(Collective Action Claim for Violation of FLSA Wage Provisions)   (Individual Claim for Unjust Enrichment)   (Individual Claim for Violation of FLSA Wage Provisions)   17.  Plaintiff repeats and realleges all preceding paragraphs of the Complaint, as if fully set  forth herein.    18.  At all times material and relevant herein, Defendants were jointly the "employer" of  Plaintiff and similarly situated employees within the meaning of 29 U.S.C §203(d) and  Louisiana Revised Statutes 23:900.    19.  At all times material and relevant herein, Defendants either directly or indirectly hired  Plaintiff and similarly situated Cashiers; controlled their work schedules and conditions of  employment; determined the rate and method of the payment of wages; and kept at least some  records regarding their employment.    20.  Upon information and belief, during the applicable statutory period, Defendants  employed, in aggregate, at least ninety (90) Cashiers at the above-listed thirty-two (32) branch  stores.     22.  Upon information and belief, at all times material and relevant herein, Plaintiff,  YUSIF AHMED, and all other similarly situated Cashiers were required by Defendants and  did regularly work well over forty (40) hours per week.    23.  Upon information and belief, at   all   relevant   times   herein, Plaintiff, YUSIF  AHMED, and all other similarly situated Cashiers were treated as non-exempt hourly  employees by Defendants.   24.  At all relevant times Plaintiff, YUSIF AHMED, and all other similarly situated  Cashiers did not receive overtime compensation at a rate not less than one and one-half (1.5)  times their regular rate of pay for work in excess of forty (40) hours per week.    25.  At all relevant times herein, Defendants maintained control, oversight, and direction  over the Plaintiff, YUSIF AHMED, and the putative members of the proposed  collective/class, including the promulgation and enforcement of policies affecting the  payment of wages for overtime compensation.    26.  Upon information and belief, Defendants never posted a notice explaining the  minimum hourly wage and overtime pay rights provided by FLSA in any area of its business  facility where Plaintiff and similarly situated employees were employed, in violation of 29  32.  Plaintiff repeats and realleges all the preceding paragraphs of this Complaint, as if  fully set forth herein.    33.  Plaintiff brings this collective and class action individually and on behalf of all other  similarly situated Cashiers who were/are affected by Defendants’ willful and intentional  violation of the FLSA and Louisiana Civil Code as described in this Complaint.   34.  Plaintiff brings this collective action to recover monetary damages owed by  Defendants to Plaintiff and members of the putative Collective for all unpaid overtime  compensation for hours in a work week in excess of forty (40) pursuant to the FLSA.   36.  Plaintiff brings this claim for relief for violation of the FLSA, as a collective action  pursuant to Section 216(b) of the FLSA, 29 U.S.C. § 216(b).  The Collective is defined as  follows:   All current and former employees of Defendants, who were/are 1)  employed as Cashiers in the State of Louisiana during the applicable  statutory period; and 2) not paid overtime compensation at a rate not  less than one and one-half (1.5) times their regular rate of pay for  hours in a work week in excess of forty (40).   37.  Plaintiff brings this class action claim for relief under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of  Civil Procedure and the Louisiana Civil Code § 2298.  The Class is defined as follows:  All current and former employees of Defendants, who were/are 1)  employed as hourly employees in the State of Louisiana during the  applicable statutory period; and 2) not paid proper overtime  compensation, without cause, for hours worked in a week in excess of  forty (40).   38.  This action is properly brought as a collective action pursuant to the collective action  procedures of the FLSA and as a class action pursuant to Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil  Procedure.  The Collective/Class is so numerous that joinder of all members is impractical.   While the exact number and identities of putative Collective and Class members are unknown  at this time, and can only be ascertained through appropriate discovery, Plaintiff believes that  at least ninety (90) putative collective and class members have worked for Defendants during  the applicable statutory period, without receiving appropriate overtime compensation, as  required by law.   40.  This litigation is properly brought as a collective/class action because Plaintiff, YUSIF  AHMED's claims are typical of the claims of the members of the Collective/Class, inasmuch  as all such claims arise from Defendants’ standard policies and practices, as alleged herein.   