Shakespeare v. National Steel and Shipbuilding Co. CA4/1

Filed 9/20/23 Shakespeare v. National Steel and Shipbuilding Co. CA4/1 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION ONE

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

ARCHIE SHAKESPEARE, D081270

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v. (Super. Ct. No. 37-2021- 00013962-CU-OE-CTL) NATIONAL STEEL AND SHIPBUILDING COMPANY,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of San Diego County, Katherine A. Bacal, Judge. Affirmed. Quarles & Brady, E. Joseph Connaughton, Evan A. Peña, and Kelly E. Kagan for Defendant and Appellant. Peter R. Dion-Kindem; The Blanchard Law Group and Lonnie C. Blanchard, III for Plaintiff and Respondent.

I INTRODUCTION National Steel and Shipbuilding Company (NASSCO) appeals an order denying its petition to compel arbitration of a wage and hour complaint

brought by its alleged former employee Archie Shakespeare. The trial court denied the petition on grounds that NASSCO failed to establish the existence of an arbitration agreement between NASSCO and Shakespeare. We affirm. II BACKGROUND Shakespeare filed the operative complaint against his putative former employers, NASSCO and Ameri-Force Craft Services, Inc. (Ameri-Force). In relevant part, he alleged NASSCO violated wage and overtime laws by failing to pay its non-exempt employees for time spent going through workplace security checkpoints, donning and doffing personal protective equipment, having their temperatures checked, and traveling between security checkpoints and their workplace sites. Further, he alleged NASSCO failed to pay wages due on termination, violated wage statement laws, and violated the Unfair Competition Law (Bus. & Prof. Code, § 17200 et seq.). He filed his claims on an individual basis, on behalf of a putative class of non-exempt NASSCO employees, and on a representative basis under the Private Attorneys General Act of 2004 (Lab. Code, § 2698 et seq.; PAGA). NASSCO petitioned to compel arbitration of the case. It argued that it entered into collective bargaining agreements (CBAs) with two labor unions that represent most of the non-exempt employees Shakespeare seeks to represent on a class or representative basis. The CBAs govern the terms of employment for unionized employees on matters such as hours, wages, and overtime. All of the CBAs provide that disputes concerning the interpretation or application of the CBAs may be referred to arbitration if the disputes are not resolved through an internal grievance procedure. Some of the CBAs state that NASSCO and its unionized employees must arbitrate