34.  Plaintiff Stancu was hired by Defendant Ethos in or around September of 2015.    35.  Plaintiff Stancu was required to perform all relevant tasks in the front of the restaurant  including acting as a bartender, waiter, busser and food runner. He also cleaned and stocked  the bar and kitchen.    36.  Plaintiff worked hard and diligently within the restaurant.   37.  Due to his hard work, in or around May of 2016, Plaintiff was asked to work a few days a  week in Defendants’ other food establishment, Pathos Café, located on 932 1st Ave, New  York, NY 10022.   38.  Throughout his employment, Plaintiff Stancu worked anywhere from thirty (30) to sixty (60)  hours a week.    39.  Throughout his employment, Plaintiff Stancu worked only as tipped employee. However,  Defendants required that Plaintiff Stancu share his tips with other employees, including the  manager. He was not paid any hourly wage for hours worked, nor any overtime wage for  hours worked over forty (40).    40.  Defendants never provided a wage statement or pay stub detailing hours worked or amount  of tips accumulated. Defendants did not have a systematic way of fairly paying their workers.  Tips were always kept in house and distributed unevenly between managers and other  employees.    41.  Throughout his employment, Plaintiff Stancu was never paid on time or on a regular basis.    43.  While the tips collected by Defendant Ethos would often be more than one thousand dollars  ($1,000.00) per week, Plaintiff Stancu would only be paid that much or less for the entire  week no matter how much he actually accumulated.   44.  Despite his hard work and long shifts, Plaintiff Stancu was not properly compensated and had  his tips stolen from him on a regular basis through a tip pool which included members of  management.    45.  Defendants often threatened to fire Plaintiff Stancu if he did not agree with their way of  payment. Mr. Chatiris was rude and malignant when Plaintiff insisted on being paid on time.  Due to the fact Plaintiff was persistent, Mr. Chatiris began to harass him making his work  unbearable. Mr. Chatiris often cursed at him in front of other employees and assigned Plaintiff  to as much heavy lifting as possible knowing he had a persistent back pain. When Plaintiff  asked for help from other workers, Mr., Chatiris refused to let anyone help him. On some  occasions Plaintiff had to call out of work due to horrible back pains and soreness.    46.  In or around the end of May of 2016, Plaintiff Stancu demanded that he be paid in full and on  time because he needed the money. Mr. Chatiris ignored his request and told Plaintiff his pay  was not ready. When Plaintiff Stancu insisted that he be paid, Mr. Chatiris responded with “I  will give you the money now but you are fired”.    48.  If Plaintiff Stancu had not complained about Defendants’ violations of the law then he would  not have been terminated. In fact, this was the explicit reason given for his termination.    49.  As a result, Plaintiff Stancu has lost pay to which he is entitled under the FLSA and NYLL  and has been damaged in an amount yet to be determined.    50.  Defendants’ violations of the FLSA and NYLL were done with knowledge of the law and  with full understanding that this policy violated the law.    51.  Plaintiff Stancu has lost income due to the loss of his job as he has suffered a period of  unemployment.    52.  Defendant Ethos is an employer under the FLSA and NYLL.  53.  Plaintiff repeats and realleges each and every allegation made in the above paragraphs of  this complaint as if same were set forth herein fully at length.   54.  Defendants willfully employed Plaintiff, Class Plaintiffs and Rule 23 Class Plaintiffs in the  afore-mentioned enterprise and failed to compensate them for all hours worked during their  employment.   55.  Defendants failed to pay any wages for hours worked by Plaintiff, Class Plaintiffs and Rule  23 Class Plaintiffs.   56.  Defendants failed to pay any wages for hours worked by Plaintiff, Class Plaintiffs and Rule  23 Class Plaintiffs.   57.  Defendants also failed to provide any pay the overtime premium rate of one and a half  times their regular hourly rate as is required by the FLSA.    59.  Plaintiff repeats and realleges each and every allegation made in the above paragraphs of  this complaint as if same were set forth herein fully at length.   60.  Plaintiff, Class Plaintiffs and Rule 23 Class Plaintiffs were employees of Defendants within  the meaning of New York Wage Regulations (NYCRR Labor Section 138 et seq.).   61.  Defendants failed to pay Plaintiff, Class Plaintiffs and Rule 23 Class Plaintiffs any rate of  pay for certain hours when they were required to be at work, ready to work, and actually  performing work.    62.  Defendants’ failure to comply with the New York Labor Law minimum wage protections  caused Plaintiff, Class Plaintiffs and Rule 23 Class Plaintiffs to suffer loss of wages and  interest thereon.   63.  Defendants’ failure to pay proper wages for each hour worked was willful.   64.  Defendants also failed to pay overtime pay as is required by the New York Labor Law.    65.  Defendants also stole tips which were owed to Plaintiff due to the work he performed,  which were paid to Plaintiff by clients and to which he is entitled.   66.  Defendants also failed to pay any spread of hours pay to Plaintiff for days in which he  worked more than ten (10) hours.    67.  On account of such violations, Defendants are liable to Plaintiff for actual, statutory and  liquidated damages.  68.  Plaintiff repeats and realleges each and every allegation made in the above paragraphs of  this complaint as if same were set forth herein fully at length.   70.  Defendants then retaliated against Plaintiff by immediately terminating his employment.    71.  This action violates the New York Labor Law § 215.   72.  As a result of this violation, Plaintiff has suffered and continues to suffer loss of wages,  benefits and emotional damages for which Defendants are liable.    73.  Plaintiff is further entitled to reinstatement, liquidated damages, injunctive relief and  attorneys’ fees and costs.   74.  Plaintiff repeats and realleges each and every allegation made in the above paragraphs of  this complaint as if same were set forth herein fully at length.   75.  At all times relevant to this action, Plaintiff was employed by Defendants within the  meaning of New York Labor Law §§ 190 et seq., including §§ 191, 193, 195, 198 and the  applicable regulations thereunder.   76.  At all times relevant herein, Defendants, individually and/or jointly, failed and willfully  failed to provide Plaintiff with the notice(s) required by NYLL 195(1) – Plaintiff is  therefore entitled to and seeks to recover in this action the maximum recovery for this  violation, plus attorneys’ fees and costs pursuant to NYLL 198 including NYLL 198(1-b).   77.  At all times relevant herein, Defendants failed and willfully failed to provide Plaintiff with  the statement(s) required by NYLL 195(3) – Plaintiff is therefore entitled to and seeks to  recover in this action the maximum recovery for this violation, plus attorneys’ fees and  costs pursuant to NYLL 198 including NYLL 198(1-d)  VIOLATION OF THE FAIR LABOR STANDARDS ACT   VIOLATION OF NEW YORK LABOR LAW    VIOLATION OF NEW YORK LABOR LAW (wage notice and statement)   VIOLATION OF NEW YORK LABOR LAW   