Preview
FILED
SEYFARTH SHAW LLP
Andrew M. Paley (SBN 149699)
apaley@seyfarth.com
2029 Century Park East, Suite 3500
Los Angeles, California 90067-3021
Telephone: (310) 277-7200 MAY 11 2021
Facsimile: (310) 201-5219
OR COURT OF CALIFORNIA
SUPERICOUNTY OF FRESNO
SEYFARTH SHAW LLP
Geoffrey C. Westbrook (SBN 281961)
—— FIT
gwestbrook@seyfarth.com
400 Capitol Mall, Suite 2350
Sacramento, California 95814-4428
Telephone: (916) 448-0159
Facsimile: (916) 558-4839
SEYFARTH SHAW LLP
Bailey K. Bifoss (SBN 278392)
10 bbifoss@seyfarth.com
560 Mission Street, 31st Floor
1 San Francisco, California 94105
Telephone: (415) 397-2823
12 Facsimile: (415) 397-8549
13 Attorneys for Defendant
FRESNO COMMUNITY HOSPITAL AND MEDICAL
14 CENTER, dba COMMUNITY MEDICAL CENTERS
15 WORK LAWYERS PC
Justin Lo (SBN 280102)
16 22939 Hawthorne Blvd., Suite 202 RECEIVED
Torrance, California 90505 5/10/2021 3:18 PM
17 Telephone: (424) 355-8535 FRESNO COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT
Facsimile: (424) 355-8335 By: C. York, Deputy
18
Attomeys for Plaintiff NORMA REYES
19
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
20
COUNTY OF FRESNO
21
NORA REYES, an individual, Case No. 21CECG00862
22
Plaintiff, ASSIGNED FOR ALL PURPOSES -
23 HON. KIMBERLY GAAB
v.
24 UNLIMITED JURISDICTION
FRESNO COMMUNITY HOSPITAL AND
25 MEDICAL CENTER, dba COMMUNITY STIPULATION AND |PROFOSED,
MEDICAL CENTERS, a California corporation; ORDER TO ARBITRATE PLAINTIFF'S
26 and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, CLAIMS AND STAY ACTION PENDING
ARBITRATION
27 Defendants.
Complaint Filed: 3/29/21
28
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO ARBITRATE PLAINTIFF’S CLAIMS: STAY ACTION
69940774v.1
This Stipulation is made by and between Plaintiff NORA REYES (“Plaintiff”) and Defendant
FRESNO COMMUNITY HOSPITAL AND MEDICAL CENTER, dba COMMUNITY MEDICAL
CENTERS (“CMC”) (“Defendant”), through their respective attorneys of record. Plaintiff and
Defendant are collectively referred to herein as the “Parties.”
The Stipulation is made with reference to the following:
1 In February 2021, Plaintiff mailed a request for arbitration to Defendant, attaching a copy
of the arbitration agreement. Attached as Exhibit A is a true and correct copy of Plaintiff's request and
the signed Dispute Resolution Agreement.
2 On March 8. 2021, Defendant through counsel agreed in writing to arbitrate the claims
10 asserted in Plaintiff's arbitration demand.
il 3 On March 26, 2021, Plaintiff filed a civil Complaint for Damages with the Fresno County|
12 Superior Court, Case No. 21CECG00862. Attached as Exhibit B is a true and correct copy of the same.
13 4. The Parties agree the purported causes of action asserted in Plaintiff's complaint fall
14 within the scope of their arbitration agreement. Plaintiff and Defendant agree to submit the matter to
15 arbitration pursuant to the terms stated in their agreement.
16 NOW THEREFORE, IT 1S HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by the Parties hereto as
17 follows:
18 1 The Parties agree and ask the Court to enter an order compelling Plaintiff to arbitrate the
19 claims she purports to assert in the complaint to final and binding arbitration pursuant to the Dispute
20 Resolution Agreement (attached to Exhibit A).
21 2 This action will be stayed pending resolution of the claims pursuant to Code of Civil
22 Procedure § 1280 ef seq. and the terms of the Dispute Resolution Agreement.
23 3 The Parties agree that Defendant need not file an answer or other responsive pleading to
24 the Complaint with this Court in light of the foregoing stipulation.
25 4 Signatures on this stipulation may be transmitted by facsimile and/or electronically
26 scanned and emailed copies with the same force and effect as originals: and
27 5 The Court may enter the following order.
28 IT IS SO STIPULATED.
2
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO ARBITRATE PLAINTIFF'S CLAIMS: STAY ACTION
69940774¥ 1
DATED: May 7, 2021 SEYFARTH SHAW LLP
By: Bn
Andrew M. Paley
Geoffrey C. Westbrook
Bailey Bifoss
Attorneys for Defendant
FRESNO COMMUNITY HOSPITAL AND MEDICAI
CENTER, dba COMMUNITY MEDICAL CENTERS
DATED: May 7, 2021 Wi
By wy
RK L. WYERS
usta
stin Lo
C.
Attorneys for Plaintiff
10 NORMA REYES
Il
12
13
14
1S
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO ARBITRATE PLAINTIFF'S CLAIMS; STAY ACTION
69940774v,1
[PROPOSED] ORDER
In light of the Parties’ Stipulation, and good cause appearing therefore, [T 1S HEREBY
ORDERED:
Plaintiff NORMA REYES is ordered to submit to a single, final and binding arbitration of the
purported causes of action against Defendant FRESNO COMMUNITY HOSPITAL AND MEDICAL
CENTER, dba COMMUNITY MEDICAL CENTERS which are set forth in Plaintiffs civil complaint
filed with this Court, pursuant to the terms of the Dispute Resolution agreement between the Parties.
