Balladarez v. Vitro Flat Glass, LLC

1

RAY BALLADAREZ, Plaintiff, v. VITRO FLAT GLASS LLC, a Delaware Limited Liability Corporation, et al., Defendants.

Civil Action No. 1:20-cv-957-LHR-HBK

United States District Court, E.D. California

June 27, 2024

MEMORANDUM AND OPINION

Lee H Rosenthal United States District Judge

Ray Balladarez was working for a glass manufacturer, Vitro Flat Glass LLC, when he fell from a seven-foot ladder during an equipment inspection. His injuries prevented him from working without accommodations. After investigating, Vitro concluded that Balladarez was responsible for his injuries because he had failed to discover a defect in the ladder's safety gate while performing an inspection days earlier. Vitro gave Balladarez a disciplinary write-up based on his inadequate inspection. When Balladerez learned of the write-up, he threw a water bottle to the ground and called the write-up “bullshit.” Vitro terminated Balladarez's employment for, in Vitro's words, his “violent outburst.” Balladarez sued, claiming wrongful termination, disability discrimination, retaliation, and failure to pay or give breaks as required under the law. Based on the pleadings, the motion and response, the record and the applicable law, the motion is granted in part and denied in part. The reasons are stated below.

I. Background

A. Balladarez's Employment and Termination

Vitro Flat Glass LLC manufactures glass at its facility in Fresno County, California. (Docket Entry No. 25 at ¶¶ 1-2). In January 2014, Ray Balladarez began working as a lead maintenance technician in the Fresno facility. (Docket Entry No. 27 at ¶¶ 2-3). Balladarez's job duties included “troubleshooting problems with mechanical and electrical systems, coordination with managers, working with general maintenance technicians, and doing preventative maintenance.” (Id. at ¶ 3).

On March 15, 2020, Balladarez was injured at work. He had climbed a ladder to reach a soda ash platform seven feet off the ground. (Docket Entry No. 23-4 at 41-42). The ladder was gated at the top of the platform to prevent workers from falling off the platform. (Id. at 43). When Balladarez opened the gate and began to climb down the ladder, the gate detached from its hinges, causing Balladarez to fall backwards off the ladder. (Id. at 43, 46). Balladarez suffered a concussion, fractured scapula, and various muscle tears, requiring surgery. (Docket Entry No. 27 at ¶ 7).

Balladarez took three days off work after his injury. (Docket Entry No. 23-4 at 47). When he returned on March 19, 2020, Vitro accommodated the work restrictions recommended by Balladarez's treating physician, including no lifting over ten pounds. (Docket Entry No. 23-6). Balladarez met with a Vitro human resources employee, Connie Cuellar, and maintenance supervisor, Ron Casey. (Docket Entry No. 27 at ¶ 9). Balladarez asked that a “general maintenance assistant” be assigned to help him perform the physical tasks his job required. (Id.). Cuellar and Casey denied the request, informing Balladarez that they would try to get “volunteers” to help him on weekdays, but that he would have no assistance when he worked on weekends. (Id.).

After his meeting with Cuellar and Casey, Balladarez complained to environmental manager Jason Zander and union representative Anthony Garcia about the gate that had caused his injury. (Docket Entry No. 27 at ¶ 13). He complained that the gate had become detached because of a faulty design. (Id.). Balladarez had presented the same complaint to Zander roughly a year before the accident. (Id.).

On March 24, 2020, Vitro issued Balladarez a “disciplinary action” based on its investigation into the March 15 accident. (Docket Entry No. 23-6). Vitro determined that Balladarez's injury had resulted “from a ladder gate that wasn't properly installed.” (Id.). Vitro found that Balladarez had conducted an annual maintenance inspection on the ladder and gate a few days before the incident but had not completed the inspection or noted any issues. (Id.). The disciplinary action notification stated that “[violation of the Company's policies and procedures will not be tolerated; any further violations will result in disciplinary actions up to and including discharge.” (Id.).

When Balladarez was presented with the disciplinary action notice by maintenance supervisor Ken Emery, he told Emery “I'm not signing that. I feel sick. I'm going home.” (Docket Entry No. 27 at ¶ 16). After leaving Emery's office, Balladarez threw his water bottle on the ground in frustration. (Id.). Balladarez then went to the human resources office, where he told Zander and human resources generalist Ashwin Kaur that he felt he was being “improperly blamed” for the gate's design defect. (Id. at ¶ 17). Emery then entered the office and told Balladarez he could go home. (Id. at ¶ 18). In response, Balladarez said “man, this is bullshit.” (Id.). Balladarez then went home. (Id.).

