Preview
Edward Kim (SBN: 183022)
1
ed@caworklawyer.com E-FILED
2 Justin Lo (SBN: 280102) 3/26/2021 4:34 PM
Superior Court of California
justin@caworklawyer.com
3 County of Fresno
WORK LAWYERS PC
By: A. Rodriguez, Deputy
22939 Hawthorne Blvd., Suite 202
4
Torrance, CA 90505
5 Telephone: (424) 355-8535
Facsimile: (213) 784-0032
6
7
Attorneys for Plaintiff, NORA REYES, an individual,
8 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
9 FOR THE COUNTY OF FRESNO
10
11 NORA REYES, an individual, Case No.: 21CECG00862
12 Plaintiff, COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
13
v. 1. Failure to Pay All Wages, Including
14 Overtime, in Violation of Labor Code
FRESNO COMMUNITY HOSPITAL AND sections 210-204, 510 and 1194;
15
MEDICAL CENTER, dba COMMUNITY 2. Failure to Provide Meal Periods in
16 MEDICAL CENTERS, a California Violation of Labor Code sections 226.7,
corporation; and DOES 1 through 50, 512;
17 inclusive, 3. Failure to Provide Rest Periods in
Violation of Labor Code section 226.7;
18
4. Failure to Provide Compliant Wage
19 Defendant. Statements in Violation of Labor Code
section 226;
20 5. Failure to Pay Owed Wages at Time of
Termination of Employment, In Violation
21
of Labor Code section 203; AND
22 6. Violation of Bus. & Prof. Code Section
17200 et seq (Unfair Competition Laws)
23
24
DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
25
26
27
28
1
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 Plaintiff Nora Reyes (hereinafter “Plaintiff” or “Ms. Reyes”), hereby respectfully alleges,
2 avers and complains as follows:
3 INTRODUCTION
4 1. Plaintiff brings this action against her former employer Fresno Community
5 Hospital and Medical Center, dba Community Medical Centers, (hereinafter “Community
6 Medical Centers” or “Defendant”), for damages arising out of the Defendant’s unfair business
7 practices pursuant to Bus. & Prof. Code sec. 17200 et seq, in addition to wage and hour violations
8 for unpaid overtime [Labor Code section 201-204, 510 and 1194, and Title 8 of California Code
9 of Regulations, section 11040 (3)], failure to provide legally compliant meal and rest periods or
10 pay compensation in lieu thereof [Labor Code sections 226.7, 512 and 8 CCR section 11040 (11)
11 and (12)], failure to provided legally compliant wage statements (Labor Code section 226) and
12 failure to pay owed wages at time of termination (Labor Code section 203.)
13 PARTIES
14 2. Plaintiff is, and at all times, herein mentioned was, a resident of the County of
15 Fresno in the State of California. Plaintiff last date of employment with Defendant was on or
16 about November 9, 2019.
17 3. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and based thereon alleges, that Defendant
18 Community Medical Centers is a California corporation was the employer of Plaintiff. Defendant
19 operates at least one location in Fresno County and Plaintiff further alleges that Defendant is
20 conducting business in good standing in the State of California.
21 4. Plaintiff is not aware of the true names and/or capacities of those entities or
22 individuals sued herein as DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, and therefore sues these defendants by
23 their fictitious names. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and based thereon alleges, that the
24 fictitiously named defendants were the agents, servants and employees of each of the named
25 Defendants and, in doing the acts and things alleged, were at all times acting within the course
26 and scope of that agency, servitude, and employment and with the permission, consent, and
27 approval, or subsequent ratification, of each of the named Defendants. Reference to “Defendants”
28 includes the named Defendants and the DOE defendants. Plaintiff will seek leave of this court to
2
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 amend this Complaint to insert their true names and/or capacities when the same are ascertained.
2 5. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and based thereon alleges, that at all material
3 times, each of the Defendants were the agents and/or employees of each of the remaining
4 Defendants, and each of them were at all material times acting within the purpose and scope of
5 such agency and employment.
6 6. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and based thereon alleges, that at all material
7 times, one or more of each named and/or unnamed defendants were in some fashion, by contract
8 or otherwise, the predecessors, affiliates, alter egos, assigns, joint venturers, co-venturers or
9 partners of one or more of the remaining named and/or unnamed Defendants, and as hereinafter
10 alleged, was acting within that capacity.
11 7. Plaintiff is further informed, and believes, and on that basis alleges, that one or
12 more of the remaining named and/or unnamed defendants are the successors of one or more of
13 the remaining named and/or unnamed defendants. Such successors are liable for the occurrences,
14 damages and injuries alleged herein to the same extent its predecessors are liable for the alleged
15 occurrences, damages and injuries.
16 8. Plaintiff alleges that Defendants acted as the employers and/or joint employers of
17 Plaintiff, and that they shared control of Plaintiff as an employee, either directly or indirectly.
18 This control included, but was not limited to, the authority to hire and fire, assign work tasks,
19 engage in day-to-day supervision of employees, and control over employee records.
20 9. Plaintiff alleges that Defendants were the alter-egos of one or more of the
21 remaining named and/or unnamed Defendants, and as hereinafter alleged, was acting for their
22 own benefit and/or the benefit of one or more of the remaining named and/or unnamed
23 Defendants. Plaintiff alleges that Defendants were acting on behalf of each other in the
24 establishment of, ratification of, and/or execution of the illegal practices and policies as set forth
25 in this pleading. Plaintiff is further informed and believes, and thereon alleges that all times
26 relevant hereto Defendants had decision–making responsibility for, and establishment and
27 execution of, illegal practices and policies for each other and are, therefore, liable on the causes
28 of action herein.
3
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 10. Unless otherwise specified herein, each DOE defendant was the agent and
2 employee of each Defendant, and in doing the things hereinafter mentioned, were at all times
3 acting within the course and scope of that agency and employment.
