Page 1 of 21

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

FORT LAUDERDALE DIVISION

CASE NO.: 

EDERSON J. PACHECO

and other similarly situated individuals,

Plaintiff(s),

v.

YORKSHIRE BUILDING SERVICES, INC.

Defendant,

___________________________________/ 

COMPLAINT

(OPT-IN PURSUANT TO 29 U.S.C § 216(b))

COMES NOW the Plaintiff, EDERSON J. PACHECO, and other similarly situated

individuals, by and through the undersigned counsel, and hereby sues Defendant YORKSHIRE 

BUILDING SERVICES, INC., and alleges:

JURISDICTION AND VENUES

1. This is an action to recover money damages for unpaid overtime wages and retaliation

under the laws of the United States. This Court has jurisdiction pursuant to the Fair Labor 

Standards Act, 29 U.S.C. § 201-219 (Section 216 for jurisdictional placement) (“the Act”).

2. The Plaintiff brings also an action for equitable and monetary relief to readdress the 

violations of Plaintiff’s rights pursuant to the Family Medical Leave Act (hereinafter 

“FMLA”), 29 U.S.C. Section 2612 (a)(1), and the anti-retaliatory provisions found in 

Section 2615 (a)(1) and (2), and (b) (1). Plaintiff also brings an action and for the violation 

of the Families First Coronavirus Response Act (“FFCRA”), P.L. 116-136, as amended;

PARTIES

Case 0:20-cv-61540-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/29/2020 Page 1 of 21
Page 2 of 21

3. Plaintiff EDERSON J. PACHECO is a covered employee for purposes of the Act. The 

Plaintiff is a resident of Broward County, Florida, within the jurisdiction of this Honorable 

Court. The Plaintiff is a covered employee for purposes of the FLSA, FMLA, and the 

Families First Coronavirus Response Act (“FFCRA”), P.L. 116-136, as amended.

4. Defendant YORKSHIRE BUILDING SERVICES, INC. (hereinafter YORKSHIRE 

BUILDING, or Defendant) is a Florida corporation, having a place of business in Broward 

County, Florida, where the Plaintiff worked. The Defendant was engaged in interstate 

commerce. 

5. The Defendant was the employer of Plaintiff and others similarly situated within the 

meaning of Section 3(d) of the “Fair Labor Standards Act” [29 U.S.C. § 203(d)], the Family 

Medical Leave Act (hereinafter “FMLA”), 29 U.S.C. Section 2612 (a)(1), as amended; and 

the Families First Coronavirus Response Act (“FFCRA”), 116 P.L. 116-136, as amended;

6. All the actions raised in this complaint took place in Broward County Florida, within the 

jurisdiction of this Court.

GENERAL ALLEGATIONS

7. FLSA allegations.- This cause of action is brought by Plaintiff EDERSON J. PACHECO

as a collective action to recover from the Defendant overtime compensation, liquidated 

damages, and the costs and reasonable attorney’s fees under the provisions of Fair Labor 

Standards Act, as amended, 29 U.S.C. § 201 et seq (the “FLA or the “ACT”) on behalf of 

Plaintiff and all other current and former employees similarly situated to Plaintiff (“the 

asserted class”) and who worked more than forty (40) hours during one or more weeks on 

or after August 2019, (the “material time”) without being properly compensated. 

Case 0:20-cv-61540-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/29/2020 Page 2 of 21
Page 3 of 21

8. Defendant YORKSHIRE BUILDING is a provider of building maintenance, janitorial, and 

cleaning services to commercial accounts. Plaintiff serves numerous businesses located in 

Miami/Dade, Broward, Palm Beach Counties, Fort Lauderdale, Miami, West Palm Beach, 

Miramar, Boca Raton, Delray Beach, Tampa, Naples and Jacksonville, Florida. The 

Defendant headquarters is located at 3740 Park Central Blvd. N. Pompano Beach, FL 

33064. 

9. Defendant YORKSHIRE BUILDING employed Plaintiff EDERSON J. PACHECO

approximately from August 01, 2019, to May 01, 2020, or 39 weeks. 

10. The Plaintiff was hired as a non-exempted, full-time cleaning employee, and he was 

assigned to work at Quest Diagnostics, in Miramar, Florida. At the clinical laboratory, the

plaintiff had duties as a janitor and cleaning employee. 

11. The Plaintiff was paid at a rate of $14.00 an hour. The Plaintiff’s overtime rate should be 

$21.00 an hour.

12. During his time of employment with Defendant, Plaintiff had an irregular schedule,

Plaintiff worked 5 days per week from Monday to Friday between 8:00 AM to 4:30, 5:00 

PM or later. 

13. The Plaintiff always worked more than 40 hours in a week, but he was paid for an average 

of 42.5 regular hours. In weeks in which Plaintiff worked many overtime hours, he was 

paid for all his hours, but at his regular rate. However, Plaintiff was not paid for overtime 

hours, as required by law. 

14. The Plaintiff estimates that he worked an average of 52.91 hours every week. Thus, the 

Plaintiff estimates that he is owed half-time for an average of 12.91 overtime hours every 

week.

Case 0:20-cv-61540-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/29/2020 Page 3 of 21
Page 4 of 21

15. The Plaintiff clocked in and out and the Defendant was able to keep track of the hours 

worked by the Plaintiff and other similarly situated individuals. 

16. Therefore, Defendant willfully failed to pay Plaintiff overtime hours at the rate of time and 

one-half his regular rate for every hour that he worked over forty (40), in violation of 

Section 7 (a) of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (29 U.S.C. 207(a)(1).

17. The Plaintiff was paid bi-weekly with checks and paystubs providing the number of hours 

paid at his regular rate. 

18. Plaintiff is not in possession of time and payment records, but he will offer an average good 

faith estimate of unpaid overtime hours based on some paystubs in his possession. After 

proper discovery, the Plaintiff will adjust his calculations accordingly.

19. Plaintiff’s last day of work was on or about May 01, 2020, day in which he learned that he 

was positive for the Coronavirus-19. Plaintiff was fully asymptomatic, and he was fired 

after he finished his self-isolation period. 

20. Plaintiff EDERSON J. PACHECO seeks to recover regular and overtime wages for every 

hour above 40 that he worked, liquidated damages, and any other relief as allowable by 

law. 

21. The additional persons who may become Plaintiffs in this action are employees and/or 

former employees of Defendant who are and who were subject to the unlawful payroll 

practices and procedures of Defendant and were not paid overtime wages at the rate of time 

and one half of their regular rate of pay for all overtime hours worked over forty. 

22. FMLA and FFCRA CLAIM.- The Plaintiff incorporates his allegations from paragraphs 1 

through 19 as if fully restated herein.

Case 0:20-cv-61540-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/29/2020 Page 4 of 21
Page 5 of 21

23. Throughout his employment with Defendant, the Plaintiff performed his duties in an 

exemplary fashion. The Plaintiff had duties as a janitor and cleaning employee at the 

clinical laboratory Quest Diagnostics, in Miramar, Florida. 

24. On or about April 24, 2020, at his request, because he had a newborn baby girl, and because 

of the nature of his work, the Plaintiff took the COVID-19 test. 

25. On or about May 01, 2020, Plaintiff learned that he tested positive for the COVID-19. The 

Plaintiff was fully asymptomatic. Plaintiff immediately informed his direct supervisor Alex 

Diaz about the results of his test. 

26. Plaintiff was sent home to begin his quarantine period. Following medical advice, the 

Plaintiff repeated the test around May 15, 2020, but the test still showed virus activity.

27. On or about May 22, Plaintiff tested negative for the virus. 

28. Plaintiff was expecting the clearance to return to work, and he constantly updated the 

Defendant about his medical condition. However, Defendant fired Plaintiff. 

29. On or about May 15, 2020 supervisor Alex Diaz fired Plaintiff, he stated that the Defendant 

did not want him anymore.

30. Plaintiff tried to recover his work, and he called management to inform that he was able to 

work, but the Defendant never called Plaintiff to work again.

31. Defendant YORKSHIRE BUILDING fired Plaintiff before he was cleared to return to 

work. Plaintiff was unlawfully and retaliatory terminated by his employer.

32. Defendant YORKSHIRE BUILDING violated Plaintiff’s protected rights under the 

Family Medical Leave Act 29 U.S.C. Section 2612 (a)(1), as amended, when it failed to 

inform Plaintiff that he was eligible to take leave under the FMLA because of his qualifying 

medical condition.

