 (Failure to Furnish Accurate Wage Statements in Violation of NYLL §195)   (Failure to Pay Minimum Wage in Violation of 29 U.S.C. §206)   (Failure to Pay Overtime in Violation of 29 U.S.C. §207)   (Failure to Pay NYLL “Call-in Pay” 12 NYCRR §142-2.3)   (Failure to Pay Overtime in Violation of NYLL §650 et seq. and 12 NYCRR §142-2.2)   (Failure to Pay Minimum Wage in Violation of NYLL §650 et seq.)   (Failure to Pay Wages for All Hours Worked in Violation of NYLL §191)   12.  Plaintiffs and the FLSA Collective and NYLL Class have worked for Defendants  as Ad-Hoc Interviewers.   13.  The primary job duty of an Ad-Hoc Interviewer is to make telephone calls to  members of the general public in order to conduct surveys and gather consumer information on  behalf of third party clients.     14.  As a condition of employment, Defendants require all Ad-Hoc Interviewers to  participate in approximately 18 hours of training before they are able to begin working for  Defendants.  However, Ad-Hoc Interviewers are not compensated at all for any of this time spent  training.      15.  After undergoing these 18 hours worth of uncompensated training, Ad-Hoc  Interviewers are paid on an hourly basis, and generally base paid at the minimum wage rate.   16.  Plaintiffs and the members of the FLSA Collective and NYLL Class have  routinely worked more than 40 hours a week, and up to 50 hours a week.   17.  Defendants determine the amount of hours to compensate Plaintiffs, the FLSA  Collective and NYLL Class based on the amount of hours that they are logged into their work  computers.    5   18.  However, Defendants routinely fail to pay Plaintiffs and the FLSA Collective and  NYLL Class for all of their hours worked.  For examples, Defendants fail to compensate  Plaintiffs and the FLSA Collective and NYLL Class for time spent while they must wait for a  seat assignment, which often takes as much as 45 minutes, or while waiting to log into their  computers if the computers are malfunctioning and/or are disabled from logging in to them,  which routinely takes more than 15 minutes.    19.  As a result, Ad-Hoc Interviewers, who are ready and waiting to work, are not  compensated for time spent waiting for seat assignments or waiting to log into their computers  while malfunctions are resolved, nor is this time accounted for when determining whether Ad- Hoc Interviewers have worked in excess of 40 hours per week, or when determining their  overtime wages.   20.  In addition, Defendants dock the wages of Plaintiffs and the FLSA Collective and  NYLL Class members for taking breaks of less than twenty (20) minutes.     21.  Furthermore, Defendants disproportionately “round up” the amount of time that  Ad-Hoc Interviewer take for breaks.  For example, if an Ad-Hoc Interviewer arrives one (1)  minute late following a ten (10) minute break, Defendants dock fifteen (15) minutes of  compensable time from their pay, and when an Ad-Hoc Interviewer arrives more than five (5)  minutes late following a ten (10) minute break, Defendants dock thirty (30) minutes of  compensable time from their pay.     22.  Thus, on a daily basis, Defendants have and continue to unlawfully dock  compensable time from Plaintiffs and the FLSA Collective and NYLL Class members for a slew  of reasons, and have failed to include this compensable time when determining whether Plaintiffs  worked in excess of 40 hours per week.   6   23.  In addition to receiving a base hourly wage, Ad-Hoc Interviewers are also paid a  non-discretionary bonus for certain client projects labeled as “production jobs” when they  achieve a pre-determined production level.     24.  Defendants, however, do not include these non-discretionary bonuses when  determining the regular rate of pay of Plaintiffs and the members of the FLSA Collective and  NYLL Class for the purpose of calculating their overtime pay, and as result, Defendants have  failed to pay Plaintiffs and the members of the FLSA Collective and NYLL Class their lawfully  entitled overtime wages.   25.  Furthermore, Defendants also failed to pay Plaintiffs and members of the NYLL  Class their proper “call-in” pay as required under New York law.    26.  Specifically, Defendants were required to pay Plaintiffs and members of the  NYLL Class who, by request or permission of Defendants, reported for duty on any day, whether  or not assigned to work, at the applicable wage rate for at least four hours for one shift, or the  number of hours in the regularly scheduled shift, whichever is less at the basic minimum hourly  wage.     27.  