Oracle Commissions Wage & Hour Lawsuits
Case name: Maryam Abrishamcar and Kavi Kapur v. Oracle America, Inc.
Case type: Wage & Hour
Filed in: [Superior Court, County of San Mateo]
Docket: [Case no.: 535490 (Cal. Super.)]
Case name: Marcella Johnson v. Oracle America, Inc.
Case type: Wage & Hour
Filed in: JAMS—San Francisco
Docket: Case no.: 1100087724
- Abrishamcar v. Oracle
Sanford Heisler Sharp, Goldstein Borgen Dardarian & Ho, and Valerian Law represent plaintiffs Maryam Abrishamcar and Kavi Kapur in a commission wages lawsuit in the Superior Court of California, County of San Mateo.
The lawsuit was filed on September 18, 2015, under California’s Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA), wherein “aggrieved employees” may file a lawsuit on behalf of themselves and other employees for employer violations of the California Labor Code. Under PAGA, Ms. Abrishamcar and Mr. Kapur seek to recover civil penalties for Labor Code violations on behalf of sales representatives in California.
Ms. Abrishamcar and Mr. Kapur are former sales representatives at Oracle America, Inc. (“Oracle”) who assert 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, the Complaint alleges that 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, according to the Complaint.
On April 4, 2018, the Court granted plaintiffs’ motion for summary adjudication of issues, finding that Ms. Abrishamcar is an “aggrieved employee as to whom Defendant Oracle violated California Labor Code Section 2751 by failing to provide Plaintiff with a signed commission agreement.”
In January 2019, the first of three phases of the trial began. During the first and second phase of trial, the Court found Oracle liable for violating the California Labor Code.
On December 19, 2022, before the start of the third phase of trial to decide penalties, the Court denied both defendant’s motion to compel arbitration of the “individual” PAGA claims and defendant’s motion to dismiss all representative PAGA claims.
- Marcella Johnson v. Oracle America, Inc.
In pleadings filed in the case Marcella Johnson v. Oracle, Plaintiff-Claimant Johnson alleged that Oracle America, Inc. shortchanged sales employees millions in earned commission wages by retroactively changing commission contracts.
Plaintiff-Claimant specifically asserted: Oracle retroactively increased quotas or decreased commission rates on past sales so that it paid sales employees less than what the existing compensation plans require. Oracle “re-planned” 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-planned” employees after commission wages had already been paid, Oracle clawed back prior payments by withholding newly earned commissions until the employees had paid the company back or else threatened a collection. By reducing and withholding commissions in this fashion, Oracle’s commission policies and practices violated numerous California Labor Code requirements, and Oracle engaged in unfair business practices.
Plaintiff-Claimant Marcella Johnson was a typical sales employee subjected to a retroactive re-plan, after which Oracle demanded that she pay back a substantial amount of her earned commissions.
Pleadings filed in the case alleged that, 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 employees.
In March 2019, a Ninth Circuit panel upheld plaintiff’s motion to compel Oracle to engage in arbitration. The decision stemmed from a petition to compel arbitration that Johnson filed after Oracle refused to participate.
We are currently seeking more information from current and former Oracle sales representatives on the procedure and terms of their commission pay.
If you are a current or former Oracle sales representative, please visit oraclecommissionslawsuit.com to submit information or questions about the case. You may also contact Sanford Heisler Sharp directly at [email protected] or (646) 681-7373.
- Click here to read Order Denying Motion to Compel Arbitration and Motion to Dismiss Case
- Click here to read tentative decision from phase 2 of trial
- Click here to read tentative decision from phase 1 of trial
- Click here to read the summary adjudication against Oracle
- Click here to read the Class Action Complaint
- Click here to read the First Amended Demand for Class Arbitration
- Click here to read the Private Attorney Complaint
- Rising Star: Sanford Heisler’s Danielle Fuschetti, Law360, June 15, 2021
- Ex-Oracle Worker Can Arbitrate Pay Dispute, 9th Circ. Says, Law360, March 21, 2019
- Oracle Loses Bid to Overturn Former Employee’s Motion to Compel Arbitration, Law.com, March 21, 2019
- Oracle’s Anti-Arbitration Line Is ‘Man Bites Dog,’ Judge Says, Law360, February 15, 2019
- Former sales rep for software maker claims company ‘stonewalling’ case over commission practices, Legal Newsline, September 18, 2017
- Oracle ‘systematically denies’ its sales reps their commissions, forces them to work to pay off ‘debts’, court told, The Register, September 7, 2017
- Oracle Refuses To Arbitrate Wage Fight, Ex-Worker Says, Law360, September 6, 2017
- Former sales representative alleges Oracle America refused to pay full, complete amount of commissions earned, Northern California Record, February 24, 2017
- Oracle faces $150m lawsuit over ‘clawed back’ sales commissions, The Global Legal Post, February 15, 2017
- Oracle Hit With $150M Class Action by Sales Staff, Courthouse News, February 15, 2017
- Oracle ‘stiffed’ sales staff by clawing back pay, $150 million lawsuit claims, The Mercury News, February 14, 2017
Attorneys Involved in the Case
17 State Street
New York, NY 10004