SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES — CENTRAL DISTRICT
MARISOL FUENTES, DEREK HALLORAN, and YESENIA PADILLA, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated,
Plaintiffs,
v.
AURELIUS MEDIA AMERICAS INC., a Delaware corporation; and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive,
Defendants.
DEFENDANT AURELIUS MEDIA AMERICAS INC.'S RESPONSES TO PLAINTIFFS' SECOND SET OF SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES (NOS. 46-78)
PRELIMINARY STATEMENT
Defendant Aurelius Media Americas Inc. ("AMA") hereby responds to Plaintiffs' Second Set of Special Interrogatories (Nos. 46-78), served on or about April 5, 2023, as follows.
AMA is a Delaware corporation, qualified to do business in the State of California, with its principal office located at 8500 Sunset Boulevard, Suite 1400, West Hollywood, California 90069. AMA is a wholly owned subsidiary of Aurelius Global Media Group PLC ("AGMG"), a public limited company organized under the laws of England and Wales (Companies House No. 08412667), with its registered office in London, United Kingdom. AMA's operations in California encompass unscripted and reality television production, digital content creation, live events programming, scripted development, post-production, and related media activities.
AMA responds to these Interrogatories subject to, and without waiving, the General Objections set forth below. Each response is further subject to all specific objections stated therein, whether or not the General Objections are expressly repeated. By making any response, including any substantive response, AMA does not waive, and expressly preserves, all objections stated herein.
These responses are based on information reasonably available to AMA as of the date of service. AMA's investigation into the facts and circumstances underlying this litigation is ongoing. AMA expressly reserves the right to supplement, amend, or modify these responses as additional information becomes available through continuing investigation, discovery, expert analysis, and preparation for trial.
These responses have been prepared with the assistance of AMA's counsel, Calderwood & Harkness LLP. Nothing herein is intended to, and nothing herein shall be construed to, waive the attorney-client privilege, the attorney work product doctrine, or any other applicable privilege or protection. To the extent any response inadvertently discloses information protected by any such privilege or doctrine, such disclosure is not intended as, and shall not constitute, a waiver.
All responses are subject to the terms and conditions of the Stipulated Protective Order entered by the Court on February 15, 2023 (the "Protective Order"). Information designated as CONFIDENTIAL herein or in connection with these responses shall be treated in accordance with the terms of the Protective Order.
GENERAL OBJECTIONS
AMA hereby asserts the following General Objections, which are incorporated by reference into each specific response below as if fully set forth therein. The assertion of a General Objection to any particular Interrogatory does not constitute an admission that such objection applies to every Interrogatory; rather, AMA asserts each General Objection to the extent applicable.
General Objection No. 1: AMA objects to each Interrogatory to the extent it seeks information protected by the attorney-client privilege, the attorney work product doctrine (including both fact work product and opinion work product), or any other applicable privilege, immunity, or protection recognized under California law, federal law, or the laws of any other applicable jurisdiction. AMA will not disclose information falling within the scope of any such privilege or protection, and no response herein shall be construed as a waiver thereof.
General Objection No. 2: AMA objects to each Interrogatory to the extent it is overbroad, unduly burdensome, or seeks information that is not relevant to the subject matter of this action or not proportional to the needs of the case under California Code of Civil Procedure Section 2017.020. AMA further objects to each Interrogatory to the extent it seeks information that is equally or more readily available to Plaintiffs from their own records, from third-party sources, or from publicly available information.
General Objection No. 3: AMA objects to each Interrogatory to the extent it calls for a legal conclusion, a contention, or a characterization of legal rights or obligations that is more appropriately addressed through legal briefing, expert testimony, or the Court's application of law to facts at the appropriate stage of this proceeding.
General Objection No. 4: AMA objects to the Definitions and Instructions accompanying Plaintiffs' Second Set of Special Interrogatories to the extent they purport to impose obligations beyond those required by the California Code of Civil Procedure, the California Rules of Court, or any applicable order of this Court. AMA will respond in accordance with its obligations under the Code of Civil Procedure and the Court's orders, and will not be bound by Plaintiffs' unilateral expansion of those obligations.
General Objection No. 5: AMA objects to each Interrogatory to the extent it seeks trade secret information, proprietary business information, confidential personnel information, or other information the disclosure of which would cause competitive harm or invasion of privacy, and which is not adequately protected by the existing Stipulated Protective Order entered February 15, 2023. AMA will designate information as CONFIDENTIAL or ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY under the Protective Order where appropriate.