However, Defendants regularly caused Plaintiffs and members of the NYLL Class  to report to work only to find themselves told to return home without “call-in” pay, in violation  of the New York Minimum Wage Order for Miscellaneous Industries and Occupations §142-2.3  and the NYLL.    28.  Further, as a result of the foregoing conduct, Defendants have failed to provide  accurate wage statements to Plaintiffs and the NYLL Class, in violation of NYLL §195.  29.  Plaintiffs bring their FLSA claims as a collective action pursuant to the FLSA on  7  behalf of themselves and on behalf of all other similarly-situated persons who were/are  employed by Defendants as Ad-Hoc Interviewers and/or in a similar position who were/are not  paid the prevailing minimum wage for all hours worked and overtime at a rate of one and one- half time their regular rate for all hours worked in excess of 40 hours per week during the FLSA  Collective Period.   30.  The basic job duties of the FLSA Collective were/are the same as or substantially  similar to those of Plaintiffs, and the FLSA Collective were/are paid in the same manner and  under the same common policies, plans and practices as Plaintiffs.   31.  The FLSA Collective, like Plaintiffs, have all been subject to the same unlawful  policies, plans and practices of Defendants, including failing to pay the prevailing minimum  wage for all hours worked and overtime at a rate of one and one-half times their regular rate of  pay for all hours worked in excess of 40 hours per week.   32.  During the FLSA Collective Period, Defendants were fully aware of the duties  performed by Plaintiffs and the FLSA Collective, and that those duties were not exempt from the  minimum wage and overtime provisions of the FLSA.     33.  As a result of Defendants’ conduct, as alleged herein, Defendants violated 29  U.S.C. §206 by not paying the FLSA Collective and Plaintiffs the prevailing minimum wage for  all hours worked.   34.  As a result of Defendants’ conduct, as alleged herein, Defendants violated 29  U.S.C. §207 by not paying the FLSA Collective and Plaintiffs overtime at a rate of one and one- half times their regular rate of pay for all hours worked in excess of 40 hours per week.  8   35.  Defendants’ violations of the aforementioned statutes were willful, repeated,  knowing, intentional and without a good faith basis, and significantly damaged Plaintiffs and the  FLSA Collective.     36.  As a result of Defendants’ conduct, Defendants are liable to Plaintiffs and the  FLSA Collective for the full amount of their unpaid minimum and overtime wages, plus  additional equal amounts as liquidated damages, plus the attorneys’ fees and costs incurred by  Plaintiffs and the FLSA Collective.   37.  While the exact number of the FLSA Collective is unknown to Plaintiffs at the  present time, upon information and belief, there are at least 1,000 other similarly-situated persons  who were/are employed by Defendants as Ad-Hoc Interviewers and/or in a similar position  during the FLSA Collective Period.   38.  Plaintiffs are currently unaware of the identities of the FLSA Collective.   Accordingly, Defendants should be required to provide Plaintiffs with a list of all persons  employed by Defendants as Ad-Hoc Interviewers and/or in a similar position during the FLSA  Collective Period, along with their last known addresses, telephone numbers and e-mail  addresses so Plaintiffs can give the FLSA Collective notice of this action and an opportunity to  make an informed decision about whether to participate in it.    39.  Plaintiffs bring their NYLL claims as a class action pursuant to Federal Rule of  Civil Procedure 23 on behalf of themselves and on behalf of all other similarly-situated persons  who were/are employed by Defendants as Ad-Hoc Interviewers and/or in a similar position who  were/are not paid the prevailing minimum wage for all hours worked, overtime at a rate of one  and one-half times their regular rate for all hours worked in excess of 40 hours per week,   9  straight-time wages for all hours worked, “call-in” pay and those who were not provided with  accurate wage statement by Defendants.   40.  The basic job duties of the NYLL Class were/are the same as or substantially  similar to those of Plaintiffs, and the NYLL Class were/are paid in the same manner and under  the same common policies, plans and practices as Plaintiffs.   