4 JURISDICTION AND VENUE
5 11. Jurisdiction is proper in this Court by virtue of the California statutes, decisional
6 law, and regulations, and the local rules under the Fresno County Superior Court Rules including,
7 but not limited to, the rules governing the proper court in which to file an action for an unlimited
8 civil action.
9 12. Venue in this Court is proper in that the causes of action herein alleged took place
10 at Community Medical Centers’s business address located in the County of Fresno State of
11 California.
12 GENERAL ALLEGATIONS
13 13. Plaintiff began her employment with Defendant on or around July 31, 2017 as a
14 Medical Assistant; her duties primarily consisted of providing medical or technical procedures
15 and assisting with clinic flow and patient care. When Plaintiff’s employment ended, she was paid
16 at a rate of $17.60 per hour.
17 14. Defendant did not pay Plaintiff for overtime, despite the fact Plaintiff regularly
18 worked more than 8 hours a day or 40 hours a week. The failure to maintain accurate daily time
19 records was in direct violation of Labor Code section 1174 but facilitated Defendant’s practice of
20 withholding overtime compensation from Plaintiff, as there was no longer accurate daily
21 documentation of the hours Plaintiff actually worked.
22 15. For the entirety of Plaintiff’s employment, Defendant failed to provide legally
23 compliant meal and rest periods.
24 16. Plaintiff’s compensable work time was also illegally rounded downward depriving
25 her of earned wages.
26 17. Despite a reasonably foreseeable volume of work, Defendant understaffed work
27 shifts in an effort to keep labor costs low. Consequently, the demanding workload imposed upon
28 Plaintiff by Defendant did not allow the former to take her meal and rest periods, as Defendant
4
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 insisted Plaintiff prioritize completion of her daily duties over meal and rest period compliance.
2 18. Although Defendant consistently failed to provided lawfully mandated meal and
3 rest periods, Defendant also failed to pay to Plaintiff the premium pay in lieu thereof, required
4 under Labor Code section 226.7 and 8 CCR section 11040 (11) and (12).
5 19. As a direct consequence of the overtime and break violations committed by
6 Defendant against Plaintiff, the wage statement issued regularly and frequently violated Labor
7 Code section 226.
8 20. When Plaintiff’s employment ended on or around November 9, 2019, the former
9 failed to pay to the latter all of the wages owed her, in the form of unpaid overtime and meal/rest
10 period premiums, and thereby incurred waiting penalties pursuant to Labor Code section 203.
11 21. Defendant’s violation of overtime laws constituted protected activity under Labor
12 Code section 98.6 et seq and 1102.5.
13 FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
14 Failure to Pay All Wages Including Overtime
15 (Cal. Lab. Code §§ 510, 1194, 1197 and Wage Order 4-2001, Section 3)
16 22. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates by references the preceding paragraphs of this
17 Complaint as if fully set forth herein.
18 23. Plaintiff seeks relief against Defendant for the failure to pay all wages due in
19 violation of the Labor Code and applicable IWC wage orders.
20 24. Labor Code section 510 provides that any work in excess of eight (8) hours in one
21 (1) workday and any work in excess of forty (40) hours in any one (1) workweek shall be
22 compensated at the rate of no less than one and one-half times (1 & ½) the regular rate of pay for
23 an employee. Any work in excess of twelve (12) hours in one (1) day shall be compensated at
24 the rate of no less than twice the regular rate of pay for an employee. These requirements are
25 reiterated in 8 CCR section 11040 (3).
26 25. Labor Code, section 1194 provides that notwithstanding any agreement to work
27 for a lesser wage, an employee receiving less than the legal minimum wage or the legal overtime
28 compensation is entitled to recover in a civil action the unpaid balance of their minimum wage or
5
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 overtime compensation, including interest, reasonable attorney’s fees and costs of suit.
2 26. Pursuant to IWC Wage Order 4, section 2(k), “hours worked” includes the time
3 during which an employee is subject to the control of the employer, and includes all time the
4 employee is suffered or permitted to work, whether or not required to do so.
5 27. Defendant has willfully violated the Labor Code and applicable IWC wage orders
6 by failing to pay Plaintiff all wages including overtime wages for all time worked.
7 28. Plaintiff regularly worked over eight (8) hours per day and forty (40) hours per
8 week. Defendants failed to pay Plaintiff overtime premium and/or double-time premium for hours
9 worked in excess of eight (8) hours per day and forty (40) hours per week for work performed for
10 the Defendant. Defendant failed to schedule Plaintiff in such a manner that allowed Plaintiff to
11 be relieved of her shift immediately, thereby causing her to work in excess of eight (8) hours per
12 day and/or forty (40) hours per week. As such, Plaintiff seeks overtime and/or double-time
13 compensation which she earned and accrued throughout her employment with Defendant, in an
14 amount according to proof.
15 29. Additionally, Plaintiff is entitled to attorney’s fees and costs, pursuant to Labor
16 Code sections 218.5, 1194 and prejudgment interest pursuant to Labor Code, section 218.6 and
17 Code of Civil Procedure section 3287.
18 SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
19 Failure to Provide Meal Periods in Violation of Labor Code
20 (Cal. Lab. Code §§ 226.7, 512 and Wage Order 4-2001, § 11)
21 30. Plaintiff, realleges and incorporates by reference the preceding paragraphs of this
22 Complaint as if fully set forth herein.
23 31. Labor Code section 512 provides that “an employer may not employ an employee
24 for a work period of more than five (5) hours per day without providing the employee with a meal
25 period of not less than thirty (30) minutes, except that if the total work period per day of the
26 employee is no more than six (6) hours, the meal period may be waived by mutual consent of
27 both the employer and employee.”
28 32. Labor Code section 512 further provides that “an employer may not employ an
6
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 employee for a work period of more than ten (10) hours per day without providing the employee
2 with a second (2nd) meal period of not less than thirty (30) minutes, except that if the total hours
3 worked is no more than twelve (12) hours, the second meal period may be waived by mutual
4 consent of the employer and the employee only if the first (1st) meal period was not waived.”