This action is stayed until the final determination of the arbitration proceedings.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
10 DATED:
11 ufo HON. KIMBERLY GAXB
Judge of the Superior Court
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
4
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO ARBITRATE PLAINTIFF'S CLAIMS: STAY ACTION
699407 74.1
PROOF OF SERVICE
1am a resident of the State of California, over the age of eighteen years, and not a party to the
within action, My business address is 400 Capitol Mall, Suite 2350, Sacramento, California 95814-
4428. On May 10, 2021, I had served the within document(s):
STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED} ORDER TO ARBITRATE PLAINTIFF’S CLAIMS
AND STAY ACTION PENDING ARBITRATION
by placing the document(s) listed above in a sealed envelope with postage thereon fully prepaid.
in the United States mail at Sacramento, California, addressed as set forth below.
by transmitting the document(s) listed above, electronically, via the e-mail address(es) set forth
O below based on a court order or an agreement of the parties to accept service by electronic
transmission.
Edward Kim Attorneys for Plaintiff
10 Justin Lo
Work Lawyers PC Tel: 424-355-8535
ll
22939 Hawthorne Blvd., Suite 202 Fax: 213-784-0032
12 Torrance, CA 90505
ed@caworklawyer.com
13 justin@caworklawyer.com
14
lam readily familiar with the firm's practice of collection and processing correspondence for
15 mailing. Under that practice it would be deposited with the U.S. Postal Service on that same day with
postage thereon fully prepaid in the ordinary course of business. I am aware that on motion of the party
16 served, service is presumed invalid if postal cancellation date or postage meter date is more than one day
after date of deposit for mailing in affidavit.
7
I declare under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct.
18
Executed on May 10, 2021, at Sacramento, California.
19
20
21
-
(Lalla?
Linda Ninelist
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
1
PROOF OF SERVICE
70308 760v.1
EXHIBIT A
Justin Lo (SBN: 280102)
justin@caworklawyer.com RECEIVED MAR 02 2021
Edward Kim (SBN: 183022)
ed@caworklawyer.com
WORK LAWYERS PC
22939 Hawthorne Blvd., Suite 202
Torrance, CA 90505
Telephone: (424) 355-8535
Facsimile: (213) 784-0032
Attorneys for Plaintiff NORA REYES, an individual,
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF FRESNO
10
ll NORA REYES, an individual, Case No.:
12
PLAINTIFF, PLAINTIFF NORA REYES’ REQUEST
13 FOR ARBITRATION
vs.
14
15
FRESNO COMMUNITY HOSPITAL AND
MEDICAL CENTER, a California
16 corporation; and DOES 1 through 50,
inclusive,
17
18 DEFENDANTs.
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that PLAINTIFF NORA REYES (“PLAINTIFF”) is
19
requesting arbitration against her former employer, DEFENDANT FRESNO COMMUNITY
20
HOSPITAL AND MEDICAL CENTER (“DEFENDANT”). Plaintiff is alleging various
21
allegations including but not limited to time rounding, failure to provide meal and rest break
22
premiums, failure to minimum wage and overtime pay.
23
24 Attached as Exhibit A is a signed copy of the arbitration agreement between Ms. Reyes
25 and Fresno Community Hospital and Medical Center.
26
Plaintiff retains the right to add additional claims if additional facts arise during the
27
discovery process.
28
PLAINTIFF NORA REYES’ REQUEST FOR BINDING ARBITRATION
Dated: February 24, 2021 WORK LAWYERS PC
tin Ls
By:
Justin Lo, Esq.
Edward Kim, Esq.
Attorneys for PLAINTIFF NORA REYES
10
il
12
13
4
15
16
7
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
PLAINTIFF NORA REYES’ REQUEST FOR BINDING ARBITRATION
Exhibit A
i
DIsP| & RESOLUTION AGREEMENT FH
Frasno Community Hospital and Medical Center, doing business as Community Madical Centers (“CMC”) is
committed to prompt and fair revolution of any-employment-related disputes that may arise, Toward that
and, Employee and CMC agrea that legal disputes betwaan them shal) be resolved In naarly all
circumstances without going to court, a3 lows:
i When applicable, Employee should first seak to resolve any concerns Internally by promptly
following tise steps outlined in CMC's Grievance Policy. These steps begin In most cases by discussing
concerns with management.
2. ‘Ifregolution i¢ not achteved through the Internal grievance steps (If applicable), excapt as otherwise
provided in this agreement; CMC and Employee agree to rasoive all legal disputes: arising aut of or relating
to the employment relationship, regardless of the data of accrual of the dispute, through final, binding
arbitration, rather than: through a court or jury tral. This process, governed by the Federal Arbitration Act
(9 U.S.C, §1-16), shall apply to legal claims (Whether arising under a statute or common law), such a5
claims of discrimination, harassment, retaliation, wrongful termination, breach of contract, misappropriation
of trade secrets, unfair competition, and theft, as well as legal claims relating to wages, claséification,
deductions, breaks and hours of work. Also included ara claimy relating to Interpretation and anforceability
of this agreement, except ae stated in paragraph 4, below.
3. Aylitration is not faquirad for iistances In which arbitration Is prebibited by an applicable law that
is not preempted under the Fadaral Arbitration Act. Regardless of any other terms of this agraement, a
claim thay be brought before and remedies awatded by an admizistrative agency if appticable taw parmits
the agancy.to prosecute or adjudicate the claim notwithstanding the existence of an agreement to arbitrate
governed. by the Federal Arbitration Act. Common examj aré charges brought with the Equal
‘Emplaymant Opportunity Commission, the U.S. Department af Labor, the National Labor Relations Board,
and the. Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs, Clalms fot workers’ compensation, state disability,
and unemployment benefits are also not subject to arbitration. A party may atso apply to court for
temporary ratlef in instances in which arbitration may be fendared inadequate without such reltef:
4 Claims for arbitration must be brought and heard on an individual basis only ("Class and
Represantative Action Walver"), This Class and Representative Action Watver does not allow for dieputes
to be resolved In arbitration as a class or collective action or a6 a private attorney general representative
action. However, this Class and Representative Action Waiver does not applyto any-claim Employes brings
In arbitration as a private attorney general solely on Employae’s own behalf and not on behalf of others.
