If you continue to work for the Company after June 1, 2014, and you have not already entered into an Arbitration Agreement with the Company, you and Company hereby agree to all of the following terms of this policy as follows: (the 'Company'), your continuing to work for the Company after Jconstitutes your agreement to be bound by this policy. If you have not already entered into an Arbitration Agreement with Alorica Inc. " This document describes Alorica's Employee Dispute Resolution Policy. It submitted a copy of an e-mail dated April 24, 2014, entitled "Mandatory Read: Alorica Employee Dispute Resolution Policy." For purposes of this appeal, the relevant provisions of the e-mail follow. Alorica fired Williams on July 22, 2014.Īlorica moved to compel arbitration. Williams alleged that he disclosed the IT department manager's harassment to Alorica's human resources (HR) manager on July 9, 2014, and notified the regional HR manager of his PTSD on July 21. Williams also alleged some non-FEHA claims: wrongful termination, retaliation, and negligent hiring and supervision. Specifically he alleged that an Alorica employee, the Information Technology (IT) department manager (whom Williams did not name as a defendant), had threatened and harassed him because of his sexual orientation, causing him to suffer from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). He alleged that he had been subjected to sexual orientation and disability discrimination and that Alorica had retaliated against him, denied reasonable accommodation for his disability, and failed to engage in the interactive process. After being terminated in July 2014, he sued Alorica for several workplace discrimination causes of action under the Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA). Williams alleged he worked for Alorica for over five years as a company trainer in the Fresno office.
EIS ALORICA TRIAL
The court did not rule on the issue Williams raised - whether the agreement was unconscionable - and we therefore return the matter to the trial court to make this ruling. Williams accepted Alorica's arbitration policy offer by continuing to work past a stated deadline. The trial court ruled that Alorica had not established the existence of an agreement to arbitrate. INTRODUCTIONĪlorica, Inc., appeals from an order denying its petition to compel respondent Dewayne Williams to arbitrate his employment-related lawsuit. Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart, Betsy Johnson, Ryan H.
30-2015-00774605) OPINION Appeal from an order of the Superior Court of Orange County, Geoffrey T. This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115. NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTSĬalifornia Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b).