Oracle Commissions Wage & Hour Lawsuits

Case Description

Case Type: Wage and Hour
Company: Oracle America, Inc.

This page is dedicated to two lawsuits concerning the rights of commissioned California sales employees, filed against Oracle America, Inc.

Were You a Sales Rep Who Didn’t Receive Full Commissions?

Contact Us Today To Discuss Your Case

If you are a current or former Oracle sales representative, we encourage you to visit oraclecommissionslawsuit.com to learn more and provide information for our investigation.

Private Attorneys General Act Lawsuit

Sanford Heisler Sharp, LLP and Valerian Law represent Plaintiff Maryam Abrishamcar, a former sales representative at Oracle America, Inc. (“Oracle”), in a commission wages lawsuit pending in the Superior Court of California, County of San Mateo. The case is set for trial in August 2018.

Plaintiff asserts 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, 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.

Under California’s Private Attorneys General Act (“PAGA”), Ms. Abrishamcar seeks to recover civil penalties for these violations on behalf of sales representatives in California.

Sanford Heisler Sharp, LLP and Valerian Law represent plaintiff.

Class Arbitration

This class arbitration pursues claims that Oracle America, Inc. has shortchanged sales employees millions in earned commission wages by retroactively changing commission contracts. The class arbitration demand asserts claims on behalf of all commissioned sales employees employed in California since February 14, 2013 who have experienced retroactive re-plans that resulted in lower compensation for work already performed. This case is proceeding in arbitration before JAMS, in San Francisco.

Plaintiff asserts that Oracle retroactively increases quotas or decreases commission rates on past sales, so that it pays sales employees less than their 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 collections lawsuit. The class arbitration demand alleges this to be a willful and systematic scheme led by the finance department designed to align commissions with financial forecasts and bottom line goals.

Plaintiff Marcella Johnson was a typical sales employee subjected to a retroactive re-plan that reduced her commission payments. Oracle demanded that she pay back a substantial amount of her earned commissions that had been paid before the re-plan.

The Class Arbitration Demand states 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 class members. Johnson seeks to recover unpaid commission wages and waiting time penalties for herself and the class, and requests an injunction and other relief.

Update (11/21/17): Recently, Plaintiff prevailed on a 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.

Sanford Heisler Sharp is co-counsel with Xinying Valerian of Valerian Law.

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 oracle@sanfordheisler.com or 415-795-2020.

Case Materials

Our Team

David SanfordDavid Sanford
Chairman
Washington, DC

Andrew MelzerAndrew Melzer
NY Partner
New York, NY

Michael PalmerMichael Palmer
NY Partner
New York, NY

Danielle FuschettiDanielle Fuschetti
Associate
San Francisco, CA

Featured In

Law360 SF Gate

Press Releases

Our News

Practice Areas

Principal Office

1350 Avenue of the Americas
31st Floor
New York, NY 10019
Back to Top