17.  Defendants STAMATIS BILLILIS and JOANN BILLILIS actively  participate in the day-to-day operation of the Restaurant. For instance, STAMATIS  BILLILIS and JOANN BILLILIS personally supervise and direct the work of the  employees, instruct the employees how to perform their jobs, and correct and/or  reprimand the employees for any errors made.   18.  Defendants ST AMA TIS BILLILIS and JOANN BILLILIS jointly create,  approve, and implement all crucial business policies, including decisions concerning the  number of hours the employees work, the amount of pay that the employees are entitled  to receive, and the manner and method by which the employees are paid.   19.  In or about August 2014, Defendants hired Plaintiff to work as a non- exempt kitchen worker/food preparer, porter, and food delivery worker for Defendants'  4  restaurant known as Stamatis Restaurant, located at 29-09 23rd Avenue, Astoria, New  York.   20.  Neither at the time of his hire nor anytime thereafter did Defendants  provide Plaintiff with a written wage notice setting forth, among other things, his regular  hourly rate of pay and corresponding regular overtime rate of pay.   21.  Plaintiff worked continuously for the Defendants m those capacities  through in or about May 2017.   22.  Plaintiff worked over forty (40) hours per week.   23.  Throughout the entirety of his employment, Plaintiff worked six (6) days  per week (Thursday off), and his work schedule consisted of nine (9) hours per day on  from 4:30 p.m. until 1 :30 a.m.   24.  Plaintiff occasionally worked more than ten (10) hours in a day.   25.  From the beginning of his employment and continuing through in or about  February 2015, Plaintiff was not paid proper overtime compensation. During this period,  Plaintiff was paid, in cash, at the rate of $450 per week straight time for all hours worked,  and worked fifty-four (54) hours per week (and sometimes in excess thereof). Work  performed above forty ( 40) hours per week was not paid at the statutory rate of time and  one-half as required by state and federal law.   26.  Beginning in or about March 2015 and continuing through in or about  February 2016, Plaintiff was not paid proper minimum wages or overtime compensation.  During this period, Plaintiff was paid, in cash, at the rate of $480 per week straight time  for all hours worked, and worked fifty-four (54) hours per week (and sometimes in  5  excess thereof). Work performed above forty (40) hours per week was not paid at the  statutory rate of time and one-half as required by state and federal law.   27.  Beginning in or about March 2016 and continuing through the remainder  of his employment in or about May 2017, Plaintiff was not paid proper minimum wages  or overtime compensation. During this period, Plaintiff was paid, partly by check and the  rest in cash, at the rate of $550 per week straight time for all hours worked, and worked  fifty-four (54) hours per week (and sometimes in excess thereof). Work performed above  forty ( 40) hours per week was not paid at the statutory rate of time and one-half as  required by state and federal law.   28.  Upon paying Plaintiff his wages each week, Defendants failed to provide  Plaintiff with proper wage statements setting forth, among other things, Plaintiff's gross  wages, deductions, and net wages.   29.  Defendants knowingly and willfully operated their business with a policy  of not paying either the FLSA minimum wage or the New York State minimum wage to  Plaintiff and other similarly situated employees.   30.  Defendants knowingly and willfully operated their business with a policy  of not paying Plaintiff and other similarly situated employees either the FLSA overtime  rate (of time and one-half), or the New York State overtime rate (of time and one-half), in  direct violation of the FLSA and New York Labor Law and the supporting federal and  New York State Department of Labor Regulations.   31.  Defendants knowingly and willfully operated their business with a policy  of not paying Plaintiff and other similarly situated employees "spread of hours" premium  for each day that they worked a shift in excess of ten (10) hours, in direct violation of the  6  New York Labor Law and the supporting New York State Department of Labor  Regulations.   32.  At all relevant times, upon information and belief, and during the course  of Plaintiff's employment, the Defendants failed to maintain accurate and sufficient time  and pay records.  33.  Plaintiff brings this action individually and as class representative on  behalf of himself and all other current and former non-exempt employees who have been  or were employed by Defendants between June 26, 2014 through the date that the opt-in  period expires as ultimately set by the Court (the "Collective Action Period"), and who  were compensated at rates less than the statutory minimum wage and/or less than the  statutory rate of time and one-half for all hours worked in excess of forty ( 40) hours per  workweek (the "Collective Action Members").   