Johnson v. Serenity Transp., Inc.
| Decision Date | 22 January 2016 |
| Docket Number | Case No. 15-cv-02004-JSC |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Northern District of California |
| Parties | CURTIS JOHNSON, Plaintiff, v. SERENITY TRANSPORTATION, INC., et al., Defendants. |
Plaintiffs Curtis Johnson ("Johnson") and Anthony Aranda ("Aranda," and together "Plaintiffs") bring this putative class action against their employer, Defendants Serenity Transportation, Inc. ("Serenity Transportation"), and its owner David Friedel ("Friedel"), as well as alleged "Customer Defendants" Service Corporation International ("SCI"), SCI California Funeral Services Inc. ("SCI California"), and the County of Santa Clara (the "County," and collectively, "Defendants"). (Dkt. No. 58.)1 The Court previously dismissed the claims against the "Customer Defendants"—i.e., all entities other than Serenity Transportation and Friedel—concluding that Plaintiffs' Third Amended Complaint ("TAC") had failed to allege sufficient facts to plausibly infer the existence of joint employer status under either federal or California law. Johnson v. Serenity Transp., Inc., --- F. Supp. 3d ----, No. 15-2004-JSC, 2015 WL 6664834, at *22 (N.D. Cal. Nov. 2, 2015). Now pending before the Court is Defendants' motion to dismiss claims against the Customer Defendants in the Fourth Amended Complaint ("FAC"). (Dkt. No. 59.) Having considered the parties' submissions, and having had the benefit of oral argument on January 21, 2016, the Court DENIES the motion.
Plaintiffs are "mortuary transportation drivers [who] carry[ ] dead bodies and other human remains from various locations (including nursing homes, hospitals, and homes) . . . to Defendants' facilities." (Dkt. No. 58 ¶ 1.) Johnson worked as a driver for Defendants from January 1, 2012 to August 23, 2013, and Aranda from approximately August 2012 to March 2015. (Id. ¶¶ 6-7.) They bring this putative class action on behalf of themselves and the other 40-plus drivers that Defendants have employed during the relevant period. (Id. ¶ 20.)
The factual background of this case was detailed in the Court's Order reviewing the TAC, which the Court incorporates here in full. Johnson, 2015 WL 6664834, at *1-3. However, the FAC has withdrawn claims against several former alleged Customer Defendants and has added allegations pertaining to the remaining Customer Defendants.2 Accordingly, the Court will recite here only the background relevant to the joint employer claims.
Defendant Serenity Transportation is a mortuary transportation company that employed Plaintiffs within the meaning of the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA"), California Labor Code, and applicable Industrial Welfare Commission wage order ("IWC Wage Order") to transport decedents. (Dkt. No. 58 ¶¶ 8, 17.) Friedel is the owner, shareholder, CEO, and Board Member of Serenity Transportation. (Id. ¶ 9.)
Together, Serenity Transportation and Friedel assign drivers to 24-hour shifts, five days a week, resulting in 120-hour work weeks. (Id. ¶ 17.) Serenity Transportation contracts to provide drivers to SCI and SCI California 24 hours a day. (Id. ¶ 18.) Serenity Transportation contracts to provide drivers to the County 365 days a year, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. (Id. ¶ 19.) Serenity Transportation and Friedel recruit and supervise Drivers and advertise available driver positions online. (Id. ¶ 21.) The advertisements specify that drivers must be available for on-call shifts 24 hours a day and that the employer enforces a professional attire dress code. (Id.) Once hired,Serenity Transportation and Friedel schedule drivers for shifts and retain the right to change the shifts at their discretion. (Id.) Friedel is personally involved in drafting hiring criteria, interviewing drivers, and scheduling their shifts. (Id.) Together, Serenity Transportation and Friedel promulgated "Client Policy Standards" that require drivers to obey a dress code (, to wear a two-piece dress suit), report to dispatch their status throughout the day, notify dispatch if the driver checks out of service before shift's end, complete Serenity Transportation invoice information, keep the driver's vehicle clean, and notify Serenity Transportation of any need for personal time off. (Id. ¶ 26; see also Dkt. No. 59-1 Ex. 1.)3 The policy also provides that continuous violations of customer standards could result in termination of the driver's contract or the driver being removed from a route. (Dkt. No. 58 ¶ 26.) Friedel is personally involved in monitoring and enforcing these policies and supervising drivers' compliance. (Id.)
