 FLSA OVERTIME WAGES   10.  Cantor Fitzgerald is a brokerage company servicing the financial and real  estate markets, employing thousands of employees in offices worldwide.    12.  Upon information and belief, during the period from 2008 through the  present, Cantor Fitzgerald employed more than 50 similarly situated persons nationwide  in office locations including, but not limited to, Newport Beach, CA, Atlanta, GA, New  York, NY, Rochelle Park, NJ, King of Prussia, PA, and Las Vegas, NV, in a similar  capacity, comprising the putative class.    13.  The putative class is so numerous that joinder of all members is  impracticable.    14.  The names of all potential members of the putative class are not known or  knowable without defendants’ records or discovery.   15.  Plaintiff and all members of the putative class constitute “employees” as  that term is defined under 29 U.S.C. § 203(e), New York Labor Law § 651, and case law  interpreting these statutes.   16.  The payments made to plaintiff and other members of the putative class by  defendants constitute wages as that term is defined under FLSA and NYLL.    18.  Adjudications with respect to individual members of the Class would, as a  practical matter, be dispositive of the interests of other Class members not parties to the  adjudication.    20.  Steven Puente is a member of the Class and his claims are typical of those  of the Class, and he will fairly and adequately protect the interests of the Class.   21.  Steven Puente’s interests do not conflict with those of the Class.   22.  Steven Puente will fairly and adequately represent the Class, and has  retained competent counsel experienced in class action litigation.   23.  Steven Puente is not aware of any other proceeding arising out of the  issues in this action.   24.  This Court is the appropriate forum for the instant action as defendants  have their headquarters in this District, and all activities at issue took place here.   25.  Steven Puente anticipates no difficulty in the management of this class  action.   26.  A class action is superior to other available methods for the fair and  efficient adjudication of this controversy.    27.  The Class members have been damaged and are entitled to recovery as a  result of defendants’ common, uniform, unlawful, and unfair personnel policies and  practices.    28.  Defendants have computerized payroll and personnel data that will make  calculation of damages for specific Class members relatively simple.    29.  The propriety and amount of compensatory and liquidated damages are  issues common to the Class.   31.  Plaintiff collectively brings the claims in this Complaint arising out of the  FLSA on behalf of himself and similarly situated persons who are nationwide current and  former employees of Cantor Fitzgerald since the date three years prior to the filing of the  complaint.    32.  Upon information and belief, the FLSA Collective consists of in excess of  fifty (50) similarly situated current and former nationwide employees of Cantor  Fitzgerald who have been victims of defendants’ common policy and practices in  violation of their rights under the FLSA by, inter alia, willfully denying them overtime  wages.   33.  As part of its regular business practice, defendants have intentionally,  willfully, and repeatedly harmed plaintiff, the Class, and the FLSA Collective by  engaging in a pattern, practice, and/or policy of violating the FLSA and the NYLL, which  policy and pattern or practice includes the following: Failing to pay employees the  applicable overtime rate for all time worked in excess of forty (40) hours per week.    34.  Defendants have engaged in their unlawful conduct pursuant to a  corporate policy of minimizing labor costs and denying employees compensation.   35.  Defendants’ unlawful conduct has been intentional, willful, and in bad  faith, and has caused significant damage to the plaintiff, the Class, and the FLSA  Collective.   37.  As a standard practice, Cantor Fitzgerald and failed to pay overtime to  plaintiffs, the Class and the FLSA Collective for all hours worked in excess of 40 hours.  The exact accounting of how many hours were inadequately compensated can only be  determined for each plaintiff and the FLSA Collective upon completion of discovery.  38.  In or about January 2008, plaintiff, Steven Puente, was employed by  Cantor Fitzgerald as a Junior Voice Support Analyst, an information technology position,  with job functions which included information technology installation and technical  support for Cantor Fitzgerald and its affiliates.   39.  As a Voice Support Analyst, Mr. Puente performed installation and  technical support functions – installing, maintaining, supporting, and repairing  communication and computer software and hardware – for Cantor Fitzgerald and its  affiliates.     40.  From January 2008 through 2013, Espeed paid Mr. Puente’s salary.      41.  Beginning on or about January 2014 through the present, BGC has paid  Mr. Puente’s salary.     43.  From January 2008 through the present, Mr. Puente worked in excess of  40 hours per week, but was not paid statutory overtime pay for overtime hours worked.    44.  Since January 2008 through the present, Mr. Puente has held the same  position and has performed essentially the same job functions.    