(Breach of Contract)   (FLSA Retaliation)   (FLSA – Unpaid Minimum Wage and Unpaid Wages)   (FLSA – Unpaid Overtime)   (NJWHL – Unpaid Overtime)   (NJWCL – Unpaid Wages)   (NJWHL – Untimely Payments)   (NJWHL – Unpaid Minimum Wage)   36. Plaintiffs bring claims for relief as a collective action pursuant to FLSA Section 16(b), 29  U.S.C. § 216(b), on behalf of all non-exempt employees, including cooks, food preparers,  waiters, dishwashers and busboys, employed by the Defendants on or after the date that is  three years before the filing of the Complaint in this case as defined herein (“FLSA  Collective Plaintiffs”).   37. At all relevant times, Plaintiffs and other FLSA Collective Plaintiffs are and have been  similarly situated, have had substantially similar job requirements and pay provisions,  and are and have been subjected to Defendants’ decisions, policies, plans, programs,  practices and procedures, protocols, routines, and rules, all culminating in a willful failure  and refusal to pay them proper overtime compensation at the rate of one and one half  times the regular hourly rate for work in excess of forty (40) hours per workweek.  The  claims of the Plaintiffs stated herein are essentially the same as those of the FLSA  Collective Plaintiffs.   39. Plaintiffs also bring claims for relief pursuant to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure  (“F.R.C.P.”) Rule 23, on behalf of all non-exempt employees, including cooks, food  preparers, waiters, dishwashers and busboys, employed by Defendants on or after the  date that is six years before the filing of the Complaint in this case as defined herein (the  “Class period”).   40. All said persons, including the Plaintiffs, are referred to herein as the “Class.”  The Class  members are readily ascertainable.  The number and identity of the Class members are  determinable from the records of Defendants.  The hours assigned and worked, the  positions held, and the rate of pay for each Class member are also determinable from the  Defendants’ records.  For purposes of notice and other purposes related to this action,  their names and addresses are readily available from Defendants.  Notice can be provided  by means permissible under F.R.C.P. Rule 23.   41. The proposed Class is so numerous that a joinder of all members is impracticable, and the  disposition of their claims as a class will benefit the parties and the Court.  Although the  precise number of such persons is unknown, and the facts on which the calculation of that  number are presently within the sole control of Defendants; upon information and belief,  there are in excess of twenty (20) Class Members.   43. The Plaintiffs are able to fairly and adequately protect the interests of the Class and have  no interests antagonistic to the Class.  The Plaintiffs are represented by attorneys who are  experienced and competent in both class action litigation and employment litigation and  have previously represented plaintiffs in wage and hour cases.   45. Defendants and other employers throughout the state violate the New Jersey wage laws.   Current employees are often afraid to assert their rights out of fear of direct or indirect  retaliation.  Former employees are fearful of bringing claims because doing so can harm  their employment, future employment, and future efforts to secure employment.  Class  actions provide class members who are not named in the Complaint a degree of  anonymity, which allows for the vindication of their rights while eliminating or reducing  those risks.   47. Defendants own and operate three Turkish restaurants in New Jersey, which primarily  serve food and drinks to the public.  The restaurants are Cinar 1 located at 677 Palisade  Avenue, Cliffside Park NJ 07010; Cinar 2 located at 632 Bloomfield Avenue, West  Caldwell NJ 07006; and Cinar 3 located at 214 Kinderkamack Roacd, Emerson NJ  07630.   48. From approximately May 2015 to December 1, 2017, Ucar was employed by the  Defendants as an Executive Chef.   49. Ucar would work, at minimum, five days per week for Defendants.   50. Ucar would work, at minimum, thirteen hours per day, from 9am to 10pm.   51. Defendants failed to provide Ucar with a wage notice, upon his hire or annually.    52. Defendants failed to provide Ucar with proper wage statements for each payment he  received.    53. Upon sincere information and belief, Defendants failed to maintain time records as to  Ucar’s hours worked.   54. From May 2015 through approximately December 2016, Ucar was paid the gross amount  of $1,500.00 on a weekly basis by a combination of check and cash.   56. During Ucar’s employment with Defendants, Ucar worked over forty (40) hours per  week.   57. Although Ucar worked over forty hours per week, Defendants never paid Ucar at the  required overtime premium rate.   58. Ucar was a non-exempt employee.   59. From approximately January 1, 2017 to December 1, 2017, Defendants failed to regularly  pay Ucar his contractual rate of $1,500.00 on a weekly basis.   