16. Williams worked for True North from June of 2015 until June 18, 2017.   17. True North hired Williams as a Customer Service Representative for True North Store 345,  located at 21920 Miles Road, Cleveland, Ohio 44128 in or around June 2015.   18. In or around April 2016, True North promoted Williams to an Assistant Store Manager for  True North Store 345, located at 21920 Miles Road, Cleveland, Ohio 44128.   19. Throughout her employment with True North, Williams was an paid an hourly wage.   20. At all times material to the Complaint, Williams worked between 40 and 65 hours per week  on average.   21. True North, however, did not pay Williams for the total hours she worked each week.  .5   22. For each week that Williams worked, True North marked a portion of Williams’ hours as  “unpaid.”   23. Williams was not paid for hours marked “unpaid” even though she performed work for True  North during those hours at the direction of True North.   24. Williams was often told to not clock-in when she was performing work for True North at the  direction of True North prior to her scheduled shift beginning.   25. Williams was often instructed to clock-out at the end of her shift although she was required to  continue performing work for True North at the direction of True North after her scheduled  shift ended and she had clocked-out.    26. Often, the hours marked “unpaid” on Williams’s time card were hours that Williams had  worked in excess of 40 hours per week.   27. True North adjusted Williams’ clock-in and clock-out times in order to avoid paying Williams  for all hours worked.   28. On May 20, 2016, former Assistant Manager John Hamrick filed a lawsuit against Defendants  in the Northern District of Ohio asserting claims for violations of the FLSA (“Hamrick  Litigation”).2   29. The Hamrick Litigation specifically sought unpaid wages springing from Defendants’ practice  of having Assistant Managers perform “fuel price surveys” of competitor gas stations before  and after they clocked in each day.   30. The Hamrick Litigation was certified as a collective action on July 20, 2016.   31. The class at issue in the Hamrick Litigation was limited to Assistant Managers, and did not  include other hourly employees.  2 See Hamrick v. True North Management, LLC, No. 1:16cv01216.  .6   32. The court-approved “Notice Of Pending Fair Labor Standards Act Lawsuit” narrowly defined  the scope of the FLSA claims at issue in the Hamrick Litigation as follows:  This lawsuit alleges that the Defendants violated the Fair Labor Standards Act  (“FLSA”) by failing to pay their Assistant Managers for all time worked, including  overtime. Specifically, the lawsuit alleges Plaintiff and other Assistant Managers are  full-time employees at True North gas stations who are typically scheduled at or near  40 hours per week, paid by the hour, and classified as non-exempt employees under  the FLSA. Defendants require their Assistant Managers to, among other things,  perform fuel price surveys of competitor gas stations off-the clock before and after  work. These fuel price surveys require Assistant Managers to drive past competitor  gas stations, make note of the prices being charged for fuel by these competitors,  and report these prices once they get to work and again after they leave work.  However, Defendants require that employees’ (including Assistant Managers)  clock-in and clock-out times for pay purposes adhere closely to their scheduled  hours, and expressly prohibit clocking in earlier than (5) five minutes prior to their  shift starting and clocking out more than (5) five minutes after their shift ends.  Plaintiff therefore alleges that Defendants require Assistant Managers to perform  these fuel price surveys off-the-clock before arriving at work for their scheduled  shift and after clocking out and leaving work at the end of their scheduled shift. As  a result, Plaintiff alleges he and other similarly situated Assistant Managers have  been denied pay for all hours worked and overtime pay at one and one half times  their regular rate in violation of the FLSA.   33. A true and accurate copy of the “Notice Of Pending Fair Labor Standards Act Lawsuit” that  was issued in the Hamrick Litigation is attached hereto as Exhibit 2.   34. The Hamrick complaint did not allege that Defendants were shaving time from Assistant  Manager’s time cards, or simply refusing to pay Assistant Managers for all hours worked.   35. The Hamrick complaint did not allege that Assistant Managers were not paid for “unpaid time”  on their time cards.   36. The claims at issue in the Hamrick Litigation differ materially from the claims raised in this  action.   37. Williams did not opt-in to the Hamrick Litigation.   38. In or around October or November of 2016, the parties to the Hamrick Litigation entered into  a settlement agreement (“Settlement Agreement”).   39. A true and accurate copy of the Settlement Agreement is attached hereto as Exhibit 3.  .7   40. As it related to the class claims that had been asserted in Hamrick, the Settlement Agreement  specifically stated that the class members released and forever discharged Defendants for all  claims, damages, or liability arising under state and federal wage and hour laws as asserted in  the Hamrick Litigation.   41. By its own express terms, the Settlement Agreement did not contemplate and does not cover  the claims asserted in this action.   42. The Hamrick litigation put Defendants on notice that their pay practices violated the FLSA.   43. Despite being aware that True North’s pay practices violated the FLSA, Defendants continued  to engage in conduct that blatantly violated the FLSA.   44. Defendants’ violations of the FLSA were willful and reckless.   45. Defendants lacked good faith and acted unreasonably in violating the FLSA.  46. Plaintiff brings this as a collective action pursuant to 29 U.S.C. § 216(b) on behalf of herself  and all similarly situated individuals who are part of the following class:  All individuals employed by True North who are or were hourly-paid, FLSA non- exempt employees who were not paid for all hours worked, and/or overtime  compensation at a rate of one-and-one-half times their respective regular rates of  pay for hours worked over forty (40) in a workweek at any time during three (3)  years preceding the filing of this action.  These individuals are referred to as the “FLSA Class” or “FLSA Class Members”.   47. Collective Action treatment of Plaintiff’s and the FLSA Class Members’ FLSA claims is  appropriate because Plaintiff and the FLSA Class Members have been subjected to the  common business practices referenced herein, and the success of their claims depends on the  resolution of common issues of law and fact, including, inter alia, whether True North’s  .8  companywide practices fail to properly compensation the FLSA Class Members for all hours  worked.   48. Plaintiff seeks to recover all wages owed to herself and the FLSA Class Members for unpaid  regular and overtime hours worked, liquidated damages to the fullest extent allowable under  the FLSA and Ohio Wage Law, all available equitable relief, including attorneys’ fees and  associated litigation costs.  49. Plaintiff restates each and every prior paragraph of this Complaint, as if it were fully stated  herein.   50. During all times material to this Complaint, Defendants were employers covered by the FLSA.   51. During all times material to this Complaint, Plaintiff and the FLSA Class Members were  employees who were not exempt from overtime compensation under the FLSA because, inter  alia, they were not “executive,” “administrative,” or “professional” employees as defined  under the FLSA, and were entitled to one-and-one-half times their respective regular rates for  hours worked in excess of forty (40) hours per workweek.   52. During all times material to this Complaint, Defendants violated the FLSA with respect to the  Plaintiff and the FLSA Class Members by, inter alia, failing to compensate them for every  hour worked in a workweek, where each hour worked includes all time spent by an employee  that was primarily for the benefit of the employer or the employer’s business and where the  employer knew or should have known that the employee was spending the time at issue  primarily for the employer’s benefit.   53. During all times material to this Complaint, Defendants violated the FLSA with respect to the  Plaintiff and the FLSA Class Members by, inter alia, failing to compensate them at one-and- .9  one-half their regular rates of pay for all hours worked in excess of forty (40) hours per  workweek.   54. During all times material to this complaint, Defendants knew that Plaintiff and the FLSA Class  Members were not exempt from the overtime obligations imposed by the FLSA. Defendants  also knew that they were required to pay Plaintiff and the FLSA Class Members overtime  compensation at a rate of one-and-one-half their respective regular rates for hours worked in  excess of forty (40) hours per workweek. Despite such knowledge, Defendants willfully  withheld and failed to pay the FLSA Class Members for all time worked, including overtime  compensation, to which Plaintiff and the FLSA Class Members are entitled.   55. In violating the FLSA, Defendants acted willfully, without a good faith basis, and in reckless  disregard of clearly applicable FLSA provisions.   56. As a direct and proximate cause of Defendants’ conduct, pursuant to 29 U.S.C. § 216(b),  Defendants are liable to Plaintiff and those similarly situated for the full amount of the required  overtime obligations, an additional equal amount as liquidated damages, as well as costs and  reasonable attorneys’ fees.  57. Plaintiff restates each and every prior paragraph of this Complaint, as if it were fully restated  herein.   58. The Ohio Wage Act requires that covered employees be compensated for every hour worked  in a workweek.   59. The Ohio Wage Act requires that employees receive overtime compensation at a rate of one- and-one-half times the employee’s regular rate of pay for all hours worked over forty (40) in a  workweek.   .10   60. During all times material to this Complaint, Defendants were employers required to comply  with the Ohio Wage Act’s mandates.   61. During all times material to this Complaint, Plaintiff was an employee entitled to individual  protection of the Ohio Wage Act.   62. Defendants violated the Ohio Wage Act with respect to Plaintiff by, inter alia, failing to  compensate Plaintiff for all hours worked, failing to pay Plaintiff the minimum wage for all  hours worked, and failing to pay Plaintiff overtime for all hours worked over forty (40) in a  workweek.   63. In violating the Ohio Wage Act, Defendants acted willfully, without a good faith basis, and  with reckless disregard of clearly applicable Ohio Wage Act provisions.  PAY OVERTIME COMPENSATION  