Like all Collective/Class members, Plaintiff was damaged by Defendants’ system-wide  policies and practices of failing to pay overtime compensation at a rate not less than one and  one-half (1.5) times their regular rate of pay for all hours in a work week in excess of forty  (40), in violation of the FLSA and Louisiana Civil Code § 2298.   42.  Collective/Class certification is also fair and efficient because prosecution of separate  actions by individual Collective/Class members would create a risk of differing adjudications  with respect to such individual members of the Collective/Class, which as a practical matter  may be dispositive of the interests of other members no parties to the adjudication, or  substantially impair or impede their ability to protect their interests.   43.  Plaintiff anticipates that there will be no difficulty in the management of this litigation.   This litigation presents FLSA claims of a type that have often been prosecuted on a classwide  basis, and the manner of identifying the Collective/Class and providing any monetary relief to  it can easily be effectuated from a review of Defendants’ records.    44.  Plaintiff and the putative collective and class members demand a trial by jury.  45.  Plaintiff repeats and realleges all the preceding paragraphs of this Complaint, as if  fully set forth herein.   46.  Defendants required Plaintiff and all other similarly situated Cashiers to work hours in  a work week in excess of forty (40).   48.  Defendants’ failure to pay Plaintiff, YUSIF AHMED, and the Collective/Class proper  overtime compensation for hours in a work week in excess of forty (40) violates the FLSA.   49.  Defendants’ uniform conduct and practices, as described above, was/is willful,  intentional, unreasonable, arbitrary and in bad faith.    50.  Because Defendants willfully violated the FLSA, as aforesaid, a three (3) year statute  of limitations shall apply to such violation, pursuant to 29 U.S.C. § 255.    51.  As a result of Defendants’ uniform policy and practice described above, Plaintiffs  were illegally deprived of overtime compensation earned, in such amounts to be determined at  trial, and is entitled to recovery of such total unpaid amounts, liquidated damages, pre- judgment interest, costs, reasonable attorneys’ fees and other compensation pursuant to 29  U.S.C § 216(b).  52.  Plaintiff repeats and realleges all the preceding paragraphs of this Complaint, as if  fully set forth herein.   53.  Defendants required Plaintiff, YUSIF AHMED and all other similarly situated  Cashiers employed in the State of Louisiana to work hours in a work week in excess of forty  (40).   55.  Defendants’ failure to pay Plaintiff and all other similarly situated Cashiers proper  overtime compensation for hours in a work week in excess of forty (40) violates the FLSA.   56.  Defendants’ uniform policy and practice, as described above, was/is willful,  intentional, unreasonable, arbitrary and in bad faith.    57.  Because Defendants willfully violated the FLSA, as aforesaid, a three (3) year statute  of limitations shall apply to such violation, pursuant to 29 U.S.C. § 255.    58.  As a result of Defendants’ foregoing violation, Plaintiff and all other similarly situated  Cashiers were illegally deprived of overtime compensation earned, in such amounts to be  determined at trial, and are entitled to recovery of such total unpaid amounts, liquidated  damages, pre-judgment interest, costs, reasonable attorney’s fees and other compensation  pursuant to 29 U.S.C § 216(b).  59.  Plaintiff repeats and realleges all the preceding paragraphs of this Complaint, as if  fully set forth herein.   60.  Defendants recognized the benefits conferred upon them by Plaintiff, YUSIF  AHMED, and all other similar situated Cashiers.   61.  Defendants accepted and retained the benefits under circumstances that would render  such retention inequitable.   62.  Defendants were aware and/or notified of the work performed without compensation  and demand was made for payment for such work.   64.  The payment requested by Plaintiff for the benefits produced by him is based on  customary and reasonable rates for such services at the time and in the locality where the  services were rendered, and the amount by which Plaintiff was impoverished and Defendants  were enriched is identical.   65.  No other remedy exists under the laws of the State of Louisiana to recover these  unlawfully unpaid wages.    66.  Plaintiff is entitled to damages equal to all unpaid wages due within three (3) years  preceding the filing of this Complaint plus periods of equitable tolling, as allowed by  Louisiana Civil Code § 3494(1).   67.  Plaintiff is entitled to an award of pre-judgment and post-judgment interest at the  applicable legal rate. 