5 33. Labor Code section 226.7 subsection (b) provides that an employer shall not
6 require an employee to work during a meal or rest period mandated pursuant to an applicable
7 statute, or applicable regulation, standard, or order of the Industrial Welfare Commission.
8 34. Labor Code section 226.7 subsection (c) provides that if an employer fails to
9 provide an employee a meal period in accordance with this section, the employer shall pay the
10 employee one (1) additional hour of pay at the employee’s regular rate of compensation for each
11 workday that the meal period is not provided in accordance with this section.
12 35. Plaintiff consistently worked over six (6) hours per shift and therefore was entitled
13 to a meal period of not less than thirty (30) minutes prior to exceeding five (5) hours of
14 employment.
15 36. Defendant failed to provide Plaintiff with work-free, uninterrupted meal periods
16 within the first five (5) hours of her work shift. Defendant failed to schedule Plaintiff in a manner
17 so as to reasonably provide timely meal and/or work free meal period as required by Labor Code
18 sections 226.7 and 512. As a result, Plaintiff was repeatedly forced to forgo her meal periods,
19 work during her meal periods and/or take meal periods after the fifth (5th) hour of her shift, but
20 Defendant did not have a policy in place that allowed Plaintiff to report missed or interrupted
21 meal periods causing these incidents to go undocumented. In so doing, Defendant failed to comply
22 with the meal period requirements established by Labor Code, sections 226.7, 512 and other
23 regulations and statutes.
24 37. Defendant further failed to implement a policy to pay Plaintiff an additional hour
25 of pay at her regular rate of pay for meal periods not provided. As such, Plaintiff was repeatedly
26 forced to forgo her meal periods, work during her meal periods and/or take meal periods after the
27 fifth (5th) hour without compensation and is thus entitled to damages in an amount equal to one
28 (1) additional hour of wages per missed meal period, in a sum to be proven at trial.
7
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 38. In addition to meal period compensation, Plaintiff requests that the Court award
2 any statutory penalties against Defendant and reasonable attorney’s fees and costs incurred by her
3 in this action in a sum provided by Labor Code sections 218.5, 1194 and any other applicable
4 statute.
5 THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION
6 Failure to Provide Rest Periods
7 (Labor Code §§ 226.7 and Wage Order 4-2001, §12)
8 39. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates by references the preceding paragraphs of this
9 Complaint as if fully set forth herein.
10 40. The Wage Order 4-2001 Section 12 and Labor Code Section 226.7 provide that
11 employers must authorize and permit all employees to take rest periods at the rate of ten (10)
12 minutes rest time per four (4) work hours.
13 41. Labor Code section 226.7, subsection (b), provides that an employer shall not
14 require an employee to work during a meal or rest period mandated pursuant to an applicable
15 statute, or applicable regulation, standard, or order of the Industrial Welfare Commission.
16 42. Labor Code section 226.7, subsection (c), further provides that if an employer fails
17 to provide an employee rest periods in accordance with this section, the employer shall pay the
18 employee one (1) hour of pay at the employees’ regular rate of compensation for each workday
19 that the rest period is not provided.
20 43. Plaintiff consistently worked over four (4) hours per shift and therefore was
21 entitled to a rest period of not less than ten (10) minutes prior to exceeding four (4) hours of
22 employment.
23 44. Defendant failed and/or refused to implement a relief system by which Plaintiff
24 could receive rest breaks and/or work-free rest breaks. Defendant failed to schedule Plaintiff in
25 a manner so as to reasonably provide timely rest and/or work free rest period as required by Labor
26 Code sections 226.7 and 512. As such, Plaintiff did not receive her rest break(s) on most, if not
27 all, days worked but Defendant did not have a policy in place that allowed Plaintiff to report
28 missed or interrupted rest periods causing these incidents to go undocumented. By and through
8
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 their actions, Defendant intentionally and improperly denied rest periods to Plaintiff in violation
2 of Labor Code sections 226.7 and 8 CCR section 11040 (12).
3 45. Defendant further failed to implement a policy to pay Plaintiff an additional hour
4 of pay at their regular rate of pay for rest periods not authorized or permitted. As such, Plaintiff
5 is entitled to damages in an amount equal to one (1) hour of wages per missed rest period, in a
6 sum to be proven at trial.
7 46. In addition to rest period compensation, Plaintiff requests that the Court award any
8 statutory penalties against Defendants and reasonable attorney’s fees and costs incurred by her in
9 this action in a sum provided by Labor Code sections 218.5 and 1194 and any other applicable
10 statute.
11 FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION
12 Failure to Provide Accurate Itemized Wage Statements
13 (Labor Code §§ 226, 226.3, and 1174)
14 47. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates by reference all preceding paragraphs of this
15 Complaint as if fully set forth herein.
16 48. Labor Code Sections 226, 226.3, 1174 and 1174.5 and applicable IWC Wage
17 Orders provide that employers must keep records and provide employees with itemized wage
18 statements showing total hours worked and each applicable rate of pay in effect during the pay
19 period with the corresponding number of hours worked at each hourly rate.
20 49. Labor Code section 226, subdivision (a) requires an employer to provide
21 employees—either as a detachable part of the check, draft, or voucher paying the employee’s
22 wages, or separately when wages are paid by personal check or cash—an accurate itemized wage
23 statement in writing showing “(1) gross wages earned, (2) total hours worked by the employee,
24 (4) all deductions, (5) net wages, (6) the inclusive dates of the period for which the employee is
25 paid, (7) the name of the employee and only the last four digits of her or her social security number
26 or an employee identification number other than a social security number, (8) the name and
27 address of the legal entity that is the employer, and (9) all applicable hourly rates in effect during
28 the pay period and corresponding number of hours worked at each hourly rate by the employee.”