Any dispute regarding the enforceability of the Class and Représentative Action Waiver must be resolved
by a civil court of competent jurisdiction and not an arbitrator. If the court determines that all or part of
the Class and Representative Action Waiver is unenforceable, the part that 1s enforceable must be enforced
in arbitration, and any claim falling within the part that Is not enforceable must be sesalved in a court and
not arbitration. The parties agree that the clainis in arbitration will be resolved first and that the civil court
action will be stayed pending resolution of the arbitration.
5. Employee understands and agrees that if he/she saeks binding arbitration, he/she must make a
requast in writing, detivared by first lass mall, within the applicable statute of limitations for the claim, to
Corporate Lagat Services, Community Medical Centers, P.O, Box 1232, Fresno, CA 93715, If CMC seeks
arbitration of a legal claim {t has agalnst Employee, CMC must make a request in writing, delivered to
Employes by first clase mall, within tha applicable statute of Imitations for the claim. Arbitration will be
conducted within the county In which the employee works for CMG or last worked for CMC Unless ail parties
agree otherwise, The arbitrator shall be-setected by: mutual agreemant or, if the parties cannot agres,
elthar party may apply to an appropriate court-to appoint a neutral arbitrator who. sftall act under this
000000074
;
agreement with the same force and effect
as if the parties had selected the arbitrator by mutual agreement.
@ arbitrator shall ke a iicanged attorney in the area or a tatired federat or state judge.
6. The arbitrator may award any: remetly to which a party Is entitled under applicable law, but
remedies are limited to those that would be avaflable in a party's Individual capacity in a court. The parties.
will hava the right to conduct adequate discovary, bring motions and prasent necessary witnesses and
avidence, with any disputes In this regard being resolved by the arbitrator. At the request of a party, the
arbitrator also may (ss subpoenas both for discovery: and hearing purposes, The arbitrater will issue 2
‘written decision stating factuat findings and lagal conctusions. The arbitrator's decision is final. An
appropriate court may enter judgment on the decision, Except as may bé permitted of required by law, as
-detarminad by the arbitrator, neither party nor the arbitrator may disclose the-existance, content or results
of any arbitration handied undér this agraament without the prior writtén consent of all parties. Each party
Is rasporisible for the cost of Its own attorneys, subject to any fae. shifting remedies under applicable law.
CMC wil! pay the artiftrator's fae. Excapt as stated In paragraph 4, above; in the evant any portion of this
agraament is deamed to be unenforceable, the remainder of this agreement will be enforceable.
7. This agreement contains the entire agreement batween Employee and CMC. Except as provided
below concerning currently pending litigation or administrative charges, all prior agreements,
undarstandings, and writings are superseded and are of no further force ar effect, This agreement does
not apply to-any litigation or administrative charge. pending as of the date of this agreement. However, if
a pending fitigatton matter or claim Is subject.to a.previousty signed arbitration agreement, the previously
signed arbitration agreement. shail have full force and effect. This agreement may be amended only bya
weittan document, slaried by bath parties,
Your Right to Opt Out: Employee may opt out of this agreement by signing a Dispute Rasulution
Agreement Opt Out. Form, available at Corporate Human Resources, of by sending a dated, written
statement to Corporate Human Resources indicating Employee's intention to opt out of this agreement,
accompanted by Employee's name and identification number. Employee must return any Dispute
Resolution Agraament Opt Out form or opt out statement to Corporate Human Resources within 30 days
of Employee's receipt of this agraemant, Corporate Human Resources {s located at 2505 Alluvial Ava.,
Clovis, CA 99611 and may be reached at (559) 450°1919, An Employee who opts olit wil! not ba subject
to an.adversé employment action, Usless Employee: dpts out, Employee and CMC agree that continuing
employment and the mutual promises contained within this agreement constitute mutual acceptance of
thie agreemerit by Employee and CMC.
tT understand that by signing below,+ 4 age that Ihave received and am agreeing to the Dispute
Resolution Agreement (which Indudes my abil to opt-out of the agreement within the period of time
noted In the Dispute Resolution Agreement). lundarstand thatI have the right to request a copy of my
ite Resolutl Agraement.
a
: éLo
VO
CV
Employee's Signature
Nora Reyes:
Employse’s Printed Nama
Date Signed
GRMC
Facility Assighment
000000075
EXHIBIT B
Edward Kim (SBN: 183022)
ed@caworklawyer.com E-FILED
Justin Lo (SBN: 280102) 3/26/2021 4:34 PM
justin@caworklawyer.com Superior Court of California
WORK LAWYERS PC County of Fresno
22939 Hawthorne Blvd., Suite 202 By: A. Rodriguez, Deputy
Torrance, CA 90505
Telephone: (424) 355-8535
Facsimile: (213) 784-0032
Attorneys for Plaintiff, NORA REYES, an individual,
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FOR THE COUNTY OF FRESNO
10
1 NORA REYES, an individual, Case No.: 21CECG00862
12
Plaintiff, COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
13
Vv, 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 Failure to Provide Meal Periods in
16 MEDICAL CENTERS, a California Violation of Labor Code sections 226.7,
corporation; and DOES | through 50, 512;
17 inclusive, Failure to Provide Rest Periods in
18 Violation of Labor Code section 226.7;
Failure to Provide Compliant Wage
19 Defendant. Statements in Violation of Labor Code
section 226;
20 Failure to Pay Owed Wages at Time of
21 Termination of Employment, In Violation
of Labor Code section 203; AND
22 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
Plaintiff Nora Reyes (hereinafter “Plaintiff” or “Ms. Reyes”), hereby respectfully alleges,
avers and complains as follows:
INTRODUCTION
1 Plaintiff brings this action against her former employer Fresno Community
Hospital and Medical Center, dba Community Medical Centers, (hereinafter “Community
Medical Centers” or “Defendant”), for damages arising out of the Defendant’s unfair business
practices pursuant to Bus, & Prof. Code sec. 17200 et seq, in addition to wage and hour violations
for unpaid overtime [Labor Code section 201-204, 510 and 1194, and Title 8 of California Code
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)
il 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
1S 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 onducting business in good standing in the State of California.
a 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
amend this Complaint to insert their true names and/or capacities when the same are ascertained.
