23.  Pursuant to 29 U.S.C. § 207, Plaintiff seeks to prosecute her FLSA claim as a  collective action on behalf of herself and others who currently work or formerly worked as  Home Health Aides for VNSNY (the “Collective Action Members”) who worked a 24-hour shift  at any time during the 3-year period immediately preceding the filing of the original complaint  (the “FLSA Statutory Period”).   24.  Plaintiff regularly worked 24-hour shifts for Defendant in which she was unable  to sleep for at least 5 uninterrupted hours, for which she should have been paid in full, yet  Defendant deducted 8 hours from her wages representing sleep time, in violation of the FLSA.   25.  As a result, Defendant failed to compensate Plaintiff at the overtime premium rate  for all hours worked in excess of 40 in a work week.   26.  Defendant subjected Plaintiff and Collective Action Members to the same pay  provision(s) in that Defendant failed to properly compensate either Plaintiff or the Collective  Action Members for their hours worked.   27.  The Collective Action Members are thus owed unpaid overtime wages under the  FLSA for the same reasons as Plaintiff.  29.  While the exact number of Class Members is presently unknown, it is estimated  that there are at least 50 Class Members.   30.  The group of potential Class Members is so numerous as to make it impracticable  to bring them all before the Court, for which reason Plaintiff initiates this litigation for all  persons similarly situated pursuant to Rule 23.   31.  Despite the numerical size of the Class, the identities of Class Members can be  ascertained through Defendant’s payroll records.    32.  Plaintiff and her counsel do not anticipate any difficulties in the management of  this action as a class action.   33.  Plaintiff is committed to vigorous prosecution of this action, will adequately  represent the purported Class Members in this action, and has retained competent counsel  experienced in class action litigation.   34.  Plaintiff is a Class Member and has no interest antagonistic to or in conflict with  other Class Members.   35.  This action raises numerous questions of law and fact which are of common and  general interest to the Class Members, including:  a. whether Defendants employed Class Members within the meaning of the  42.  In or around September 2004, VNSNY hired Ms. Brown as a Home Health Aide  working in VNSNY’s Partners in Care division, earning $6.70 per hour.   43.  During her employment at VNSNY, Ms. Brown received raises as follows:  a. October 2004: $7.20 per hour;  b. June 2005: $7.50 per hour;  c. June 2007: $7.75 per hour;  d. July 2007: $8.00 per hour;  e. September 2008: $8.50 per hour;  f. January 2010: $9.00 per hour;  g. October 2010: $9.25 per hour;  h. February 2012: $9.50 per hour; and  i. November 2013: $10.75 per hour.   44.  As a Home Health Aide, Ms. Brown provided private home care for VNSNY’s  clients on an on-call basis.   45.  As an on-call Home Health Aide, Ms. Brown’s hours varied considerably from  week to week, depending on VNSNY’s scheduling needs.   47.  Ms. Brown was eligible for overtime pay throughout her employment at VNSNY.  I.  Wage-and-Hour Claims   48.  Under the FLSA, when an employee is scheduled for a shift of 24 hours or more,  an employer may exclude up to 8 hours that the employee spends sleeping at the worksite from  the time for which the employee must be paid.     49.  In order to legitimately exclude time spent sleeping from an employee’s wages,  the employer must:  a. pay the employee for any interruptions to sleep time by a call to duty;  b. ensure that the employee can usually enjoy an uninterrupted night’s sleep of at  least 5 consecutive hours;   c. compensate the employee in full for the entire night if the employee is  interrupted such that he or she cannot get reasonable periods of sleep totaling  at least 5 hours;  d. provide adequate sleeping facilities for the employee;  e. have an express or implied agreement with the employee to exclude sleep  time; and  f. exclude no more than 8 hours in a fixed period as sleep time in each 24-hour  shift.   50.  From the beginning of her employment with VNSNY, Ms. Brown regularly  worked 24-hour shifts for VNSNY.   52.  Ms. Brown and VNSNY had an agreement according to which Ms. Brown would  work for 16 of the scheduled 24 hours and sleep for the remaining 8 hours.   53.  VNSNY would then deduct these 8 hours, representing Ms. Brown’s time spent  sleeping, from Ms. Brown’s wages.    54.  However, throughout Ms. Brown’s employment, VNSNY did not allow Ms.  Brown to get uninterrupted sleep during the scheduled sleeping period.   55.  VNSNY required Ms. Brown to call VNSNY every hour, on the hour, during 24- hour shifts—including during her designated sleeping period—to confirm that she was awake.   56.  As a result, Ms. Brown was never able to sleep for even the FLSA–mandated  minimum of 5 uninterrupted hours, much less the 8 hours which were deducted from her pay.   57.  Under the FLSA, Ms. Brown should have been paid in full for the entire night, as  VNSNY explicitly prevented her from sleeping for the mandatory minimum of 5 hours during  her 24-hour shifts.   58.  Yet VNSNY continued to deduct 8 hours representing sleep time from Ms.  Brown’s wages, failing to compensate Ms. Brown whatsoever for these hours worked.   59.  As a result, during weeks in which Ms. Brown worked overnight shifts and also  worked over 40 hours in a work week, VNSNY failed to pay her at the overtime premium rate  for all hours worked in excess of 40 per week.   60.  Additionally, as a result of VNSNY’s failure to compensate Ms. Brown for these  hours, Ms. Brown’s effective hourly rate during multiple weeks of her employment was less than  the applicable New York State minimum wage.   62.  Ms. Brown worked at least 72 hours per work week in each week of her  employment from August 2014 through October 2014.   63.  Throughout that time period, Ms. Brown’s regular pay rate was $10.75 per hour.   64.  