9
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 50. Labor Code section 226.2(a)(2) requires the itemized statements required by
2 subdivision (a) of section 226 shall, in addition to the other items specified in that subdivision,
3 state the following: total hours of compensable rest and recovery periods, the rate of
4 compensation, and the gross wages paid for those periods during the pay period.
5 51. Moreover, IWC Wage Order No.4-2001, paragraph 7 requires that every employer
6 shall keep accurate information with respect to each employee, including time records showing
7 when each employee begins and ends each work periods, the beginning and end times for each
8 meal period, the total daily hours worked by each employee and the total hours worked in each
9 payroll period, and applicable rates of pay.
10 52. Plaintiff is informed and believe that throughout the course of her employment,
11 Defendant willfully and intentionally failed to make, keep and/or provide Plaintiff with records
12 which accurately reflect the hours worked by Plaintiff. Specifically, Plaintiff believes that
13 Defendant’s records do not accurately reflect the start and stop times of her shifts and/or meal
14 periods, do not accurately reflect when she worked during her meal and/or rest breaks.
15 Furthermore, Defendant’s records do not reflect all hours worked, specifically the hours Plaintiff
16 was required to work in excess of her scheduled shift.
17 53. Plaintiff was injured by Defendants’ failure to provide accurate and complete
18 information as required by Subsections (1) - (9) of Labor Code 226(a) pursuant to Labor Code
19 226(e)(2)(B)(i) and (iii)in that she is/was not able to promptly and easily determine from the
20 wage statements alone, without significant effort and/or assistance from experts, the total hours
21 worked, all applicable hourly rates of pay with the corresponding number of hours worked, and
22 the proper gross/net pay due her. Also, Defendant’s failure to comply with Labor Code §226(a)
23 hindered Plaintiff from determining the amounts of wages actually owed to her without reference
24 to other documents or information, creating significant effort and cost to Plaintiff.
25 54. Labor Code section 226(e) provides that if an employer knowingly and
26 intentionally fails to provide a statement itemizing, inter alia, the gross and net wages earned, the
27 total hours worked by the employee and the applicable hourly overtime rates, causing the
28 employee injury, then the employee is entitled to recover the greater of all actual damages or fifty
10
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 dollars ($50) for the initial violation and one hundred dollars ($100) for each subsequent violation,
2 up to four thousand dollars ($4,000). Plaintiff is informed and believes that Defendant willfully
3 failed to make or keep accurate records for her.
4 55. Plaintiff is informed and believes that Defendant’s failure to keep accurate payroll
5 records, as described above, violated Labor Code sections 1174, subdivision (d) and 226,
6 subdivision (a), and the applicable IWC Wage Order(s).
7 56. As a result, Defendant is liable to Plaintiff for penalties in an amount provided by
8 Labor Code §226(e) and reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs.
9 FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION
10 Failure to Pay Wages upon Termination of Employment
11 (Labor Code §§ 201, 202, and 203)
12 57. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates by reference all preceding paragraphs of this
13 Complaint as if fully set forth herein.
14 58. Plaintiff, upon being terminated from Defendant’s employment, was entitled to be
15 promptly paid lawful overtime compensation and other premiums, as required by Labor Code §§
16 201-203. Defendant refused and/or failed to promptly compensate Plaintiff for wages owed as a
17 result of Defendant’s failure to pay Plaintiff both overtime and meal/rest period premiums.
18 Pursuant to Labor Code § 203, such Plaintiff seeks the payment of penalties pursuant to Labor
19 Code § 203, according to proof.
20 SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION
21 Unfair Business Practices in Violation of Cal. Business Code § 17200
22 59. As a separate and distinct cause of action, Plaintiff complains and re-alleges all of
23 the allegations contained in this complaint and incorporates them by reference into this cause of
24 action as though fully set forth herein.
25 60. At all relevant times, Defendant M&S, as the employer of Plaintiff, was subject to
26 the California Unfair Trade Practices Act, Business & Professions Code § 17200 et seq., which
27 required them to abide by the Labor Code.
28 61. Defendant engaged in unfair trade practices prohibited by Business & Professions
11
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 Code § 17200 et seq., by committing acts prohibited by applicable Labor Code statutes, which
2 includes but is not limited to retaliating against employees engaging in the protected activity of
3 reporting illegal conduct in the workplace, as well as the wage and hour violations set forth in this
4 Complaint, thus giving Defendant a competitive advantage over other employers and businesses
5 with whom Defendants were in competition with and in compliance with the law.
6 62. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that Defendant continues to
7 engage in some or all of the aforementioned unfair and unlawful business practices.
8 63. Plaintiff seeks an injunction prohibiting Defendant from engaging in the unfair
9 and unlawful conduct described herein.
10 64. Plaintiff has incurred costs and attorneys' fees in bringing this action and seeks to
11 recover such costs under Civil Code § 1021.5 and otherwise.
12 PRAYER FOR RELIEF
13 WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for the following relief:
14 1. For compensatory damages in an amount according to proof;
15 2. For general damages in an amount according to proof;
16 3. For attorney’s fees and expenses under the Labor Code;
17 4. For costs of the suit herein incurred; and
18 5. For restitution under the Business and Professions Code; and
19 6. For such other and further relief as this Court may deem proper and just.
20
21 Dated: March 26, 2021 WORK LAWYERS, PC
22
23 By:
24 Edward Kim, Esq.
Justin Lo, Esq.
25 Attorneys for Plaintiff NORA REYES
//
26
27
//
28 //
12
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
1 DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
2 Plaintiff NORA REYES hereby demands trial by jury on all issues so triable in the
3 Complaint.
4
5 Dated: March 26, 2021 WORK LAWYERS, PC
6
7 By:
8 Edward Kim, Esq.
Justin Lo, Esq.