5 Plaintiff is informed and believes, and based thereon alleges, that at all material
times, each of the Defendants were the agents and/or employees of each of the remaining
Defendants, and each of them were at all material times acting within the purpose and scope of
such agency and employment.
6 Plaintiff is informed and believes, and based thereon alleges, that at all material
times, one or more of each named and/or unnamed defendants were in some fashion, by contract
or otherwise, the predecessors, affiliates, alter egos, assigns, joint venturers, co-venturers or
partners of one or more of the remaining named and/or unnamed Defendants, and as hereinafter
10 alleged, was acting within that capacity.
AL 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
1S 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
10. Unless otherwise specified herein, each DOE defendant was the agent and
employee of each Defendant, and in doing the things hereinafter mentioned, were at all times
acting within the course and scope of that agency and employment.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
ll. Jurisdiction is proper in this Court by virtue of the California statutes, decisional
jaw, and regulations, and the local rules under the Fresno County Superior Court Rules including,
but not limited to, the rules governing the proper court in which to file an action for an unlimited
civil action.
42. 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
i 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
1s and assisting with clinic flow and patient care. When Plaintiff's employment ended, she was paid
16 at arate 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. Plaintiffs 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
insisted Plaintiff prioritize completion of her daily duties over meal and rest period compliance.
18. Although Defendant consistently failed to provided {awfully mandated meal and
rest periods, Defendant also failed to pay to Plaintiff the premium pay in lieu thereof, required
under Labor Code section 226.7 and 8 CCR section 11040 (11) and (12).
19. As a direct consequence of the overtime and break violations committed by
Defendant against Plaintiff, the wage statement issued regularly and frequently violated Labor
Code section 226.
20. When Plaintiff's employment ended on or around November 9, 2019, the former
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.
i 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
1S (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 & 4) 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
overtime compensation, including interest, reasonable attorney’s fees and costs of suit.
26. Pursuant to IWC Wage Order 4, section 2(k), “hours worked” includes the time
during which an employee is subject to the control of the employer, and includes all time the
employee is suffered or permitted to work, whether or not required to do so.
27. Defendant has willfully violated the Labor Code and applicable [WC wage orders
by failing to pay Plaintiff all wages including overtime wages for all time worked.
28. Plaintiff regularly worked over eight (8) hours per day and forty (40) hours per
week. Defendants failed to pay Plaintiff overtime premium and/or double-time premium for hours
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
iM 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
employee for a work period of more than ten (10) hours per day without providing the employee
with a second (2"°) meal period of not less than thirty (30) minutes, except that if the total hours
worked is no more than twelve (12) hours, the second meal period may be waived by mutual
consent of the employer and the employee only if the first (1st) meal period was not waived.”
33. Labor Code section 226.7 subsection (b) provides that an employer shall not
require an employee to work during a meal or rest period mandated pursuant to an applicable
statute, or applicable regulation, standard, or order of the Industrial Welfare Commission.
34. Labor Code section 226.7 subsection (c) provides that if an employer fails to
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
IL 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 (Sth) 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 (Sth) 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
38. In addition to meal period compensation, Plaintiff requests that the Court award
any statutory penalties against Defendant and reasonable attorney’s fees and costs incurred by her
in this action in a sum provided by Labor Code sections 218.5, 1194 and any other applicable
statute.
THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION
Failure to Provide Rest Periods
(Labor Code §§ 226.7 and Wage Order 4-2001, §12)
39. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates by references the preceding paragraphs of this
Complaint as if fully set forth herein.
10 40. The Wage Order 4-2001 Section 12 and Labor Code Section 226.7 provide that
ll 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.
413 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 ifn 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
their actions, Defendant intentionally and improperly denied rest periods to Plaintiff in violation
of Labor Code sections 226.7 and 8 CCR section 11040 (12).
45. Defendant further failed to implement a policy to pay Plaintiff an additional hour
of pay at their regular rate of pay for rest periods not authorized or permitted. As such, Plaintiff
is entitled to damages in an amount equal to one (1) hour of wages per missed rest period, in a
sum to be proven at trial.
46. In addition to rest period compensation, Plaintiff requests that the Court award any
statutory penalties against Defendants and reasonable attorney’s fees and costs incurred by her in
this action in a sum provided by Labor Code sections 218.5 and 1194 and any other applicable
10 statute.
i 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 employecs 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.”
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
50. Labor Code section 226.2(a)(2) requires the itemized statements required by
subdivision (a) of section 226 shall, in addition to the other items specified in that subdivision,
state the following: total hours of compensable rest and recovery periods, the rate of
compensation, and the gross wages paid for those periods during the pay period.
51. Moreover, IWC Wage Order No.4-2001, paragraph 7 requires that every employer
shall keep accurate information with respect to cach employee, including time records showing
when each employee begins and ends each work periods, the beginning and end times for each
meal period, the total daily hours worked by each employee and the total hours worked in each
payroll period, and applicabic rates of pay.
10 52. Plaintiff is informed and believe that throughout the course of her employment,
i 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.
\7 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 ali actual damages or fifty
10
COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES
dollars ($50) for the initial violation and one hundred dollars ($100) for each subsequent violation,
up to four thousand dollars ($4,000). Plaintiff is informed and believes that Defendant willfully
failed to make or keep accurate records for her.
55. Plaintiff is informed and believes that Defendant’s failure to keep accurate payroll
records, as described above, violated Labor Code sections 1174, subdivision (d) and 226,
subdivision (a), and the applicable IWC Wage Order(s).