45.  Upon information and belief, Cantor Fitzgerald failed to post and keep  posted notices explaining the overtime provisions of the FLSA and New York State  Labor laws in conspicuous places in every establishment where plaintiff and other  information technology employees were employed so as to permit them to readily  observe a copy.   46.  Upon information and belief, Cantor Fitzgerald failed to comply with the  record-keeping requirements of the FLSA and New York State Labor laws with respect  to overtime hours worked by plaintiff and other information technology employees.   47.  In or about January 2014, Cantor Fitzgerald acknowledged that Mr.  Puente’s position as Junior Voice Support Analyst, and other positions within his  information technology department, were nonexempt and had been misclassified as  exempt.    49.  In or about February 2014, Mr. Puente and his coworkers submitted to  their supervisors and Human Resources detailed records of their overtime during the  requested six-year period.     50.  Mr. Puente provided Cantor Fitzgerald with records documenting his  unpaid overtime from 2008-2014, which totaled in excess of $100,000.   51.  During the period February through November 2014, Mr. Puente’s and his  coworkers’ supervisors repeatedly inquired as to the status of payment.    52.  Human Resources responded that they were working on it and requested  additional time records and updates from Mr. Puente and his coworkers.     53.  On or about November 20, 2014, Mr. Puente wrote directly to the Human  Resources Director, Patricia Dreste, to inquire about payment and, receiving no response,  Mr. Puente wrote again to Ms. Dreste on December 1, 2014 and January 12, 2015.     54.  On or about January 12, 2015, Ms. Dreste replied stating “we are working  on this,” and “I am doing my best to resolve this in the next week.”    55.  Two months later, on or about March 13, 2015, Ms. Dreste, with Mr.  Viola on the line, called Mr. Puente and advised that Cantor Fitzgerald was prepared to  pay him two years of overtime totaling $51,528 for the period 2012-2014.    56.  When Mr. Puente asked Ms. Dreste why Cantor Fitzgerald was not paying  unpaid overtime for the entire six year period, Ms. Dreste was unable to answer the  question.    58.  Mr. Puente elected not to sign the proposed Acknowledgment because the  proposed payment of two years of overtime did not include all the unpaid overtime  during the time period Cantor Fitzgerald misclassified him as exempt.   59.  Upon information and belief, Cantor Fitzgerald made similar offers of  partial payment to Mr. Puente’s coworkers and unlawfully required that they sign an  Acknowledgement of full payment.       60.  Upon information and belief, Cantor Fitzgerald engaged in a pattern and  practice of unlawfully requiring similarly situated individuals to sign purported waivers  or acknowledgement forms as a condition of receiving partial payment of overtime,  which waivers are invalid and contrary to law.   61.  Upon information and belief, Cantor Fitzgerald engaged in a pattern and  practice of willfully failing to pay its information technology employees overtime pay in  full.    62.  Plaintiff repeats and re-alleges the allegations set forth in paragraphs 1-61  as if fully set forth herein.   63.  This claim is brought individually on behalf of the named plaintiff and the  FLSA Collective.   65.  Defendants violated the FLSA by failing to compensate plaintiff and the  FLSA Collective for overtime wages.   66.  Defendants willfully and intentionally failed to compensate plaintiff and  the FLSA Collective for overtime wages.    67.  As a result of defendant’s willful and unlawful violations of the FLSA,  plaintiff and the FLSA Collective are entitled to recover their unpaid overtime wages,  reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs of the action, liquidated damages, and pre- and post- judgment interest.  68.  Plaintiff repeats and re-alleges the allegations set forth in paragraphs 1-67  as if fully set forth herein.   69.  This claim is brought individually on behalf of the named plaintiff and the  Class.   70.  The NYLL requires that employers pay employees one and one-half times  their regular rate of pay for all hours worked in excess of 40 hours during any work week.   71.  Defendants violated the NYLL by failing to compensate plaintiff and the  Class for overtime wages.   72.  Defendants willfully and intentionally failed to compensate plaintiff and  the Class for overtime wages.    9.  Plaintiff brings this action as a collective action pursuant to FLSA on  behalf of those non-managerial employees who elect to opt-in to this action (the “FLSA  Collective”) and pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. Rule 23, on behalf of a class of all past,  present and future non-managerial information technology employees who perform  installation and technical support functions – installing, maintaining, supporting, and  repairing communication and computer software and hardware, for Cantor Fitzgerald  except those who elect to opt out of this action (the “Plaintiffs” or “Class”).   COLLECTIVE AND CLASS ACTION ALLEGATIONS   NYLL OVERTIME WAGES  