Page 1 of 12

Shelley Whittenberg, et al. v. Centene Company of Texas, L.P., et al.

U.S.D.C. (W.D. Tex.) Case No. 5:20-cv-353

Original Complaint—Collective Action

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

SAN ANTONIO DIVISION

SHELLEY WHITTENBERG, Individually and PLAINTIFF

on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated

vs. No. 5:20-cv-353

CENTENE COMPANY OF TEXAS, L.P. DEFENDANTS

CENTENE CORPORATION and

CENTENE MANAGEMENT COMPANY, LLC

ORIGINAL COMPLAINT—COLLECTIVE ACTION

COMES NOW Plaintiff Shelley Whittenberg (“Plaintiff”), individually and on 

behalf of all others similarly situated, by and through her attorney Josh Sanford of 

Sanford Law Firm, PLLC, and for her Original Complaint—Collective Action 

(“Complaint”) against Defendants Centene Company of Texas, L.P., Centene 

Corporation, and Centene Management Company, LLC (collectively “Defendant”

or “Defendants”), she does state and allege as follows:

I. PRELIMINARY STATEMENTS

1. Plaintiff, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, 

brings this action under the Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C. § 201, et seq.

(“FLSA”), for declaratory judgment, monetary damages, liquidated damages, 

prejudgment interest, and costs, including reasonable attorneys’ fees as a result 

of Defendants’ failure to pay Plaintiff and all others similarly situated a proper 

overtime compensation for all hours that Plaintiff and all others similarly situated 

worked.

Case 5:20-cv-00353 Document 1 Filed 03/20/20 Page 1 of 12
Page 2 of 12

Shelley Whittenberg, et al. v. Centene Company of Texas, L.P., et al.

U.S.D.C. (W.D. Tex.) Case No. 5:20-cv-353

Original Complaint—Collective Action

II. JURISDICTION AND VENUE

2. The United States District Court for the Western District of Texas

has subject matter jurisdiction over this suit under the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 

1331 because this suit raises federal questions under the FLSA.

3. Defendants conduct business within the State of Texas, operating 

and managing a healthcare management company with locations worldwide.

4. Venue lies properly within this Court under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b)(1)

and (c)(2), because the State of Texas has personal jurisdiction over Defendants, 

and Defendants therefore “reside” in Texas.

5. Plaintiff was employed by Defendants at one of their healthcare 

management offices located in the San Antonio Division of the Western District of 

Texas.

6. The acts alleged in this Complaint had their principal effect within 

the San Antonio Division of the Western District of Texas, and venue is proper in

this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391.

III. THE PARTIES

7. Plaintiff is an individual resident and domiciliary of the State of 

Texas.

8. Separate Defendant Centene Company of Texas, L.P. (“CCT”), is a 

domestic limited partnership.

9. CCT’s registered agent for service is CT Corporation System at 

1999 Bryan Street, Suite 900, Dallas, Texas 75201.

Case 5:20-cv-00353 Document 1 Filed 03/20/20 Page 2 of 12
Page 3 of 12

Shelley Whittenberg, et al. v. Centene Company of Texas, L.P., et al.

U.S.D.C. (W.D. Tex.) Case No. 5:20-cv-353

Original Complaint—Collective Action

10. Separate Defendant Centene Corporation (“CC”) is a foreign forprofit corporation.

11. CC’s registered agent for service is CT Corporation System at 1999 

Bryan Street, Suite 900, Dallas, Texas 75201.

12. Separate Defendant Centene Management Company, LLC (“CMC”) 

is a foreign limited liability company.

13. CMC’s registered agent for service is CT Corporation System at 

1999 Bryan Street, Suite 900, Dallas, Texas 75201.

14. Defendants maintain a website at https://www.centene.com/. 

IV. FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS

 

1. Plaintiff repeats and re-alleges all previous paragraphs of this 

Complaint as though fully incorporated in this section.

2. Defendants have unified operational control and management, as 

well as control over employees, including shared power to supervise, hire and 

fire, establish wages and wage policies and set schedules for their employees 

through unified management.

3. Upon information and belief, the revenue generated from CCT, CC 

and CMC is merged and managed in a unified manner.

4. As a result of this unified operation, control and management, 

through shared employees and ownership with the authority to establish wages 

and wage policy, Defendants operate as a single enterprise.

5. During each of the three years preceding the filing of this 

Complaint, Defendant employed at least two individuals who were engaged in 

Case 5:20-cv-00353 Document 1 Filed 03/20/20 Page 3 of 12
Page 4 of 12

Shelley Whittenberg, et al. v. Centene Company of Texas, L.P., et al.