41.  The NYLL Class, like Plaintiffs, all have been subject to the same unlawful  policies, plans and practices of Defendants, including not paying the prevailing minimum wage  for all hours worked, overtime at a rate of one and one-half times their regular rate of pay for all  hours worked in excess of 40 hours per week, straight-time wages for all hours worked, “call-in”  pay and not being provided accurate wage statements by Defendants.   42.  During the NYLL Class Period, Defendants were fully aware of the duties  performed by Plaintiffs and the NYLL Class, and that those duties were not exempt from the  minimum wage and overtime provisions of the NYLL and/or its regulations.   43.  As a result of Defendants’ conduct, as alleged herein, Defendants violated the  NYLL and/or its regulations by not paying the NYLL Class and Plaintiffs the prevailing  minimum wage for all hours worked, overtime at a rate of one and one-half times their regular  rate of pay for all hours worked in excess of 40 hours per week, straight-time wages for all hours  worked, “call-in” pay and by not providing them with accurate wage statements.   44.  Defendants’ violations of the NYLL and/or its regulations were willful, repeated,  knowing, intentional and without a good faith basis, and significantly damaged Plaintiffs and the  NYLL Class.    10   45.  As a result of Defendants’ conduct, Defendants are liable to Plaintiffs and the  NYLL Class for the full amount of their unpaid minimum, overtime and straight-time wages,  “call-in” pay, statutory penalties for failing to provide accurate wage statements, plus an  additional amount as liquidated damages, plus the attorneys’ fees and costs incurred by Plaintiffs  and the NYLL Class.   46.  Certification of the NYLL Class’s claims as a class action is the most efficient  and economical means of resolving the questions of law and fact common to Plaintiffs’ claims  and the claims of the NYLL Class.  Plaintiffs have standing to seek such relief because of the  adverse effect that Defendants’ unlawful compensation policies and practices have had on them  individually and on members of the NYLL Class.  Without class certification, the same evidence  and issues would be subject to re-litigation in a multitude of individual lawsuits with an attendant  risk of inconsistent adjudications and conflicting obligations.  Certification of the NYLL Class is  the most efficient and judicious means of presenting the evidence and argument necessary to  resolve such questions for Plaintiffs, the NYLL Class and Defendants.     47.  Plaintiffs’ claims raise questions of law and fact common to the NYLL Class.   Among these questions are:   (a)  Whether Defendants failed to pay Plaintiffs and the NYLL Class the prevailing  minimum wage for all hours worked during the NYLL Class Period;  (b)  Whether Defendants failed to pay Plaintiffs and the NYLL Class overtime at a  rate of one and one-half times their regular rate of pay for all hours worked in  excess of 40 hours per week during the NYLL Class Period;  (c)  Whether Defendants failed to pay Plaintiffs and the NYLL Class straight-time  wages for all hours worked during the NYLL Class Period;  (d)  Whether Defendants failed to provide Plaintiffs and the NYLL Class with  accurate wage statemnts during the NYLL Class Period;  11  (e)  Whether Defendants’ failure to pay the prevailing minimum wage to Plaintiffs  and the NYLL Class constitutes a violation of NYLL §650 et seq.;  (f)  Whether Defendants’ failure to pay overtime to Plaintiffs and the NYLL Class  constitutes a violation of NYLL §650 et seq. and 12 NYCRR §142.2-2;  (g)  Whether Defendants’ failure to pay Plaintiffs and the NYLL Class straight-time  wages constitutes a violation of NYLL §191;  (h)  Whether Defendants paid Plaintiff and the NYLL Class members “call-in” pay;  (i)  Whether Defendants’ failure to provide Plaintiffs and the NYLL Class with  accurate wage statements constitutes a violation of NYLL §195; and  (j)  Whether Defendants’ violations of the NYLL and/or its regulations were willful.   52.  These common questions of law and fact arise from the same course of events and  each class member will make similar legal and factual arguments to prove Defendants’ liability.   53.  Plaintiffs are members of the NYLL Class that they seek to represent.  Plaintiffs’  claims are typical of the claims of the NYLL Class.  