UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE WINCHESTER DIVISION CRISTOBAL PASCUAL, DAVID JIMENEZ, and OSCAR

PARRA, on behalf of themselves and all similarly situated individuals Plaintiffs, v. CORSICANA BEDDING, INC., Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

COLLECTIVE ACTION CASE NO. ________________

COLLECTIVE ACTION COMPLAINT

INTRODUCTION 1. Cristobal Pascual, David Parra, and Tomas Flores (collectively Plaintiffs) bring

this lawsuit against Defendant Corsicana Bedding, Inc. (Defendant), seeking to recover unpaid wages owed to them under federal law. 2. In violation of federal law, Defendant has failed to pay its mattress factory

production employees for all time worked, including failing to pay such employees the overtime wages they are owed under the law. 3. Plaintiffs bring this action for violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938

(FLSA), 29 U.S.C. 201, et seq., as amended by the Portal-to-Portal Act of 1947, 29 U.S.C. 251, et seq., for the purpose of obtaining relief for, inter alia, unpaid wages, unpaid overtime wages, liquidated damages, costs, attorneys fees, and declaratory and injunctive relief. Pursuant to 29 U.S.C. 216(b), Plaintiffs also seek to represent all other similarly situated past and

1 Case 4:14-cv-00008 Document 1 Filed 02/03/14 Page 1 of 8 PageID #: 1

present employees, as described herein, who have not been paid for all compensable time worked, and to have this action certified as a collective action with Court-supervised notice. JURISDICTION AND VENUE 4. This Court has jurisdiction over Plaintiffs FLSA claims because they are brought

pursuant to the FLSA, 29 U.S.C. 216(b), and because they raise a federal question pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1331. 5. Venue is proper in this federal jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1391(b) and

(c) because a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to these claims occurred within this judicial district, and because Defendant resides in this judicial district due to the fact that it regularly conducts business within this judicial district and thus is subject to personal jurisdiction within this judicial district. PARTIES A. Plaintiffs 6. Plaintiff Cristobal Pascual is over the age of nineteen (19) and worked for

Defendant since 2006 as a production worker before he resigned in October 2013. Through his employment with Defendant, Plaintiff Pascual was classified by Defendant as non-exempt from the provisions of the FLSA. He is a resident of Bedford County, Tennessee. 7. Plaintiff David Jimenez is over the age of (19) and has worked for Defendant as a

production worker since 2008. Through his employment with Defendant, Plaintiff Jimenez was classified by Defendant as non-exempt from the provisions of the FLSA. He is a resident of Coffee County, Tennessee. 8. Plaintiff Oscar Parra is over the age of (19) and has worked for Defendant a

production worker since 2007. Through his employment with Defendant, Plaintiff Parra was

2 Case 4:14-cv-00008 Document 1 Filed 02/03/14 Page 2 of 8 PageID #: 2

classified by Defendant as non-exempt from the provisions of the FLSA. He is a resident of Bedford County, Tennessee. B. Defendant 9. Defendant Corsicana Bedding, Inc. is a Texas Corporation headquartered at 2700

Texas 31, Corsicana, Texas 75109. Defendant maintains a production facility at 1 Cedar King Road in Shelbyville, Tennessee 37160. 10. commerce. 11. At all relevant times, Defendant was and is an employer within the meaning of the At all relevant times, Defendant was and is regularly engaged in interstate

FLSA, 29 U.S.C. 206-07. 12. At all relevant times, Defendant was and is an enterprise within the meaning of

3(r) and 3(s)(1) of the FLSA. FACTS 13. 14. Defendant is in the business of manufacturing and selling mattresses. Plaintiffs and those they seek to represent have all been employed by Defendant

as non-exempt production workers. 15. As a matter of company policy, Defendant pays the overwhelming majority of its

non-exempt production workers according to a piece rate system. 16. Under this system, Plaintiffs and similarly situated employees are paid per

mattress piece completed. 17. Plaintiffs compensation, and the compensation of similarly situated employees,

varies based on the quantity of the mattress pieces completed during each workweek.

