28.  Upon information and belief, Corporate Defendants WIWI 1 NAIL & SPA  INC d/b/a WiWi Nails & Spa; and WIWI NAILS & SPA INC d/b/a WiWi Nails & Spa are  joint employers of Plaintiff and constitute an enterprise as the term is defined by 29 USC  §203(r) insofar as they do business as WiWi Nail at the same location concurrently, and as  such jointly share staff, including Plaintiff, pay Plaintiff for the work performed; and are  otherwise engaged in related activities performed through unified operation and/or common  control for a common business purpose, and are co-owned by the same partners.   29.  At all times relevant herein, WIWI 1 NAIL & SPA INC d/b/a WiWi Nails &  Spa; and WIWI NAILS & SPA INC d/b/a WiWi Nails & Spa was, and continues to be, an  “enterprise engaged in commerce” within the meaning of FLSA.   31.  There are at least thirteen (13) nail saloon employees at any one time.   32.  Defendants committed the following alleged acts knowingly, intentionally and  willfully against the Plaintiff, the FLSA Collective Plaintiffs, and the Class.   33.  Pursuant to NYCRR Part 146-2.2 and 29 USC § 203(m), an employer cannot  take credit towards the basic minimum wage if a service employee or food service worker has  not received notification of the tip credit.   34.  At all relevant times, Defendants knowingly and willfully failed to pay  Plaintiff and similarly situated employees at least the New York minimum wage for each hour  worked.   35.  At all relevant times, Defendants knowingly and willfully failed to pay  Plaintiff his lawful overtime compensation of one and one-half times (1.5x) their regular rate  of pay for all hours worked over forty (40) in a given workweek.   36.  While employed by Defendants, Plaintiff was not exempt under federal and  state laws requiring employers to pay employees overtime.    37.  Defendants failed to keep full and accurate records of Plaintiff's hours and  wages.   38.  Upon information and belief, Defendants failed to keep full and accurate  records in order to mitigate liability for their wage violations. Defendants never furnished any  notice of their use of tip credit.   40.  Defendants knew that the nonpayment of overtime pay and New York’s  “spread of hours” premium for every day in which Plaintiff worked over ten (10) hours would  financially injure Plaintiff and similarly situated employees and violate state and federal laws.   41.  Defendants did not post the required New York State Department of Labor  posters regarding minimum wage pay rates, overtime pay, tip credit, and pay day.  Plaintiff WEIDONG LI   42.  From on or about April 15, 2019 to June 22, 2019, Plaintiff WEIDONG LI was  employed by Defendants to work as a nail saloon worker and masseur at 739 State Highway  28, Suite 4, Oneonta, NY 13820.   43.  Plaintiff WEIDONG LI paid one hundred fifty dollars ($150) a month to live  in the company-provided dormitory at 45-47 London Avenue, Oneonta, NY 13820.   44.  From on or about April 15, 2019 to June 22, 2019, Plaintiff WEIDONG LI’s  regular work schedule ran from 09:30 to 20:30 for eleven (11) hours a day for six (6) days a  week, with one (1) day off, not fixed for a total of sixty-six (66) hours each week.   45.  At all relevant times, Plaintiff WEIDONG LI did not have a fixed time for  lunch or for dinner.   46.  In fact, Plaintiff WEIDONG LI had less than ten (10) minutes to eat and even  then he was on call, meaning that if customer’s order came, his break stopped and he had to  deliver.   48.  From on or about May 25, 2019 to June 22, 2019 , Plaintiff WEIDONG LI’s  pay was decreased because he was “too old.”   49.  As such, Plaintiff WEIDONG LI was unlawfully discriminated against and had  his pay reduced to a flat compensation at a rate of six hundred dollars ($600.00) per week.    50.  On June 22, 2019, Plaintiff WEIDONG LI was unlawfully terminated, again  because he was too old, when four younger workers were hired.   51.  These four younger workers included two workers who did not have the  requisite nail saloon license at the time of hire.   52.  At all relevant times, Plaintiff WEIDONG LI was not paid overtime pay for  overtime work.   53.  At all relevant times, Plaintiff WEIDONG LI was never informed of his hourly  pay rate or any tip deductions toward the minimum wage.   54.  Throughout his employment, Plaintiff WEIDONG LI was not given a  statement with his weekly payment reflecting employee’s name, employer’s name,  employer’s address and telephone number, employee’s rate or rates of pay, any deductions  made from employee’s wages, any allowances claimed as part of the minimum wage, and the  employee’s gross and net wages for each pay day in Chinese, Plaintiff’s native language.   55.  Throughout his employment, Plaintiff WEIDONG LI was not compensated at  least at one-and-one-half his promised hourly wage for all hours worked above forty (40) in  each workweek.   57.  As part of his employment with Defendants, Plaintiff WEIDONG LI was  compelled to purchase gloves and masks for one hundred dollars ($100) from Defendants.  58.  Plaintiff brings this action individually and as class representative individually  and on behalf of all other and former non-exempt employees who have been or were  employed by the Defendants for up to the last three (3) years, through entry of judgment in  this case (the “Collective Action Period”) and whom were not compensated at their promised  hourly rate for all hours worked and at one and one half times their promised work for all  hours worked in excess of forty (40) hours per week (the “Collective Action Members”).  59.  Plaintiff brings his NYLL claims pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure  (“Fed. R. Civ. P.”) Rule 23, on behalf of all non-exempt personnel 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”).   60.  All said persons, including Plaintiff, are referred to herein as the “Class.”   62.  The proposed Class is so numerous that 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 the number is presently within the sole control of the Defendants, upon  information and belief, there are more than forty (40) members of the class.  Commonality   64.  Plaintiff's claims are typical of those claims which could be alleged by any  member of the Class, and the relief sought is typical of the relief that would be sought by each  member of the Class in separate actions. All the Class members were subject to the same  corporate practices of Defendants, as alleged herein, of failing to pay minimum wage or  overtime compensation. Defendants’ corporate-wide policies and practices affected all Class  members similarly, and Defendants benefitted from the same type of unfair and/or wrongful  acts as to each Class member. Plaintiff and other Class members sustained similar losses,  injuries and damages arising from the same unlawful policies, practices and procedures.  Adequacy   65.  Plaintiff is able to fairly and adequately protect the interests of the Class and  have no interests antagonistic to the Class. Plaintiff is represented by attorneys who are  experienced and competent in representing Plaintiffs in both class action and wage-and-hour  employment litigation cases.  Superiority   Defendants Constitute an Enterprise  