9 Attorneys for Plaintiff NORA REYES
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
13
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
Preview
Edward Kim (SBN: 183022) 1 ed@caworklawyer.com E-FILED 2 Justin Lo (SBN: 280102) 3/26/2021 4:34 PM Superior Court of California justin@caworklawyer.com 3 County of Fresno WORK LAWYERS PC By: A. Rodriguez, Deputy 22939 Hawthorne Blvd., Suite 202 4 Torrance, CA 90505 5 Telephone: (424) 355-8535 Facsimile: (213) 784-0032 6 7 Attorneys for Plaintiff, NORA REYES, an individual, 8 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 9 FOR THE COUNTY OF FRESNO 10 11 NORA REYES, an individual, Case No.: 21CECG00862 12 Plaintiff, COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 13 v. 1. Failure to Pay All Wages, Including 14 Overtime, in Violation of Labor Code FRESNO COMMUNITY HOSPITAL AND sections 210-204, 510 and 1194; 15 MEDICAL CENTER, dba COMMUNITY 2. Failure to Provide Meal Periods in 16 MEDICAL CENTERS, a California Violation of Labor Code sections 226.7, corporation; and DOES 1 through 50, 512; 17 inclusive, 3. Failure to Provide Rest Periods in Violation of Labor Code section 226.7; 18 4. Failure to Provide Compliant Wage 19 Defendant. Statements in Violation of Labor Code section 226; 20 5. Failure to Pay Owed Wages at Time of Termination of Employment, In Violation 21 of Labor Code section 203; AND 22 6. Violation of Bus. & Prof. Code Section 17200 et seq (Unfair Competition Laws) 23 24 DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL 25 26 27 28 1 COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 1 Plaintiff Nora Reyes (hereinafter “Plaintiff” or “Ms. Reyes”), hereby respectfully alleges, 2 avers and complains as follows: 3 INTRODUCTION 4 1. Plaintiff brings this action against her former employer Fresno Community 5 Hospital and Medical Center, dba Community Medical Centers, (hereinafter “Community 6 Medical Centers” or “Defendant”), for damages arising out of the Defendant’s unfair business 7 practices pursuant to Bus. & Prof. Code sec. 17200 et seq, in addition to wage and hour violations 8 for unpaid overtime [Labor Code section 201-204, 510 and 1194, and Title 8 of California Code 9 of Regulations, section 11040 (3)], failure to provide legally compliant meal and rest periods or 10 pay compensation in lieu thereof [Labor Code sections 226.7, 512 and 8 CCR section 11040 (11) 11 and (12)], failure to provided legally compliant wage statements (Labor Code section 226) and 12 failure to pay owed wages at time of termination (Labor Code section 203.) 13 PARTIES 14 2. Plaintiff is, and at all times, herein mentioned was, a resident of the County of 15 Fresno in the State of California. Plaintiff last date of employment with Defendant was on or 16 about November 9, 2019. 17 3. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and based thereon alleges, that Defendant 18 Community Medical Centers is a California corporation was the employer of Plaintiff. Defendant 19 operates at least one location in Fresno County and Plaintiff further alleges that Defendant is 20 conducting business in good standing in the State of California. 21 4. Plaintiff is not aware of the true names and/or capacities of those entities or 22 individuals sued herein as DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, and therefore sues these defendants by 23 their fictitious names. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and based thereon alleges, that the 24 fictitiously named defendants were the agents, servants and employees of each of the named 25 Defendants and, in doing the acts and things alleged, were at all times acting within the course 26 and scope of that agency, servitude, and employment and with the permission, consent, and 27 approval, or subsequent ratification, of each of the named Defendants. Reference to “Defendants” 28 includes the named Defendants and the DOE defendants. Plaintiff will seek leave of this court to 2 COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 1 amend this Complaint to insert their true names and/or capacities when the same are ascertained. 2 5. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and based thereon alleges, that at all material 3 times, each of the Defendants were the agents and/or employees of each of the remaining 4 Defendants, and each of them were at all material times acting within the purpose and scope of 5 such agency and employment. 6 6. Plaintiff is informed and believes, and based thereon alleges, that at all material 7 times, one or more of each named and/or unnamed defendants were in some fashion, by contract 8 or otherwise, the predecessors, affiliates, alter egos, assigns, joint venturers, co-venturers or 9 partners of one or more of the remaining named and/or unnamed Defendants, and as hereinafter 10 alleged, was acting within that capacity. 11 7. Plaintiff is further informed, and believes, and on that basis alleges, that one or 12 more of the remaining named and/or unnamed defendants are the successors of one or more of 13 the remaining named and/or unnamed defendants. Such successors are liable for the occurrences, 14 damages and injuries alleged herein to the same extent its predecessors are liable for the alleged 15 occurrences, damages and injuries. 16 8. Plaintiff alleges that Defendants acted as the employers and/or joint employers of 17 Plaintiff, and that they shared control of Plaintiff as an employee, either directly or indirectly. 18 This control included, but was not limited to, the authority to hire and fire, assign work tasks, 19 engage in day-to-day supervision of employees, and control over employee records. 20 9. Plaintiff alleges that Defendants were the alter-egos of one or more of the 21 remaining named and/or unnamed Defendants, and as hereinafter alleged, was acting for their 22 own benefit and/or the benefit of one or more of the remaining named and/or unnamed 23 Defendants. Plaintiff alleges that Defendants were acting on behalf of each other in the 24 establishment of, ratification of, and/or execution of the illegal practices and policies as set forth 25 in this pleading. Plaintiff is further informed and believes, and thereon alleges that all times 26 relevant hereto Defendants had decision–making responsibility for, and establishment and 27 execution of, illegal practices and policies for each other and are, therefore, liable on the causes 28 of action herein. 3 COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 1 10. Unless otherwise specified herein, each DOE defendant was the agent and 2 employee of each Defendant, and in doing the things hereinafter mentioned, were at all times 3 acting within the course and scope of that agency and employment. 