56. As a result, Defendant is liable to Plaintiff for penalties in an amount provided by
Labor Code §226(e) and reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs.
FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION
10 Failure to Pay Wages upon Termination of Employment
il (Labor Code §§ 201, 202, and 203)
12 37. 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 § 17
Preview
FILED SEYFARTH SHAW LLP Andrew M. Paley (SBN 149699) apaley@seyfarth.com 2029 Century Park East, Suite 3500 Los Angeles, California 90067-3021 Telephone: (310) 277-7200 MAY 11 2021 Facsimile: (310) 201-5219 OR COURT OF CALIFORNIA SUPERICOUNTY OF FRESNO SEYFARTH SHAW LLP Geoffrey C. Westbrook (SBN 281961) —— FIT gwestbrook@seyfarth.com 400 Capitol Mall, Suite 2350 Sacramento, California 95814-4428 Telephone: (916) 448-0159 Facsimile: (916) 558-4839 SEYFARTH SHAW LLP Bailey K. Bifoss (SBN 278392) 10 bbifoss@seyfarth.com 560 Mission Street, 31st Floor 1 San Francisco, California 94105 Telephone: (415) 397-2823 12 Facsimile: (415) 397-8549 13 Attorneys for Defendant FRESNO COMMUNITY HOSPITAL AND MEDICAL 14 CENTER, dba COMMUNITY MEDICAL CENTERS 15 WORK LAWYERS PC Justin Lo (SBN 280102) 16 22939 Hawthorne Blvd., Suite 202 RECEIVED Torrance, California 90505 5/10/2021 3:18 PM 17 Telephone: (424) 355-8535 FRESNO COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT Facsimile: (424) 355-8335 By: C. York, Deputy 18 Attomeys for Plaintiff NORMA REYES 19 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 20 COUNTY OF FRESNO 21 NORA REYES, an individual, Case No. 21CECG00862 22 Plaintiff, ASSIGNED FOR ALL PURPOSES - 23 HON. KIMBERLY GAAB v. 24 UNLIMITED JURISDICTION FRESNO COMMUNITY HOSPITAL AND 25 MEDICAL CENTER, dba COMMUNITY STIPULATION AND |PROFOSED, MEDICAL CENTERS, a California corporation; ORDER TO ARBITRATE PLAINTIFF'S 26 and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, CLAIMS AND STAY ACTION PENDING ARBITRATION 27 Defendants. Complaint Filed: 3/29/21 28 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO ARBITRATE PLAINTIFF’S CLAIMS: STAY ACTION 69940774v.1 This Stipulation is made by and between Plaintiff NORA REYES (“Plaintiff”) and Defendant FRESNO COMMUNITY HOSPITAL AND MEDICAL CENTER, dba COMMUNITY MEDICAL CENTERS (“CMC”) (“Defendant”), through their respective attorneys of record. Plaintiff and Defendant are collectively referred to herein as the “Parties.” The Stipulation is made with reference to the following: 1 In February 2021, Plaintiff mailed a request for arbitration to Defendant, attaching a copy of the arbitration agreement. Attached as Exhibit A is a true and correct copy of Plaintiff's request and the signed Dispute Resolution Agreement. 2 On March 8. 2021, Defendant through counsel agreed in writing to arbitrate the claims 10 asserted in Plaintiff's arbitration demand. il 3 On March 26, 2021, Plaintiff filed a civil Complaint for Damages with the Fresno County| 12 Superior Court, Case No. 21CECG00862. Attached as Exhibit B is a true and correct copy of the same. 13 4. The Parties agree the purported causes of action asserted in Plaintiff's complaint fall 14 within the scope of their arbitration agreement. Plaintiff and Defendant agree to submit the matter to 15 arbitration pursuant to the terms stated in their agreement. 16 NOW THEREFORE, IT 1S HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by the Parties hereto as 17 follows: 18 1 The Parties agree and ask the Court to enter an order compelling Plaintiff to arbitrate the 19 claims she purports to assert in the complaint to final and binding arbitration pursuant to the Dispute 20 Resolution Agreement (attached to Exhibit A). 21 2 This action will be stayed pending resolution of the claims pursuant to Code of Civil 22 Procedure § 1280 ef seq. and the terms of the Dispute Resolution Agreement. 23 3 The Parties agree that Defendant need not file an answer or other responsive pleading to 24 the Complaint with this Court in light of the foregoing stipulation. 25 4 Signatures on this stipulation may be transmitted by facsimile and/or electronically 26 scanned and emailed copies with the same force and effect as originals: and 27 5 The Court may enter the following order. 28 IT IS SO STIPULATED. 2 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO ARBITRATE PLAINTIFF'S CLAIMS: STAY ACTION 69940774¥ 1 DATED: May 7, 2021 SEYFARTH SHAW LLP By: Bn Andrew M. Paley Geoffrey C. Westbrook Bailey Bifoss Attorneys for Defendant FRESNO COMMUNITY HOSPITAL AND MEDICAI CENTER, dba COMMUNITY MEDICAL CENTERS DATED: May 7, 2021 Wi By wy RK L. WYERS usta stin Lo C. Attorneys for Plaintiff 10 NORMA REYES Il 12 13 14 1S 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO ARBITRATE PLAINTIFF'S CLAIMS; STAY ACTION 69940774v,1 [PROPOSED] ORDER In light of the Parties’ Stipulation, and good cause appearing therefore, [T 1S HEREBY ORDERED: Plaintiff NORMA REYES is ordered to submit to a single, final and binding arbitration of the purported causes of action against Defendant FRESNO COMMUNITY HOSPITAL AND MEDICAL CENTER, dba COMMUNITY MEDICAL CENTERS which are set forth in Plaintiffs civil complaint filed with this Court, pursuant to the terms of the Dispute Resolution agreement between the Parties. This action is stayed until the final determination of the arbitration proceedings. IT IS SO ORDERED. 10 DATED: 11 ufo HON. KIMBERLY GAXB Judge of the Superior Court 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 4 STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER TO ARBITRATE PLAINTIFF'S CLAIMS: STAY ACTION 699407 74.1 PROOF OF SERVICE 1am a resident of the State of California, over the age of eighteen years, and not a party to the within action, My business address is 400 Capitol Mall, Suite 2350, Sacramento, California 95814- 4428. On May 10, 2021, I had served the within document(s): STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED} ORDER TO ARBITRATE PLAINTIFF’S CLAIMS AND STAY ACTION PENDING ARBITRATION by placing the document(s) listed above in a sealed envelope with postage thereon fully prepaid. in the United States mail at Sacramento, California, addressed as set forth below. by transmitting the document(s) listed above, electronically, via the e-mail address(es) set forth O below based on a court order or an agreement of the parties to accept service by electronic transmission. Edward Kim Attorneys for Plaintiff 10 Justin Lo Work Lawyers PC Tel: 424-355-8535 ll 22939 Hawthorne Blvd., Suite 202 Fax: 213-784-0032 12 Torrance, CA 90505 ed@caworklawyer.com 13 justin@caworklawyer.com 14 lam readily familiar with the firm's practice of collection and processing correspondence for 15 mailing. Under that practice it would be deposited with the U.S. Postal Service on that same day with postage thereon fully prepaid in the ordinary course of business. I am aware that on motion of the party 16 served, service is presumed invalid if postal cancellation date or postage meter date is more than one day after date of deposit for mailing in affidavit. 