Seyfarth Shaw LLP | www.seyfarth.com Litigating CA Wage & Hour and Labor Code Class Actions (22nd Edition) 137 were being conducted in connection with the company’s “internal investigation about the conditions at the warehouse.”802 Applying some of the Johnnie’s Poultry safeguards, the attorneys further explained that the interview and subsequently signing declarations were voluntary and that the employee could end the interview at any time; that if the employee decided to sign a declaration, he or she should make sure it was truthful and accurate; that the employer could not retaliate against or reward an employee based on the decision to participate or the information provided; that the employee was a potential class member in a lawsuit with claims pertaining to the subject of the meeting; that defense counsel represented the company, not the employees; and that the employees could consult with an attorney regarding the process.803 At the end of each interview, the employees were asked to sign a declaration. The attorneys did not explain, however, that the document was a sworn declaration that the employer could use to limit the employees’ potential recovery in the class action.804 Instead, the attorneys said that the document was a “consent form” regarding voluntary participation in the interview process.805 Some employees said they felt pressure to sign and only six out of the 120 interviewees declined to sign.806 The federal district court determined that, despite the attorneys’ disclosures to the employees at the outset of the interviews, the communications were deceptive because the employees were never told of the nature and purpose of the interviews, which was to gather evidence to use against class members in the lawsuit.807 In addition, the court held that the interviews were conducted in a coercive manner because the employees were essentially ordered to attend the meetings.808 Even though the employees were told the interviews were voluntary, the fact that only five employees actually chose to leave and that only six refused to sign a declaration confirmed the coercive nature of the interviews.809 802 Id. at *2. 803 Id. at *1-2. 804 Id. at *2. 805 Id. 806 Id. at *6. 807 Id. at *5. 808 Id. at *6. 809 Id. at *2, 6.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTkwMTQ4