16.  Plaintiff brings claims for relief as a collective action pursuant to FLSA Section  16(b), 29 U.S.C. § 216(b), on behalf of all non-exempt tipped employees, including bartenders,  barbacks, waiters, runners, bussers and delivery persons, employed by Defendants on or after the  date that is six years before the filing of the Complaint in this case as defined herein (“FLSA  Collective Plaintiffs”).   17.  At all relevant times, Plaintiff and FLSA Collective Plaintiffs are and have been  similarly situated, have had substantially similar job requirements and pay provisions, and are  and have been subjected to Defendants’ decisions, policies, plans, programs, practices,  procedures, protocols, routines, and rules, all culminating in a willful failure and refusal to pay  them the prevailing minimum wage. Defendants were not entitled to take any tip credits because  they failed to meet statutory requirements under the FLSA. Furthermore, a subclass of FLSA  Collective Plaintiffs who worked as delivery persons (“Delivery Subclass”) also suffered from  Defendants’ failure and refusal to compensate/reimburse them for costs of tools of the trade,  which cut into their minimum wage. The claims of Plaintiff stated herein are essentially the same  as those of FLSA Collective Plaintiffs.   19.  Plaintiff brings claims for relief pursuant to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure  (“F.R.C.P.”) Rule 23, on behalf of all non-exempt tipped employees, including bartenders,  barbacks, waiters, runners, bussers and delivery persons, employed by Defendants on or after the  date that is six years before the filing of the Complaint in this case as defined herein (the “Class  Period”).   20.  All said persons, including Plaintiff, are referred to herein as the “Class.” The  Class members are readily ascertainable. The number and identity of the Class members are  determinable from the records of Defendants. The hours assigned and worked, the position held,  and rates of pay for each Class member are also determinable from Defendants’ records. For  purposes of notice and other purposes related to this action, their names and addresses are readily  available from Defendants. Notice can be provided by means permissible under F.R.C.P. 23.   21.  The proposed Class is so numerous that a joinder of all members is impracticable,  and the disposition of their claims as a class will benefit the parties and the Court. Although the  precise number of such persons is unknown, the facts on which the calculation of that number  are presently within the sole control of Defendants, there is no doubt that there are more than  forty (40) members of the Class.   23.  Plaintiff is able to fairly and adequately protect the interests of the Class and has  no interests antagonistic to the Class. Plaintiff is represented by attorneys who are experienced  and competent in both class action litigation and employment litigation and have previously  represented plaintiffs in wage and hour cases.   25.  Defendants and other employers throughout the state violate the New York Labor  Law. Current employees are often afraid to assert their rights out of fear of direct or indirect  retaliation. Former employees are fearful of bringing claims because doing so can harm their  employment, future employment, and future efforts to secure employment. Class actions provide  class members who are not named in the Complaint a degree of anonymity, which allows for the  vindication of their rights while eliminating or reducing these risks.   27.  From in or about May 2013 until in or about May 2016, Plaintiff MARTIN  ALVAREZ was employed by Defendants to work as a delivery person for Defendants’  “Schnipper’s 8th Ave & 41st” restaurant located at 620 8th Avenue, New York, NY 10018.   28.  During his employment with Defendants, Plaintiff MARTIN ALVAREZ was  regularly required to work at Defendants’ other three Schnipper’s Restaurants, including  “Schnipper’s 23rd Street & Madison” located at 23 East 23rd Street, New York, NY 10010,  “Schnipper’s 570 Lexington at 51st” located at 570 Lexington Avenue, New York, NY  10022, and “Schnipper’s One NY Plaza” located at One New York Plaza, New York, NY 10004.   30.  From the beginning of his employment with Defendants until in or about  December 2013, Plaintiff MARTIN ALVAREZ was paid at a regular rate of $5.65 per hour. From in  or about January 2014 until in or about December 2014, Plaintiff MARTIN ALVAREZ was paid at a  regular rate of $5.65 per hour and an overtime rate of $9.65 per hour. From in or about January 2015  until in or about December 2015, Plaintiff MARTIN ALVAREZ was paid at a regular rate of $5.65  per hour and an overtime rate of $10.03 per hour. From in or about January 2016 until the end of his  employment with Defendants, Plaintiff MARTIN ALVAREZ was paid at a regular rate of $7.50 per  hour and an overtime rate of $12.00 per hour. Based on Plaintiff MARTIN ALVAREZ’s direct  observations and conversations with other employees at Schnipper’s Restaurants, all FLSA  Collective Plaintiffs and Class members were paid similarly.   