7 I declare under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct. 18 Executed on May 10, 2021, at Sacramento, California. 19 20 21 - (Lalla? Linda Ninelist 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 1 PROOF OF SERVICE 70308 760v.1 EXHIBIT A Justin Lo (SBN: 280102) justin@caworklawyer.com RECEIVED MAR 02 2021 Edward Kim (SBN: 183022) ed@caworklawyer.com WORK LAWYERS PC 22939 Hawthorne Blvd., Suite 202 Torrance, CA 90505 Telephone: (424) 355-8535 Facsimile: (213) 784-0032 Attorneys for Plaintiff NORA REYES, an individual, SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF FRESNO 10 ll NORA REYES, an individual, Case No.: 12 PLAINTIFF, PLAINTIFF NORA REYES’ REQUEST 13 FOR ARBITRATION vs. 14 15 FRESNO COMMUNITY HOSPITAL AND MEDICAL CENTER, a California 16 corporation; and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, 17 18 DEFENDANTs. PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that PLAINTIFF NORA REYES (“PLAINTIFF”) is 19 requesting arbitration against her former employer, DEFENDANT FRESNO COMMUNITY 20 HOSPITAL AND MEDICAL CENTER (“DEFENDANT”). Plaintiff is alleging various 21 allegations including but not limited to time rounding, failure to provide meal and rest break 22 premiums, failure to minimum wage and overtime pay. 23 24 Attached as Exhibit A is a signed copy of the arbitration agreement between Ms. Reyes 25 and Fresno Community Hospital and Medical Center. 26 Plaintiff retains the right to add additional claims if additional facts arise during the 27 discovery process. 28 PLAINTIFF NORA REYES’ REQUEST FOR BINDING ARBITRATION Dated: February 24, 2021 WORK LAWYERS PC tin Ls By: Justin Lo, Esq. Edward Kim, Esq. Attorneys for PLAINTIFF NORA REYES 10 il 12 13 4 15 16 7 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2 PLAINTIFF NORA REYES’ REQUEST FOR BINDING ARBITRATION Exhibit A i DIsP| & RESOLUTION AGREEMENT FH Frasno Community Hospital and Medical Center, doing business as Community Madical Centers (“CMC”) is committed to prompt and fair revolution of any-employment-related disputes that may arise, Toward that and, Employee and CMC agrea that legal disputes betwaan them shal) be resolved In naarly all circumstances without going to court, a3 lows: i When applicable, Employee should first seak to resolve any concerns Internally by promptly following tise steps outlined in CMC's Grievance Policy. These steps begin In most cases by discussing concerns with management. 2. ‘Ifregolution i¢ not achteved through the Internal grievance steps (If applicable), excapt as otherwise provided in this agreement; CMC and Employee agree to rasoive all legal disputes: arising aut of or relating to the employment relationship, regardless of the data of accrual of the dispute, through final, binding arbitration, rather than: through a court or jury tral. This process, governed by the Federal Arbitration Act (9 U.S.C, §1-16), shall apply to legal claims (Whether arising under a statute or common law), such a5 claims of discrimination, harassment, retaliation, wrongful termination, breach of contract, misappropriation of trade secrets, unfair competition, and theft, as well as legal claims relating to wages, claséification, deductions, breaks and hours of work. Also included ara claimy relating to Interpretation and anforceability of this agreement, except ae stated in paragraph 4, below. 3. Aylitration is not faquirad for iistances In which arbitration Is prebibited by an applicable law that is not preempted under the Fadaral Arbitration Act. Regardless of any other terms of this agraement, a claim thay be brought before and remedies awatded by an admizistrative agency if appticable taw parmits the agancy.to prosecute or adjudicate the claim notwithstanding the existence of an agreement to arbitrate governed. by the Federal Arbitration Act. Common examj aré charges brought with the Equal ‘Emplaymant Opportunity Commission, the U.S. Department af Labor, the National Labor Relations Board, and the. Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs, Clalms fot workers’ compensation, state disability, and unemployment benefits are also not subject to arbitration. A party may atso apply to court for temporary ratlef in instances in which arbitration may be fendared inadequate without such reltef: 4 Claims for arbitration must be brought and heard on an individual basis only ("Class and Represantative Action Walver"), This Class and Representative Action Watver does not allow for dieputes to be resolved In arbitration as a class or collective action or a6 a private attorney general representative action. However, this Class and Representative Action Waiver does not applyto any-claim Employes brings In arbitration as a private attorney general solely on Employae’s own behalf and not on behalf of others. Any dispute regarding the enforceability of the Class and Représentative Action Waiver must be resolved by a civil court of competent jurisdiction and not an arbitrator. If the court determines that all or part of the Class and Representative Action Waiver is unenforceable, the part that 1s enforceable must be enforced in arbitration, and any claim falling within the part that Is not enforceable must be sesalved in a court and not arbitration. The parties agree that the clainis in arbitration will be resolved first and that the civil court action will be stayed pending resolution of the arbitration. 5. Employee understands and agrees that if he/she saeks binding arbitration, he/she must make a requast in writing, detivared by first lass mall, within the applicable statute of limitations for the claim, to Corporate Lagat Services, Community Medical Centers, P.O, Box 1232, Fresno, CA 93715, If CMC seeks arbitration of a legal claim {t has agalnst Employee, CMC must make a request in writing, delivered to Employes by first clase mall, within tha applicable statute of Imitations for the claim. Arbitration will be conducted within the county In which the employee works for CMG or last worked for CMC Unless ail parties agree otherwise, The arbitrator shall be-setected by: mutual agreemant or, if the parties cannot agres, elthar party may apply to an appropriate court-to appoint a neutral arbitrator who. sftall act under this 000000074 ; agreement with the same force and effect as if the parties had selected the arbitrator by mutual agreement. @ arbitrator shall ke a iicanged attorney in the area or a tatired federat or state judge. 