Case 0:20-cv-61540-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/29/2020 Page 5 of 21
Page 6 of 21

33. Defendant YORKSHIRE BUILDING violated Plaintiff’s protected rights under the 

Families First Coronavirus Response Act (“FFCRA”), 116 P.L. 116-136, as amended,

when it fired Plaintiff due to the COVID-19 diagnosis, and therefore should be punishable 

under FLSA, 29 U.S.C. § 215 (a) (3).

34. As a direct and proximate cause of Defendant’s willful, wanton, and malicious acts 

described in part above, Plaintiff has sustained damages for the loss of his employment, as 

well as the security and peace of mind it provided him. Plaintiff has incurred additional 

damages including lost wages, pain and suffering, mental anguish, and other damages 

connected with the loss of his job. 

35. Plaintiff seeks to recover damages pursuant to the Family Medical Leave Act; and to 

Families First Coronavirus Response Act (“FFCRA”), 116 P.L. 116-136, as amended; and 

any other remedy, as allowable by law.

COUNT I:

WAGE AND HOUR FEDERAL STATUTORY VIOLATION;

FAILURE TO PAY OVERTIME

36. Plaintiff EDERSON J. PACHECO re-adopts every factual allegation as stated in 

paragraphs 1-21 concerning to FLSA, as if set out in full herein. 

37. This cause of action is brought by Plaintiff EDERSON J. PACHECO as a collective action 

to recover from the Defendant overtime compensation, liquidated damages, costs, and 

reasonable attorney’s fees under the provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act, as 

amended, 29 U.S.C. § 201 et seq (the “FLA or the “ACT”), on behalf of Plaintiff and all 

other current and former employees similarly situated to Plaintiff (“the asserted class”) and 

who worked in excess of forty (40) hours during one or more weeks on or after August 

Case 0:20-cv-61540-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/29/2020 Page 6 of 21
Page 7 of 21

2019, (the “material time”) without being compensated “at a rate not less than one and a 

half times the regular rate at which he is employed.”

38. The Defendant YORKSHIRE BUILDING was and is engaged in interstate commerce as 

defined in §§ 3 (r) and 3(s) of the Act, 29 U.S.C. § 203(r) and 203(s)(1)(A). The Defendant 

is a commercial provider of maintenance and janitorial and is engaged in interstate 

commerce. The Defendant had more than two employees recurrently engaged in 

commerce or the production of goods and services for commerce by regularly and 

recurrently ordering supplies produced out of state, by using the instrumentalities of 

interstate commerce to accept and solicit funds from non-Florida sources, by using 

electronic devices to authorize credit card transactions. Upon information and belief, the 

annual gross revenue of the Employer/Defendant was always more than $500,000 per 

annum. By reason of the foregoing, Defendant’s business activities involve those to which 

the Fair Labor Standards Act applies. Therefore, there is FLSA enterprise coverage.

39. Plaintiff and those similarly situated were employed by an enterprise engaged in interstate 

commerce. Plaintiff and those similarly situated through their daily activities were 

regularly engaged in interstate commerce. The Plaintiff regularly handled and worked on 

goods and materials that were produced for commerce and were moved across State lines 

at any time during the business. Therefore, there is FLSA individual coverage.

40. Defendant YORKSHIRE BUILDING employed Plaintiff EDERSON J. PACHECO 

approximately from August 01, 2019, to May 01, 2020, or 39 weeks. 

41. The Plaintiff was hired as a non-exempted, full-time cleaning employee, and he was 

assigned to work at Quest Diagnostics, in Miramar, Florida. At the clinical laboratory, The 

Plaintiff had duties as a janitor and cleaning employee. 

Case 0:20-cv-61540-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/29/2020 Page 7 of 21
Page 8 of 21

42. The Plaintiff was paid at a rate of $14.00 an hour. The Plaintiff’s overtime rate should be 

$21.00 an hour.

43. During his time of employment with Defendant, Plaintiff had an irregular schedule, 

Plaintiff worked 5 days per week from Monday to Friday between 8:00 AM to 4:30, 5:00 

PM or later. 

44. The Plaintiff always worked more than 40 hours in a week, but he was paid for an average 

of 42.5 regular hours. In weeks in which Plaintiff worked many overtime hours, he was 

paid for all his hours, but at his regular rate. However, Plaintiff was not paid for overtime 

hours, as required by law. 

45. The Plaintiff estimates that he worked an average of 52.91 hours every week. Thus, the 

Plaintiff estimates that he is owed half-time for an average of 12.91 overtime hours every 

week.