34.  The collective action class is so numerous that joinder of all members is  impracticable. Although the precise number of such persons is unknown, and the facts  upon which the calculation of that number are presently within the sole control of the  Defendants, upon information and belief, there are more than forty ( 40) Collective Action  Members who worked for Defendants during the Collective Action Period, most of  whom would not be likely to file individual suits because they lack adequate financial  resources, access to attorneys, or knowledge of their claims. Therefore, Plaintiff submits  that this matter should be certified as a collective action under the FLSA, 29 U.S.C. §  216(b).  7   35.  Plaintiff will fairly and adequately protect the interests of the Collective  Action Members and has retained counsel that is experienced and competent in the fields  of employment law and class action litigation. Plaintiff has no interests that are contrary  to or in conflict with those members of this collective action.   36.  This action should be certified as a collective action because the  prosecution of separate actions by individual members of the class would create a risk of  either inconsistent or varying adjudications with respect to individual members of the  class, or adjudications with respect to individual members of the class that would as a  practical matter be dispositive of the interests of the other members not parties to the  adjudication, or substantially impair or impede their ability to protect their interests.  3 7.  A collective action is superior to other available methods for the fair and  efficient adjudication of this controversy, since joinder of all members is impracticable.  Furthermore, inasmuch as the damages suffered by individual Collective Action  Members may be relatively small, the expense and burden of individual litigation make it  virtually impossible for the members of the collective action to individually seek redress  for the wrongs done to them. There will be no difficulty in the management of this action  as a collective action.   38.  Questions of law and fact common to the members of the collective action  predominate over questions that may affect only individual members because Defendants  have acted on grounds generally applicable to all members.  Among the common  questions of law and fact common to Plaintiff and other Collective Action Members are:  a.  Whether Defendants employed Plaintiff and the Collective Action  Members within the meaning of the FLSA;  8  b.  Whether Defendants failed to keep true and accurate wage and  hour records for all hours worked by Plaintiff and the Collective  Action Members;  c.  What proof of hours worked is sufficient where the employer fails  in its duty to maintain time records;  d.  Whether Defendants failed to pay Plaintiff and the Collective  Action Members statutory minimum wages;  e.  Whether Defendants failed to pay Plaintiff and the Collective  Action Members overtime compensation for all hours worked in  excess of forty ( 40) hours per workweek, in violation of the FLSA  and the regulations promulgated thereunder;  f.  Whether Defendants' violations of the FLSA are willful as that  terms is used within the context of the FLSA; and,  g.  Whether Defendants are liable for all damages claimed hereunder,  including but not limited to compensatory, liquidated and statutory  damages, interest, attorneys' fees, and costs and disbursements.   39.  Plaintiff knows of no difficulty that will be encountered in the  management of this litigation that would preclude its maintenance as a collective action.   40.  Plaintiff and others similarly situated have been substantially damaged by  Defendants' wrongful conduct.  9  41.  Plaintiff sues on his own behalf and on behalf of a class of persons under  Rules 23(a), (b)(2), and (b)(3) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.   42.  Plaintiff brings his New York Labor Law claims on behalf of all persons  who were employed by Defendants at any time since June 26, 2011 (the "Class Period")  who were non-exempt employees within the meaning of the New York Labor Law and  have not been paid statutory minimum wages, overtime compensation, and/or "spread of  hours" premium in violation of the New York Labor Law (the "Class").   43.  The persons in the Class identified herein are so numerous that joinder of  all members is impracticable. Although the identity and precise number of such persons  is unknown, and the facts upon which the calculation of that number may be ascertained  are presently within the sole control of the Defendants, the Class consists of all non- managerial current and former employees and, therefore, is so numerous that joinder is  impracticable and most of whom would not be likely to file individual suits because they  lack financial resources, access to attorneys, or knowledge of their claims.   44.  