The relief Plaintiffs seek for the unlawful  policies and practices complained of herein are also typical of the relief which is sought on  behalf of the NYLL Class.     54.  Plaintiffs’ interests are co-extensive with those of the NYLL Class that they seek  to represent in this case.  Plaintiffs are willing and able to represent the NYLL Class fairly and to  vigorously pursue their similar individual claims in this action.  Plaintiffs have retained counsel  who are qualified and experienced in employment class action litigation, and who are able to  meet the time and fiscal demands necessary to litigate a class action of this size and complexity.   The combined interests, experience and resources of Plaintiffs and their counsel to litigate the  individual and NYLL Class claims at issue in this case satisfy the adequacy of representation  requirement of Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a)(4).  12   55.  Defendants have acted or refused to act on grounds generally applicable to the  NYLL Class, making final injunctive and declaratory relief appropriate with respect to the  NYLL Class as a whole.   56.  Injunctive and declaratory relief are the predominant relief sought in this case  because they are the culmination of the proof of Defendants’ individual and class-wide liability  and the essential predicate for Plaintiffs’ and the NYLL Class’ entitlement to monetary and non- monetary remedies to be determined at a later stages of the proceedings.     57.  The common issues of fact and law affecting Plaintiffs’ claims and those of the  NYLL Class members, including the common issues identified above, predominate over any  issues affecting only individual claims.   58.  A class action is superior to other available means for the fair and efficient  adjudication of Plaintiffs’ claims and the claims of the NYLL Class.  There will be no difficulty  in the management of this action as a class action.   59.  The cost of proving Defendants’ violations of the NYLL and the supporting New  York State Department of Labor regulations makes it impracticable for Plaintiffs and the NYLL  Class to pursue their claims individually.  Maintenance of a class action promotes judicial  economy by consolidating a large class of plaintiffs litigating identical claims.  The claims of the  NYLL Class interrelate such that the interests of the members will be fairly and adequately  protected in their absence.  Additionally, the questions of law and fact common to the NYLL  Class arise from the same course of events and each class member makes similar legal and  factual arguments to prove the Defendants’ liability.   13   60.  The NYLL Class is so numerous that joinder of all members is impracticable.   While the exact number of the NYLL Class is unknown to Plaintiffs at the present time, upon  information and belief, there are at least 1,000 other similarly-situated persons who were/are  employed by Defendants as Ad-Hoc Interviewers and/or in a similar position and during the  NYLL Class Period.   61.  Plaintiffs are currently unaware of the identities of the members of the NYLL  Class.  Accordingly, Defendants should be required to provide Plaintiffs with a list of all persons  employed by Defendants as Ad-Hoc Interviewers and/or in similar positions during the NYLL  Class Period, along with their last known addresses, telephone numbers and e-mail addresses so  Plaintiffs can give the NYLL Class notice of this action and an opportunity to make an informed  decision about whether to participate in it.    62.  Plaintiffs, on behalf of themselves and the FLSA Collective, reallege and  incorporate by reference all proceeding paragraphs as if they were set forth again herein.   63.  The FLSA requires covered employers, such as Defendants, to pay all non- exempt employees the prevailing minimum wage for all hours worked.  Plaintiffs and the FLSA  Collective were not exempt from the requirement that Defendants pay them the prevailing  minimum wage under the FLSA.   64.  During the FLSA Collective Period, Defendants however, did not always pay  Plaintiffs and the FLSA Collective at the prevailing minimum wage rate for all hours worked  because they, inter alia, failed to compensate them for time spent training, and failed to count all  of the hours worked by Plaintiffs and the FLSA Collective, causing Plaintiffs and the FLSA  Collective to perform a substantial amount of off-the-clock work.  14   65.  As a result of Defendants’ failure to pay Plaintiffs and the FLSA Collective the  prevailing minimum wage rate for all hours worked, Defendants violated the FLSA.   66.  