31. Plaintiffs were typically scheduled to work for Defendant Monday through Thursday from 9:00 a.m. until 7:00 p.m., and from 9:00 a.m. until 2:00 p.m. on Friday, resulting  in overtime hours on a weekly basis. Defendant promises its Agents a one-hour unpaid lunch  break each Monday through Thursday. Thus, Agents are typically scheduled to work 41 hours  each week (nine hours per day Monday through Thursday and five hours on Friday).  Nevertheless, Defendant does not pay overtime to its Agents, nor does Defendant issue pay stubs  to its Agents reflecting the number of hours worked in a pay period. (See Exh. B, D and F.)  Rather, Plaintiffs’ pay stubs falsely represent that Plaintiffs are paid a salary. (See Exh. B and F.)   32. Throughout their employment with Defendant, Plaintiffs were required to work a substantial amount of unpaid time, including overtime, as part of their jobs as Agents.   33. Defendant’s Agents are responsible for, among other things: (a) booting up their computers and logging into essential computer software programs and applications before taking  live calls; (b) verifying and prescreening inbound customer leads over the telephone and then  delivering them via hot call transfer to a sales person; (c) ensuring that every live call is  accounted for in the Auto Dialer; and (d) logging out of the computer software programs and  applications and shutting down the computer.   34. Defendant has strict expectations that its Agents will remain on the phones during scheduled meal and rest breaks if there are not enough Agents to cover the phones or if the Agent  is stuck on a live call; and Defendant threatens discipline if an Agent fails to do so.   36. Agents are assigned by Defendant to work on several different call campaigns, including mortgage lending, solar energy, home security, reverse mortgages, debt resolution,  auto warranty, credit repair, and tax relief.    37. During his employment with Defendant, Plaintiff Baudin was assigned to work on the solar energy campaign. Plaintiff Duffney was assigned by Defendant to work on several  different call campaigns including mortgage lending, solar energy, home security, and auto  warranty. Likewise, Plaintiff Persaud was assigned by Defendant to work on several different  call campaigns including mortgage lending, solar energy, debt resolution, auto warranty, and  credit repair. Plaintiffs Duffney and Persaud regularly worked on multiple call campaigns at the  same time, often during the same shift.   38. Defendant’s unlawful pay policies and timekeeping practices, as well as the Agents’ job duties, are substantially the same irrespective of the call campaign they are assigned  to and irrespective of whether they work from home or from Defendant’s brick-and-mortar call  center facility.   40.  Upon information and belief, all Agents are and were hourly, non-exempt  employees.   41.  Defendant’s Agents use the same or substantially similar computer software  programs and applications in the course of performing their job responsibilities. These programs  and applications are integral and an important part of the Agents’ work, and they cannot perform  their jobs effectively without them.    42.  Defendant’s Agents receive substantially the same training, are subject to the  same disciplinary policies, and are subject to quality assurance reviews based on the same or  similar criteria.   43.  Defendant expressly instructs and trains Agents to have all their computer  software programs and applications open and ready at the start of their scheduled shifts so that  they can change their status to “Active” in the Auto Dialer and begin taking live calls at the  moment their shifts begin.   45.  When an Agent receives a demerit, Defendant furnishes the Agent with a  document explaining the nature of the “violation” and the penalty (i.e., the “demerit”) imposed  upon the Agent for the violation. The Agent must sign the document, certifying that the Agent  understands the nature of the violation and the penalty being imposed, and that the Agent  “accepts” the demerit.   46.  These policies reinforce that Agents are required to have the essential computer  software programs and applications open and ready at the start of their shifts so that they can  change their status in the Auto Dialer to “Active” and begin taking live calls at the moment their  shifts begin.   48.  Defendant requires its Agents to track their hours worked each and every day by  manually recording their time on paper timesheets provided by Defendant. At the end of each  pay period, the Agents must tally and record on their timesheets the number of hours worked  during the pay period, sign their timesheets, and submit them to Defendant’s managers for  approval. Defendant, however, will not approve an Agent’s timesheet unless the hours recorded  on the timesheet substantially adhere to the Agent’s scheduled working hours, meaning that the  Agents must record a clock-in time that matches their scheduled start-of-shift time and a clock- out time that matches their scheduled end-of-shift time, while also deducting a mandatory one- hour lunch break for their Monday through Thursday shifts.   49.  Because Defendant trains and instructs its Agents not to record time spent  performing pre-shift, mid-shift and post-shift work tasks, Defendant’s compensation system fails  to properly account for and compensate Agents for all time worked, including their overtime  hours, during each day and during each workweek.   50.  The hours reflected on the Agents’ timesheets are not accurate, are contrived by  Defendant, and are not related to the hours the Agents actually worked for Defendant. This is  because Defendant requires its Agents to perform compensable work tasks before and after their  shifts and during their unpaid meal periods but trains and instructs them not to record this time  on their timesheets.   52.  Pursuant to Defendant’s policies, training and direction, Defendant’s Agents are  required to start up and log into essential computer software programs and applications in order  to access information and take live calls. The pre-shift startup and login process takes substantial  time on a daily basis, in the range of 5 to 10 minutes per shift, or even longer when technical  issues arise. Before each shift and before taking live phone calls, Agents must undertake the  following essential work tasks in chronological order:  a. Locate their workstation and turn-on/warm-up their computer.  b. Log into Microsoft Windows by clicking a single sign on button and wait for  the computer to establish an internet connection.  c. Open Google Chrome by clicking the Google Chrome icon and go to  Ytel.com.  d. Log into Ytel (the Auto Dialer) using a user ID (a four digit number provided  by Defendant) and password (last four digits of the Agent’s Social Security  Number), select your campaign (i.e., mortgage lending, solar energy, home  security, credit repair, tax relief, etc.), and wait for the dashboard to appear.  Once the dashboard appears, it will display three overlapping menus/panels,  which the Agents must rearrange or resize so that they can simultaneously  view each menu.  e. Clear the cache in Google Chrome, which entails the following:   i. From the “Menu” button in the upper-right corner of the Chrome  window, choose “More Tools” > “Clear browsing data….”   ii. Select the period of time you wish to delete cached information using  the “Clear the following items from” drop down menu. From there,  choose “Cached images and files”.  iii. Select the “Clear browsing data” button and wait for Chrome to clear  the cache.  f. Change status in Ytel to “Active” and wait for the Auto Dialer to connect to a  live call.   53.  Agents who work from home are required to undertake the exact same login steps.   55.  Defendant’s Agents are not compensated for this time because Defendant trains  and instructs its Agents not to record this time on their timesheets. This policy results in Agents  performing no less than 5 to 10 minutes of unpaid pre-shift work each and every day.   56.  The unpaid work performed prior to each shift by Plaintiffs and all other Agents  directly benefits Defendant, and the tasks undertaken in connection with the off-the-clock work  are integral and indispensable to their job duties and responsibilities as Agents.  B.  Meal-Period Off-the-Clock Work   57.  Defendant promises its Agents one unpaid 60-minute meal period each Monday  through Thursday. However, in reality, Agents regularly work through unpaid meal periods—or  take them late—when there are not enough Agents to cover the phones or when the Agent is  stuck on a live call.   59.  Instead of complying with the law, Defendant does not provide Agents with bona  fide meal periods because it requires the Agents to resume taking live calls promptly at the end  of their scheduled meal breaks, meaning that the Agents must return to their computer stations  prior to the end of their unpaid meal breaks to log back in and reconnect to the Auto Dialer.   60.  The work performed by Agents during their unpaid meal breaks takes substantial  time on a daily basis, in the range of 5 minutes per shift, but Agents are not paid for this time.  C.  Post-Shift Off-the-Clock Work   61.  