46. The Plaintiff clocked in and out and the Defendant was able to keep track of the hours 

worked by the Plaintiff and other similarly situated individuals. 

47. Therefore, Defendant willfully failed to pay Plaintiff overtime hours at the rate of time and 

one-half his regular rate for every hour that he worked over forty (40), in violation of 

Section 7 (a) of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (29 U.S.C. 207(a)(1).

48. The Plaintiff was paid bi-weekly with checks and paystubs providing the number of hours 

paid at his regular rate. 

49. Plaintiff’s last day of work was on or about May 01, 2020, day in which he learned that he 

was positive for the Coronavirus-19, and then he was fired.

50. The records, if any, concerning the number of hours worked by the Plaintiff and those 

similarly situated, and the compensation paid to such employees should be in the 

Case 0:20-cv-61540-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/29/2020 Page 8 of 21
Page 9 of 21

possession and custody of the Defendant. However, upon information and belief, 

Defendant did not maintain time accurate records of hours worked by the Plaintiff and 

other employees. 

51. The Defendant violated the record-keeping requirements of FLSA, 29 CFR Part 516.

52. Upon information and belief, Defendants never posted any notice, as required by the Fair 

Labor Standards Act and Federal Law, to inform employees of their Federal rights to 

overtime and minimum wage payments. Defendants violated the Posting requirements of 

29 U.S.C. § 516.4.

53. Plaintiff is not in possession of time and payment records, but he will offer an average good 

faith estimate of unpaid overtime hours based on some paystubs in his possession. After 

proper discovery, the Plaintiff will adjust his calculations accordingly.

* Please note that these amounts are based on a preliminary calculation and that these 

figures could be subject to modifications as discovery could dictate.

a. Total amount of alleged unpaid O/T wages:

Three Thousand Five Hundred Twenty-Four Dollars and 43/100 ($3,524.43)

b. Calculation of such wages:

Relevant weeks of employment: 39 weeks

 Total number of relevant weeks: 39 weeks

Total hours worked: 52.91 hours weekly

Total overtime hours: 12.91 hour weekly

Regular rate: $14.00 an hour x 1.5 = $21.00

Overtime rate: $21.00-$14.00 rate paid= $7.00 half-time difference

Half-time O/T $7.00 x 12.91 O/T hours =$90.37 x 39 weeks=$3,524.43

 

c. Nature of wages (e.g. overtime or straight time):

 This amount represents unpaid half-time overtime wages.

Case 0:20-cv-61540-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/29/2020 Page 9 of 21
Page 10 of 21

54. At all times, the Employer/Defendant failed to comply with Title 29 U.S.C. §207 (a) (1).

In that, Plaintiff and those similarly-situated performed services and worked over the 

maximum hours provided by the Act but no provision was made by the Defendant to 

properly pay them at the rate of time and one half for all hours worked in excess of forty 

hours (40) per workweek as provided in said Act. 

55. Defendant knew and/or showed reckless disregard of the provisions of the Act concerning 

the payment of overtime wages as required by the Fair Labor Standards Act and remain

owing Plaintiff and those similarly-situated these overtime wages since the commencement 

of Plaintiff’s and those similarly-situated employee’s employment with Defendant as set 

forth above, and Plaintiff and those similarly-situated are entitled to recover double 

damages. 

56. Defendant YORKSHIRE BUILDING willfully and intentionally refused to pay Plaintiff 

overtime wages at the rate of time and one half his regular rate, as required by the law of 

the United States, and remain owing Plaintiff these overtime wages since the 

commencement of Plaintiff’s employment with Defendant as set forth above. 

57. The Plaintiff has retained the law offices of the undersigned attorney to represent him in 

this action and is obligated to pay a reasonable attorneys’ fee. 

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff EDERSON J. PACHECO and those similarly situated respectfully 

requests that this Honorable Court: 

A. Enter judgment for Plaintiff EDERSON J. PACHECO and other similarly situated

individuals and against the Defendant YORKSHIRE BUILDING; 

B. based on Defendant’s willful violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C. § 

Case 0:20-cv-61540-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/29/2020 Page 10 of 21
Page 11 of 21

201 et seq.; and

C. Award Plaintiff EDERSON J. PACHECO actual damages in the amount shown to be 

due for unpaid overtime compensation for hours worked in excess of forty weekly, with 

interest; and

D. Award Plaintiff an equal amount in double damages/liquidated damages; and

E. Award Plaintiff reasonable attorneys' fees and costs of suit; and 

F. Grant such other and further relief as this Court deems equitable and just and/or 

available pursuant to Federal Law. 

JURY DEMAND

Plaintiff EDERSON J. PACHECO demands trial by a jury of all issues triable as of right by a jury.

COUNT II:

VIOLATION OF FAMILY & MEDICAL LEAVE ACT OF 1993;

INTERFERENCE WITH FMLA RIGHTS

58. Plaintiff EDERSON J. PACHECO re-adopts every factual allegation about the Family 

Medical Leave Act as stated in paragraphs 1-6 and 22-36 above, or the FMLA allegations, 

as if set out in full herein. 

59. This is an action against corporate Defendant YORKSHIRE BUILDING for damages and 

injunctive relief for violation of the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 (29 U.S.C. § 

2601-2654).

60. At all times relevant and material, the Defendant YORKSHIRE BUILDING, is an 

Employer under the FMLA, as defined in 29 U.S.C. § 2611(4). Defendant was always 

pertinent to this Complaint, engaged in interstate commerce, and employed 50 or more 

employees within a 75 miles radius of the facility where the Plaintiff worked. 

Case 0:20-cv-61540-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/29/2020 Page 11 of 21
Page 12 of 21

61. Plaintiff EDERSON J. PACHECO is a qualified member of the protected class within the 

purview of 29 USC Section 2601, The Family & Medical Leave Act.

62. The Defendant YORKSHIRE BUILDING employed Plaintiff EDERSON J. PACHECO

from approximately August 01, 2019, to May 01, 2020, or 39 weeks.

63. Plaintiff was hired as a full-time janitorial employee, and at the time of his termination, 

Plaintiff was paid an hourly rate of $14.00 an hour.

64. Plaintiff had worked for YORKSHIRE BUILDING for more than 1250 hours in the 12 

months preceding his need for medical leave.

65. At all times material, Plaintiff was qualified to perform his job as a janitor and cleaning 

employee within the legitimate expectations of his employer. 

66. However, on or around May 01, 2020, Plaintiff informed his direct supervisor Alex Diaz 

that he tested positive for COVID-19. 

67. Plaintiff initiated his self-quarantine related to COVID-19, a qualifying condition under 

the FMLA, and he took 2 weeks of unprotected leave to treat his qualifying medical 

condition.

68. Defendant YORKSHIRE BUILDING violated Plaintiff’s FMLA protections when it failed 

to inform Plaintiff that he was eligible to take protected leave under the FMLA. According 

to 29 CFR §825.300 (a)(1) and (b)(1), employers are required to inform employees when 

they meet the requirements to be eligible for FMLA. YORKSHIRE BUILDING did not 

inform Plaintiff of his FMLA rights.

69. Plaintiff was expecting to get back to work after his quarantine period and upon medical 

clearance.

Case 0:20-cv-61540-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/29/2020 Page 12 of 21
Page 13 of 21

70. Instead, on or about May 15, 2020, the Plaintiff was wrongfully terminated and his rights 

under the provisions of the Family Medical Leave Act were violated. 

71. Defendant YORKSHIRE BUILDING is subjected to the provisions of the Family and 

Medical Leave Act of 1993 (29 U.S.C. § 2601-2654). Defendant interfered with Plaintiff's 

rights. 

72. 29 U.S. CODE § 2615 states in pertinent part: 

a) Interference with rights 

(1) Exercise of rights 

It shall be unlawful for any employer to interfere with, restrain, or deny the exercise of or 

the attempt to exercise, any right provided under this subchapter.

(2) Discrimination 

It shall be unlawful for any employer to discharge or in any other manner discriminate 

against any individual for opposing any practice made unlawful by this subchapter.

73. Plaintiff was entitled to FMLA leave. However, Defendant in complete disregard of 

Plaintiff’s protected rights under the Family Medical Leave Act fired Plaintiff, preventing 

him from obtaining the benefits of FMLA to treat his condition, to obey Federal, State, and 

local quarantine orders, and then continuing his job in his original position or any 

equivalent position. 