The claims of Plaintiff are typical of the claims of the Class, and a class  action is superior to other available methods for the fair and efficient adjudication of the  controversy, particularly in the context of wage and hour litigation, where individuals  lack the financial resources to vigorously prosecute a lawsuit in federal court against a  corporate defendant.   45.  Defendants have acted on grounds generally applicable to the Class,  thereby making appropriate final injunctive relief or corresponding declaratory relief with  respect to the Class as a whole.  10   46.  Plaintiff has committed himself to pursuing this action and has retained  counsel experienced in employment law and class action litigation.  4 7.  Plaintiff will fairly and adequately protect the interests of the NY Class  members.  Plaintiff understands that, as class representative, he assumes a fiduciary  responsibility to the Class members to represent their interests fairly and adequately, and  that he must consider the interests of the Class members just as he would represent and  consider his own interests, and that he may not favor his own interests over those of the  Class members.   48.  Plaintiff recognizes that any resolution of a class action lawsuit, including  any settlement or dismissal thereof, must be in the best interests of the Class. Plaintiff  understands that in order to provide adequate representation, he must remain informed of  litigation developments and he understands that he may be called upon to testify in  depositions and at trial.   49.  Plaintiff has the same interests in this matter as all other members of the  Class and Plaintiff's claims are typical of the Class.   50.  There are questions of law and fact common to the Class which  predominate over any questions solely affecting the individual members of the Class,  including but not limited to:  a. Whether Defendants employed Plaintiff and the Class members within  the meaning of the New York Labor Law;  b. Whether Defendants failed to keep true and accurate wage and hour  records for all hours worked by Plaintiff and the Class members;  11  c. What proof of hours worked is sufficient where the employer fails in  its duty to maintain time records;  d. Whether Defendants failed to pay Plaintiffs and the Class members  statutory minimum wages;  e. Whether Defendants failed to pay the Plaintiff and the Class members  overtime compensation for all hours worked in excess of forty ( 40)  hours per workweek, in violation of the New York Labor Law and the  regulations promulgated thereunder;  f. Whether Defendants failed to pay Plaintiff and the Class members  "spread of hours" premium for each day they worked a shift in excess  of ten (10) hours, in violation of the New York Labor Law and the  regulations promulgated thereunder;  g. Whether Defendants' violations of the New York Labor Law are  willful as that terms is used within the context of the New York Labor  Law; and,  h. Whether Defendants are liable for all damages claimed hereunder,  including but not limited to compensatory, liquidated and statutory  damages, interest, costs, attorneys' fees, and costs and disbursements.  51.  Plaintiff re-alleges and re-avers each and every allegation and statement  contained in paragraphs "1" through "50" of this Complaint as if fully set forth herein.  12   52.  At all relevant times, upon information and belief, Defendants were and  continue to be an employer engaged in interstate commerce and/or the production of  goods for commerce within the meaning of the FLSA, 29 U.S.C. §§ 206(a) and 207(a).  Further, Plaintiff and the Collective Action Members are covered individuals within the  meaning of the FLSA, 29 U.S.C. §§ 206(a) and 207(a).   53.  At all relevant times, Defendants employed Plaintiff and the Collective  Action Members within the meaning of the FLSA.   54.  Upon information and belief, at least within each of the three (3) most  recent years, ST AMA TIS RESTAURANT has had annual gross revenues in excess of  $500,000.   55.  Plaintiff and the Collective Action Members worked hours for which they  were not paid the statutory minimum wage.   56.  Defendants had, and continue to have, a policy and practice of refusing to  pay the statutory minimum wage to Plaintiff and the Collective Action Members for  hours worked.   57.  Defendants failed to pay Plaintiff and the Collective Action Members  minimum wages in the lawful amount for hours worked.   58.  Plaintiff and the Collective Action Members were entitled to be paid at the  rate of time and one-half for all hours worked in excess of the maximum hours provided  for in the FLSA.   59.  Defendants failed to pay Plaintiff and the Collective Action Members  overtime compensation in the lawful amount for all hours worked in excess of the  maximum hours provided for in the FLSA.  13   60.  At all relevant times, Defendants had, and continue to have a policy and  practice of refusing to pay overtime compensation at the statutory rate of time and one- half to Plaintiff and the Collective Action Members for all hours worked in excess of  forty ( 40) hours per work week, which violated and continues to violate the FLSA, 29  U.S.C. §§ 201 et seq., including 29 U.S.C. §§ 207(a)(l) and 215(a).   