General Objection No. 6: AMA expressly reserves the right to supplement, amend, or modify these responses as additional information becomes available through ongoing investigation, discovery, document review, expert analysis, depositions, and preparation for trial. AMA's provision of any response herein does not constitute a representation that AMA's investigation is complete or that all responsive information has been identified.
RESPONSES TO SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES
SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 46:
Describe AMA's organizational structure for its California-based operations, including all divisions, departments, and reporting relationships for non-exempt hourly employees during the Class Period (November 1, 2018 through the present).
OBJECTIONS:
AMA objects to this Interrogatory on the grounds that it is overbroad as to both time and scope. AMA's organizational structure has evolved over the course of the approximately five-year Class Period, including through corporate reorganizations, the creation and dissolution of production units, changes in personnel, and changes in reporting lines. It would be unduly burdensome and disproportionate to the needs of this case to describe every permutation of AMA's organizational structure over this entire period. AMA further objects to this Interrogatory to the extent it seeks information regarding exempt employees and management-level personnel whose organizational reporting structures are not relevant to the claims of the putative class. AMA further incorporates General Objections Nos. 2, 4, and 6 by reference.
RESPONSE:
Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, AMA responds as follows:
AMA employs approximately 2,400 employees in the State of California, out of approximately 3,200 employees in the United States. AMA's California operations are currently organized as described below. AMA notes that this organizational structure reflects the current state of affairs and that the structure has undergone changes during the Class Period; however, the general framework described below has been substantially consistent since approximately January 2019.
AMA's California operations are led by the President, Jonathan Mercer, who reports to the Chief Executive Officer of Aurelius Global Media Group PLC, Sir Edmund Halesworth, based in London, United Kingdom. The following key officers report directly to President Mercer and are responsible for oversight of various aspects of AMA's California operations:
• Lorraine Okafor, Senior Vice President of Human Resources, who oversees all human resources functions for AMA's California operations, including recruitment, employee relations, benefits administration, compliance training, and the handling of employee complaints and grievances;
• Gregory Tanaka, Vice President of Legal & Compliance, who oversees legal affairs, regulatory compliance, and certain payroll oversight functions for AMA's California operations;
• Dwayne Prescott, Vice President of Unscripted Programming, who oversees creative and operational management of AMA's unscripted and reality television production units;
• Celine Arroyo, Director of Production Operations, who oversees day-to-day operational aspects of production across all show units, including production logistics, scheduling coordination, and compliance with operational standards;
• Karen Fong, Payroll Manager, who manages payroll processing, timekeeping system administration, and wage-and-hour record-keeping for AMA's California employees; Ms. Fong reports through the Finance Department.
AMA's non-exempt hourly production-support employees are organized into fourteen (14) distinct show units, which operate across seven (7) California production facilities. The show units are the primary organizational unit for purposes of day-to-day work assignments, scheduling, and supervisory oversight of non-exempt hourly employees.
Each show unit is supervised by a Unit Production Manager ("UPM") or Line Producer, who reports to a divisional head. For example, UPMs of unscripted show units report to the Vice President of Unscripted Programming, Dwayne Prescott, while UPMs of other production types report to the Director of Production Operations, Celine Arroyo, or to other divisional heads as appropriate. The UPMs and Line Producers have day-to-day responsibility for scheduling, staffing, and operational decisions within their respective show units, including the scheduling of meal and rest breaks for non-exempt employees.
SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 47:
Identify each of the 14 show units referenced in AMA's prior discovery responses, including the name of each show unit, the facility at which it operates, and the UPM or Line Producer responsible for each unit during the Class Period.
OBJECTIONS:
AMA objects to this Interrogatory on the grounds that it is unduly burdensome to identify every UPM or Line Producer who served in that capacity for each show unit across the full Class Period, as personnel in these positions changed over time due to staff turnover, production hiatuses, and project-based staffing. AMA further incorporates General Objections Nos. 2, 5, and 6 by reference.
RESPONSE:
Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, AMA responds as follows:
AMA operated the following fourteen (14) show units during the Class Period. Not all show units were active simultaneously; some were in active production at certain times and on hiatus or in development at other times. The show units are categorized by production type and associated facility as follows:
Studio-Based Show Units:
1. "Kitchen Clash" — A studio-based unscripted competition series produced at Facility 1 (8500 Sunset Boulevard, West Hollywood). This show unit has been in active production for substantially the entire Class Period.
2. Additional studio-based show units operated at Facility 1 (West Hollywood) and Facility 3 (Sherman Oaks) during the Class Period, producing unscripted content for various networks and streaming platforms. AMA is compiling the specific names and operating periods of these units and will supplement this response.