On March 27, 2020, Vitro terminated Balladarez's employment based on:

A hostile encounter with another party or parties, resulting in a physical struggle or contact (fighting), or a verbal altercation using obscene, abusive, hostile, or threatening language or gestures, engaging in malicious gossip or immoral behavior, or other such conduct that interferes with or adversely affects co-workers' morale or the performance of their job.

(Docket Entry No. 23-6 at 33).

In April 2020, Balladarez filed a complaint with the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing, alleging that Vitro discriminated, harassed, and retaliated against him based on his disability and request for disability accommodations. (Docket Entry No. 23-4 at 18). The Department declined to proceed against Vitro and issued Balladarez a “right to sue” notice. (Id. at 15).

In May 2020, Balladarez sued Vitro in Fresno County Superior Court, bringing nine causes of action:

1. Wrongful termination in violation of public policy;

2. Whistleblower wrongful termination in violation of California Labor Code § 1102.5;

3. Disability and medical condition discrimination and retaliation in violation of California Government Code § 12940(a);

4. Unlawful retaliation in violation of California Government Code § 12940(n);

5. Failure to investigate and prevent or remedy discrimination and retaliation in violation of California Government Code § 12940(k);

6. Failure to provide meal and rest periods in violation of California Labor Code § 226.7 and industrial welfare commission regulations;

7. Failure to pay overtime compensation under California Industrial Welfare Commission orders and California Labor Code §§ 510, 512, 558, 1194, and 1198; 8. Failure to compensate for all hours worked in violation of California Industrial Welfare Commission order and California Labor Code § 1198; and

9. Waiting time penalties under California Labor Code § 203.

(Docket Entry No. 23-4 at 7-13).

B. The Romero Class Action

In October 2020, Aaron Romero, a former Vitro employee, filed a class action lawsuit against Vitro under the California Labor Code Private Attorneys General Act of 2004. Romero alleged that Vitro violated the Act by: (1) failing to pay straight and overtime wages; (2) failing to provide meal periods; (3) failing to authorize and permit rest periods; (4) failing to comply with itemized employee wage statement provisions; (5) failing to pay all wages at the time of termination of employment; (6) failing to adopt a compliant sick pay and paid time off policy; and (7) violating California's Unfair Competition Law. (Docket Entry No. 23-2 at ¶¶ 9, 13).

In June 2022, the Romero class action settled. (Docket Entry No. 23-2 at 162). The class included Balladarez. As a class member, Balladarez was sent a notice of the pendency of the class action and the proposed settlement. He neither objected nor opted out. (Docket Entry No. 23-5 at 7). In August 2022, Balladarez received and endorsed a check for $4,294.39 as his settlement payment. (Docket Entry No. 23-5 at 19). Under the settlement agreement, class members released all claims against Vitro based on “the same facts alleged in the Action,” including:

(1) Failure to Pay All Straight Time Wages; (2) Failure to Pay All Overtime Wages; (3) Failure to Provide Meal Periods (Lab. Code §§ 226.7, 512, IWC Wage Order No. 1- 2001(11); Cal. Code Regs., tit. 8 § 11090); (4) Failure to Authorize and Permit Rest Periods (Lab. Code § 226.7; IWC Wage Order No. 1-2001(12)); Cal. Code Regs. tit. 8 § 11090); (5) Knowing and Intentional Failure to Comply with Itemized Employee Wage Statement Provisions (Lab. Code §§ 226, 1174, 1175); (6) Failure to Pay All Wages Due at the Time of Termination of Employment (Lab. Code §§ 201-203); (7) Failure to Adopt a Compliant Sick Pay/Paid Time Off Policy (Lab. Code §§ 233, 234, 246); (8) Violation of Unfair Competition Law (Bus. & Prof. Code §§ 17200, et seq.); and (9) Violations of the Private Attorneys General Act, Labor Code §§ 2699, et seq.

(Id. at 9).

C. The Procedural History

In July 2020, Vitro removed this action to federal court based on diversity jurisdiction. (Docket Entry No. 1). In September 2022, Vitro moved for summary judgment. (Docket Entry No. 23). Balladarez filed a response, (Docket Entry No. 26), and Vitro replied, (Docket Entry No. 29). Vitro also lodged evidentiary objections to the declaration Balladarez filed in opposition to Vitro's summary judgment motion, (Docket Entry No. 31), and asked the court to take judicial notice of certain public filings. (Docket Entry No. 23).

In April 2024, the case was assigned to this court, which is temporarily performing judicial duties in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California to ease the backlog in that overburdened district. (Docket Entry No 40). The pending motions are...