Oracle Commission Lawyers
Representing Commissioned California Sales Employees
Sanford Heisler Sharp is currently working on two cases for the rights of commissioned California sales employees, filed against Oracle America, Inc.
The two Oracle commissions lawsuits we are working on include:
- Maryam Abrishamcar v. Oracle America, Inc. (Case No. CIV535490)
- Marcella Johnson v. Oracle America, Inc. (JAMS REF# 1100087724)
In both cases, the plaintiffs assert that Oracle has unlawfully withheld pay related to commissions earned through sales, as well as violating commission agreements. If you have worked for Oracle in a sales role and think you have been shorted commissions pay, then you should contact our firm immediately. The more people who speak up against Oracle, the stronger each lawsuit can become.
PAGA Claims
In the case of Maryam Abrishamcar v. Oracle, the plaintiffs 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. Plaintiffs allege that Oracle has failed to provide commissioned sales representatives with 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 their 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.
Arbitration Claims
In the arbitration of Marcella Johnson v. Oracle, Plaintiff-Claimant Johnson alleges that Oracle America, Inc. has shortchanged sales employees millions in earned commission wages by retroactively changing commission contracts. She asserts that Oracle retroactively increases quotas or decreases commission rates on past sales so that it pays sales employees less than what the 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 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.
This case is proceeding in arbitration before JAMS in San Francisco. Plaintiff-Claimant Johnson seeks to recover unpaid commission wages and waiting time penalties for herself and requests an injunction and other relief.
Retaliation Protection Against Oracle
Anyone who might have a claim against Oracle and still works there should know that California employment law protects you from retaliation for participating in the investigation or lawsuit. If Oracle tries to penalize you or treats you differently after hearing that you know about the lawsuits, then a separate employment lawsuit for unjust retaliation might be in order. Let our firm know right away if you have faced retaliation.
Help Our Investigation – Contact Us Today
As part of the investigation conducted by our Oracle commission attorneys, we would like to hear from you regarding your experiences at Oracle relating to sales commissions. Please feel free to submit any comments, questions, and concerns you have by using an online contact form. Remember: Oracle can’t legally retaliate against you for your participation or interest in the ongoing investigation or lawsuits.