U.S.D.C. (W.D. Tex.) Case No. 5:20-cv-353

Original Complaint—Collective Action

interstate commerce or in the production of goods for interstate commerce, or 

had employees handling, selling, or otherwise working on goods or materials that 

had been moved in or produced for commerce by any person.

6. Defendant’s annual gross volume of sales made or business done 

was not less than $500,000.00 (exclusive of excise taxes at the retail level that

are separately stated) during each of the three calendar years preceding the 

filing of this complaint.

7. At all times material herein, Defendant was an “employer” of 

Plaintiff and similarly situated employees within the meaning of the FLSA.

8. Defendant owns and operates a healthcare management company 

registered to do business in Texas.

9. At all times material herein, Defendant classified Plaintiff as nonexempt from the overtime requirements of the FLSA and paid her an hourly 

wage.

10. At all times material herein, Plaintiff and those similarly situated 

have been entitled to the rights, protections and benefits of the FLSA.

11. Defendant has employed Plaintiff as an hourly-paid Service 

Coordinator from February of 2013 through the present.

12. At all relevant times herein, Defendant directly hired Service 

Coordinators to work for its healthcare management company, paid them wages

and benefits, controlled their work schedules, duties, protocols, applications,

assignments and employment conditions, and kept at least some records 

regarding their employment.

Case 5:20-cv-00353 Document 1 Filed 03/20/20 Page 4 of 12
Page 5 of 12

Shelley Whittenberg, et al. v. Centene Company of Texas, L.P., et al.

U.S.D.C. (W.D. Tex.) Case No. 5:20-cv-353

Original Complaint—Collective Action

13. As a Service Coordinator, Plaintiff’s duties included meeting with 

potential clients in their homes and performing assessments of their eligibility for 

healthcare services, and completing and submitting the related paperwork.

14. Plaintiff and similarly situated employees regularly worked in 

excess of forty (40) hours per week while working for Defendant.

15. In addition to their hourly rate, Plaintiff and similarly situated 

employees periodically received nondiscretionary bonuses. 

16. Plaintiff and similarly situated employees received bonuses based 

on company productivity.

17. These nondiscretionary bonuses were a form of compensation to

Plaintiff and similarly situated employees. 

18. During weeks in which Plaintiff and similarly situated employees 

worked over forty (40) hours, Defendant paid an improper overtime rate because 

Defendant determined the regular rate of pay solely based on employees’ hourly 

rate, without including the value of the nondiscretionary bonuses that Defendant 

provided to Plaintiff and similarly situated employees. 

19. Section 778.208 of Title 29 of the CFR requires that all forms of 

compensation, such as nondiscretionary bonuses, “must be totaled in with other 

earnings to determine the regular rate on which overtime pay must be based.” 

20. Therefore, Defendant violated the FLSA by not including all forms 

of compensation, such as nondiscretionary bonuses, in the regular rate when 

calculating Plaintiff’s and similarly situated employees’ overtime pay.

Case 5:20-cv-00353 Document 1 Filed 03/20/20 Page 5 of 12
Page 6 of 12

Shelley Whittenberg, et al. v. Centene Company of Texas, L.P., et al.

U.S.D.C. (W.D. Tex.) Case No. 5:20-cv-353

Original Complaint—Collective Action

21. Upon information and belief, Defendant’s bonus policy was the

same at all of its locations.

22. At all relevant times herein, Defendant has deprived Plaintiff and 

similarly situated employees of proper overtime compensation for all of the hours

worked over forty (40) per week.

23. Plaintiff was regularly required to perform work from home in the 

evenings, on weekends, and while she was on sick leave or vacation for 

Defendant while she was not clocked in, including completing paperwork and 

responding to urgent emails.

24. Plaintiff spent about ten (10) hours per week working off the clock 

for Defendant.

25. Plaintiff was not compensated for her time spent working off the

clock.

26. Defendant was or should have been aware that Plaintiff’s job duties 

required her to perform work outside of her recorded hours.

27. Defendant’s failure to compensate Plaintiff for her off-the-clock 

work resulted in additional overtime violations.

28. Defendant knew or showed reckless disregard for whether its

actions violated the FLSA. 

IV. REPRESENTATIVE ACTION ALLEGATIONS

29. Plaintiff repeats and re-alleges all previous paragraphs of this 

Complaint as though fully incorporated in this section. 

Case 5:20-cv-00353 Document 1 Filed 03/20/20 Page 6 of 12
Page 7 of 12

Shelley Whittenberg, et al. v. Centene Company of Texas, L.P., et al.

U.S.D.C. (W.D. Tex.) Case No. 5:20-cv-353

Original Complaint—Collective Action

30. Plaintiff brings her FLSA claim on behalf of all other Service 

Coordinators who received nondiscretionary bonuses and were employed by 

Defendant at any time within the applicable statute of limitations period, who 

were classified by Defendant as non-exempt from the overtime requirements of 

the FLSA, and who are entitled to payment of the following types of damages:

A. Payment of a lawful overtime premium for all hours worked for 

Defendant in excess of forty (40) hours in a week; 

B. Liquidated damages; and

C. Attorney’s fees and costs 

47. Plaintiff proposes the following collective under the FLSA:

All hourly-paid Service Coordinators who earned a bonus in

connection with work performed in any week in which they 

worked more than forty hours within the past three years.

48. In conformity with the requirements of FLSA Section 16(b), Plaintiff

has filed or will soon file a written Consent to Join this lawsuit.

49. The relevant time period dates back three years from the date on 

which Plaintiff’s Original Complaint—Collective Action was filed herein and 

continues forward through the date of judgment pursuant to 29 U.S.C. § 255(a),

except as set forth herein below.

50. The proposed FLSA collective members are similarly situated in 

that they share these traits:

A. They were classified by Defendant as non-exempt from the 

overtime requirements of the FLSA;

B. They were paid hourly rates;

Case 5:20-cv-00353 Document 1 Filed 03/20/20 Page 7 of 12
Page 8 of 12

Shelley Whittenberg, et al. v. Centene Company of Texas, L.P., et al.

U.S.D.C. (W.D. Tex.) Case No. 5:20-cv-353

Original Complaint—Collective Action

C. They were eligible for and received bonuses;

D. They had the same or substantially similar job duties, requirements

and pay provisions;

E. They worked over forty (40) hours in at least one week in which

they received a bonus; and

F. They were subject to Defendant’s common policy of improperly

calculating overtime pay for hours worked over forty (40) per week.

51. Plaintiff is unable to state the exact number of the class but 

believes that there are at least two hundred (200) other employees who worked 

as Service Coordinators and received an improperly calculated overtime rate due 

to nondiscretionary bonuses.

52. Defendant can readily identify the members of the Section 16(b)

class which encompasses all hourly Service Coordinators who received a bonus

and worked more than forty hours in a week.

53. The names and physical and mailing addresses of the FLSA 

collective action plaintiffs are available from Defendant, and a Court-approved 

Notice should be provided to the FLSA collective action plaintiffs via first class 

mail and email to their last known physical and electronic mailing addresses as 

soon as possible, together with other documents and information descriptive of 

Plaintiff’s FLSA claim.

V. FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF

(Individual Claim for Violation of the FLSA)

54. Plaintiff repeats and re-alleges all the preceding paragraphs of this 

Complaint as if fully set forth in this section.

Case 5:20-cv-00353 Document 1 Filed 03/20/20 Page 8 of 12
Page 9 of 12

Shelley Whittenberg, et al. v. Centene Company of Texas, L.P., et al.

U.S.D.C. (W.D. Tex.) Case No. 5:20-cv-353

Original Complaint—Collective Action

55. Plaintiff asserts this claim for damages and declaratory relief 

pursuant to the FLSA, 29 U.S.C. § 201, et seq.

56. 29 U.S.C. § 207 requires employers to pay employees one and 

one-half (1.5) times the employee’s regular rate for all hours that the employee 

works in excess of forty (40) per week. 

57. Defendant classified Plaintiff as non-exempt from the overtime 

requirements of the FLSA. 

58. Defendant violated 29 U.S.C. § 207 by not paying Plaintiff a proper 

overtime rate of compensation for all hours worked in excess of forty (40) per 

week. 

59. Defendant violated Section 778.208 of Title 29 of the Code of 

Federal Regulations by not including all forms of compensation, including 

nondiscretionary bonuses, for Plaintiff in her regular rate when calculating her 

overtime pay.

60. Defendant failed to pay Plaintiff for all hours worked, including 

failing to pay Plaintiff an overtime rate of one and one-half (1.5) times her regular 

rate for all hours worked over forty in a week. 

61. Defendant’s conduct and practice, as described above, has been 

and is willful, intentional, unreasonable, arbitrary and in bad faith.