31.  Throughout his employment with Defendants, MARTIN ALVAREZ was required  to use his own bicycle for deliveries and was not compensated or reimbursed for the costs of  purchasing and maintaining the bicycle, including repair costs. Based on Plaintiff MARTIN  ALVAREZ’s direct observations and conversations, all delivery persons employed at Schnipper’s  Restaurants were required to use their own bicycles for delivery and was not compensated or  reimbursed for the costs of purchasing and maintaining the bicycle.   32.  At all relevant times, Defendants paid Plaintiff, FLSA Collective Plaintiffs and  Class members at hourly rates below the prevailing minimum wage in violation of the FLSA and  41.  Plaintiff realleges and reavers Paragraphs 1 through 40 of this class and collective  action Complaint as if fully set forth herein.   42.  At all relevant times, Defendants were and continue to be employers engaged in  interstate commerce and/or the production of goods for commerce within the meaning of the  FLSA, 29 U.S.C. §§ 206(a) and 207(a). Further, Plaintiff and FLSA Collective Plaintiffs are  covered individuals within the meaning of the FLSA, 29 U.S.C. §§ 206(a) and 207(a).   43.  At all relevant times, Defendants employed Plaintiff and FLSA Collective  Plaintiffs within the meaning of the FLSA.   44.  At all relevant times, Corporate Defendants had gross annual revenues in excess  of $500,000.   46.  At all relevant times, Defendants had a policy and practice of refusing to  compensate Plaintiff and the Delivery Subclass of costs of tools of the trade in that they never  reimbursed the Delivery Subclass for using their own bicycles for deliveries and paying for the  maintenance, which cut into their minimum wage.   47.  Defendants knew of and/or showed a willful disregard for the provisions of the  FLSA as evidenced by their failure to compensate Plaintiff and FLSA Collective Plaintiffs at the  prevailing minimum wage or reimburse costs of tools of the trade when Defendants knew or  should have known such was due.   48.  Defendants failed to properly disclose or apprise Plaintiff and FLSA Collective  Plaintiffs of their rights under the FLSA.   49.  As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ willful disregard of the FLSA,  Plaintiff and FLSA Collective Plaintiffs are entitled to liquidated damages pursuant to the FLSA.   50.  Due to the intentional, willful and unlawful acts of Defendants, Plaintiff and  FLSA Collective Plaintiffs suffered damages in an amount not presently ascertainable of unpaid  minimum wage and unpaid costs of tools of the trade, plus an equal amount as liquidated  damages.   51.  Records, if any, concerning the number of hours worked by Plaintiff and FLSA  Collective Plaintiffs and the actual compensation paid to Plaintiff and FLSA Collective Plaintiffs  are in the possession and custody of Defendants. Plaintiff intends to obtain these records by  appropriate discovery proceedings to be taken promptly in this case and, if necessary, will then  seek leave of Court to amend this Complaint to set forth the precise amount due.   53.  Plaintiff realleges and reavers Paragraphs 1 through 52 of this class and collective  action Complaint as if fully set forth herein.   54.  At all relevant times, Plaintiff and Class members were employed by Defendants  within the meaning of the New York Labor Law §§ 2 and 651.   55.  Defendants knowingly and willfully violated the rights of Plaintiff and Class  members by failing to pay them minimum wages in the lawful amount for hours worked.  Defendants were not entitled to take any tip credits because they failed to meet the statutory  requirements under the NYLL.   56.  Defendants knowingly and willfully violated rights of Plaintiff and and the  Delivery Subclass of costs of tools of the trade in that they never reimbursed the Delivery  Subclass for using their own bicycles for deliveries and paying for the maintenance, which cut  into their minimum wage.   57.  Defendants knowingly and willfully failed to provide proper wage and hour  notices to Plaintiff and Class members, as required by New York Labor Law § 195(1).   58.  Defendants knowingly and willfully failed to provide proper wage statements to  Plaintiff and Class members with every wage payment, as required by New York Labor Law §  195(3).   VIOLATION OF THE FAIR LABOR STANDARDS ACT   VIOLATION OF THE NEW YORK LABOR LAW  