6. The arbitrator may award any: remetly to which a party Is entitled under applicable law, but remedies are limited to those that would be avaflable in a party's Individual capacity in a court. The parties. will hava the right to conduct adequate discovary, bring motions and prasent necessary witnesses and avidence, with any disputes In this regard being resolved by the arbitrator. At the request of a party, the arbitrator also may (ss subpoenas both for discovery: and hearing purposes, The arbitrater will issue 2 ‘written decision stating factuat findings and lagal conctusions. The arbitrator's decision is final. An appropriate court may enter judgment on the decision, Except as may bé permitted of required by law, as -detarminad by the arbitrator, neither party nor the arbitrator may disclose the-existance, content or results of any arbitration handied undér this agraament without the prior writtén consent of all parties. Each party Is rasporisible for the cost of Its own attorneys, subject to any fae. shifting remedies under applicable law. CMC wil! pay the artiftrator's fae. Excapt as stated In paragraph 4, above; in the evant any portion of this agraament is deamed to be unenforceable, the remainder of this agreement will be enforceable. 7. This agreement contains the entire agreement batween Employee and CMC. Except as provided below concerning currently pending litigation or administrative charges, all prior agreements, undarstandings, and writings are superseded and are of no further force ar effect, This agreement does not apply to-any litigation or administrative charge. pending as of the date of this agreement. However, if a pending fitigatton matter or claim Is subject.to a.previousty signed arbitration agreement, the previously signed arbitration agreement. shail have full force and effect. This agreement may be amended only bya weittan document, slaried by bath parties, Your Right to Opt Out: Employee may opt out of this agreement by signing a Dispute Rasulution Agreement Opt Out. Form, available at Corporate Human Resources, of by sending a dated, written statement to Corporate Human Resources indicating Employee's intention to opt out of this agreement, accompanted by Employee's name and identification number. Employee must return any Dispute Resolution Agraament Opt Out form or opt out statement to Corporate Human Resources within 30 days of Employee's receipt of this agraemant, Corporate Human Resources {s located at 2505 Alluvial Ava., Clovis, CA 99611 and may be reached at (559) 450°1919, An Employee who opts olit wil! not ba subject to an.adversé employment action, Usless Employee: dpts out, Employee and CMC agree that continuing employment and the mutual promises contained within this agreement constitute mutual acceptance of thie agreemerit by Employee and CMC. tT understand that by signing below,+ 4 age that Ihave received and am agreeing to the Dispute Resolution Agreement (which Indudes my abil to opt-out of the agreement within the period of time noted In the Dispute Resolution Agreement). lundarstand thatI have the right to request a copy of my ite Resolutl Agraement. a : éLo VO CV Employee's Signature Nora Reyes: Employse’s Printed Nama Date Signed GRMC Facility Assighment 000000075 EXHIBIT B Edward Kim (SBN: 183022) ed@caworklawyer.com E-FILED Justin Lo (SBN: 280102) 3/26/2021 4:34 PM justin@caworklawyer.com Superior Court of California WORK LAWYERS PC County of Fresno 22939 Hawthorne Blvd., Suite 202 By: A. Rodriguez, Deputy Torrance, CA 90505 Telephone: (424) 355-8535 Facsimile: (213) 784-0032 Attorneys for Plaintiff, NORA REYES, an individual, SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF FRESNO 10 1 NORA REYES, an individual, Case No.: 21CECG00862 12 Plaintiff, COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 13 Vv, 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 Failure to Provide Meal Periods in 16 MEDICAL CENTERS, a California Violation of Labor Code sections 226.7, corporation; and DOES | through 50, 512; 17 inclusive, Failure to Provide Rest Periods in 18 Violation of Labor Code section 226.7; Failure to Provide Compliant Wage 19 Defendant. Statements in Violation of Labor Code section 226; 20 Failure to Pay Owed Wages at Time of 21 Termination of Employment, In Violation of Labor Code section 203; AND 22 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 Plaintiff Nora Reyes (hereinafter “Plaintiff” or “Ms. Reyes”), hereby respectfully alleges, avers and complains as follows: INTRODUCTION 1 Plaintiff brings this action against her former employer Fresno Community Hospital and Medical Center, dba Community Medical Centers, (hereinafter “Community Medical Centers” or “Defendant”), for damages arising out of the Defendant’s unfair business practices pursuant to Bus, & Prof. Code sec. 17200 et seq, in addition to wage and hour violations for unpaid overtime [Labor Code section 201-204, 510 and 1194, and Title 8 of California Code 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) il 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 1S 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 onducting business in good standing in the State of California. a 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 amend this Complaint to insert their true names and/or capacities when the same are ascertained. 5 Plaintiff is informed and believes, and based thereon alleges, that at all material times, each of the Defendants were the agents and/or employees of each of the remaining Defendants, and each of them were at all material times acting within the purpose and scope of such agency and employment. 6 Plaintiff is informed and believes, and based thereon alleges, that at all material times, one or more of each named and/or unnamed defendants were in some fashion, by contract or otherwise, the predecessors, affiliates, alter egos, assigns, joint venturers, co-venturers or partners of one or more of the remaining named and/or unnamed Defendants, and as hereinafter 10 alleged, was acting within that capacity. AL 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 1S 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 10. Unless otherwise specified herein, each DOE defendant was the agent and employee of each Defendant, and in doing the things hereinafter mentioned, were at all times acting within the course and scope of that agency and employment. JURISDICTION AND VENUE ll. Jurisdiction is proper in this Court by virtue of the California statutes, decisional jaw, and regulations, and the local rules under the Fresno County Superior Court Rules including, but not limited to, the rules governing the proper court in which to file an action for an unlimited civil action. 