4 JURISDICTION AND VENUE 5 11. Jurisdiction is proper in this Court by virtue of the California statutes, decisional 6 law, and regulations, and the local rules under the Fresno County Superior Court Rules including, 7 but not limited to, the rules governing the proper court in which to file an action for an unlimited 8 civil action. 9 12. Venue in this Court is proper in that the causes of action herein alleged took place 10 at Community Medical Centers’s business address located in the County of Fresno State of 11 California. 12 GENERAL ALLEGATIONS 13 13. Plaintiff began her employment with Defendant on or around July 31, 2017 as a 14 Medical Assistant; her duties primarily consisted of providing medical or technical procedures 15 and assisting with clinic flow and patient care. When Plaintiff’s employment ended, she was paid 16 at a rate of $17.60 per hour. 17 14. Defendant did not pay Plaintiff for overtime, despite the fact Plaintiff regularly 18 worked more than 8 hours a day or 40 hours a week. The failure to maintain accurate daily time 19 records was in direct violation of Labor Code section 1174 but facilitated Defendant’s practice of 20 withholding overtime compensation from Plaintiff, as there was no longer accurate daily 21 documentation of the hours Plaintiff actually worked. 22 15. For the entirety of Plaintiff’s employment, Defendant failed to provide legally 23 compliant meal and rest periods. 24 16. Plaintiff’s compensable work time was also illegally rounded downward depriving 25 her of earned wages. 26 17. Despite a reasonably foreseeable volume of work, Defendant understaffed work 27 shifts in an effort to keep labor costs low. Consequently, the demanding workload imposed upon 28 Plaintiff by Defendant did not allow the former to take her meal and rest periods, as Defendant 4 COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 1 insisted Plaintiff prioritize completion of her daily duties over meal and rest period compliance. 2 18. Although Defendant consistently failed to provided lawfully mandated meal and 3 rest periods, Defendant also failed to pay to Plaintiff the premium pay in lieu thereof, required 4 under Labor Code section 226.7 and 8 CCR section 11040 (11) and (12). 5 19. As a direct consequence of the overtime and break violations committed by 6 Defendant against Plaintiff, the wage statement issued regularly and frequently violated Labor 7 Code section 226. 8 20. When Plaintiff’s employment ended on or around November 9, 2019, the former 9 failed to pay to the latter all of the wages owed her, in the form of unpaid overtime and meal/rest 10 period premiums, and thereby incurred waiting penalties pursuant to Labor Code section 203. 11 21. Defendant’s violation of overtime laws constituted protected activity under Labor 12 Code section 98.6 et seq and 1102.5. 13 FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION 14 Failure to Pay All Wages Including Overtime 15 (Cal. Lab. Code §§ 510, 1194, 1197 and Wage Order 4-2001, Section 3) 16 22. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates by references the preceding paragraphs of this 17 Complaint as if fully set forth herein. 18 23. Plaintiff seeks relief against Defendant for the failure to pay all wages due in 19 violation of the Labor Code and applicable IWC wage orders. 20 24. Labor Code section 510 provides that any work in excess of eight (8) hours in one 21 (1) workday and any work in excess of forty (40) hours in any one (1) workweek shall be 22 compensated at the rate of no less than one and one-half times (1 & ½) the regular rate of pay for 23 an employee. Any work in excess of twelve (12) hours in one (1) day shall be compensated at 24 the rate of no less than twice the regular rate of pay for an employee. These requirements are 25 reiterated in 8 CCR section 11040 (3). 26 25. Labor Code, section 1194 provides that notwithstanding any agreement to work 27 for a lesser wage, an employee receiving less than the legal minimum wage or the legal overtime 28 compensation is entitled to recover in a civil action the unpaid balance of their minimum wage or 5 COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 1 overtime compensation, including interest, reasonable attorney’s fees and costs of suit. 2 26. Pursuant to IWC Wage Order 4, section 2(k), “hours worked” includes the time 3 during which an employee is subject to the control of the employer, and includes all time the 4 employee is suffered or permitted to work, whether or not required to do so. 5 27. Defendant has willfully violated the Labor Code and applicable IWC wage orders 6 by failing to pay Plaintiff all wages including overtime wages for all time worked. 7 28. Plaintiff regularly worked over eight (8) hours per day and forty (40) hours per 8 week. Defendants failed to pay Plaintiff overtime premium and/or double-time premium for hours 9 worked in excess of eight (8) hours per day and forty (40) hours per week for work performed for 10 the Defendant. Defendant failed to schedule Plaintiff in such a manner that allowed Plaintiff to 11 be relieved of her shift immediately, thereby causing her to work in excess of eight (8) hours per 12 day and/or forty (40) hours per week. As such, Plaintiff seeks overtime and/or double-time 13 compensation which she earned and accrued throughout her employment with Defendant, in an 14 amount according to proof. 15 29. Additionally, Plaintiff is entitled to attorney’s fees and costs, pursuant to Labor 16 Code sections 218.5, 1194 and prejudgment interest pursuant to Labor Code, section 218.6 and 17 Code of Civil Procedure section 3287. 18 SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION 19 Failure to Provide Meal Periods in Violation of Labor Code 20 (Cal. Lab. Code §§ 226.7, 512 and Wage Order 4-2001, § 11) 21 30. Plaintiff, realleges and incorporates by reference the preceding paragraphs of this 22 Complaint as if fully set forth herein. 23 31. Labor Code section 512 provides that “an employer may not employ an employee 24 for a work period of more than five (5) hours per day without providing the employee with a meal 25 period of not less than thirty (30) minutes, except that if the total work period per day of the 26 employee is no more than six (6) hours, the meal period may be waived by mutual consent of 27 both the employer and employee.” 28 32. Labor Code section 512 further provides that “an employer may not employ an 6 COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 1 employee for a work period of more than ten (10) hours per day without providing the employee 2 with a second (2nd) meal period of not less than thirty (30) minutes, except that if the total hours 3 worked is no more than twelve (12) hours, the second meal period may be waived by mutual 4 consent of the employer and the employee only if the first (1st) meal period was not waived.” 