 (Collective Action Alleging FLSA Violations)  A.  FLSA COVERAGE   (Class Action Alleging Violations of the Missouri Act)  A.  MISSOURI ACT COVERAGE   23.  Harvey Pallets provides wooden shipping pallets to its clients across the United States  and claims to have “more than two billion pallets in circulation at any given time in the United States.”2   24.  Plaintiff and the Putative Class Members’ job duties consisted of removing wooden  pallets from a conveyor belt, stacking them, and performing any necessary repairs on the pallets if they  were damaged.    25.  Plaintiff Sandoval-Osegura was employed by Harvey Pallets as a pallet repairer in St.  Louis, Missouri from approximately October 2017 to July 2018.   26.  Plaintiff and the Putative Class Members are non-exempt employees paid a piece- rate—that is, they were paid a set rate for each pallet on which they performed work.   27.  Specifically, Plaintiff was paid a rate of approximately $0.40 per pallet.    28.  However, Harvey Pallets impermissibly reduced the weekly pay of any employee who  missed work for any reason by half. See 29 C.F.R. § 778.307.   29.  Plaintiff and the Putative Class Members’ duties did not (and currently do not) include  managerial responsibilities or the exercise of independent discretion or judgment.    30.  Plaintiff and the Putative Class Members did not have the authority or discretion to  vary or change their proscribed job duties.   31.  Plaintiff and the Putative Class Members did not have the authority to bind or  represent the company financially.   32.  Plaintiff and the Putative Class Members did not (and currently do not) have the  authority to hire or fire other employees.  2   http://harveypallets.com/wp/?page_id=60  Original Collective/Class Action Complaint  Page 6   33.  Plaintiff and the Putative Class Members were not (and currently are not) responsible  for making decisions regarding salary, pay, or other administrative matters.   34.  Plaintiff and the Putative Class Members’ duties did not (and currently do not) concern  work directly related to the management or general business operation of Harvey Pallets and/or its  customers.   35.  Rather, Plaintiff and the Putative Class Members were blue-collar factory workers.   36.  In addition to their duties as stackers, Plaintiff and the Putative Class were required to  remain at Harvey Pallet’s facility up to an hour each day after their shifts had ended in order to clean  Harvey Pallets’ warehouse.   37.   Harvey Pallets did not compensate Plaintiff and the Putative Class for these cleaning  activities.   38.  Plaintiff Sandoval-Osegura worked an average of forty-five (45) hours per week, but  did not receive: (1) the federal minimum wage in some or all workweeks, (2) compensation for all  hours worked, or (3) overtime compensation at the required rate of time-and-one-half of his regular  rate of pay for all hours worked over forty (40) each week.   39.  Harvey Pallets has employed other individuals who perform(ed) the same or similar  job duties under the same pay provisions as Plaintiff.   40.  Harvey Pallets applied its illegal pay practices despite clear and controlling law that  states that non-exempt employees paid by the piece—Plaintiff and the Putative Class Members—are  entitled to receive overtime compensation at one and one half times their regular rates of pay for all  hours worked over forty (40) in a single workweek. See 29 C.F.R. § 778.111.   41.  Harvey Pallets is aware of its obligation to pay for all hours worked, minimum wage  for all hours worked, and the proper amount of overtime for all hours worked in excess of forty (40)  each week, but has failed to do so.   Original Collective/Class Action Complaint  Page 7   42.  Because Harvey Pallets did not pay Plaintiff and the Putative Class Members for all  hours worked, minimum wage for all hours worked, and time and a half for all hours worked in excess  of forty (40) in a workweek, Harvey Pallets’ pay policies and practices violate the FLSA.    43.  Because Harvey Pallets did not pay Plaintiff and the Putative Class Members for all  hours they worked on behalf of Harvey Pallets, Harvey Pallets’ pay policies and practices also violate  Missouri state law.  V.  44.  All previous paragraphs are incorporated as though fully set forth herein.   45.  The FLSA Collective is defined as:  62.  All previous paragraphs are incorporated as though fully set forth herein.  Original Collective/Class Action Complaint  Page 10   63.  Pursuant to 29 U.S.C. § 216(b), this collective claim is made on behalf of all of Harvey  Pallets’ employees who have been similarly situated to Plaintiff with regard to the work they performed  and the manner in which they have not been paid.   64.  Other similarly situated employees have been victimized by Harvey Pallets’ patterns,  practices, and policies, which are in willful violation of the FLSA.   65.  The FLSA Collective Members are defined in Paragraph 45.   66.  Harvey Pallets’ failure to pay Plaintiff and the FLSA Collective Members for all hours  worked, minimum wage for all hours worked, and overtime compensation at the rates required from  the FLSA, results from generally applicable policies and practices of Harvey Pallets and does not  depend on the personal circumstances of Plaintiff or the individual FLSA Collective Members.   67.  Thus, Plaintiff’s experiences are typical of the experiences of the FLSA Collective  Members.   68.  The specific job titles or precise job requirements of the various FLSA Collective  Members does not prevent collective treatment.   69.  All of the FLSA Collective Members—regardless of their specific job titles, precise job  requirements, rates of pay, or job locations—are entitled to be properly compensated, at a rate not  below the federal minimum wage, for all hours worked and are entitled to overtime compensation for  all hours worked in excess of forty (40) hours per workweek.   70.  Although the issues of damages may be individual in character, there is no detraction  from the common nucleus of liability facts.    71.  Absent a collective action, many members of the proposed FLSA collective likely will  not obtain redress of their injuries and Harvey Pallets will retain the proceeds of its rampant violations.  Original Collective/Class Action Complaint  Page 11   72.  Moreover, individual litigation would be unduly burdensome to the judicial system.  Concentrating the litigation in one forum will promote judicial economy and parity among the claims  of the individual members of the classes and provide for judicial consistency.   73.  Accordingly, the FLSA collective of similarly situated plaintiffs should be certified as  defined as in Paragraph 45 and notice should be promptly sent.  74.  All previous paragraphs are incorporated as though fully set forth herein.   75.  The Missouri Act Class is defined as:  88.  Plaintiff Sandoval-Osegura brings his Missouri Act claims as a class action pursuant to  Rule 23 on behalf of all similarly situated individuals employed by Harvey Pallets to work in Missouri  since January 24, 2017.   89.  Class action treatment of Plaintiff Sandoval-Osegura’s Missouri Act claims is  appropriate because, as alleged below, all of Rule 23’s class action requisites are satisfied.   90.  The number of Missouri Class Members is so numerous that joinder of all class  members is impracticable.   91.  Plaintiff Sandoval-Osegura is a member of the Missouri Class, his claims are typical of  the claims of the Missouri Class Members, and he has no interests that are antagonistic to or in conflict  with the interests of the Missouri Class Members.   92.  Plaintiff Sandoval-Osegura and his counsel will fairly and adequately represent the  Missouri Class Members and their interests.   93.  Class certification is appropriate under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(b)(3)  because common questions of law and fact predominate over questions affecting only individual class  members and because a class action is superior to other available methods for the fair and efficient  adjudication of this litigation.   94.  Accordingly, the Missouri Class should be certified as defined in Paragraph 75.  VI. 