74. Defendant YORKSHIRE BUILDING willfully and wantonly denied or otherwise 

interfered with Plaintiff substantive rights under FMLA, 29 U.S.C. Sect 2615(a)(1), (a) (2), 

and 2615(b) (2) which states in pertinent part: (b) Interference with proceedings or 

inquiries........(2) It shall be unlawful for any person to discharge or in any other manner 

discriminate against any individual because such individual—has given, or is about to give, 

any information in connection with any inquiry or proceeding relating to any right provided 

under this subchapter”

75. As a direct and proximate cause of Defendant’s willful, wanton, and malicious acts 

Case 0:20-cv-61540-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/29/2020 Page 13 of 21
Page 14 of 21

described in part above, Plaintiff has sustained damages for the loss of his employment, as 

well as the security and peace of mind it provided him. Plaintiff has sustained mental, 

nervous, and emotional injury. Plaintiff has incurred additional damages including lost 

wages, pain and suffering, mental anguish, loss of capacity for the enjoyment of life, and 

other damages attendant with the loss of his job. 

76. Plaintiff has retained the law offices of the undersigned attorney to represent him in this 

action and is obligated to pay reasonable attorneys’ fees. 

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff EDERSON J. PACHECO respectfully requests that this Honorable 

Court will grant judgment:

A. Finding that YORKSHIRE BUILDING’S actions towards Plaintiff to be violative of 

the Plaintiff’s rights under the FMLA;

B. Awarding Plaintiff EDERSON J. PACHECO payment of all back wages lost benefits, 

and other economic damages, including front pay, found by the Court to be due under 

FMLA;

C. Awarding Plaintiff an additional equal amount as liquidated damages for Defendant’s 

willful violation of the FMLA;

D. Granting such other and further relief as is just and proper;

E. Awarding Plaintiff costs, including a reasonable attorney’s fee.

JURY DEMAND

Plaintiff EDERSON J. PACHECO demands trial by a jury of all issues triable as of right by a jury. 

COUNT III:

VIOLATION OF FAMILY & MEDICAL LEAVE ACT OF 1993

RETALIATION FOR EXERCISING FMLA RIGHTS

Case 0:20-cv-61540-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/29/2020 Page 14 of 21
Page 15 of 21

77. Plaintiff EDERSON J. PACHECO re-adopts every factual allegation about the Family 

Medical Leave Act as stated in paragraphs 1-6 and 22-36 above, or the FMLA allegations, 

as if set out in full herein. 

78. This is an action against corporate Defendant YORKSHIRE BUILDING for damages and 

injunctive relief for violation of the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 (29 U.S.C. § 

2601-2654).

79. At all times relevant and material, the Defendant YORKSHIRE BUILDING, is an 

Employer under the FMLA, as defined in 29 U.S.C. § 2611(4). Defendant, was at all-time 

pertinent to this Complaint, engaged in interstate commerce, and employed 50 or more 

employees within a 75 miles radius of the facility where the Plaintiff worked. 

80. Plaintiff EDERSON J. PACHECO is a qualified member of the protected class within the 

purview of 29 USC Section 2601, The Family & Medical Leave Act.

81. The Defendant YORKSHIRE BUILDING employed Plaintiff EDERSON J. PACHECO

from approximately August 01, 2019, to May 01, 2020, or 39 weeks.

82. Plaintiff was hired as a full-time janitorial employee, and at the time of his termination, 

Plaintiff was paid an hourly rate of $14.00 an hour.

83. Plaintiff had worked for YORKSHIRE BUILDING for more than 1250 hours in the 12 

months preceding his need for medical leave.

84. At all times material, Plaintiff was qualified to perform his job as a janitor and cleaning 

employee within the legitimate expectations of his employer. 

85. However, on or around May 01, 2020, Plaintiff informed his direct supervisor Alex Diaz 

that he tested positive for COVID-19. 

Case 0:20-cv-61540-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/29/2020 Page 15 of 21
Page 16 of 21

86. Plaintiff initiated his self-quarantine related to COVID-19, a qualifying condition under 

the FMLA, and he took 2 weeks of unprotected leave to treat his qualifying medical 

condition.

87. Plaintiff engaged in statutorily protected conduct by giving notice to his employer about 

his need for a protected FMLA leave.

88. Plaintiff suffered a materially adverse action of a type that would dissuade a reasonable 

employee from engaging in statutorily protected activity. Specifically, Defendant 

terminated Plaintiff’s employment. 

89. There is a causal link between Plaintiff’s need for an FMLA leave and the adverse action. 

90. Plaintiff was wrongfully terminated from his position in retaliation to his qualified position 

to exercise his rights under the Act thereby adversely affecting Plaintiff. 