The foregoing conduct of Defendants constitutes willful violations of the FLSA.   67.  Defendants’ violations of the FLSA has significantly damaged Plaintiffs and the  FLSA Collective and entitles them to recover the total amount of their unpaid minimum wages,  an additional equal amount in liquidated damages and attorneys’ fees and costs.  68.  Plaintiffs, on behalf of themselves and the FLSA Collective, reallege and  incorporate by reference all proceeding paragraphs as if they were set forth again herein.   69.  The FLSA requires covered employers, such as Defendants, to pay all non- exempt employees at a rate not less than one and one-half times their regular rate of pay for all  hours worked in excess of 40 hours per week.  Plaintiffs and the FLSA Collective were not  exempt from the requirement that Defendants pay them overtime under the FLSA.   70.  During the FLSA Collective Period, Defendants knew that Plaintiffs and the  FLSA Collective worked more than 40 hours in a workweek.  However, Defendants did not  always pay them overtime for each hour worked in excess of 40 hours per week because they,  inter alia, did not count all of the hours worked by Plaintiffs and the FLSA Collective, causing  Plaintiffs and the FLSA Collective to perform a substantial amount of off-the-clock work, and  thus failing to compensate them for all overtime hours worked.   71.  Furthermore, when Defendants did pay Plaintiffs and the FLSA Collective for  hours worked in excess of 40 hours per week, Defendants did not pay them one and one-half  times their regular rate of pay because they, inter alia, did not include the non-discretionary  bonuses they earned when determining their regular rate of pay.  15   72.  As a result of Defendants’ failure to pay Plaintiffs and the FLSA Collective  overtime at a rate of one and one-half times their regular rate of pay for all hours worked in  excess of 40 hours per week, Defendants violated the FLSA.   73.  The foregoing conduct of Defendants constitutes willful violations of the FLSA.   74.  Defendants’ violations of the FLSA has significantly damaged Plaintiffs and the  FLSA Collective and entitles them to recover the total amount of their unpaid overtime wages,  an additional equal amount in liquidated damages and attorneys’ fees and costs.  75.  Plaintiffs, on behalf of themselves and the NYLL Class, reallege and incorporate  by reference all proceeding paragraphs as if they were set forth again herein.    76.  The NYLL requires covered employers, such as Defendants, to pay all non- exempt employees the prevailing minimum wage rate for all hours worked.  Plaintiffs and the  NYLL Class were not exempt from the requirement that Defendants pay them the prevailing  minimum wage under the NYLL.   77.  During the NYLL Class Period, however, Defendants did not pay Plaintiffs and  the NYLL Class the prevailing minimum wage rate for all hours worked because they, inter alia,  did not compensate them for time spent training, and failed to count all of the hours worked by  Plaintiffs and the NYLL Class, causing Plaintiffs and the FLSA Collective to perform substantial  off-the-clock work.   78.  As a result of Defendants’ failure to pay Plaintiffs and the NYLL Class the  prevailing minimum wage rate for all hours, Defendants violated the NYLL.   79.  The foregoing conduct of Defendants constitutes willful violations of the NYLL.  16   80.  Defendants’ violations of the NYLL have significantly damaged Plaintiffs and the  NYLL Class and entitles them to recover the total amount of their unpaid minimum wages, an  additional amount in liquidated damages and attorneys’ fees and costs.  81.  Plaintiffs, on behalf of themselves and the NYLL Class, reallege and incorporate  by reference all proceeding paragraphs as if they were set forth again herein.    82.  The NYLL and 12 NYCRR §142-2.2 require a covered employer, such as  Defendants, to pay employees overtime at a rate of one and one-half times the employee’s  regular rate of pay in the manner and methods provided in the FLSA.  Plaintiffs and the NYLL  Class were not exempt from the requirement that Defendants pay them overtime under the  NYLL and/or its regulations.   83.  During the NYLL Class Period, Defendants knew that Plaintiffs and the NYLL  Class worked above 40 hours in a workweek.  