5 33. Labor Code section 226.7 subsection (b) provides that an employer shall not 6 require an employee to work during a meal or rest period mandated pursuant to an applicable 7 statute, or applicable regulation, standard, or order of the Industrial Welfare Commission. 8 34. Labor Code section 226.7 subsection (c) provides that if an employer fails to 9 provide an employee a meal period in accordance with this section, the employer shall pay the 10 employee one (1) additional hour of pay at the employee’s regular rate of compensation for each 11 workday that the meal period is not provided in accordance with this section. 12 35. Plaintiff consistently worked over six (6) hours per shift and therefore was entitled 13 to a meal period of not less than thirty (30) minutes prior to exceeding five (5) hours of 14 employment. 15 36. Defendant failed to provide Plaintiff with work-free, uninterrupted meal periods 16 within the first five (5) hours of her work shift. Defendant failed to schedule Plaintiff in a manner 17 so as to reasonably provide timely meal and/or work free meal period as required by Labor Code 18 sections 226.7 and 512. As a result, Plaintiff was repeatedly forced to forgo her meal periods, 19 work during her meal periods and/or take meal periods after the fifth (5th) hour of her shift, but 20 Defendant did not have a policy in place that allowed Plaintiff to report missed or interrupted 21 meal periods causing these incidents to go undocumented. In so doing, Defendant failed to comply 22 with the meal period requirements established by Labor Code, sections 226.7, 512 and other 23 regulations and statutes. 24 37. Defendant further failed to implement a policy to pay Plaintiff an additional hour 25 of pay at her regular rate of pay for meal periods not provided. As such, Plaintiff was repeatedly 26 forced to forgo her meal periods, work during her meal periods and/or take meal periods after the 27 fifth (5th) hour without compensation and is thus entitled to damages in an amount equal to one 28 (1) additional hour of wages per missed meal period, in a sum to be proven at trial. 7 COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 1 38. In addition to meal period compensation, Plaintiff requests that the Court award 2 any statutory penalties against Defendant and reasonable attorney’s fees and costs incurred by her 3 in this action in a sum provided by Labor Code sections 218.5, 1194 and any other applicable 4 statute. 5 THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION 6 Failure to Provide Rest Periods 7 (Labor Code §§ 226.7 and Wage Order 4-2001, §12) 8 39. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates by references the preceding paragraphs of this 9 Complaint as if fully set forth herein. 10 40. The Wage Order 4-2001 Section 12 and Labor Code Section 226.7 provide that 11 employers must authorize and permit all employees to take rest periods at the rate of ten (10) 12 minutes rest time per four (4) work hours. 13 41. Labor Code section 226.7, subsection (b), provides that an employer shall not 14 require an employee to work during a meal or rest period mandated pursuant to an applicable 15 statute, or applicable regulation, standard, or order of the Industrial Welfare Commission. 16 42. Labor Code section 226.7, subsection (c), further provides that if an employer fails 17 to provide an employee rest periods in accordance with this section, the employer shall pay the 18 employee one (1) hour of pay at the employees’ regular rate of compensation for each workday 19 that the rest period is not provided. 20 43. Plaintiff consistently worked over four (4) hours per shift and therefore was 21 entitled to a rest period of not less than ten (10) minutes prior to exceeding four (4) hours of 22 employment. 23 44. Defendant failed and/or refused to implement a relief system by which Plaintiff 24 could receive rest breaks and/or work-free rest breaks. Defendant failed to schedule Plaintiff in 25 a manner so as to reasonably provide timely rest and/or work free rest period as required by Labor 26 Code sections 226.7 and 512. As such, Plaintiff did not receive her rest break(s) on most, if not 27 all, days worked but Defendant did not have a policy in place that allowed Plaintiff to report 28 missed or interrupted rest periods causing these incidents to go undocumented. By and through 8 COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 1 their actions, Defendant intentionally and improperly denied rest periods to Plaintiff in violation 2 of Labor Code sections 226.7 and 8 CCR section 11040 (12). 3 45. Defendant further failed to implement a policy to pay Plaintiff an additional hour 4 of pay at their regular rate of pay for rest periods not authorized or permitted. As such, Plaintiff 5 is entitled to damages in an amount equal to one (1) hour of wages per missed rest period, in a 6 sum to be proven at trial. 7 46. In addition to rest period compensation, Plaintiff requests that the Court award any 8 statutory penalties against Defendants and reasonable attorney’s fees and costs incurred by her in 9 this action in a sum provided by Labor Code sections 218.5 and 1194 and any other applicable 10 statute. 11 FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION 12 Failure to Provide Accurate Itemized Wage Statements 13 (Labor Code §§ 226, 226.3, and 1174) 14 47. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates by reference all preceding paragraphs of this 15 Complaint as if fully set forth herein. 16 48. Labor Code Sections 226, 226.3, 1174 and 1174.5 and applicable IWC Wage 17 Orders provide that employers must keep records and provide employees with itemized wage 18 statements showing total hours worked and each applicable rate of pay in effect during the pay 19 period with the corresponding number of hours worked at each hourly rate. 20 49. Labor Code section 226, subdivision (a) requires an employer to provide 21 employees—either as a detachable part of the check, draft, or voucher paying the employee’s 22 wages, or separately when wages are paid by personal check or cash—an accurate itemized wage 23 statement in writing showing “(1) gross wages earned, (2) total hours worked by the employee, 24 (4) all deductions, (5) net wages, (6) the inclusive dates of the period for which the employee is 25 paid, (7) the name of the employee and only the last four digits of her or her social security number 26 or an employee identification number other than a social security number, (8) the name and 27 address of the legal entity that is the employer, and (9) all applicable hourly rates in effect during 28 the pay period and corresponding number of hours worked at each hourly rate by the employee.” 