91. Defendant YORKSHIRE BUILDING is subjected to the provisions of the Family and 

Medical Leave Act of 1993 (29 U.S.C. § 2601-2654). Defendant retaliated against Plaintiff 

violating 29 U.S. CODE § 2615 and 29 C.F.R § 825.220 which states in pertinent part: 

§ 825.220 Protection for employees who request leave or otherwise assert FMLA rights. 

(a) The FMLA prohibits interference with an employee's rights under the law, and with 

legal proceedings or inquiries relating to an employee's rights. More specifically, the law 

contains the following employee protections: 

(1) An employer is prohibited from interfering with, restraining, or denying the exercise 

of (or attempts to exercise) any rights provided by the Act. 

(2) An employer is prohibited from discharging or in any other way discriminating 

against any person (whether or not an employee) for opposing or complaining about 

any unlawful practice under the Act. 

92. Plaintiff was entitled to FMLA leave. However, Defendant in complete disregard of 

Plaintiff’s protected rights under the Family Medical Leave Act, acting in bad faith, fired 

Plaintiff, preventing him from obtaining the benefits of FMLA leave, and then continuing 

Case 0:20-cv-61540-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/29/2020 Page 16 of 21
Page 17 of 21

his job in his original position or any equivalent position. 

93. Defendant willfully and wantonly denied, or otherwise interfered and retaliated against 

Plaintiff for his entitlement to exercise substantive rights under the Family Medical Leave 

Act. 

94. As a direct and proximate cause of Defendant’s willful, wanton, and malicious acts 

described in part above, Plaintiff has sustained damages for the loss of his employment, as 

well as the security and peace of mind it provided him. Plaintiff has incurred additional 

damages including lost wages, pain and suffering, mental anguish, and other damages 

connected with the loss of his job. 

95. Plaintiff has retained the law offices of the undersigned attorney to represent him in this 

action and is obligated to pay reasonable attorneys’ fees. 

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff EDERSON J. PACHECO respectfully requests that this Honorable 

Court will grant judgment:

A. Finding that YORKSHIRE BUILDING’S actions toward Plaintiff to be violative of 

the Plaintiff’s rights under the FMLA.

B. Awarding Plaintiff EDERSON J. PACHECO payment of all back wages lost benefits, 

and other economic damages, including front pay, found by the Court to be due under 

FMLA;

C. Awarding Plaintiff an additional equal amount as liquidated damages for Defendant’s 

willful violation of the FMLA;

D. Granting such other and further relief as is just and proper;

E. Awarding Plaintiff costs, including a reasonable attorney’s fee.

Case 0:20-cv-61540-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/29/2020 Page 17 of 21
Page 18 of 21

JURY DEMAND

Plaintiff EDERSON J. PACHECO demands trial by a jury of all issues triable as of right by a jury.

COUNT IV:

VIOLATION OF THE FAMILY FIRST CORONAVIRUS RESPONSE ACT 

(“FFCRA”) P.L. 116-136, AS AMENDED

96. Plaintiff EDERSON J. PACHECO re-adopts every factual allegation about the FFCRA, as 

stated in paragraphs 1-6 and 22-36 above, as if set out in full herein. 

97. At all times relevant and material, the Defendant YORKSHIRE BUILDING, is an 

Employer under the FMLA, as defined in 29 U.S.C. § 2611(4). 

98. Plaintiff EDERSON J. PACHECO is a qualified member of the protected class within the 

purview of 29 USC Section 2601, The Family & Medical Leave Act.

99. The Defendant YORKSHIRE BUILDING employed Plaintiff EDERSON J. PACHECO

from approximately August 01, 2019, to May 01, 2020, or 39 weeks.

100. Plaintiff was hired as a full-time janitorial employee, and at the time of his

termination, Plaintiff was paid an hourly rate of $14.00 an hour.

101. At all times material, Plaintiff was qualified to perform his job as a janitor and 

cleaning employee within the legitimate expectations of his employer. 

102. Defendant YORKSHIRE BUILDING is a large business with less than five 

hundred (500) employees and is therefore subject to the FFCRA

103. Plaintiff had worked for YORKSHIRE BUILDING for more than 30 days before

his need for medical leave.

