Case 1:22-cv-21579-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/22/2022 Page 1 of 23
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
`MIAMI DIVISION
`
`CASE NO.:
`
`
`MARCOS J. BRITTON,
`ARLYN E. LOPEZ
`and other similarly situated individuals,
`
`
`
`
`v.
`
`17TH AVE FOODS & GROCERY LLC,
`d/b/a FRIENDS MEAT MARKET,
`JOSHUA AKREAM, and
`MOHAMED WASHAM, individually
`
`
`
`__________________________________/
`
`
`Plaintiffs,
`
`Defendants,
`
`COMPLAINT
`(OPT-IN PURSUANT TO 29 U.S.C § 216(b))
`
`
`
`COME NOW the Plaintiffs MARCOS J. BRITTON and ARLYN E. LOPEZ, and other
`
`similarly situated individuals, by and through the undersigned counsel, and hereby sue Defendants
`
`17TH AVE FOODS & GROCERY, LLC, d/b/a FRIENDS MEAT MARKET, JOSHUA
`
`AKREAM, and MOHAMED WASHAM, individually, and allege:
`
`JURISDICTION VENUES AND PARTIES
`
`1. This is an action to recover money damages for unpaid regular and overtime wages and
`
`retaliation under the laws of the United States. This Court has jurisdiction pursuant to
`
`the Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C. § 201-219 (Section 216 for jurisdictional
`
`placement) ("the Act").
`
`
`
`Page 1 of 23
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-21579-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/22/2022 Page 2 of 23
`
`2. Plaintiffs MARCOS J. BRITTON and ARLYN E. LOPEZ are residents of Miami-
`
`Dade County within the jurisdiction of this Court. Plaintiffs were employees of
`
`Defendants within the meaning of the FLSA.
`
`3. Corporate Defendant 17TH AVE FOODS & GROCERY, LLC, d/b/a FRIENDS MEAT
`
`MARKET (hereinafter FRIENDS MEAT MARKET, or Defendant) is a Florida
`
`corporation having a place of business in Dade County, Florida. At all times, Defendant
`
`was engaged in interstate commerce.
`
`4. The individual Defendants JOSHUA AKREAM, and MOHAMED WASHAM, are the
`
`owners/partners/ and managers FRIENDS MEAT MARKET. These individual
`
`Defendants are the employers of Plaintiffs within the meaning of Section 3(d) of the
`
`"Fair Labor Standards Act" [29 U.S.C. § 203(d).
`
`5. All the actions raised in this Complaint took place in Dade County, Florida, within this
`
`Court's jurisdiction.
`
`GENERAL ALLEGATIONS
`
`6. This cause of action is brought by Plaintiffs MARCOS J. BRITTON and ARLYN E.
`
`LOPEZ to recover from Defendants unpaid regular wages and overtime compensation,
`
`liquidated damages, retaliatory damages, costs, and reasonable attorney's fees under
`
`the provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act, as amended, 29 U.S.C. § 201 et seq (the
`
`"FLA or the "ACT").
`
`7. Defendant FRIENDS MEAT MARKET is a supermarket and cafeteria. Defendant has
`
`a place of business located at 6101 NW 17th Avenue, Miami, Florida 33142, where both
`
`Plaintiffs worked.
`
`
`
`Page 2 of 23
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-21579-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/22/2022 Page 3 of 23
`
`8. Defendants FRIENDS MEAT MARKET, JOSHUA AKREAM, and MOHAMED
`
`WASHAM employed Plaintiff MARCOS J. BRITTON as a non-exempted full-time
`
`hourly employee from approximately February 12, 2022, to April 28, 2022, or 11
`
`weeks. Plaintiff had duties as a supermarket employee, he had multiple duties as a
`
`supermarket attendant, kitchen helper, and maintenance employee. Plaintiff was paid a
`
`salary of $750.00 weekly
`
`9. Defendants FRIENDS MEAT MARKET, JOSHUA AKREAM, and MOHAMED
`
`WASHAM employed Plaintiff ARLYN E. LOPEZ as a non-exempted full-time hourly
`
`employee from approximately January 24, 2022, to April 28, 2022, or 13 weeks.
`
`Plaintiff has duties as a cook, supermarket attendant, and cleaning employee. Plaintiff
`
`was paid a salary of $720.00 weekly.
`
`10. While employed by Defendants, Plaintiffs worked more than 40 hours every week, but
`
`they were not paid for their wages as required by law.
`
`11. Plaintiffs had a regular and mandatory schedule, and they worked six days per week.
`
`Plaintiffs worked from 7:00 AM to 10:00 PM (15 hours daily) from Monday to
`
`Saturday, or a total of 90 hours weekly. Plaintiffs were unable to take bonafide
`
`lunchtime.
`
`12. Plaintiff MARCOS J. BRITTON was paid $750.00 weekly, and Plaintiff ARLYN E.
`
`LOPEZ was paid $720.00 weekly.
