                 (Violation of the Overtime Provisions of the New York Labor Law)  53) Plaintiff repeat and realleges all paragraphs above as though fully set forth herein.  54) Defendants, in violation of the NYLL § 190 et seq.and associated rules and regulations,  failed to pay Plaintiff (and the FLSA class members) overtime compensation at rates of one and  one-half times the regular rate of pay for each hour worked in excess of forty hours in a workweek.  55) Defendants’ failure to pay Plaintiff (and the FLSA class members) overtime  compensation was willful within the meaning of N.Y.Lab.Law § 663.  56) Plaintiff (and the FLSA class members) have been damaged in an amount to be   determined at trial.                                                 Defendants Constitute Joint Employers  15) Defendants operate a Pizzeria establishment in Queens, New York.  16) Defendants maintain as their principal place of business a centralized office, located at   at 3767 Junction Boulevard, Corona NY. Individual Mohammed Abrahim possess or   possessed operational control over Defendant Corporation, possess or possessed an ownership   interest in Defendant Corporations, and control or controlled significant functions of Defendant   Corporations.  17) Upon information and belief, Defendant Mohammed Abrahim serve or served as   Chairperson and/or as Chief Executive Officer of Defendant Corporation.  18) Defendants are associated and joint employers, act in the interest of each other with   respect to employees, pay employees by the same method, and share control over the employees.  19) Defendants possess or possessed substantial control over the Plaintiff (and other   similarly situated employees’) working conditions, and over the policies and practices with   respect to the employment and compensation of the Plaintiff, and all similarly situated   individuals, referred to herein.  20) Defendants jointly employed the Plaintiff, and all similarly situated individuals, and are  Plaintiff (and all similarly situated individuals’) employers within the meaning of 29 U.S.C.201   et seq.and the New York Labor Law.  21) In the alternative, the Defendants constitute a single employer of the Plaintiff and/or   similarly situated individuals.  22) At all relevant times, Defendants were the Plaintiff employers within the meaning of   the FLSA and New York Labor Law. Defendants had the power to hire and fire Plaintiff, control   the terms and conditions of his employment and determine the rate and method of any  compensation in exchange for Plaintiff services.  23) In each year from 2014 to the present, the Defendants, both separately and jointly, had   gross annual volume of sales of not less than $500,000 (exclusive of excise taxes at the retail   level that are separately stated).  24) In addition, upon information and belief, the Defendants and/or their enterprise were   directly engaged in interstate commerce. As example, numerous items, such as soap, brushes and   cleaning materials that were used in the Pizzeria on a daily basis were produced outside of the  state of New York.  Individual Plaintiff  25) The Plaintiff was an employee of the Defendants, and was primarily employed as a   Pizza Maker.  26) He seeks to represent a class of similarly situated individuals under 29 U.S.C.216(b).  Plaintiff JOSE ACERO  27) Plaintiff Acero worked for Defendants from approximately June 2019 until February   2020.  28) Plaintiff Acero’ duties included making pizza ten (10) hours per day, (7) seven days per   Week. Plaintiff was paid $11 per hour the entire time he worked for Defendants.   29) Plaintiff Acero regularly handled goods in interstate commerce, such as food,   vegetables and other items produced outside of the State of New York.  30) Plaintiff Acero’ work duties required neither discretion nor independent judgment.  31) Plaintiff Acero worked in excess of 40 hours per week without appropriate overtime   compensation from June 2019 until February 2020.   32) From June 2013 until June 2019, Defendants did not provide Plaintiff Acero    with any document or other statement accounting for his actual hours worked or setting forth the  rate of pay for all of his hours.    33) No notification, either in the form of posted notices, or other means, was ever given to   Plaintiff Acero regarding overtime and wages as required under the FLSA and NYLL.  34) Defendants did not provide Plaintiff Acero with each payment of wages an accurate   statement of wages, as required by NYLL 195(3).  35) Defendants never provided Plaintiff with a written notice, in English and in   Spanish (Plaintiff Acero primary language), of his rate of pay, employer’s regular payday, and  such other information as required by NYLL §195(1).  Defendants’ General Employment Practices  36) At all times, relevant to this complaint, Defendants maintained a policy and practice   of requiring Plaintiff and all similarly situated employees to work in excess of 40 hours   per week without paying them appropriate minimum wage, overtime, and spread of hours’  compensation, as required by federal and state laws. Defendants’ pay practices resulted in Plaintiff  not receiving payments for all their hours worked, resulting in Plaintiff effective rate of pay falling  below the required minimum and overtime wage rate.  37) Plaintiff has been victim of Defendants’ common policy and practices violating his  rights under the FLSA and New York Labor Law by not paying them the wages they were owed   for the hours they had worked.  a. As part of their regular business practice, Defendants intentionally, willfully, and  repeatedly harmed Plaintiff by engaging in a pattern, practice, and/or policy of  violating the FLSA and the NYLL.  b. Defendants failed to provide Plaintiff with statutorily required wage and hour  records or statements of her pay received, in part so as to hide Defendants’  violations of the wage and hour laws, and to take advantage of Plaintiff relative  lack of sophistication in wage and hour laws.  c. Defendants willfully disregarded and purposefully evaded recordkeeping  requirements of the Fair Labor Standards Act and New York Labor Law by failing  to maintain accurate and complete timesheets and payroll records.  d. Upon information and belief, this was done to disguise the actual number of hours  Plaintiff worked, and to avoid paying Plaintiff properly for (i) her full hours  worked, (ii) for overtime due, and (iii) for spread of hours pay.  e. Defendants did not provide Plaintiff with any document or other statement  accurately accounting for their actual hours worked and setting forth rate of  minimum wage and overtime wage.  f. Defendants did not provide Plaintiff with any break periods.   (Violation of the FLSA and New York Minimum Wage Act)  44) Plaintiff repeats and realleges all paragraphs above as though fully set forth herein.  45) At all times relevant to this action, Defendants were Plaintiff’ employers within the   meaning of the N.Y. Lab. Law §§ 2 and 651.  46) Defendants, in violation of the NYLL, paid Plaintiff than the minimum wage in  violation of NYLL § 652(1) and the supporting regulations of the New York State Department of  Labor.  47) Defendants’ failure to pay Plaintiff minimum wage was willful within the meaning of  N.Y. Lab. Law § 663.  48) Plaintiff was damaged in an amount to be determined at trial.  (Violation of the Overtime Provisions of the FLSA)  49) Plaintiff repeat and reallegess all paragraphs above as though fully set forth herein.  50) Defendants, in violation of the FLSA, failed to pay Plaintiff (and the FLSA class   members) overtime compensation at rates of one and one-half times the regular rate of pay for  each hour worked in excess of forty hours in a workweek, in violation of 29 U.S.C.§ 207 (a)(1).  51) Defendants’ failure to pay Plaintiff (and the FLSA class members) overtime   compensation was willful within the meaning of 29 U.S.C.§ 255(a)  52) Plaintiff (and the FLSA class members) were damaged in an amount to be determined  at trial.  New York Labor Law – Failure to Provide Accurate Wage Statements  60) Plaintiff realleges and incorporates by reference all allegations in all preceding   paragraphs.  61) Defendants have failed to provide Plaintiff with complete and accurate wage  statements throughout his employment listing, inter alia, all his regular and overtime hours of  work, his rate of pay, and the basis of pay, in violation of NYLL § 195(3).   62) Due to Defendants’ violations of the NYLL, Plaintiff is entitled to recover from  Defendants’ statutory damages of Two Hundred and Fifty dollars ($250) per workday that the  violation occurred, up to a maximum of Five Thousand Dollars ($5,000), pursuant to NYLL §  198 (1-d).   New York Labor Law – Failure to Provide Notice at Time of Hiring  57) Plaintiff realleges and incorporates by reference all allegations in all preceding   paragraphs.  58) Defendants failed to provide Plaintiff at the time of hiring or at any point thereafter, a  notice containing the rate of pay and basis thereof, whether paid by the hour, shift, day, week,  salary, piece, commission, or other; the regular pay day designated by the employer; the physical  address of the employer's main office or principal place of business; the telephone number of the  employer, and anything otherwise required by law, in violation of NYLL § 195(1).  59) Due to Defendants' violations of the NYLL § 195(1), Plaintiff is entitled to recover  from Defendants statutory damages of Fifty dollars ($50) per workday that the violation occurred,  up to a maximum of Five Thousand Dollars ($5,000) pursuant to NYLL § 198 (1-b). 