United States District Court, E.D. California
ISABELLE FRANKLIN, individually and behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff,
v.
COMMUNITY REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER f/k/a FRESNO COMMUNITY HOSPITAL AND MEDICAL CENTER, Defendant.
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO COMPEL
ARBITRATION AND DISMISSING ACTION (DOC. 36)
SHEILA
K. OBERTO, UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
I.
INTRODUCTION
This
matter is before the Court on Defendant Fresno Community
Hospital and Medical Center's (erroneously named
as Community Regional Medical Center f/k/a Fresno Community
Hospital and Medical Center) motion to compel arbitration,
filed October 23, 2019.[1] (Doc. 36.)
Plaintiff
Isabelle Franklin filed her opposition on November 6, 2019
(Doc. 38), and Defendant filed its reply in support of the
motion to compel arbitration on November 13, 2019 (Doc. 40.)
The Court reviewed the parties' papers and all supporting
material and found the matter suitable for decision without
oral argument pursuant to Local Rule 230(g). The hearing set
for November 20, 2019, was therefore vacated. (Doc. 43.)
Plaintiff thereafter was granted leave to file a sur-reply,
which she filed on November 26, 2019. (Doc. 45.)
Having
considered the parties' briefing, and for the reasons set
forth below, Defendant's motion will be granted, and this
action will be dismissed without prejudice.[2]
II.
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
Plaintiff,
a registered nurse, was employed by United Staffing
Solutions, Inc. (“USSI”), a contingent labor
staffing provider. (Doc. 36-3, Declaration of Geoffrey C.
Westbrook (“Westbrook Decl.”) ¶ 2 and Ex. A;
Doc. 40-1, Reply Declaration of Geoffrey C. Westbrook
(“Westbrook Reply Decl.”) ¶¶ 3-4 and
Exs. A-C.) On November 30, 2017, Plaintiff entered into a
“Mediation and Arbitration Policy and Agreement”
with USSI (the “Arbitration Agreement”). (Doc.
36-3, Westbrook Decl. ¶ 2 and Ex. A.) The Arbitration
Agreement, which was a term of Plaintiff's employment,
contained the following provision:
[Plaintiff] and USSI [defined to include its “owners,
directors, officers, managers, or agents”] agree that
if we are unable to first resolve the dispute (also called a
“claim” in this Policy) informally and through
mediation with a neutral mediator, we agree to use binding
arbitration as the exclusive means to resolve all disputes
that may arise out of or be related to your employment,
including but not limited to the termination of your
employment and your compensation.
Id. Ex. A. at 1.
On
December 21, 2017, Plaintiff executed a “Travel Nurse
Assignment Contract” with USSI (the “Assignment
Contract”). (Doc. 40-1, Westbrook Reply Decl. ¶ 4
and Ex. C.) The Assignment Contract assigned Plaintiff to
work for a minimum of thirteen weeks as a
“traveler” nurse at Defendant Fresno Community
Hospital and Medical Center (the
“Hospital”).[3] (Id. Ex. C. ¶ 1; Doc.
36-4, Declaration of Terry Nye (“Nye Decl.) ¶ 3.)
Under the Assignment Contract, Plaintiff agreed to provide
USSI her availability to work “based upon assignment
and shifts confirmed with USSI and the [Hospital]” and
USSI in turn agreed to schedule Plaintiff to work at the
Hospital a minimum number of hours per week “except as
dictated by the [Hospital]'s cancellation policy for
Travel personnel.” (Doc. 40-1, Westbrook Reply Decl.
¶ 4 and Ex. C ¶ 2.)
The
Assignment Contract set Plaintiff's total contracted
hours, shift hours, hourly rates, and “travel
reimbursement” for her assignment at the Hospital.
(Id. Ex. C.) It also set the hourly rate for
overtime and provided that “[a]ll overtime will be paid
for all approved hours worked over 8 hours per day, or
greater than 40 hours per week, as dictated by Hospital
policy and/or State Law based upon your work schedule.
[Please note that any overtime must be approved by USSI prior
to working, or we cannot guarantee overtime
compensation].” (Id. Ex. C ¶ 11.) USSI
agreed under the Assignment Contract to process
Plaintiff's payroll via weekly direct deposit and to
deduct all applicable taxes. (Id. ¶ 10.) The
Assignment Contract further provided that all
“Pre-Employment Testing, Licenses & Certifications,
Modules, Onboard and Annual Compliance Requirements, that are
required for this assignment, are to be completed at
[Plaintiff's] own time and [Plaintiff] will not be
compensated for [Plaintiff's] time to finish these
assignment requirements.” (Id. ¶ 5.)
Finally,
the Assignment Contract contained an arbitration provision
that provides, in reference to the Arbitration Agreement,
that
any controversy or claim arising under federal, state, and
local statutory or common or contract law between [USSI] and
[Plaintiff] involving the construction or application of any
of the terms, provisions, or conditions of the [Assignment
Contract], including, but not limited to, breach of contract,
tort, and/or fraud, must be submitted to neutral binding
arbitration on the written request of either Party served on
the other. Arbitration is the exclusive forum for any such
controversy, refer to United Staffing Solutions Inc's
employee handbook for more information about our arbitration
policy.
(Id. ¶ 21.)
Plaintiff's
assignment at the Hospital was terminated on January 17,
2018. (Doc. 36-5, Milton Decl. ¶ 8.) On May 20, 2019,
Plaintiff filed this putative class and collective action
against the Hospital for alleged violations of the Fair Labor
Standards Act, and California's Labor Code and unfair
competition laws. (Doc. 1.) As alleged in her complaint, the
Hospital failed to provide Plaintiff and other similarly
situated nursing staff with (1) pay for all hours worked; (2)
pay for all overtime worked; (3) proper meal and rest breaks;
(4) complete and accurate wage statements; (5) all pay owed
at the time of termination; and (6) reimbursement for
business expenses. (See id. ¶¶ 44-52, 55,
89, 98, 108, 118, 129, 158.) Plaintiff alleges that these
failures were the result of the Hospital's
“longstanding policy and ...