 ( Overtime Wages Under the FLSA)   (Overtime Under the NYLL)   (Unpaid Wages Under the NYLL)   15.  At all time relevant, each Plaintiff was hired and employed by Defendant within  the City and State of New York and worked primarily in Richmond County.     16.  Plaintiffs have worked for Defendant to provide supervisory services for security   4  guards employed by Defendant for its clients within and outside the City of New York including  Richmond County.    17.  Plaintiffs were Defendant’s non exempt employees as that term is used under the   FLSA and NYLL.    18.  Plaintiffs and other similarly situated workers were paid on a salaried basis.    19.  Plaintiffs and other similarly situated workers were and still are entitled to be paid  at least one and one half of their respective regular hourly rates of pay for each hour in excess of  forty (40) hours that they worked in any work week to the FLSA and NYLL.    20.  During the relevant times periods, Plaintiffs and other similarly situated workers   worked in excess of forty (40) hours during a single work week and were entitled to receive  overtime wages.    21.  Plaintiffs and other similarly situated workers were not paid for all hours worked  as required by NYLL §191 and §663   22.  When all compensable time is accounted for Defendant willfully failed to, in the  case of some Plaintiffs, pay the minimum wage for all hours worked as required by the NYLL  and FLSA and/or  such Plaintiffs were not compensated for overtime hours.    23.   Indeed, Plaintiffs regularly worked more than then ten hours in a single day.  When Plaintiff and other similarly situated workers were paid at or less then the New York  minimum wage or not paid for overtime, NYCRR §142-2.4 required Defendants to pay these  workers for an additional hour at the New York minimum wage when the spread of hours  exceeded ten hours in a single work day.  Defendants willfully failed to pay Plaintiffs the spread  of hours premium pay when due.   5   24.  Defendants willfully failed to pay Plaintiffs and other similarly situated  employees and the overtime premium of one half times their regular hourly work rate for any  hours that they worked in excess of 40 hours per week, in violation of the FLSA and NYLL.    25.  First, Defendants willfully paid Plaintiffs and other similarly situated workers  nothing for the uncompensated hours in excess of forty hours in a work week.   26.  Second, Defendant willfully failed to pay Plaintiffs and other similarly situated   workers compensated hours in excess of forty hours in a work week at the overtime rate.   Defendants paid only straight time, with no premium for overtime hours worked.    27.  Since late 2010, Plaintiffs and other similarly situated workers have been entitled  to wage statements indicating the regular and overtime rate of pay, the basis of the rate of pay,  the dates covered by the payment; the name, address and phone number of the employer; and  itemized allowances and deductions pursuant to NYLL §195(3). Defendants fail to furnish wage  statements in compliance with the statute.   28.  Between late 2010 and 2015, Plaintiffs and other similarly situated workers were  entitled to receive notifications of wage rate pursuant to the Wage Theft Prevention Act  indicating their hourly rates and other payroll information annually and at the commencement of  their employment pursuant to NYLL 195(1).  Defendants failed to furnish such notices in  compliance with the statute.   36.  Marventano bring this case as a representatives of a class of all similarly situated   supervisors to Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure on behalf of themselves and  similarly situated supervisors employed by Defendant from the period commencing six years  prior to the filing of this complaint of the date of final judgment in this matter.     37.  Marventano estimates that the Class includes over 50 similarly situated  individuals who have not been paid overtime wages, who have not been paid for travel time, and  who have not received proper payroll stubs and payroll notification pursuant to the Wage Theft  Prevention Act.   38.  The Class is so numerous as to make it impracticable to join all members of the  Class as Plaintiffs.    39.  Members of the Class are readily ascertainable through Defendant’s records.   7   40.  There are questions of law and fact common to all members of the Class and  those questions predominate over any question affecting only individual class members.   Defendant has acted on grounds generally applicable to all class members in that Defendant’s  acts and omissions constitute a violation of the wage laws of the State of New York.    41. Common questions of law and fact include, but are not limited to the following:  a. Whether Defendant has consistently failed to pay class members overtime wages  at one and one half times their regular rate of pay as required by the NYLL;   b. Whether Defendant has failed to pay Plaintiffs at an hourly rate below the New  York State minimum wage.   c. Whether Defendant has failed to pay overtime to Plaintiffs.   d. Whether Defendant has paid Plaintiffs for travel time and from the job sites.  e. Whether Defendant has consistently failed to provide Plaintiffs wage statements  as required by the NYLL;  f. Whether Defendant has in failing to make the required payments to Plaintiffs  acted willfully and with the intent of depriving members of the class of such  compensation.    42.  Plaintiffs’ wage and hour claims and Defendant’s anticipated affirmative defenses   thereto are typical of the claims of all Class members and of Defendant’s anticipated affirmative  defense thereto.   43.  Marventano will fairly and adequately protect the interests of all Class members  in the prosecution of this action and in the administration of all matters relating to the claims of  the Class. Plaintiffs are similarly situated with, and have suffered similar injuries as, the  members of the Class they seek to represent.  8   44.  Marventano has retained counsel capable of handling Class action suits similar to  those sought to be brought in this action. Neither Marventano nor his counsel have an interest  which is in conflict with the Class or which might cause them not to vigorously pursue this  action.   45.  Pursuant to F.R.C.P 23 (b) (3), class certification is appropriate here because  questions of law or fact common to members of the Class predominate over any questions  affecting only individual members and because a class action is superior to other methods  available to the fair and efficient adjudication of the controversy.  46.  Plaintiffs’ FLSA claims are brought as a collective action pursuant to 29 U.S.C.   §216 (b).   47.  Employees are “similary situated” for purposes of FLSA collective wage suits if   they are subject to a common policy, plan or design.   48.  Marventano brings the FLSA claims on behalf of himself and others similarly   situated, namely employees of Defendant who worked as supervisors from the period  commencing three years from the date of filing of this complaint to the date of final judgment in  this matter (hereinafter referred as the (“Collective”).   49.  Upon information and belief, the Collective and the Class consist of roughly fifty   similarly situated individuals who have not been paid proper overtime wages and who would  benefit from the insurance of a Court-supervised notice of the lawsuit and the opportunity to join  the lawsuit.   9   50.  Upon information and belief, Defendant has failed to pay overtime to those in the  Collective, and Plaintiffs reserve the right to broaden their definition of the Collective group  and/or subgroups to this claim as additional members are discovered.   51.  Defendant is liable under the FLSA for, inter alia, failing to properly compensate   Plaintiffs and other similarly situated.   52.  Those similarly situated potential Collective members are known to Defendant,  are readily identifiable and can be located through Defendant’s records.   53.  Members of the Collective are entitled to collectively participate in this action by   choosing to “opt in” and submit written Consents to Join this action pursuant to 29 U.S.C. § 216  (b).  54.  Marventano and members of the Collective and the class defined above,   (collectively “Members”) have been victims of a common policy and plan perpetrated by  Defendant that has violated their rights under the FLSA and NYLL by denying them pay,  including without limitation, overtime wages.   55.  As part of their ongoing business practice, Defendant has intentionally, willfully  and repeatedly harmed Plaintiffs and the Members by engaging in a pattern, practice and/or  policy of violating the FLSA and/or the NYLL.   56.  Defendant has substantially benefitted and profited from the work that Plaintiffs   and the Members have performed.    57.  Defendant’s conduct, policies, and practices and described herein are ongoing and   continuing.  10   58.  Defendant’s conduct, policies and practices have been intentional, willfull, and in  bad faith, and has cause significant damages to Plaintiffs and the Members.   59.  Plaintiffs repeat and reallege each and every allegation in the preceding  paragraphs with the same force and effect as if fully set forth herein.   60.  Plaintiffs bring this claim on behalf of themselves and the Members.   61.  At all relevant times, Defendant was subject to the overtime wage requirements  set forth in the FLSA, 29 U.S.C. §§ 201 et. seq.    62.  At all relevant times, Plaintiff and the Members were employees of   Defendant within the meaning of 29 U.S.C. §203 (e).    63.  At all relevant times, Defendant was engaged in commerce within the meaning of  29 U.S.C. § 203 (e) (m), and 206 (a).   64.  Defendant suffered or permitted Plaintiffs and the Members to work more   than forty (40) hours a week throughout their employment.   65.  Defendant suffered or permitted Plaintiffs and the Members a rate of one and one   half times their hourly rate of pay for all the hours they worked in excess of forty (40) hours per  week.    66.  Defendants willfully, knowingly, and intentionally did not, and continue not to,   compensate Plaintiffs and the Members for overtime at a rate of one and one half times their  hourly rate of pay for all of the hours they worked in excess of forty (40) hours a week.    67.  As a result of Defendant’s violation of the law and failures to pay Plaintiffs  required overtime wages, Plaintiffs and the Members have been damaged and are entitled to  11  recover from Defendant, all wages due, along with reasonable attorney fees, interests and costs  pursuant to 29 U.S.C. § 216 (b).   68.  As Defendant did not have a good faith basis to believe that its failure to pay  overtime wages to Plaintiff and the Collective was in compliance with the law, Plaintiff and the   Collective are entitled to additional damages equal to one hundred percent of the total amount of  wages due, pursuant to 29 U.S.C.  § 216 ( b).   69.  Plaintiffs repeat and reallege each and every allegation in the preceding  paragraphs with the same force and effect as if fully set forth herein.    70.  Plaintiffs bring this claim on behalf of themselves and the Class.   71.  At all relevant times, Defendant was subject to the, overtime wage  requirements set forth in Articles 6 and 19 of the NYLL.   72.  Pursuant to NYLL §190 et seq and 650 et seq., and 12 NYCRR 142-2.2, non-   exempt employees are required to be paid one and one-half times the employees' regular rate of   pay for any hours in excess of forty (40) worked  in any workweek.   73.  Defendant expected Plaintiffs and the Members, to work more than forty (40)  hours per week, and Plaintiffs’ and the Members regularly worked more than forty (40) hours  per week throughout their employment.    74.  At no time has Defendant paid Plaintiffs and the Members a rate of   one and one-half times their hourly rate of pay for all the hours they worked in excess of forty  (40) hours per week.     75.  Defendant willfully and intentionally have no, and continue not to,   12  compensate Plaintiffs and the Members for overtime at a rate of one and half times their hourly  rate for pay for all the hours they worked in excess of forty (40) hours a week.  76.  Plaintiffs repeat and reallage each and every allegation in the preceding   paragraphs with the same force and effect as if fully set forth herein.   77.  Plaintiff Marventano brings this claim on behalf of themselves and the Class.   78.  Plaintiffs and the Class were entitled to be compensated for every hour   worked at their regular hourly rate (or at their overtime rate).   79.  Defendant failed to pay Plaintiffs and the Members the wages due to them for  the hours they worked, including time traveling between jobsite after reporting to work.   80.  Defendant violated NYLL § 191 et. seq and § 663 et. seq. by failing to pay   Plaintiffs of all their earned wages.   81.  Upon information and belief, Defendant did not have a good faith basis for   failing to pay Plaintiffs all of their wages, and willfully denied Plaintiff these wages.   82.  Judgment should be entered in favor of Plaintiffs and against Defendant on the   claim for relief for unpaid wages, liquated damages, reasonable attorney fees, interest and costs  in an amount to be determined by this Court.  