Pursuant to Defendant’s policies, training and direction, at the conclusion of their  scheduled shifts, Defendant’s Agents are required to log out of and shut down the computer  software programs and applications and shut down the computer. The post-shift logout and  shutdown process takes substantial time on a daily basis, ranging from 2 to 3 minutes per shift,  but can take as long as 10 minutes if the Agent experiences technical problems with the  computer, software or applications.   62.  Defendant’s Agents are not compensated for this time because Defendant trains  and instructs its Agents not to record this time on their timesheets. This policy results in Agents  performing no less than 2 to 3 minutes of unpaid post-shift work each and every day.   63.  The unpaid work performed subsequent to each shift by Plaintiffs and all other  Agents directly benefits Defendant, and the tasks undertaken in connection with the off-the-clock  work are integral and indispensable to their job duties and responsibilities as Agents.  D.  Additional Off-The-Clock Work   65.  In sum, Defendant deducted 6.72 hours of compensable time from Plaintiff  Persaud during the four representative pay periods identified above. (See Exh. H-I.)   66.  Defendant’s pay violations illustrated above stem, at least in part, from  Defendant’s decision to compensate its Agents for only such time that they are connected to  Defendant’s Auto Dialer, meaning that they are only paid for time spent on the phones (i.e., “on  the dialer”) and are not paid for any time spent disconnected from the Auto Dialer.   67.  In this regard, Defendant tracks the amount of time that its Agents are not “on the  dialer,” deducts all such time from its Agents’ compensable time, and fraudulently induces its  Agents to sign off on this illegal policy by requiring its Agents to sign payroll reports at the end  of each pay period acknowledging that they have reviewed the payroll report and “agree” with  the calculations, while at the same time failing to disclose to the Agents the illegal nature of its  pay policy.   68.  Agents spend significant amounts of compensable time disconnected from the  Auto Dialer, but Defendant does not pay them for this time.   69.  For instance, if an Agent accumulates too much “dead time,” meaning that the  Agent is connected to the Auto Dialer but is not on the phone with a live call, Defendant’s  managers will manually boot the Agent from the Auto Dialer. The Agent is not paid for this time  because they are no longer connected to the Auto Dialer, nor are they paid for the time spent  logging back into and reconnecting to the Auto Dialer.   71.  Defendant deducts additional time from the Agents if they are not “on the dialer”  and ready to take calls promptly at the end of their scheduled rest breaks, prompting Defendant’s  managers to manually boot the Agents from the Auto Dialer. The Agents are not paid for this  time because they are no longer connected to the Auto Dialer, nor are they paid for the time  spent logging back into and reconnecting to the Auto Dialer.   73. These policies result in Agents performing significant amounts of unpaid work each and every week. Because Agents typically work 40 or more hours per week, this policy also  deprives them of overtime pay.   75. An example of specific workweeks where Defendant failed to pay Plaintiffs all overtime due for hours worked in excess of 40 hours (as mandated by the FLSA) includes the  following:  Pay Period of 01/11/2019 to 01/25/2019   Plaintiff Baudin was paid gross wages equal to $1,615.36 for the pay period.  With unpaid pre-shift, meal-period, and post-shift time, in a range of 12 to 18 minutes per shift, at 11 shifts for the pay period, Plaintiff Baudin should have been paid an additional 132-198 minutes at his overtime rate of pay.  (Exh. B, Baudin Pay Stub.)  Pay Period of 09/09/2018 to 09/24/2018   Plaintiff Duffney was paid gross wages equal to $1,382.05 for the pay period.  With unpaid pre-shift, meal-period, and post-shift time, in a range of 12 to 18 minutes per shift, at 11 shifts for the pay period, Plaintiff Duffney should have been paid an additional 132-198 minutes at her overtime rate of pay.  (Exh. D, Duffney Pay Stub.)  F. Defendant Benefited from the Uncompensated Off-the-Clock Work  76. At all relevant times, Defendant directed and directly benefited from the work performed by Plaintiffs and similarly situated employees in connection with the above-described  pre-shift, mid-shift, and post-shift activities performed by Agents.   78.  At all relevant times, Defendant was able to track the amount of time Agents  spent in connection with the pre-shift, mid-shift, and post-shift activities. However, Defendant  failed to do so and failed to compensate Agents for the off-the-clock work they performed.   79.  At all relevant times, Agents were non-exempt hourly employees, subject to the  requirements of the FLSA.   80.  At all relevant times, Defendant used its attendance and adherence policies  against the Agents in order to pressure them into performing the pre-shift, mid-shift, and post- shift off-the-clock work.   81.  Defendant expressly trained and instructed its Agents to perform the above- described pre-shift activities before the start of their scheduled shifts, to ensure they were  prepared to take live calls (i.e., were “phone ready”) at the moment their shifts began.   82.  At all relevant times, Defendant’s policies and practices deprived Agents of  wages owed for the pre-shift, mid-shift, and post-shift activities they performed. Because  Defendant’s Agents typically worked 40 hours or more in a workweek, Defendant’s policies and  practices also deprived them of overtime pay.   83.  Defendant knew or should have known that the time spent by Agents in  connection with the pre-shift, mid-shift, and post-shift activities was compensable under the law.  Indeed, in light of the explicit DOL guidance cited above, there is no conceivable way for  Defendant to establish that it acted in good faith.   84.  Despite knowing Agents performed work before and after their scheduled shifts  and during their unpaid meal breaks, Defendant failed to make any effort to stop or disallow the  off-the-clock work and instead suffered and permitted it to happen.   86.  Plaintiffs bring this action pursuant to 29 U.S.C. § 216(b) of the FLSA on their  own behalf and on behalf of:  All similarly situated current and former hourly brick-and-mortar and/or at- home Account Representatives or Transfer Agents who work or have worked  for Defendant at any time during the three years preceding the filing of this  Complaint through judgment.  (hereinafter referred to as the “FLSA Collective”). Plaintiffs reserve the right to amend this  definition if necessary.   87.  Defendant is liable under the FLSA for, inter alia, failing to properly compensate  Plaintiffs and other similarly situated Agents.     88.  Excluded from the FLSA Collective are Defendant’s executives and  administrative and professional employees, including computer professionals and outside  salespersons.   89.  Consistent with Defendant’s policy and pattern or practice, Plaintiffs and the  FLSA Collective were not paid premium overtime compensation when they worked beyond 40  hours in a workweek.   90.  Defendant assigned and/or was aware of all of the work that Plaintiffs and the  FLSA Collective performed.   92.  Defendant is aware or should have been aware that federal law required it to pay  Plaintiffs and the FLSA Collective overtime premiums for hours worked in excess of 40 per  workweek.   93.  Defendant’s unlawful conduct has been widespread, repeated and consistent.   94.  A collective action under the FLSA is appropriate because the employees  described above are “similarly situated” to Plaintiffs under 29 U.S.C. § 216(b). The employees  on behalf of whom Plaintiffs bring this collective action are similarly situated because (a) they  have been or are employed in the same or similar positions; (b) they were or are performing the  same or similar job duties; (c) they were or are subject to the same or similar unlawful practices,  policy, or plan; and (d) their claims are based upon the same factual and legal theories.   95.  The employment relationships between Defendant and every proposed FLSA  Collective member are the same. The key issues - the amount of uncompensated pre-shift start- up/log-in time, unpaid meal period time, and the amount of post-shift shut-down/log-out time  owed to each employee - do not vary substantially among the proposed FLSA Collective  members.   96.  Many similarly situated current and former Agents have been underpaid in  violation of the FLSA and would benefit from the issuance of a court-supervised notice of this  lawsuit and the opportunity to join it.    98.  Those similarly situated employees are known to Defendant, are readily  identifiable, and can be located through Defendant’s records.   99.  Plaintiffs estimate the proposed FLSA Collective, including both current and  former employees over the relevant period, will include hundreds of workers. The precise  number of FLSA Collective members should be readily available from a review of Defendant’s  personnel and payroll records. 