Free Consultation

Active - Cooley v. The ServiceMaster Company, LLC, et al.

This class action lawsuit alleges that The ServiceMaster Company, LLC, Terminix International, Inc. and The Terminix International Company Limited Partnership (collectively referred to as “Defendants”), engaged in unlawful conduct by their: (1) failure to pay all wages when due, including failure to pay all proposed class members whose employment with Defendants terminated within the last four years, all wages due immediately upon termination or within seventy-two hours of resignation, and all associated waiting time penalties, in violation of California Labor Code sections 201-203; (2) failure to provide Plaintiff, and proposed class members with meal breaks and/or proper compensation for missed meal breaks, in violation of California Labor Code sections 512 and 226.7 and the applicable Industrial Welfare Commission Wage Order (“Wage Orders”); (3) failure to provide Plaintiff, and proposed class members, with rest breaks and/or proper compensation for missed rest breaks, in violation of California Labor Code section 226.7 and the applicable Wage Order; (4) failure to pay Plaintiff, and proposed class members, for all hours worked, including all overtime wages earned, in violation of California Labor Code sections 510 and 1194 and the applicable Wage Order; (5) failure to provide accurate itemized wage statements to Plaintiff and proposed class members, in violation of California Labor Code section 226; (6) failure to provide Plaintiff and proposed class members, whom Defendants paid commissions, with signed written contracts that set forth the method by which commissions would be computed and paid, in violation of California Labor Code section 2751; and (7) failure to reimburse Plaintiff and proposed class members for work-related expenses, including, but not limited to, the use of their personal vehicles to do their jobs, the use of their personal cell phones and internet to do their jobs, and the purchase of required steel-toed safety shoes, in violation of California Labor Code section 2802. These failures further constitute unfair business practices, in violation of California Business and Professions Code section 17200, et. seq., and violations of California Labor Code section 2698, et. seq., the Private Attorneys General Act of 2004 (“the PAGA”), through which Plaintiff seeks civil penalties.

On July 8, 2020, Defendant removed this case to the United States District Court, Eastern District of California.

The parties are awaiting the Court's ruling on Plaintiff's Motion for Remand and Defendant's Motion to Compel Arbitration.

For More Information

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.