Scott Brothers Dairy v. Zavala

Filed 6/1/06 Scott Brothers Dairy v. Zavala CA2/3

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS

California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION THREE

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, William Fahey, Judge. Affirmed.

Kesluk & Silverstein, Douglas N. Silverstein and Alexandra M. Steinberg for Defendant and Respondent.

Marc D. Roberts & Associates, Marc D. Roberts and James M. Gilbert for Plaintiff and Appellant.

INTRODUCTION

Plaintiffs Robert Zavala and a class of employees sued their employer Scott Brothers Dairy, Inc. (the Dairy) asserting an unfair business practices claim and two wage claims under provisions of the Labor Code and wage orders issued by the Industrial Welfare Commission (IWC) concerning itemized wage statements and rest periods. The trial court denied the Dairy's petition to compel arbitration (Code Civ. Proc., § 1294, subd. (a)) and the Dairy appeals. We conclude that the trial court did not err, and therefore affirm the order.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDRUAL BACKGROUND

Zavala, a former employee of the Dairy, filed this class action lawsuit alleging that the Dairy had failed to provide him and other employees similarly situated with statutory rest breaks and properly itemized wage statements in violation of Labor Code sections 226.7 and 226 and IWC wage orders. Plaintiffs alleged that the Dairy had a consistent policy of failing to provide hourly employees with rest periods of at least 10 minutes per four hours worked, and failing to pay employees one hour of pay for each workday that rest periods were not provided. The complaint sought waiting-time penalties under section 203, and, alleging that the Dairy's conduct was an unfair business practice in violation of Business and Professions Code section 17200, sought injunctive relief, restitution, and disgorgement.

The Dairy moved to dismiss the action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction or in the alternative to compel arbitration. It based its argument on the fact that employees of the Dairy, including Zavala while he was employed there, were represented by a recognized union, the Chino Valley Products Dairy and Teamsters Local Number 63. The union operated under a collective-bargaining agreement (CBA) with the Dairy, which defined grievances as â€