Maryam Abrishamcar v. Oracle America, Inc.
Case No. CIV535490
Marcella Johnson v. Oracle America, Inc.
JAMS REF# 1100087724
This site is dedicated to two lawsuits concerning the rights of commissioned California sales employees, filed against Oracle America, Inc.
Private Attorneys General Act Lawsuit: Maryam Abrishamcar v. Oracle America, Inc.
Maryam Abrishamcar v. Oracle America, Inc. is a Private Attorneys General Act (“PAGA”) commission wages lawsuit against Oracle America, Inc. (“Oracle”), pending in the Superior Court of California, County of San Mateo. The case is set for trial in August 2018.
Plaintiff asserts that Oracle has engaged in unlawful practices against sales representatives by failing to comply with laws governing commission agreements and failing to pay sales representatives full and timely commissions. Plaintiff believes that Oracle has failed to provide commissioned sales representatives signed compensation plans that set forth the method by which their commissions are actually calculated and paid. In addition, through the use of a long and confusing set of Terms and Conditions issued to each sales representative with his or her compensation plan, we believe Oracle unlawfully and retroactively reduced the commissions of sales representatives based on grounds, criteria, and methods not defined in a signed commission contract. Oracle also imposed an illegal confidentiality agreement on its sales representatives as a condition of employment. Oracle denies these claims and asserts various defenses.
Class Arbitration: Marcella Johnson v. Oracle America, Inc.
Marcella Johnson v. Oracle America, Inc. is a prospective class arbitration filed with JAMS in San Francisco.
In her demand for class arbitration, Plaintiff Johnson alleges that Oracle America, Inc. has shortchanged sales employees millions in earned commission wages by retroactively changing commission contracts. Plaintiff asserts that Oracle retroactively increases quotas or decreases commission rates on past sales, so that it pays sales employees less than their existing compensation plans require. Oracle “re-plans” employees to reduce commissions earned on completed sales going back to any time of Oracle’s choosing, sometimes to the beginning of the same fiscal year and even earlier. When it “re-plans” employees after commission wages have already been paid, Oracle claws back prior payments by withholding newly earned commissions until the employees have paid the company back or else threatens a collections lawsuit. By reducing and withholding commissions in this fashion, Oracle’s commission policies and practices violated numerous California Labor Code requirements and caused damages of over $150 million to class members.
The class arbitration demand asserts claims on behalf of all commissioned sales employees employed in California from February 14, 2013 who experienced retroactive re-plans that resulted in lower compensation for work already performed. This case is proceeding in arbitration before JAMS, in San Francisco. Johnson seeks to recover unpaid commission wages and waiting time penalties for herself and the class and requests an injunction and other relief.
Recently, Judge Elizabeth D. Laporte of the Northern District of California granted Johnson’s motion to compel arbitration in this matter.