9 COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 1 50. Labor Code section 226.2(a)(2) requires the itemized statements required by 2 subdivision (a) of section 226 shall, in addition to the other items specified in that subdivision, 3 state the following: total hours of compensable rest and recovery periods, the rate of 4 compensation, and the gross wages paid for those periods during the pay period. 5 51. Moreover, IWC Wage Order No.4-2001, paragraph 7 requires that every employer 6 shall keep accurate information with respect to each employee, including time records showing 7 when each employee begins and ends each work periods, the beginning and end times for each 8 meal period, the total daily hours worked by each employee and the total hours worked in each 9 payroll period, and applicable rates of pay. 10 52. Plaintiff is informed and believe that throughout the course of her employment, 11 Defendant willfully and intentionally failed to make, keep and/or provide Plaintiff with records 12 which accurately reflect the hours worked by Plaintiff. Specifically, Plaintiff believes that 13 Defendant’s records do not accurately reflect the start and stop times of her shifts and/or meal 14 periods, do not accurately reflect when she worked during her meal and/or rest breaks. 15 Furthermore, Defendant’s records do not reflect all hours worked, specifically the hours Plaintiff 16 was required to work in excess of her scheduled shift. 17 53. Plaintiff was injured by Defendants’ failure to provide accurate and complete 18 information as required by Subsections (1) - (9) of Labor Code 226(a) pursuant to Labor Code 19 226(e)(2)(B)(i) and (iii)in that she is/was not able to promptly and easily determine from the 20 wage statements alone, without significant effort and/or assistance from experts, the total hours 21 worked, all applicable hourly rates of pay with the corresponding number of hours worked, and 22 the proper gross/net pay due her. Also, Defendant’s failure to comply with Labor Code §226(a) 23 hindered Plaintiff from determining the amounts of wages actually owed to her without reference 24 to other documents or information, creating significant effort and cost to Plaintiff. 25 54. Labor Code section 226(e) provides that if an employer knowingly and 26 intentionally fails to provide a statement itemizing, inter alia, the gross and net wages earned, the 27 total hours worked by the employee and the applicable hourly overtime rates, causing the 28 employee injury, then the employee is entitled to recover the greater of all actual damages or fifty 10 COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 1 dollars ($50) for the initial violation and one hundred dollars ($100) for each subsequent violation, 2 up to four thousand dollars ($4,000). Plaintiff is informed and believes that Defendant willfully 3 failed to make or keep accurate records for her. 4 55. Plaintiff is informed and believes that Defendant’s failure to keep accurate payroll 5 records, as described above, violated Labor Code sections 1174, subdivision (d) and 226, 6 subdivision (a), and the applicable IWC Wage Order(s). 7 56. As a result, Defendant is liable to Plaintiff for penalties in an amount provided by 8 Labor Code §226(e) and reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs. 9 FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION 10 Failure to Pay Wages upon Termination of Employment 11 (Labor Code §§ 201, 202, and 203) 12 57. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates by reference all preceding paragraphs of this 13 Complaint as if fully set forth herein. 14 58. Plaintiff, upon being terminated from Defendant’s employment, was entitled to be 15 promptly paid lawful overtime compensation and other premiums, as required by Labor Code §§ 16 201-203. Defendant refused and/or failed to promptly compensate Plaintiff for wages owed as a 17 result of Defendant’s failure to pay Plaintiff both overtime and meal/rest period premiums. 18 Pursuant to Labor Code § 203, such Plaintiff seeks the payment of penalties pursuant to Labor 19 Code § 203, according to proof. 20 SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION 21 Unfair Business Practices in Violation of Cal. Business Code § 17200 22 59. As a separate and distinct cause of action, Plaintiff complains and re-alleges all of 23 the allegations contained in this complaint and incorporates them by reference into this cause of 24 action as though fully set forth herein. 25 60. At all relevant times, Defendant M&S, as the employer of Plaintiff, was subject to 26 the California Unfair Trade Practices Act, Business & Professions Code § 17200 et seq., which 27 required them to abide by the Labor Code. 28 61. Defendant engaged in unfair trade practices prohibited by Business & Professions 11 COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 1 Code § 17200 et seq., by committing acts prohibited by applicable Labor Code statutes, which 2 includes but is not limited to retaliating against employees engaging in the protected activity of 3 reporting illegal conduct in the workplace, as well as the wage and hour violations set forth in this 4 Complaint, thus giving Defendant a competitive advantage over other employers and businesses 5 with whom Defendants were in competition with and in compliance with the law. 6 62. Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereon alleges that Defendant continues to 7 engage in some or all of the aforementioned unfair and unlawful business practices. 8 63. Plaintiff seeks an injunction prohibiting Defendant from engaging in the unfair 9 and unlawful conduct described herein. 10 64. Plaintiff has incurred costs and attorneys' fees in bringing this action and seeks to 11 recover such costs under Civil Code § 1021.5 and otherwise. 12 PRAYER FOR RELIEF 13 WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for the following relief: 14 1. For compensatory damages in an amount according to proof; 15 2. For general damages in an amount according to proof; 16 3. For attorney’s fees and expenses under the Labor Code; 17 4. For costs of the suit herein incurred; and 18 5. For restitution under the Business and Professions Code; and 19 6. For such other and further relief as this Court may deem proper and just. 20 21 Dated: March 26, 2021 WORK LAWYERS, PC 22 23 By: 24 Edward Kim, Esq. Justin Lo, Esq. 25 Attorneys for Plaintiff NORA REYES // 26 27 // 28 // 12 COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 1 DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL 2 Plaintiff NORA REYES hereby demands trial by jury on all issues so triable in the 3 Complaint. 4 5 Dated: March 26, 2021 WORK LAWYERS, PC 6 7 By: 8 Edward Kim, Esq. Justin Lo, Esq. 9 Attorneys for Plaintiff NORA REYES 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 13 COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES