Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Rollins v. Community Hospital of San Bernardino

United States District Court, C.D. California

May 23, 2014

STARLA ROLLINS, Plaintiff,
v.
COMMUNITY HOSPITAL OF SAN BERNARDINO, a California Corporation; DIGNITY HEALTH, a California Corporation; SERVICE EMPLOYEES INTERNATIONAL UNION-UNITED HEALTHCARE WORKERS WEST (SEIU-UHW), a California union, and DOES 1 through 70, inclusive, Defendants.

BRUCE A. HARLAND, WEINBERG, ROGER & ROSENFELD, A Professional Corporation Alameda, CA.,

MONICA T. GUIZAR, JACOB J. WHITE, WEINBERG, ROGER & ROSENFELD, A Professional Corporation Los Angeles, California. Attorneys for Defendant SERVICE EMPLOYEES INTERNATIONAL UNION, UNITED HEALTHCARE WORKERS-WEST.

ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT; AND UNCONTROVERTED FACTS AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

MANUEL L. REAL, District Judge.

Defendant SEIU UNITED HEALTHCARE WORKERS-WEST'S ("SEIU UHW") Motion for Summary Judgment came on for a scheduled hearing before the Hon. Manual L. Real in the above-entitled Court on April 21, 2014, at 10:00 a.m. Michael Jacob, Kesluck & Silverstein, appeared as attorney for Plaintiff Starla Rollins, and Monica Guizar, Weinberg, Roger & Rosenfeld, appeared as attorney for Defendant SEIU UHW.

The Court finds no genuine issue as to the following facts:

1. From 2007 to 2012, Plaintiff, Starla Rollins, was employed as billing coordinator at the Community Hospital San Bernardino.

2. Previously, Plaintiff had worked as a ward clerk. In 2007, Plaintiff, via human resources director with the hospital and a Union representative, made an agreement through e-mail that in the event of a reduction in force, R.I.F., Plaintiff would bump into a ward clerk position.

3. The Union and hospital entered into a new Collective Bargaining Agreement in October 2008.

4. On September 14, 2012, the hospital informed the Union that it would be instituting an R.I.F.

5. Article 14, Section E of the C.B.A. provides that in the event of an R.I.F., the Union and the hospital may agree as to an alternative agreement regarding a reduction in force.

6. The hospital and the Union, entered into such an agreement in the form of a Memorandum of Understanding, an M.O.U.

7. The M.O.U. stated the plaintiff's position was being eliminated.

8. During the October 9, 2012 meeting, Plaintiff presented Union and hospital representatives with emails.

9. On November 7th, 2012, the Union filed a grievance on behalf of Plaintiff. The Union later ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.