62. By reason of the unlawful acts alleged in this Complaint, Defendant 

is liable to Plaintiff for, and Plaintiff seeks, unpaid overtime wages, liquidated 

damages, and costs, including reasonable attorney’s fees as provided by the 

FLSA.

Case 5:20-cv-00353 Document 1 Filed 03/20/20 Page 9 of 12
Page 10 of 12

Shelley Whittenberg, et al. v. Centene Company of Texas, L.P., et al.

U.S.D.C. (W.D. Tex.) Case No. 5:20-cv-353

Original Complaint—Collective Action

63. Alternatively, should the Court find that Defendant acted in good 

faith in failing to pay Plaintiff as provided by the FLSA, Plaintiff is entitled to an 

award of prejudgment interest at the applicable legal rate.

VI. SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF

(Collective Action Claim for Violation of the FLSA)

64. Plaintiff repeats and re-alleges all the preceding paragraphs of this 

Complaint as if fully set forth in this section.

65. Plaintiff brings this collective action on behalf of herself and all 

hourly Service Coordinators who were employed by Defendant and received 

nondiscretionary bonuses, to recover monetary damages owed by Defendant to 

Plaintiff and members of the putative collective for overtime compensation for all 

the hours she and they worked in excess of forty (40) each week. 

66. 29 U.S.C. § 207 requires employers to pay employees one and 

one-half (1.5) times the employee’s regular rate for all hours that the employee 

works in excess of forty (40) per week. 

67. Defendant violated Section 778.208 of Title 29 of the Code of 

Federal Regulations by not including all forms of compensation, such as 

nondiscretionary bonuses, given to Plaintiff and those similarly situated in their 

regular rate when calculating their overtime pay.

68. In the past three years, Defendant has employed more than two 

hundred (200) hourly Service Coordinators who were eligible for nondiscretionary 

bonuses.

Case 5:20-cv-00353 Document 1 Filed 03/20/20 Page 10 of 12
Page 11 of 12

Shelley Whittenberg, et al. v. Centene Company of Texas, L.P., et al.

U.S.D.C. (W.D. Tex.) Case No. 5:20-cv-353

Original Complaint—Collective Action

69. Upon information and belief, Plaintiff and all or almost all Service 

Coordinators who received nondiscretionary bonuses regularly worked more than 

forty (40) hours in a week.

70. Defendant failed to pay Plaintiff and similarly situated employees at 

the proper overtime rate. 

71. Defendant’s conduct and practice, as described above, has been 

and is willful, intentional, unreasonable, arbitrary and in bad faith.

72. By reason of the unlawful acts alleged in this Complaint, Defendant 

is liable to Plaintiff and all those similarly situated for, and Plaintiff and all those 

similarly situated seek, unpaid overtime wages, liquidated damages, and costs,

including reasonable attorney’s fees as provided by the FLSA.

73. Alternatively, should the Court find that Defendant acted in good 

faith in failing to pay Plaintiff and all those similarly situated as provided for by the 

FLSA, Plaintiff and all those similarly situated are entitled to an award of 

prejudgment interest at the applicable legal rate

VIII. PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, premises considered, Plaintiff Shelley Whittenberg,

individually on behalf of all others similarly situated, respectfully prays as follows:

A. That each Defendant be summoned to appear and answer this 

Complaint; 

B. A declaratory judgment that Defendant’s practices alleged herein 

violate the FLSA;

Case 5:20-cv-00353 Document 1 Filed 03/20/20 Page 11 of 12
Page 12 of 12

Shelley Whittenberg, et al. v. Centene Company of Texas, L.P., et al.

U.S.D.C. (W.D. Tex.) Case No. 5:20-cv-353

Original Complaint—Collective Action

C. Judgment for damages for all unpaid overtime wage compensation

owed under the FLSA;

D. Judgment for liquidated damages under the FLSA;

E. For a reasonable attorney’s fee, costs, and pre-judgment interest; 

and 

F. Such other relief as this Court may deem just and proper. 

Respectfully submitted,

SHELLEY WHITTENBERG,

Individually and on Behalf of All 

Others Similarly Situated, PLAINTIFF

SANFORD LAW FIRM, PLLC

ONE FINANCIAL CENTER

650 SOUTH SHACKLEFORD, SUITE 411

LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72211

TELEPHONE: (501) 221-0088

FACSIMILE: (888) 787-2040

/s/ Josh Sanford

Josh Sanford

Tex. Bar No. 24077858

josh@sanfordlawfirm.com

Case 5:20-cv-00353 Document 1 Filed 03/20/20 Page 12 of 12