3 Case 4:14-cv-00008 Document 1 Filed 02/03/14 Page 3 of 8 PageID #: 3

18.

Defendant regularly requires Plaintiffs and similarly situated employees to work

10 or more hours per day, Monday through Friday, and also regularly requires Plaintiffs to work 8 or more hours on Saturdays. 19. Plaintiffs and similarly situated production workers work forty or more hours per

week on a regular basis. 20. Defendant requires Plaintiffs and similarly situated production workers to use a

laminated card containing an individualized barcode to punch in to work when they arrive. 21. Defendant requires Plaintiffs and similarly situated production workers to use a

separate laminated card containing an individualized barcode to scan each piece they complete. 22. In order for Plaintiffs and similarly situated workers to begin scanning pieces,

they must prepare their work areas with the materials required for production, including, for example, foam, fibers, glue, tape, stables, and other materials for assembling and sewing the mattresses. 23. The preparation process that must occur before piecework production can begin

takes between 15 and 20 minutes each workday. However, Defendants pay system fails to capture all of this work time for pay purposes. 24. As a matter of company policy, Corsicana does not compensate Plaintiffs and

similarly situated workers for the time they spend preparing their areas before piecework begins. This policy violates the continuous workday principle of the FLSA, which requires that employers pay for all time worked after its employees engage in their first principal work activity of the day. IBP vs. Alvarez, 546 U.S. 21 (2005).

4 Case 4:14-cv-00008 Document 1 Filed 02/03/14 Page 4 of 8 PageID #: 4

25.

As a result of this policy, Defendant regularly fails to accurately calculate and pay

one and one-half times the regular piece rate to Plaintiffs and similarly situated workers for work performed over 40 hours in a work week. 26. As a result of this common policy or practice, Defendant has failed to pay

Plaintiffs and similarly situated workers an overtime piece rate for most or all of the overtime hours they have worked. COLLECTIVE ACTION ALLEGATIONS 27. Plaintiffs assert their FLSA claims pursuant to 29 U.S.C. 216(b) as a collective

action on behalf of the following potential opt-in litigants: All individuals employed by Corsicana Bedding, Inc. at any time between January 31, 2011 and the present, working out of its Shelbyville, Tennessee facility as piece rate production workers. 28. 29. Plaintiffs are representatives of the class they seek to represent. All, or virtually all, of the legal and factual issues that will arise in litigating the

class claims are common to the class members and Plaintiffs. These include: a. Whether Defendant, as a matter of company policy or practice, utilized a

pay system that failed to capture all time worked for pay purposes; b. Whether Defendant, as a matter of company policy or practice, regularly

required, suffered, or permitted its piece rate production workers to work more than 40 hours per workweek; and c. Whether Defendant, as a matter of company policy or practice, failed to

pay its piece rate production workers an overtime piece rate for work performed over 40 hours per workweek.

5 Case 4:14-cv-00008 Document 1 Filed 02/03/14 Page 5 of 8 PageID #: 5

30.

Plaintiffs and class members are similarly situated as that term is defined under 29

U.S.C. 216(b) and the associated case law, see, e.g., OBrien v. Ed Donnelly Enterprises, Inc., 575 F.3d 567 (6th Cir. 2009), because, inter alia, they were all subjected to Defendants common practices of refusing to pay an overtime piece rate for work performed over 40 hours per workweek. CAUSES OF ACTION COUNT I (Alleging Violation of the FLSA for Unpaid Overtime, Brought on Behalf of Plaintiffs and All Similarly Situated Individuals) 31. 32. All previous paragraphs are incorporated as though fully set forth herein. The FLSA requires that Defendant pay employees overtime compensation not

less than one and one-half times their regular rate of pay. 29 U.S.C. 207(a). 33. Because Plaintiffs and class members were paid at piece rates, rather than hourly

wages, the FLSA more specifically requires that Defendant pay overtime compensation not less than one and one-half times the bona fide piece rates applicable to the same work when performed during non-overtime hours. 29 U.S.C. 207(g)(1). 34. Pursuant to Defendants common business policies and/or practices, Defendant

has violated the FLSA by consistently requiring, suffering, or permitting Plaintiffs and similarly situated piece rate production workers to work more than 40 hours per week and by failing to pay Plaintiffs and similarly situated piece rate production workers overtime compensation for all time worked above 40 hours per workweek. 35. In violation of the FLSA, Defendant acted willfully and with reckless disregard of

clearly applicable FLSA provisions.