However, Defendants failed to pay Plaintiffs and  the NYLL Class overtime wages for each hour worked in excess of 40 hours per week because  they, inter alia, failed to count all of the hours worked by Plaintiffs and the NYLL Class, causing  Plaintiffs and the FLSA Collective to perform a substantial amount of off-the-clock work, and  thus failing to compensate them for all overtime hours worked.   84.  Furthermore, when Defendants did pay Plaintiffs and the NYLL Class for hours  worked in excess of 40 hours per week, Defendants did not pay them one and one-half times  their regular rate of pay because, inter alia, they failed to include the amount of non- discretionary bonuses they earned when determining their regular rate of pay.  17   85.  As a result of Defendants’ failure to pay Plaintiffs and the NYLL Class overtime  wages at a rate of one and one-half times their regular rate of pay for all hours worked in excess  of 40 hours per week, Defendants violated the NYLL and 12 NYCRR §142-2.2.   86.  The foregoing conduct of Defendants constitutes willful violations of the NYLL  and/or its regulations.   87.  Defendants’ violations of the NYLL and/or its regulations have significantly  damaged Plaintiffs and the NYLL Class and entitles them to recover the total amount of their  unpaid overtime wages, an additional equal amount in liquidated damages and attorneys’ fees  and costs.  88.  Plaintiffs, on behalf of themselves and the NYLL Class, reallege and incorporate  by reference all proceeding paragraphs as if they were set forth again herein.    89.  The NYLL requires covered employers, such as Defendants, to pay employees for  all hours worked.  Plaintiffs and the NYLL Class were not exempt from the requirement that  Defendants pay them for all hours worked under the NYLL.   90.  During the NYLL Class Period, however, Defendants did not always pay  Plaintiffs and the NYLL Class their straight-time wages for all hours worked because they, inter  alia, did not compensate them for time spent training, and failed to count all of the hours worked  by Plaintiffs and the NYLL Class, causing Plaintiffs and the FLSA Collective to perform a  substantial amount of off-the-clock work.   91.  As a result of Defendants’ failure to pay Plaintiffs and the NYLL Class their  straight-time wages for all hours worked, Defendants violated the NYLL.   92.  The foregoing conduct of Defendants constitutes willful violations of the NYLL.  18   93.  Defendants’ violations of the NYLL has significantly damaged Plaintiffs and the  NYLL Class and entitles them to recover the total amount of their unpaid straight-time wages, an  additional amount in liquidated damages and attorneys’ fees and costs.  94.  Plaintiffs, on behalf of themselves and the NYLL Class, reallege and incorporate  by reference all proceeding paragraphs as if they were set forth again herein.    95.  During the NYLL Period, Defendants were required to pay Plaintiff and the  NYLL Class members “call-in” pay, in violation of the NYLL, including, but not limited to,  New York Minimum Wage Order for Miscellaneous Industries and Occupations §142-2.3.    96.  As a result of Defendants’ NYLL violation, Plaintiff and the NYLL Class  members are entitled to recover from Defendants their “call-in” pay owed, and an equal amount  in liquidated damages, as well as attorneys’ fees, costs and interests.   97.  Plaintiffs, on behalf of themselves and the NYLL Class, reallege and incorporate  by reference all proceeding paragraphs as if they were set forth again herein.    98.  The NYLL requires covered employers, such as Defendants, to furnish wage  statements to its employees with every payment of wages and to provide wage notices.  Plaintiff  and the NYLL Class were not exempt from this requirement.    99.  During the NYLL Class Period, Defendants failed to furnish accurate wage  statements and wage notices to Plaintiffs and the NYLL Class, in violation of NYLL §195 by,  inter alia, providing wage statements that inaccurately recorded hours worked and/or wages  earned.  As a result, the wage statements furnished by Defendants to Plaintiffs and the members  19  of the NYLL Class contained inacurrate information with respect to wages purportedly paid and  hours worked.  100.  The foregoing conduct of Defendants constitute willful violations of the NYLL  and/or its regulations.   101.  Defendants’ violations of the NYLL have significantly damaged Plaintiffs and the  NYLL Class and entitles them to recover statutory damages, together with attorneys’ fees and  costs. 