104. On or about May 01, 2020, Plaintiff tested positive for COVID-19. 1) Plaintiff was 

subjected to a Federal, State, or Local quarantine or isolation order related to COVID-19; 

Case 0:20-cv-61540-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/29/2020 Page 18 of 21
Page 19 of 21

2) Plaintiff had been advised by a health care provider to self-quarantine related to COVID19; 3) Plaintiff was under observation because of his COVID-19 diagnosis.

105. Defendant YORKSHIRE BUILDING violated the FFCRA by discharging Plaintiff 

from his position based upon his positive COVID-19 diagnosis and orders from his 

physician to self-isolate. 

106. Under the FFCRA, employers are to provide their employees with paid sick leave 

up to two (2) weeks or eighty (80) hours at their regular rate of pay, which the Defendant 

did.

107. However, the Defendant YORKSHIRE BUILDING terminated Plaintiff on or 

about May 15, 2020.

108. Defendant YORKSHIRE BUILDING was fully aware of the health status of the 

Plaintiff by virtue of the regular updates he provided to his supervisor. 

109. Before Plaintiff was cleared to return to work by physicians because of the concerns 

for his health regarding the positive COVID-19 diagnosis, he was unlawfully and 

retaliatorily terminated by his employer, YORKSHIRE BUILDING.

110. Plaintiff’s need for time off work, due to the concerns related to COVID-19 

expressed by his physicians, was the motivating factor behind his termination. 

111. Pursuant to the FFCRA, the Defendant YORKSHIRE BUILDING was prohibited 

from terminating Plaintiff for his physician-ordered time off work due to COVID-19, and 

therefore shall be punishable under FLSA, 29 U.S.C. § 215 (a) (3). 

112. 29 U.S.C. 215(a)(3) states... it shall be unlawful for any person— “to discharge or 

in any other manner discriminate against any employee because such employee has filed 

Case 0:20-cv-61540-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/29/2020 Page 19 of 21
Page 20 of 21

any complaint or instituted or caused to be instituted any proceeding under or related to 

this chapter, or has testified or is about to testify in any such proceeding,......”

113. Defendant YORKSHIRE BUILDING willfully and intentionally retaliated against 

Plaintiff by firing him. 

114. The motivating factor which caused the Plaintiff’s termination as described above 

was the 2 weeks leave to treat his COVID-19 diagnosis. In other words, the Plaintiff would 

not have been discharged but for his positive COVID-19 test and related 2 weeks selfisolation period.

115. The Defendant’s termination of the Plaintiff was in direct violation of 29 U.S.C. 

215 (a) (3) and, as a direct result, the Plaintiff has been damaged.

116. The Plaintiff has retained the law offices of the undersigned attorney to represent 

him in this action and is obligated to pay a reasonable attorneys’ fee. 

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff EDERSON J. PACHECO respectfully requests that this Honorable 

Court:

A. Issue a declaratory judgment that Defendant’ acts, policies, practices, and procedures 

complained of herein violated provisions of the Families First Coronavirus Response 

Act (“FFCRA”), 116 P.L. 116-136, as amended;

B. Enter judgment against Defendant YORKSHIRE BUILDING, and DAWN M. 

HURLBURT that Plaintiff EDERSON J. PACHECO recovers compensatory, damages 

and an equal amount of liquidated damages as provided under the law and in 29 U.S.C. 

§ 216(b); 

C. That Plaintiff recovers an award of reasonable attorney fees, costs, and expenses. 

Case 0:20-cv-61540-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/29/2020 Page 20 of 21
Page 21 of 21

D. Order the Defendant to make whole the Plaintiff by providing appropriate back pay and 

other benefits wrongly denied in an amount to be shown at trial and other affirmative 

relief; 

E. Plaintiff EDERSON J. PACHECO further prays for such additional relief as the 

interests of justice may require.

JURY DEMAND

Plaintiff EDERSON J. PACHECO demands trial by a jury of all issues triable as of right by a jury.

Dated: July 28, 2020 

 Respectfully submitted,

 

 By: _/s/ Zandro E. Palma____

 ZANDRO E. PALMA, P.A.

 Florida Bar No.: 0024031

 9100 S. Dadeland Blvd.

 Suite 1500

 Miami, FL 33156

 Telephone: (305) 446-1500

 Facsimile: (305) 446-1502

 zep@thepalmalawgroup.com

 Attorney for Plaintiff 

 

Case 0:20-cv-61540-AHS Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/29/2020 Page 21 of 21