Field-Based Show Units:
3. "Summit Challenge" — A field-based unscripted adventure/competition series coordinated from Facility 4 (3800 W. Alameda Avenue, Burbank), with filming conducted at various outdoor locations throughout California and other states. This show unit involves extended shoot days and remote production logistics.
4. "Apex Endurance" — A field-based unscripted series in the development stage, coordinated from Facility 4 (Burbank).
5. "Untamed West" — A field-based unscripted series in the development stage, coordinated from Facility 4 (Burbank).
Live Events Show Units:
6. Live concert and award show production units operating out of Facility 4 (Burbank), providing production services for live televised events. These units are activated on a project-by-project basis and employ significant numbers of non-exempt hourly personnel during event preparation and production periods.
Digital Content Show Units:
7. Multiple digital content production units operating at Facility 3 (Sherman Oaks), producing short-form and digital-first content for online platforms and social media distribution.
Post-Production Show Units:
8. Post-production operations conducted at Facility 1 (West Hollywood), Facility 5 (Hollywood), and Facility 7 (El Segundo), encompassing editing, color correction, sound mixing, visual effects, and quality control for AMA's various productions.
E-Commerce Show Units:
9. E-commerce studio production operating at Facility 6 (Santa Monica), producing product-focused video content for AMA's e-commerce partners and affiliated platforms.
Scripted Development:
10. Scripted development unit operating at Facility 5 (Hollywood), focused on the development of scripted television content, including table reads, development workshops, and pilot production support.
AMA will produce a supplemental chart identifying the UPMs and/or Line Producers assigned to each show unit, organized by time period, as this information is currently being compiled from AMA's Human Resources records. AMA anticipates that this supplemental production will be completed within thirty (30) days.
AMA designates the information regarding show unit names, UPM/Line Producer identities, and facility assignments as CONFIDENTIAL under the terms of the Stipulated Protective Order entered February 15, 2023.
SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 48:
Identify the address, function, and approximate number of non-exempt hourly employees at each of AMA's California production facilities during the Class Period.
OBJECTIONS:
AMA objects to this Interrogatory to the extent it seeks precise employee counts for each facility for each point in time during the Class Period. Employee counts fluctuated throughout the Class Period due to production cycles, seasonal staffing needs, employee turnover, and the activation and deactivation of show units. AMA will provide approximate figures as of a representative date. AMA further incorporates General Objections Nos. 2 and 6 by reference.
RESPONSE:
Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, AMA responds as follows:
AMA operated the following seven (7) California production facilities during the Class Period. The approximate number of non-exempt hourly employees at each facility is stated as of approximately October 2022, which AMA believes to be reasonably representative. Employee counts varied at other points during the Class Period.
1. Facility 1: 8500 Sunset Boulevard, Suite 1400, West Hollywood, California 90069. Function: Corporate headquarters, studio-based unscripted production (including "Kitchen Clash"), and post-production operations. Approximate non-exempt hourly employees: 450.
2. Facility 2: 4024 Penmark Strategy Partners Avenue, Studio City, California 91604. Function: Stage A and Stage B, unscripted television production. Approximate non-exempt hourly employees: 280.
3. Facility 3: 15301 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 300, Sherman Oaks, California 91403. Function: Digital content production and distribution. Approximate non-exempt hourly employees: 200.
4. Facility 4: 3800 W. Alameda Avenue, Burbank, California 91505. Function: Live events production, field production coordination (including "Summit Challenge," "Apex Endurance," and "Untamed West"). Approximate non-exempt hourly employees: 320.
5. Facility 5: 1438 N. Gower Street, Hollywood, California 90028. Function: Scripted development, post-production. Approximate non-exempt hourly employees: 175.
6. Facility 6: 2120 Colorado Avenue, Santa Monica, California 90404. Function: E-commerce studio production. Approximate non-exempt hourly employees: 180.
7. Facility 7: 888 N. Sepulveda Boulevard, El Segundo, California 90245. Function: Post-production annex (editing, color correction, sound mixing). Approximate non-exempt hourly employees: 145.
The total approximate number of non-exempt hourly employees across all seven (7) California facilities was approximately 1,750 as of October 2022. This figure fluctuated during the Class Period based on production cycles, seasonal staffing, and other factors. AMA estimates that the total number of unique individuals who were employed as non-exempt hourly employees at some point during the Class Period is approximately 1,850.
SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 49:
For each show unit and facility, identify the chain of supervision from the non-exempt hourly employee to the highest-level AMA officer, including all intermediate supervisory positions.
