inconsistent or varying adjudications with respect to individual members of the Class which would establish incompatible standards of conduct for Defendants; and/or 10 2) Adjudications with respect to the individual members which would, 11 as a practical matter, be dispositive of the interests of other 12 members not parties to the adjudications, or would substantially 13 impair or impede their ability to protect their interests, including but 14 not limited tothe potential for exhausting the funds available from 15 those parties who are, or may be, responsible Defendants; and, 16 (g) Defendants have acted or refused to act on grounds generally applicable to 17 the Class, thereby making final injunctive relief appropriate with respect to 18 the class as a whole. 19 30. Plaintiff contemplates the eventual issuance of notice to the proposed members of the 20 Class that would set forth the subject and nature of the instant action. The Defendants’ own 21 business records may be utilized for assistance in the preparation and issuance of the 22 contemplated notices. To the extent that any further notices may be required, Plaintiff would