60. From approximately January 1, 2017 to December 1, 2017, Defendants failed to regularly  pay Ucar at the required minimum wage rate.   61. From approximately January 1, 2017 to December 1, 2017, Defendants failed to pay Ucar  at the required overtime premium rate.   62. Ucar complained to Tunc about not being paid the amount he was owed.   63. No action was taken in response to Ucar’s complaints; rather, in retaliation for his  complaints, Ucar was constructively terminated on or about December 1, 2017.   64. Other employees of the Defendants, including but not limited to: Hakan Hanegelioglu,  Baris Turkmen, Ferdi Memli, Mehmet (last name currently unknown), Gokhan Bayrak  and Nuh Demirel were also improperly paid.   65. Defendants knew that the foregoing acts violated the law, and that they would  economically injure Plaintiff.   67. Plaintiff hereby repeats and realleges the preceding paragraphs as though they were fully  set forth herein.   68. The FLSA requires covered employees, such as Defendants, to pay all employees their  regular rate of pay for all hours worked.  Plaintiff was not exempt from this requirement.   69. From approximately January 1, 2017 to December 1, 2017, Defendants failed to regularly  pay Plaintiff at his weekly rate of $1,500.00 per week.   70. As a result of Defendants’ failure to pay, Defendants violated the FLSA.   71. The foregoing conduct of Defendants constitutes willful violations of the FLSA.   72. Defendants’ violations of the FLSA have significantly damaged Plaintiff and entitle him  to recover the total amount of his unpaid wages, and an additional equal amount in  liquidated damages, and attorney’s fees and costs.  73. Plaintiff hereby repeats and realleges the preceding paragraphs as though they were fully  set forth herein.   74. By failing to pay overtime at a rate not less than one and one-half (1.5) times the regular  rate of pay for work performed in excess of 40 hours per week, Defendants have violated  and continue to violate the FLSA, 29 U.S.C. §§ 201 et seq., including 29 U.S.C. §§  207(a)(1) and 215(a)(2).   76. Defendants’ failure to pay overtime caused Plaintiff to suffer loss of wages and interest  thereon.  Plaintiff is entitled to recover from Defendants this unpaid overtime premium  compensation, damages for unreasonably delayed payment of wages, liquidated damages,  reasonable attorneys’ fees, and costs and disbursements of the action pursuant to 29  U.S.C. § 216(b).  77. Plaintiff hereby repeats and realleges the preceding paragraphs as though they were fully  set forth herein.   78. Defendants intentionally and willfully regularly failed to pay and refused to pay Ucar  minimum wage, in violation of New Jersey Wage Payment Law, N.J.S.A. § 34:11-4.7,  the New Jersey Wage and Hour Law, N.J.S.A. § 34:11-56a, and the New Jersey Wage  and Hour Regulations, N.J.A.C. § 12:56-1.2(a)6, from approximately January 1, 2017 to  December 1, 2017.   79. Defendants’ willful violations entitle Plaintiff to his unpaid wages, liquidated damages,  reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs of the action to be determined by the court, plus  interest.  80. Plaintiff hereby repeats and realleges the preceding paragraphs as though they were fully  set forth herein.   82. Defendants’ willful violations entitle Plaintiff to the recovery of his unpaid overtime,  liquidated damages, reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs of the action to be determined  by the court, plus interest.  83. Plaintiff hereby repeats and realleges the preceding paragraphs as though they were fully  set forth herein.   84. The NJWCL provides a private cause of action to allow aggrieved employees, like  Plaintiff, to demand and collect all “wages” due and owing to him.   85. From approximately January 1, 2017 to December 1, 2017, Defendants failed to pay  Plaintiff at his regular rate of $1,500.00 per week.   86. As a result, Plaintiff has been damages in an amount to be determined at trial, plus  interest.  87. Plaintiff hereby repeats and realleges the preceding paragraphs as though they were fully  set forth herein.   88. NJWHL 34:11-4.2 requires that “every employer shall pay the full amount of wages due  to his employees as least twice during each calendar month, on regular pay days  designated in advances by the employer…”   90. As a result, Plaintiff has been damages in an amount to be determined at trial, plus  interest.  91. Plaintiff hereby repeats and realleges the preceding paragraphs as though they were fully  set forth herein.   92. Defendants agreed by contract to pay Plaintiff $1,500.00 per week.   93. For a portion of Plaintiff’s employment, Defendants failed to pay Plaintiff at his  contractual rate of $1,500.00 per week, in breach of contract.  94. Plaintiff hereby repeats and realleges the preceding paragraphs as though they were fully  set forth herein.   95. Section 15(a)(3) of the FLSA states that it is a violation for any person to “discharge or in  any other manner discriminate against any employee because such employee has filed  any complaint or caused to be instituted any proceeding under or related to this Act…”   96. During the course of Plaintiff’s employment with Defendants, Plaintiff complained about  being improperly paid.   97. Plaintiff was retaliated against for complaining, ultimately resulting in Plaintiff’s  constructive termination.  