OBJECTIONS:
AMA objects to this Interrogatory on the grounds that it is overbroad and unduly burdensome. Supervisory chains varied by show unit, facility, and time period throughout the Class Period. It would be impracticable and disproportionate to the needs of this case to reconstruct every variation in supervisory structure across fourteen (14) show units, seven (7) facilities, and approximately five (5) years. AMA further objects to the extent this Interrogatory seeks information regarding exempt management-level employees whose supervisory chains are not directly relevant to the putative class claims. AMA incorporates General Objections Nos. 2 and 6 by reference.
RESPONSE:
Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, AMA responds as follows:
The general supervisory chain for a typical non-exempt hourly production-support employee at AMA during the Class Period is as follows:
Non-Exempt Employee → Show Unit UPM / Line Producer → Divisional Head (e.g., Vice President of Unscripted Programming, Dwayne Prescott, or Director of Production Operations, Celine Arroyo) → President (Jonathan Mercer)
For matters specifically involving human resources functions, including complaints regarding meal and rest break practices, the supervisory chain is:
Non-Exempt Employee → Show Unit UPM / Line Producer → HR Business Partner (assigned to the relevant facility or division) → Senior Vice President of Human Resources (Lorraine Okafor) → President (Jonathan Mercer)
For matters involving payroll and timekeeping, including questions or disputes regarding recorded hours, deductions, or premium payments, the chain is:
Non-Exempt Employee → Show Unit UPM / Line Producer → Payroll Manager (Karen Fong) → Vice President of Legal & Compliance (Gregory Tanaka)
AMA notes that supervisory structures varied across show units. UPMs and Line Producers exercised significant discretion in day-to-day scheduling and operational decisions affecting non-exempt employees, including decisions regarding meal and rest break timing, shift assignments, and crew deployment. The specific reporting relationship between a given UPM and the appropriate divisional head depended on the production type and organizational placement of the show unit.
SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 50:
Identify every version of AMA's written meal period policy in effect during the Class Period, including the dates of adoption and revision.
OBJECTIONS:
AMA interposes no objection to the scope of this Interrogatory.
RESPONSE:
AMA maintained the following written meal period policies during the Class Period (November 1, 2018 through the present):
1. Pre-January 2019 Policy: AMA's prior Employee Handbook, which was originally effective approximately 2016 and revised in or about 2017, contained a meal period policy applicable to all non-exempt employees. This handbook was in effect at the beginning of the Class Period (November 1, 2018) and remained in effect until it was superseded on or about January 1, 2019, when AMA transitioned its payroll and timekeeping systems to NovaPay Solutions Inc. and adopted a new standalone policy.
2. January 2019 — March 2021 Policy: AMA adopted a standalone Meal and Rest Break Policy, effective January 1, 2019, concurrent with the implementation of the NovaPay Solutions "TimeTrack Pro" electronic timekeeping system. This policy was issued as a standalone document distributed to all non-exempt employees and their supervisors. The policy provided, in relevant part, that all non-exempt employees are entitled to a thirty (30) minute uninterrupted, duty-free meal period for shifts exceeding five (5) hours, and a second thirty (30) minute uninterrupted, duty-free meal period for shifts exceeding ten (10) hours. The policy further provided that employees should not perform any work duties during their meal period, that meal periods are unpaid, and that employees must clock out and clock back in for each meal period using the TimeTrack Pro system.
3. March 2021 — Present Policy: AMA revised its Employee Handbook effective March 2021, incorporating the previously standalone Meal and Rest Break Policy into the handbook as Section 4.3. Section 4.3 of the March 2021 Employee Handbook provides, in relevant part: "All non-exempt employees are entitled to a 30-minute uninterrupted meal period for shifts exceeding five (5) hours." The policy further provides: "A second 30-minute meal period is required for shifts exceeding ten (10) hours." Section 4.3 also states: "Employees who are unable to take a meal period should notify their supervisor immediately." The substantive provisions of the March 2021 policy are consistent with the January 2019 standalone policy.
Copies of all versions of AMA's meal period policy referenced above have been produced in response to Plaintiffs' First Set of Requests for Production of Documents (RFP No. 14), bearing production numbers AMA-000412 through AMA-000498.
SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 51:
Identify every version of AMA's written rest period policy in effect during the Class Period.
OBJECTIONS:
AMA interposes no specific objection to this Interrogatory beyond the General Objections stated above.