6 Case 4:14-cv-00008 Document 1 Filed 02/03/14 Page 6 of 8 PageID #: 6

PRAYER FOR RELIEF WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs seek the following relief on behalf of themselves and other similarly situated employees who opt in to this action: A. An order permitting this litigation to proceed as a collective action pursuant to 29

U.S.C. 216(b); B. Prompt notice, pursuant to 29 U.S.C. 216(b), of this litigation provided to all

potential members of the collective action; C. D. E. A declaration that Defendant has violated the FLSA: A declaration that Defendants violation of the FLSA was willful and knowing; Unpaid wages (including overtime wages) and prejudgment interest to the fullest

extent permitted under the law; F. G. H. An injunction prohibiting Defendant from violating the FLSA; Liquidated damages to the fullest extent permitted under the FLSA; Litigation costs, expenses, and Plaintiffs attorneys fees to be paid by Defendants

to the fullest extent permitted under the law, including under 29 U.S.C. 216(b); I. Such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper. Respectfully submitted, /s/ David W. Garrison _ DAVID W. GARRISON, BPR No. 24968 R. ANDREW FREE, BPR No. 30513 BARRETT JOHNSTON, LLC 217 Second Avenue North Nashville, TN 37201 Telephone: (615) 244-2202 Facsimile: (615) 252-3798 dgarrison@barrettjohnston.com afree@barrettjohnston.com

Dated: February 3, 2014

7 Case 4:14-cv-00008 Document 1 Filed 02/03/14 Page 7 of 8 PageID #: 7

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

8 Case 4:14-cv-00008 Document 1 Filed 02/03/14 Page 8 of 8 PageID #: 8

AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

for the

Eastern District __________ Districtof ofTennessee __________

Cristobal Pascual, et al.,

Plaintiff(s)

v.
Corsicana Bedding, Inc.

Defendant(s)

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Civil Action No.

SUMMONS IN A CIVIL ACTION To: (Defendants name and address) c/o Kim Cobb or Mike Dane
Corsicana Bedding, Inc. 1 Cedar King Rd. Shelbyville, TN 37160

A lawsuit has been filed against you. Within 21 days after service of this summons on you (not counting the day you received it) or 60 days if you are the United States or a United States agency, or an officer or employee of the United States described in Fed. R. Civ. P. 12 (a)(2) or (3) you must serve on the plaintiff an answer to the attached complaint or a motion under Rule 12 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The answer or motion must be served on the plaintiff or plaintiffs attorney, whose name and address are: David W. Garrison &
R. Andrew Free 217 Second Avenue North Nashville, TN 37201

If you fail to respond, judgment by default will be entered against you for the relief demanded in the complaint. You also must file your answer or motion with the court.

CLERK OF COURT

Date:
Signature of Clerk or Deputy Clerk

Case 4:14-cv-00008 Document 1-1 Filed 02/03/14 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 9

AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action (Page 2)

Civil Action No. PROOF OF SERVICE (This section should not be filed with the court unless required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 4 (l)) This summons for (name of individual and title, if any) was received by me on (date)
Corsicana Bedding, Inc.

I personally served the summons on the individual at (place) on (date) I left the summons at the individuals residence or usual place of abode with (name) , a person of suitable age and discretion who resides there, on (date) , and mailed a copy to the individuals last known address; or , who is on (date) I returned the summons unexecuted because Other (specify): . My fees are $ for travel and $ for services, for a total of $ . ; or ; or ; or

I served the summons on (name of individual) designated by law to accept service of process on behalf of (name of organization)

0.00

I declare under penalty of perjury that this information is true.

Date:
Servers signature

Printed name and title

Servers address

Additional information regarding attempted service, etc:

Print

Case 4:14-cv-00008 Document 1-1 Filed 02/03/14 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 10

Save As...

Reset