On both their website and in advertisements, Serenity Transportation and Friedel refer to the drivers as "staff." (Id. ¶ 42.) Serenity Transportation and Friedel lease equipment to drivers, including vehicles, a Nextel radio, stretchers, and other equipment. (Id.) Initially, when Serenity Transportation was founded in 2010, it classified the drivers as employees, but Friedel, in his capacity as a member of the corporation's Board of Directors, recommended that SerenityTransportation reclassify the drivers as independent contractors, and Serenity Transportation followed suit in February 2011. (Id.)
Drivers receive as many as seven or eight calls per day, sometimes more, with each call lasting two hours. (Id. ¶ 98.) Serenity Transportation and Friedel require drivers to immediately respond to notices of calls on their work-issued Nextel radios. (Id. ¶ 95.) They have established a default 75-minute response time for calls—as in, time to arrive at the scene—but want drivers to respond within 45 to 60 minutes. (Id.) Because calls are frequently 30-60 minutes away from drivers in traffic, they typically have to respond immediately or leave their location within 15 minutes to get to the call location. (Id.) If drivers do not respond immediately on their radios, Serenity follows up with a phone call. (Id. ¶ 98.) Drivers' work-issued Nextel radios and/or vehicles contained GPS tracking, and sometimes when drivers are not in the area in which they typically responded to calls, Friedel calls them directly to inquire where they are. (Id.) Drivers are unable to trade calls with ease. (Id. ¶ 96.) They are unable to refuse calls; if they do, they could be taken off call rotation for the rest of the day. (Id.) While Plaintiffs attempted to engage in personal activities while on call, they were often unable to do so and got as little as two hours of sleep a night due to the frequency of calls. (Id. ¶ 97.) Plaintiff Johnson generally waited at home for calls and found it difficult to do any personal activities while on shift. (Id.)
Drivers work for Serenity Transportation and Friedel continuously for many months or years. (Id. ¶ 45.) The drivers are, however, subject to termination by Serenity Transportation and Friedel at any time for any reason. (Id. ¶ 47.) Drivers are not required to possess a special license or undergo special training to perform Serenity Transportation's transportation services. (Id. ¶ 46.)
Serenity Transportation and Friedel serve as labor contractors for SCI, SCI California, and the County by providing drivers to meet their needs. (Id. ¶ 24.) SCI and SCI California (together, the "SCI entities"4) provide funeral and end-of-life services in Alameda County and across theUnited States. (Id. ¶¶ 11-12.) The County provides investigation, removal, and autopsies in Santa Clara County. (Id. ¶ 13.) Serenity Transportation has made drivers available to these Customer Defendants on an ongoing basis. (Id. ¶ 45.) On any given day, Serenity Transportation and Friedel provided approximately 9 to 12 drivers to the SCI entities, and the County. (Id.) The SCI entities routinely engaged five or more Serenity Transportation drivers each week. (Id.) The SCI entities and the County employ drivers by permitting them to work, exercising control over their wages, hours, and working conditions, and engaging them. (Id. ¶¶ 11-13.) The work that Plaintiffs and drivers generally perform for these Defendants is labor within the entities' usual course of business. (Id. ¶¶ 11-13.) The Customer Defendants control the means and methods by which drivers carry out their jobs by directing drivers as to how to handle and remove decedents. (Id. ¶ 27.) While drivers are at each Customer Defendant's location, drivers are under that Customer Defendant's supervision and control. (Id. ¶ 28, 33, 39.)
Specifically, the SCI entities have promulgated detailed policies governing drivers' work, including requiring a particular type of identification band, specific labeling procedures, a protocol for witnessing removal of human remains, and step-by-step procedures for removing infant and fetal remains. (Id. ¶ 28.) The SCI entities have referred to the identification and labeling procedures as "one of the most fundamental aspects of [its] business[.]" (Id.) Each SCI location has step-by-step specifications for drivers. For example, one SCI company specifies where drivers are to park; the documents drivers must complete upon arrival; that drivers are to proceed to the delivery area and label the deceased according to SCI procedures; that drivers are next to place the shroud on a lift, the body on the lift, wrap the shroud, write the deceased's name on the shroud, and staple the paperwork to the shroud; slide the case onto the shelf head first with the feet showing; roll up the door, remove their vehicle, close the door, then exit the building through the office area. (Id.) These activities take drivers up to 30 minutes. (Id.) The SCI entities require drivers to respond to calls within 60 to 75 minutes and required drivers to be dressed "in a professional manner at all times." (Id. ¶ 31.) Because of the distances and traffic involved,Plaintiffs frequently had to leave for SCI calls immediately. (Id.) SCI has a policy that prohibits drivers...
To continue reading
Request your trial