RESPONSE:
AMA's written rest period policy has been substantively consistent throughout the Class Period. The current version of the policy is set forth in AMA's Employee Handbook (revised March 2021), Section 4.4, which provides: "All non-exempt employees are entitled to a net 10-minute paid rest period for every four (4) hours worked or major fraction thereof." The policy further provides that rest periods must, "insofar as practicable, be in the middle of each work period." Prior versions of AMA's rest period policy, including the standalone Meal and Rest Break Policy effective January 2019 and the prior Employee Handbook effective approximately 2016-2017, contained substantially identical language regarding rest period entitlements.
AMA notes that rest periods are paid time under California law, consistent with the requirements of IWC Wage Order 12-2001, Section 12. Accordingly, rest periods are not recorded in AMA's TimeTrack Pro timekeeping system, and employees are not required to clock out or clock in for rest periods. This practice is consistent with standard industry practice in the motion picture and television production industry.
Copies of all versions of AMA's rest period policy have been produced in response to Plaintiffs' First Set of Requests for Production of Documents (RFP No. 14).
SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 52:
For each of the 14 show units, describe how meal and rest breaks were scheduled, communicated to employees, and monitored during the Class Period.
OBJECTIONS:
AMA objects to this Interrogatory on the grounds that it is overbroad and unduly burdensome. The Interrogatory seeks individualized descriptions of meal and rest break practices across fourteen (14) distinct show units over a period of approximately five (5) years. The specific manner in which meal and rest breaks were scheduled, communicated, and monitored within each show unit was a function of the day-to-day operational decisions of the individual UPM or Line Producer assigned to that unit, taking into account production schedules, location logistics, crew size, and other variables that changed on a daily or weekly basis. This information lies substantially within the personal knowledge of individual UPMs and Line Producers rather than within AMA's centralized corporate knowledge. Responding in the level of detail sought by this Interrogatory would be unduly burdensome and disproportionate to the needs of the case. AMA further incorporates General Objections Nos. 2, 3, and 6 by reference.
RESPONSE:
Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, AMA responds as follows:
AMA's written meal and rest break policies, as described in response to Interrogatories Nos. 50 and 51, applied uniformly to all non-exempt hourly employees across all fourteen (14) show units and all seven (7) California facilities. However, the day-to-day implementation of those policies was delegated to the UPM or Line Producer of each show unit, who had discretion to schedule breaks in a manner appropriate to the unique operational demands of the particular production. The key variations in implementation across production types are described below:
Studio-based show units (e.g., "Kitchen Clash" at Facility 1): Production days for studio-based show units typically ran eight (8) to ten (10) hours. Meal breaks were scheduled in advance and included in the daily call sheet, which was distributed to all crew members prior to each production day. Production activity paused for a designated meal period at a time specified on the call sheet. Employees generally clocked out for the meal period at the designated time and clocked back in upon returning.
Field-based show units (e.g., "Summit Challenge" coordinated from Facility 4): Field-based productions involved extended shoot days, frequently running twelve (12) to sixteen (16) hours or more, depending on weather, daylight, and logistical conditions. Meal breaks were included in the daily call sheet; however, the logistical challenges inherent in remote outdoor filming locations — including limited access to food service, transportation constraints, and environmental conditions — could affect the timing and duration of meal breaks. UPMs on field shoots exercised significant judgment in scheduling meal breaks to balance production needs with crew welfare and legal compliance.
Live events show units (Facility 4): Scheduling of meal and rest breaks for live event productions was dictated in significant part by the timing and requirements of the live event itself. Meal breaks were provided when feasible and were included in the production schedule, but the live nature of the production created constraints on break timing and duration that did not exist in studio or field environments.
Post-production operations (Facilities 1, 5, and 7): Post-production operations were primarily office-based, with regular schedules typically running eight (8) to ten (10) hours. Meal and rest break scheduling followed standard office protocols, with employees taking meal breaks at designated or self-selected times.
Digital content units (Facility 3): Digital content production operated on a hybrid schedule, involving both studio-based and remote shooting. Schedules varied by content type and project requirements. Meal and rest break scheduling was managed by the relevant UPM or supervisor.
E-commerce studio production (Facility 6): E-commerce studio operations followed regular studio schedules, with standard meal and rest break implementation.
AMA's written policy required UPMs and Line Producers to include a designated meal break in every daily call sheet for every production day. Monitoring of meal and rest break compliance was conducted through the NovaPay TimeTrack Pro system (which recorded clock-in and clock-out times and applied the automatic meal period deduction) and through supervisory and HR oversight. UPMs were expected to report any operational issues affecting break compliance to the Director of Production Operations, Celine Arroyo, who oversaw operational matters across show units.
SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 53:
Describe in detail the configuration of the automatic meal period deduction feature in AMA's NovaPay Solutions TimeTrack Pro timekeeping system, including when it was implemented, how it operates, and all changes made to its configuration during the Class Period.
OBJECTIONS:
AMA interposes no objection to the scope of this Interrogatory. AMA notes that the information sought has been substantially addressed in its prior discovery responses and supplemental document production.
RESPONSE:
AMA implemented the NovaPay Solutions "TimeTrack Pro" electronic timekeeping system effective January 1, 2019, replacing AMA's prior manual time-sheet system. The TimeTrack Pro system includes an automatic meal period deduction feature (the "auto-deduction"), which was configured and has operated during the Class Period as follows:
Trigger threshold: The auto-deduction was configured to activate for any recorded shift of six (6) hours or more. AMA acknowledges that this six-hour threshold was inconsistent with the requirements of IWC Wage Order 12-2001 and California Labor Code Section 512, which require a first meal period for shifts exceeding five (5) hours. The threshold was corrected to five (5) hours in December 2022, as described below.
Deduction amount: The auto-deduction applied a fixed thirty (30) minute deduction to the employee's recorded work time for the shift. The thirty (30) minutes were subtracted at the sixth hour of the recorded shift (i.e., the system assumed the meal period began at the six-hour mark and lasted thirty minutes).
Application: The auto-deduction was applied uniformly to all non-exempt hourly employees across all seven (7) California facilities. The deduction operated automatically and did not require any action by the employee or supervisor. The deduction was applied regardless of whether the employee actually took a meal period, unless the employee activated the Missed Meal Attestation feature (at facilities where that feature was enabled).
Second meal period: The auto-deduction applied only to the first meal period. No automatic deduction was configured in the TimeTrack Pro system for second meal periods on shifts exceeding ten (10) hours. Employees who worked shifts exceeding ten (10) hours were expected to manually clock out and clock back in for their second meal period, or to manually adjust their time entries to reflect the second meal period.
Changes to configuration during the Class Period:
(1) January 1, 2019: Initial implementation of the TimeTrack Pro system with auto-deduction configured at a six (6) hour trigger threshold.
(2) December 2022: Trigger threshold corrected from six (6) hours to five (5) hours to align with the requirements of IWC Wage Order 12-2001 and California Labor Code Section 512.
No other changes to the auto-deduction configuration were made during the Class Period.
SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 54:
Describe the "Missed Meal Attestation" feature in the TimeTrack Pro system, including how it operates, when it was implemented, and at which facilities it was activated during the Class Period.
OBJECTIONS:
AMA interposes no specific objection to this Interrogatory beyond the General Objections stated above.
RESPONSE:
The NovaPay Solutions TimeTrack Pro system includes a "Missed Meal Attestation" feature that provides employees with a mechanism to report a missed or shortened meal period directly through the time clock terminal at their assigned facility. The feature operates as follows:
When an employee activates the Missed Meal Attestation feature — by selecting the appropriate option on the time clock terminal at the end of their shift or within a designated time window — the system performs the following actions:
(a) The system overrides the automatic thirty (30) minute meal period deduction for that shift, so that the employee is not docked thirty (30) minutes of work time for a meal period that was not taken;
(b) The system adds thirty (30) minutes back to the employee's total recorded hours for the shift, ensuring that the employee is compensated for the time that would otherwise have been deducted;
(c) The system triggers a one-hour meal period premium payment, calculated at the employee's regular rate of pay, to be processed and paid in the next regular pay cycle, in accordance with California Labor Code Section 226.7; and
(d) The attestation generates a detailed record in the payroll system, identifying the employee by name and employee identification number, the date of the missed meal period, the time of the attestation, and the facility at which the attestation was recorded.
Implementation: The Missed Meal Attestation feature was part of the initial TimeTrack Pro system deployment on January 1, 2019. However, the feature was not activated at all facilities simultaneously.
Activation status by facility:
Activated at initial rollout (January 2019): Facility 1 (West Hollywood HQ), Facility 3 (Sherman Oaks), Facility 5 (Hollywood), and Facility 6 (Santa Monica).
NOT activated at second-wave rollout (March 2019): Facility 2 (Studio City), Facility 4 (Burbank), and Facility 7 (El Segundo). At these three facilities, the Missed Meal Attestation feature was not functional from the time of the second-wave rollout in March 2019 until December 2022.
Corrected (December 2022): The Missed Meal Attestation feature was activated at Facilities 2, 4, and 7 in December 2022.
