10.  Moreover, APOS Sales Representatives do not work in a retail or service  establishment, and they do not derive more than half of their compensation from commissions on  goods or services.   11.  Based on these duties and responsibilities, Dell’s APOS Sales Representatives are  clearly not exempt from the requirements of the FLSA.  Indeed, Dell treats APOS Sales  Representatives as not exempt from the FLSA.     13.  Notably, Plaintiff Johnson and other APOS Sales Representatives complained to  Dell’s Management that APOS Sales Representatives work off-the-clock.  Specifically, Plaintiff  Johnson complained to his supervisor, Denise Rebaudo, about working off-the-clock.  Other  APOS Sales Representatives also complained to Ms. Rebaudo, Dell Supervisors Greg Hoskins  and Bruce Kipperman, and Dell’s Human Resources Department.  Dell’s supervisors and Human  Resource Department ignored the complaints, and continue to encourage and allow APOS Sales  Representatives to work off-the-clock.   14.  When Dell does pay APOS Sales Representatives overtime, it has a common  policy or scheme of unlawfully failing to include their non-discretionary bonuses and  commissions into the APOS Sales Representatives’ regular rates of pay when calculating  overtime, which is a violation of the FLSA.  See 29 C.F.R. § 778.500(a).     15.  Dell’s acts violate the FLSA, which prohibits the denial of payment of minimum  wage for all hours worked and prohibits the denial of overtime compensation for hours worked  in excess of forty per workweek.  As described above, Dell willfully violated Plaintiffs’ right to  minimum wage and overtime compensation guaranteed under the FLSA.  16.  The preceding paragraphs are incorporated herein for all purposes.     18.  Dell has failed to pay Plaintiffs and the putative class members overtime wages at  time and a half for hours that they worked over 40 hours in a work week.  Further, Dell  unlawfully calculated Plaintiffs’ and the putative class members’ regular rates of pay by failing  to include non-discretionary bonuses and commissions.   19.  As a result of Dell’s unlawful acts, Plaintiffs and the putative class members have  been deprived of overtime compensation in amounts to be determined at trial, and are entitled to  recovery of such amounts, liquidated damages, prejudgment interest, attorneys’ fees, costs, and  other compensation pursuant to the FLSA.   20.  Dell’s unlawful conduct has been willful and intentional.  Dell was aware or  should have been aware that the practices described herein are unlawful.  Dell has not made a  good faith effort to comply with the FLSA with respect to the compensation of Plaintiffs and the  putative class members.   21.  Because Dell’s violations of the FLSA have been willful, a three-year statute of  limitations applies, pursuant to 29 U.S.C. § 255.  22.  The preceding paragraphs are incorporated herein for all purposes.     23.  Dell failed to make, keep, and preserve accurate records with respect to Plaintiffs  and other APOS Sales Representatives, including hours worked each workday and total hours  worked each workweek, as required by 29 U.S.C. § 211(c), and supporting federal regulations.  COLLECTIVE ACTION UNDER 29 U.S.C. § 216(b)   25.  Dell has a common policy or scheme of misclassifying APOS Sales  Representatives as exempt from the FLSA.  As a result of this common policy or scheme, Dell  wrongfully denied APOS Sales Representatives of overtime for all hours worked in excess of  forty in a workweek.  Further, Dell had a common policy or scheme of not including APOS  Sales Representatives’ nondiscretionary bonuses and commissions in their regular rate of pay.   Therefore, the Court should certify a collective action of all current and former APOS Sales  Representatives employed by Dell at any time during the three years preceding the filing of this  Original Petition.  Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and based thereon, allege that there are  other FLSA class members who could “opt-in” to this class, the actual number of FLSA class  members is readily ascertainable by a review of Dell’s records through appropriate discovery,  and Plaintiffs propose to take proceedings in this action to have such persons notified of this  litigation and given an opportunity to file written consents to join this litigation.  7.  At all times hereinafter mentioned, Dell has been an employer and enterprise  engaged in commerce within the meaning of the FLSA.  Dell has employees engaged in  interstate commerce.  Dell has an annual gross volume of sales made or business done of not less  than $500,000.00.  In addition, at all times hereinafter mentioned, Plaintiffs were engaged in  commerce as required by 29 U.S.C. §§ 206-207.    9.  As APOS Sales Representatives, Plaintiffs did not:   (a) manage an enterprise or a recognized department or subdivision of Dell;   (b) direct the work of two or more employees;   (c) have the authority to hire or fire other employees, nor were their suggestions  and recommendations concerning hiring, firing, advancement, promotion or any  other change of status of other employees given particular weight;   (d) perform office or non-manual work directly related to the management or  general business operations of Dell or Dell’s customers;   (e) exercise discretion or independent judgment with respect to matters of  significance; or   (f) customarily or regularly engage away from Dell’s place or places of business  in performing their primary duty.    