Soremekun

Soremekun v. Thrifty Payless, Inc.

Good Law
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 26, 200706-55035California8,894 words

Opinion

Opinion

I. FACTUAL BACKGROUND

Adediji Soremekun was employed by Rite Aid as a phar- macist from approximately January 15, 1998, until his resig- nation on June 27, 2003.4 Soremekun’s employment at Rite Aid was governed by successive collective bargaining agree- ments (“CBAs”) between Rite Aid and the United Food and Commercial Workers Union (the “Union”).

A. Pay Provisions

Under the collective bargaining agreement for the period from July 5, 1999 to July 7, 2002 (the “1999-2002 CBA”),6 4 [Proposed] Statement of Uncontroverted Facts and Conclusions of Law (“Def.’s Facts”), ¶ 1; Plaintiff Adediji A. Soremekun’s Separate Statement of Disputed Material Facts (“Pl.’s Facts”), ¶ 1. 5 ‘Def.’s Facts, ¶ 2; Pl.’s Facts, ¶ 2. Plaintiff contends that he received a copy of the CBA only after he had filed a complaint with the Division of Labor Standards and Enforcement. (Pl.’s Facts, ¶ 2.) 6 Declaration of Glenn L. Briggs in Support of Defendant Thrifty Pay- less, Inc. d/b/a/ Rite Aid Corporation’s Motion for Summary Judgment or, in the Alternative, Partial Summary Judgment (“Briggs Decl.”), Exh. C at 47 (Retail Pharmacist Agreement between Rite Aid Inc. and UFCW Locals 135, 324, 770, 1036,…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.