42. 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 i 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 1s and assisting with clinic flow and patient care. When Plaintiff's employment ended, she was paid 16 at arate 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. Plaintiffs 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 insisted Plaintiff prioritize completion of her daily duties over meal and rest period compliance. 18. Although Defendant consistently failed to provided {awfully mandated meal and rest periods, Defendant also failed to pay to Plaintiff the premium pay in lieu thereof, required under Labor Code section 226.7 and 8 CCR section 11040 (11) and (12). 19. As a direct consequence of the overtime and break violations committed by Defendant against Plaintiff, the wage statement issued regularly and frequently violated Labor Code section 226. 20. When Plaintiff's employment ended on or around November 9, 2019, the former 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. i 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 1S (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 & 4) 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 overtime compensation, including interest, reasonable attorney’s fees and costs of suit. 26. Pursuant to IWC Wage Order 4, section 2(k), “hours worked” includes the time during which an employee is subject to the control of the employer, and includes all time the employee is suffered or permitted to work, whether or not required to do so. 27. Defendant has willfully violated the Labor Code and applicable [WC wage orders by failing to pay Plaintiff all wages including overtime wages for all time worked. 28. Plaintiff regularly worked over eight (8) hours per day and forty (40) hours per week. Defendants failed to pay Plaintiff overtime premium and/or double-time premium for hours 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 iM 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 employee for a work period of more than ten (10) hours per day without providing the employee with a second (2"°) meal period of not less than thirty (30) minutes, except that if the total hours worked is no more than twelve (12) hours, the second meal period may be waived by mutual consent of the employer and the employee only if the first (1st) meal period was not waived.” 33. Labor Code section 226.7 subsection (b) provides that an employer shall not require an employee to work during a meal or rest period mandated pursuant to an applicable statute, or applicable regulation, standard, or order of the Industrial Welfare Commission. 34. Labor Code section 226.7 subsection (c) provides that if an employer fails to 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 IL 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 (Sth) 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 (Sth) 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 38. In addition to meal period compensation, Plaintiff requests that the Court award any statutory penalties against Defendant and reasonable attorney’s fees and costs incurred by her in this action in a sum provided by Labor Code sections 218.5, 1194 and any other applicable statute. THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION Failure to Provide Rest Periods (Labor Code §§ 226.7 and Wage Order 4-2001, §12) 39. Plaintiff realleges and incorporates by references the preceding paragraphs of this Complaint as if fully set forth herein. 10 40. The Wage Order 4-2001 Section 12 and Labor Code Section 226.7 provide that ll 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. 413 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 ifn 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 their actions, Defendant intentionally and improperly denied rest periods to Plaintiff in violation of Labor Code sections 226.7 and 8 CCR section 11040 (12). 45. Defendant further failed to implement a policy to pay Plaintiff an additional hour of pay at their regular rate of pay for rest periods not authorized or permitted. As such, Plaintiff is entitled to damages in an amount equal to one (1) hour of wages per missed rest period, in a sum to be proven at trial. 46. In addition to rest period compensation, Plaintiff requests that the Court award any statutory penalties against Defendants and reasonable attorney’s fees and costs incurred by her in this action in a sum provided by Labor Code sections 218.5 and 1194 and any other applicable 10 statute. i 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 employecs 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.” COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES 50. Labor Code section 226.2(a)(2) requires the itemized statements required by subdivision (a) of section 226 shall, in addition to the other items specified in that subdivision, state the following: total hours of compensable rest and recovery periods, the rate of compensation, and the gross wages paid for those periods during the pay period. 51. Moreover, IWC Wage Order No.4-2001, paragraph 7 requires that every employer shall keep accurate information with respect to cach employee, including time records showing when each employee begins and ends each work periods, the beginning and end times for each meal period, the total daily hours worked by each employee and the total hours worked in each payroll period, and applicabic rates of pay. 10 52. Plaintiff is informed and believe that throughout the course of her employment, i 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. \7 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 ali actual damages or fifty 10 COMPLAINT FOR DAMAGES dollars ($50) for the initial violation and one hundred dollars ($100) for each subsequent violation, up to four thousand dollars ($4,000). Plaintiff is informed and believes that Defendant willfully failed to make or keep accurate records for her. 55. Plaintiff is informed and believes that Defendant’s failure to keep accurate payroll records, as described above, violated Labor Code sections 1174, subdivision (d) and 226, subdivision (a), and the applicable IWC Wage Order(s). 56. As a result, Defendant is liable to Plaintiff for penalties in an amount provided by Labor Code §226(e) and reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs. FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION 10 Failure to Pay Wages upon Termination of Employment il (Labor Code §§ 201, 202, and 203) 12 37. 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 § 17