61.  Defendants knowingly and willfully disregarded the prov1s10ns of the  FLSA as evidenced by their failure to compensate Plaintiff and the Collective Action  Members at the statutory minimum wage rate and the statutory overtime rate of time and  one-half for all hours worked in excess of forty ( 40) hours per week, when they knew or  should have known such was due and that non-payment of minimum wages and overtime  compensation would financially injure Plaintiff and the Collective Action Members.   62.  As a result of Defendants' failure to properly record, report, credit and/or  compensate its employees, including Plaintiff and the Collective Action Members,  Defendants have failed to make, keep and preserve records with respect to each of its  employees sufficient to determine the wages, hours and other conditions and practices of  employment in violation of the FLSA, 29 U.S.A. §§ 201 et seq., including 29 U.S.C. §§  21 l(c) and 215(a).   63.  Defendants failed to properly disclose or appnse Plaintiff and the  Collective Action Members of their rights under the FLSA.   64.  As a direct and proximate result of Defendants' violation of the FLSA,  Plaintiff and the Collective Action Members are entitled to liquidated damages pursuant  to the FLSA.  14   65.  Due to the reckless, willful and unlawful acts of Defendants, Plaintiff and  the Collective Action Members suffered damages in an amount not presently  ascertainable of unpaid minimum wages and overtime compensation, an equal amount as  liquidated damages, and prejudgment interest thereon.   66.  Plaintiff and the Collective Action Members are entitled to an award of  their reasonable attorneys' fees, costs and expenses, pursuant to 29 U.S.C. § 216(b).  67.  Plaintiff re-alleges and re-avers each and every allegation and statement  contained in paragraphs "1" through "66" of this Complaint as if fully set forth herein.   68.  Defendants employed Plaintiff and the Class members within the meaning  of New York Labor Law§§ 2 and 651.   69.  Defendants knowingly and willfully violated the rights of Plaintiff and the  Class members by failing to pay Plaintiff and Class members minimum wages in the  lawful amount for hours worked.   70.  Defendants knowingly and willfully violated the rights of Plaintiff and the  Class members by failing to pay Plaintiff and Class members overtime compensation at  the rate of time and one-half for each hour worked in excess of forty ( 40) hours in a  workweek.   71.  Employers are required to pay a "spread of hours" premium of one (1)  additional hour's pay at the statutory minimum hourly wage rate for each day where the  spread of hours in an employee's workday exceeds ten (10) hours. New York State  Department of Labor Regulations § 146-1.6.  15   72.  Defendants knowingly and willfully violated the rights of Plaintiff and the  Class members by failing to pay "spread of hours" premium to Plaintiff and Class  members for each day they worked a shift in excess of ten (10) hours pursuant to New  York State Department of Labor Regulations.   73.  Defendants failed to properly disclose or apprise Plaintiff and the Class  members of their rights under the New York Labor Law.   74.  Defendants failed to furnish Plaintiff and the Class members with a  statement with every payment of wages listing gross wages, deductions and net wages, in  contravention of New York Labor Law § 195(3) and New York State Department of  Labor Regulations§ 146-2.3.  7 5.  Defendants failed to keep true and accurate records of hours worked by  each employee covered by an hourly minimum wage rate, the wages paid to all  employees, and other similar information in contravention of New York Labor Law §  661.   76.  Defendants failed to establish, maintain, and preserve for not less than six  (6) years payroll records showing the hours worked, gross wages, deductions, and net  wages for each employee, in contravention of the New York Labor Law § 194(4), and  New York State Department of Labor Regulations§ 146-2.1.   77.  Defendants failed to notify Plaintiff and the Class members at the time of  hire or thereafter of their rates of pay and their regularly designated payday, in  contravention of New York Labor Law§ 195(1).   78.  Due to Defendants' New York Labor Law violations, Plaintiff and the  Class members are entitled to recover from Defendants their unpaid minimum wages,  16  unpaid overtime compensation, and unpaid "spread of hours" premmm, reasonable  attorneys' fees, and costs and disbursements of this action, pursuant to New York Labor  Law§§ 663(1), 198.   79.  Plaintiff and the Class members are also entitled to liquidated damages  pursuant to New York Labor Law § 663(1 ), as well as civil penalties and/or liquidated  damages pursuant to the New York State Wage Theft Prevention Act.  [Violation of the New York Labor Law]   [Violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act]  