AMA's Senior Vice President of Human Resources, Lorraine Okafor, has stated that the non-activation of the Missed Meal Attestation feature at Facilities 2, 4, and 7 was the result of an administrative oversight during the second wave of the TimeTrack Pro system rollout in March 2019. The initial rollout in January 2019 was managed directly by NovaPay Solutions' implementation team and included activation of the attestation feature at the first four facilities. The second wave, which brought the remaining three facilities online in March 2019, was managed primarily by AMA's internal IT and Payroll staff, and the attestation feature activation step was inadvertently omitted from the implementation checklist. Ms. Okafor has stated that she first became aware of this discrepancy in approximately November 2022, in connection with AMA's internal review prompted by this litigation.
SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 55:
For each facility where the Missed Meal Attestation feature was activated, state the usage rate (as a percentage of total eligible shifts) for each calendar year during the Class Period.
OBJECTIONS:
AMA objects to this Interrogatory to the extent it requires AMA to perform statistical calculations that are not normally maintained in the ordinary course of business. AMA does not maintain pre-calculated "usage rate" percentages in its payroll or timekeeping systems. To provide the requested information, AMA would need to extract raw data from the TimeTrack Pro system, identify all "eligible shifts" (i.e., shifts at or above the auto-deduction trigger threshold) at each facility, compare that figure to the number of Missed Meal Attestations recorded at each facility, and calculate a percentage. AMA will provide such usage data as is reasonably available from its records. AMA incorporates General Objections Nos. 2 and 6 by reference.
RESPONSE:
Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, AMA responds as follows:
Based on data extracted from the NovaPay TimeTrack Pro system, the aggregate usage rates (expressed as a percentage of total eligible shifts for which the auto-deduction was applied) for the Missed Meal Attestation feature at each facility where the feature was activated are approximately as follows:
• Facility 1 (West Hollywood HQ): Approximately 2.3% of eligible shifts.
• Facility 3 (Sherman Oaks): Approximately 4.1% of eligible shifts.
• Facility 5 (Hollywood): Approximately 1.8% of eligible shifts.
• Facility 6 (Santa Monica): Approximately 3.7% of eligible shifts.
• Facilities 2, 4, and 7: The Missed Meal Attestation feature was not activated at these facilities during the relevant period (January 2019 through December 2022). Accordingly, no attestation data is available for these facilities prior to December 2022.
AMA notes that the above figures are aggregate figures calculated across the entire period during which the feature was activated at each facility (January 2019 through the present). Year-by-year breakdowns are currently being compiled from the TimeTrack Pro data and will be provided in a supplemental response.
AMA further notes that, in its view, the relatively low usage rates at the facilities where the feature was activated are consistent with employees at those facilities generally receiving timely, compliant meal periods. AMA does not concede that the low usage rates indicate a lack of employee awareness of the feature or that employees were discouraged from using the feature.
SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 56:
Describe all training, instruction, or communication provided to non-exempt hourly employees regarding the Missed Meal Attestation feature, including the dates, method, and content of such training.
OBJECTIONS:
AMA interposes no specific objection to this Interrogatory beyond the General Objections stated above.
RESPONSE:
AMA's Employee Handbook (revised March 2021), Section 4.3, states that non-exempt employees "are entitled to a 30-minute uninterrupted meal period" and "should notify their supervisor if they are unable to take a meal period." The Employee Handbook does not specifically reference the TimeTrack Pro Missed Meal Attestation feature by name, nor does it describe the specific process by which an employee may use the electronic attestation feature on the time clock terminal.
AMA did not conduct formal classroom training, online training modules, or dedicated training sessions specifically regarding the Missed Meal Attestation feature during the Class Period. Rather, AMA's expectation was that managers and UPMs/Line Producers would familiarize newly hired and existing employees with the TimeTrack Pro time clock system during the onboarding process and on an ongoing basis. This familiarization was intended to include the attestation feature at facilities where it was activated. However, AMA does not have records documenting the specific content or extent of such onboarding-level familiarization at each facility.
AMA is not aware of any written training materials, instructional guides, tip sheets, or other written communications specifically addressing the Missed Meal Attestation feature that were prepared by AMA and distributed to non-exempt hourly employees during the Class Period. AMA acknowledges that NovaPay Solutions Inc. may have provided general user guides or quick-reference materials for the TimeTrack Pro system that included information about the attestation feature, but AMA has not identified any such materials as having been specifically distributed to AMA's non-exempt employees.
AMA has produced all responsive training materials in its possession, custody, or control in response to Plaintiffs' First Set of Requests for Production of Documents (RFP No. 33).
SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 57:
At facilities where the Missed Meal Attestation feature was not activated (Facilities 2, 4, and 7), describe all mechanisms available to employees to report missed or shortened meal periods.