From December 31, 2013, through December 31, 2014, the New York State  minimum wage was $8.00 per hour.   65.  As a result of VNSNY’s failure to compensate Ms. Brown for all hours worked,  her effective hourly rate during this time period fell below the New York State minimum wage.  II.  Sexual Harassment and Retaliation Claims   66.  On or about October 14, 2015, Ms. Brown was working at the Bailey House, a  client of Partners in Care located at 180 Christopher Street, New York, New York 10014.   67.  Ms. Brown was doing laundry in the basement with another Home Health Aide,  Maurice Poole, who was assigned to the same job.     68.  After Mr. Poole left the basement, Ms. Brown finished the laundry and exited the  basement, as well.   69.  As Ms. Brown entered the corridor to the stairwell leading out of the basement,  she found Mr. Poole waiting for her, exposing himself to her and openly masturbating.     70.  Shocked and disturbed, Ms. Brown screamed and rushed upstairs.     71.  Ms. Brown informed Raymond Young, a Bailey House Security Guard; a male  Bailey House receptionist; and a female coordinator at the Bailey House front desk, known to  Ms. Brown only as “Jeanette,” of what had transpired and complained about Mr. Poole’s  conduct.   73.  Ms. Brown gave the police officer VNSNY’s phone number to contact VNSNY.   74.  Ms. Brown returned to Bailey House to finish her shift.   75.  Ms. Brown did not see Mr. Poole at Bailey House.    76.  Ms. Brown later learned that, due to Mr. Poole’s conduct, Bailey House had  banned Mr. Poole from working at Bailey House.   77.  However, since Mr. Poole was a VNSNY employee, not a Bailey House  employee, Bailey House was unable to terminate or otherwise discipline Mr. Poole.   78.  Upon information and belief, both Bailey House and the police contacted VNSNY  to inform the company about the incident.    79.  After Ms. Brown’s complaint of sexual harassment, VNSNY began to retaliate  against her.     80.  On or about October 19, 2015, Ms. Brown went to VNSNY’s offices located at  1250 Broadway, 9th Floor, New York, New York 10001.    81.  After being buzzed in by the receptionist, Ms. Brown signed in and told the  VNSNY receptionist that she wanted to make a complaint about a VNSNY employee.    82.  The receptionist directed Ms. Brown to go to the payroll department window.   83.  Ms. Brown went to the payroll department window, where she reiterated that she  wanted to make a complaint about a VNSNY employee.   84.  The payroll coordinator invited Ms. Brown to speak with her in the payroll  department.   86.  After explaining the incident, Ms. Brown asked what VNSNY was doing to  correct the situation.   87.  Rather than answer Ms. Brown’s question, however, VNSNY’s payroll  coordinator reprimanded Ms. Brown for inquiring about Mr. Poole, claiming that it somehow  constituted “harassment” on Ms. Brown’s part “to even be asking all these questions about him.”     88.  The payroll coordinator also instructed Ms. Brown not to contact VNSNY’s  Human Resources Department regarding Mr. Poole, telling Ms. Brown that VNSNY would  consider such conduct “harassment” and that, if Ms. Brown ignored this prohibition, she could  be “fired or further.”   89.  Following this conversation, VNSNY stopped scheduling Ms. Brown for work.    90.  In and around November 2015, Ms. Brown received a warning letter from  VNSNY, stating that, as she had “not reported for work,” she was at risk of being terminated.     91.  This was entirely untrue; Ms. Brown had not failed to report for work on any  occasion throughout her employment at VNSNY.     92.  In reality, VNSNY had not scheduled Ms. Brown for work since she reported the  incident with Mr. Poole.   93.  Far from failing to report for work, Ms. Brown had been repeatedly calling  VNSNY to request job assignments—including contacting Cynthia Nita, her union  representative, and Jason Connelly, VNSNY’s Executive President—to no avail.     94.  Mr. Connelly simply told Ms. Brown, without explanation, that she should “look  for another job.”    96.  Yet Ms. Brown knew that VNSNY had continued to hire and schedule new Home  Health Aides—including Ms. Brown’s own sister—during the time period in which Ms. Brown  had not been scheduled for work.   97.  Ms. Brown responded to VNSNY’s November 2015 letter, informing VNSNY  that the letter’s contents were entirely false and again requesting that she be scheduled for work.     98.  However, VNSNY continued to ignore Ms. Brown’s attempts to contact VNSNY  for two months.   99.  In and around January 2016, VNSNY sent Ms. Brown a termination letter, stating  that she was being terminated because she had not called in for work and had taken a “leave of  absence.”    100.  VNSNY sent Ms. Brown another termination letter in February 10, 2016, giving  the same reasons for her termination.    101.  Ms. Brown, confused by VNSNY’s two letters, attempted to call VNSNY for  clarification, but VNSNY ignored all of her communications.  102.  In reality, VNSNY terminated Ms. Brown’s employment in retaliation for her  complaints of sexual harassment.  Unpaid Minimum Wage in Violation of the NYLL  115.  Plaintiff, on behalf of herself and those similarly situated, hereby realleges and  incorporates each and every allegation contained in paragraphs 1 through 114 with the same  force as though separately alleged herein.  116.  At all times relevant to this action, Plaintiff was employed by Defendant within  the meaning of the NYLL.   117.  The NYLL mandates that employers pay each of their employees for each hour  worked at an hourly rate not less than the New York State minimum wage.  118.  Defendant’s wages to Plaintiff resulted in an hourly rate below the applicable  mandated New York State minimum wage.  119.  Defendant violated Plaintiff’s rights under the NYLL by failing to pay her the  minimum wage for hours worked.  120.  Due to Defendant’s NYLL violations, Plaintiff is entitled to recover from  Defendant her unpaid compensation, liquidated damages, interest and reasonable attorneys’ fees,  costs, and interest related to the action. 