OBJECTIONS:
AMA interposes no specific objection to this Interrogatory beyond the General Objections stated above.
RESPONSE:
At Facilities 2 (Studio City), 4 (Burbank), and 7 (El Segundo), where the electronic Missed Meal Attestation feature was not activated during the period from approximately March 2019 through December 2022, employees could report missed or shortened meal periods through the following mechanisms:
1. Direct notification to UPM/Line Producer or immediate supervisor. Employees could report a missed or shortened meal period directly to their UPM, Line Producer, or other immediate supervisor. Upon receiving such a report, the UPM or supervisor was responsible for adjusting the employee's time records in the TimeTrack Pro system (by submitting a manual override request to the Payroll Department) and for initiating the payment of a one-hour meal period premium through payroll.
2. Notification to the Payroll Department. Employees could contact the Payroll Manager (Karen Fong) or the Payroll Department directly to report a missed or shortened meal period. The Payroll Department had the ability to manually override the automatic meal period deduction in the TimeTrack Pro system and to process a premium payment for the affected shift.
3. Human Resources complaint or inquiry. Employees could file a formal or informal complaint or inquiry with the Human Resources Department, either through their assigned HR Business Partner or directly with the Senior Vice President of Human Resources, Lorraine Okafor. The HR Department would then coordinate with the Payroll Department to ensure appropriate corrections and premium payments were made.
AMA acknowledges that each of these mechanisms was manual in nature and depended on the employee's initiative to affirmatively report a missed or shortened meal period. Unlike the electronic Missed Meal Attestation feature available at Facilities 1, 3, 5, and 6 — which was integrated into the time clock terminal and required only a simple selection at the time of clock-out — the mechanisms available at Facilities 2, 4, and 7 required the employee to take one or more affirmative steps outside the normal clocking process to report a missed meal period and obtain the appropriate deduction override and premium payment.
SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 58:
Identify each complaint, grievance, or report made by any non-exempt hourly employee regarding meal or rest break issues during the Class Period, including the date, identity of the complainant, facility, subject, and resolution.
OBJECTIONS:
AMA objects to this Interrogatory on the grounds that it is overbroad and unduly burdensome. The Interrogatory seeks the identification of every complaint, grievance, or report regarding meal or rest break issues made by any of the approximately 1,850 non-exempt hourly employees who worked at any of AMA's seven California facilities over a period of approximately five years. Compiling this information requires a review of HR files, email records, supervisor notes, and other documentation across all seven facilities and fourteen show units. AMA further objects to this Interrogatory to the extent it seeks disclosure of confidential personnel information, including the identities and personnel records of employees who are not parties to this action and who have reasonable expectations of privacy in their employment records. AMA further objects that some complaints may have involved informal oral communications between employees and supervisors that were not documented in any formal system and cannot be identified. AMA incorporates General Objections Nos. 2 and 5 by reference.
RESPONSE:
Subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, AMA responds as follows:
AMA's Human Resources Department received approximately fourteen (14) formal written complaints or documented reports during the Class Period from non-exempt hourly employees regarding meal or rest break issues. These fourteen (14) complaints came from employees at five (5) of AMA's seven (7) California facilities and from employees assigned to eight (8) of AMA's fourteen (14) show units. The complaints addressed a range of meal and rest break issues, including allegations of shortened meal periods, late meal periods, missed rest periods, and questions regarding premium payments.
Each of the fourteen (14) complaints was investigated individually by the HR Department, in consultation with the relevant UPM or supervisor and, where appropriate, with input from the Payroll Department and VP of Legal & Compliance, Gregory Tanaka. The outcomes of those investigations were as follows:
• In nine (9) of the fourteen (14) cases, AMA determined, following investigation, that a meal or rest period premium was owed to the affected employee. In each such case, AMA processed and paid the applicable premium to the affected employee.
• In the remaining five (5) cases, AMA determined, following investigation, that the employee had received a compliant meal or rest break and that no premium was owed. In each such case, AMA communicated its findings to the affected employee and documented the resolution.
AMA will produce a CONFIDENTIAL summary identifying the fourteen (14) complaints, including the approximate date, facility, show unit, subject matter, and resolution of each complaint. In this supplemental production, employee names will be redacted to protect the privacy of non-party employees, unless Plaintiffs can demonstrate a specific need for identifying information sufficient to overcome the employees' privacy interests. AMA is willing to meet and confer with Plaintiffs' counsel regarding the scope of identifying information to be disclosed, including the possibility of using pseudonyms or employee identification numbers in lieu of names.