`
`13. The fixed amount paid weekly to Plaintiffs divided by 90 working hours per week,
`
`resulted in a wage rate lower than the minimum wage rate required by law.
`
`14. Furthermore, Plaintiffs worked routinely and consistently 90 hours weekly. However,
`
`Defendants did not pay Plaintiffs for overtime hours, as required by the FLSA.
`
`
`
`Page 3 of 23
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-21579-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/22/2022 Page 4 of 23
`
`15. Plaintiffs did not clock in and out, but Defendants were able to monitor the hours
`
`worked by Plaintiffs and other similarly situated individuals. Defendants knew about
`
`the number of hours worked by Plaintiffs. Defendants were in complete control of the
`
`Plaintiffs' schedule, and time records and they knew the real number of hours that
`
`Plaintiffs and other similarly situated individuals were working.
`
`16. Therefore, Defendants willfully failed to pay Plaintiffs minimum wages in violation of
`
`29 U.S.C. §206 (a) of the Fair Labor Standards Act. Defendants also failed to pay
`
`Plaintiffs overtime wages at the rate of time and a half their regular rate for every hour
`
`that they worked in excess of forty (40), in violation of Section 7 (a) of the Fair Labor
`
`Standards Act of 1938 (29 U.S.C. 207(a)(1).
`
`17. Plaintiffs were paid weekly strictly in cash, without paystubs or any record providing
`
`basic information about the number of days and hours worked, wage rate paid,
`
`employee taxes deducted, etc.
`
`18. Plaintiffs MARCOS J. BRITTON and ARLYN E. LOPEZ are husband and wife.
`
`Plaintiffs complained verbally many times to their supervisors JOSHUA AKREAM,
`
`and MOHAMED WASHAM. Plaintiffs complained about the lack of payment for
`
`overtime hours.
`
`19. On or about April 16, Plaintiffs complained about overtime to JOSHUA AKREAM,
`
`for the last time.
`
`20. On or about April 28, 2022, a co-worker maliciously caused an altercation with Plaintiff
`
`MARCOS J. BRITTON and attacked him with a broom. As a result, Defendants
`
`JOSHUA AKREAM and MOHAMED WASHAM unfairly fired Plaintiff MARCOS
`
`J. BRITTON and his wife ARLYN E. LOPEZ.
`
`
`
`Page 4 of 23
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-21579-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/22/2022 Page 5 of 23
`
`21. At the time of their termination, Plaintiffs MARCOS J. BRITTON, and ARLYN E.
`
`LOPEZ were not paid for their last two weeks of work.
`
`22. Plaintiffs are not in possession of time and payment records, but they will provide a
`
`good faith estimate of unpaid wages based on their recollections. Plaintiffs will amend
`
`their Complaint accordingly when Defendants produce time and payment records.
`
`23. Plaintiffs MARCOS J. BRITTON and ARLYN E. LOPEZ intend to recover regular
`
`unpaid wages, overtime wages for every hour in excess of 40 in a week, liquidated
`
`damages, retaliatory damages, and any other relief as allowable by law.
`
`24. The additional persons who may become Plaintiffs in this action are employees and/or
`
`former employees of Defendants who are and who were subject to the unlawful payroll
`
`practices and procedures of Defendants and were not paid minimum wages and
`
`overtime wages at the rate of time and one half of their regular rate of pay for all
`
`overtime hours worked in excess of forty.
`
`COUNT I:
`WAGE AND HOUR FEDERAL STATUTORY VIOLATION;
`FAILURE TO PAY OVERTIME; AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS
`
`25. Plaintiffs J MARCOS J. BRITTON and ARLYN E. LOPEZ re-adopt every factual
`
`allegation as stated in paragraphs 1-24 above as if set out in full herein.
`
`26. This cause of action is brought by Plaintiffs as a collective action to recover from
`
`Defendants overtime compensation, liquidated damages, costs, and reasonable
`
`attorney's fees under the provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act, as amended, 29
`
`U.S.C. § 201 et seq (the "FLA or the "ACT"), on behalf of Plaintiff and all other current
`
`and former employees similarly situated to Plaintiff ("the asserted class") and who
`
`worked in excess of forty (40) hours during one or more weeks on or after January
`
`
`
`Page 5 of 23
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-21579-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/22/2022 Page 6 of 23
`
`2022, (the "material time") without being compensated "at a rate not less than one and
`
`a half times the regular rate at which he is employed."
`
`27. Defendant was and is engaged in interstate commerce as defined in §§ 3 (r) and 3(s) of
`
`the Act, 29 U.S.C. § 203(r) and 203(s)(1)(A). Defendant is a supermarket and cafeteria.
`
`Defendant had more than two employees recurrently engaged in commerce or the
`
`production of goods for commerce. Defendant uses the instrumentalities of interstate
`
`commerce to accept and solicit funds from non-Florida sources by using electronic
`
`devices to authorize credit card transactions. Upon information and belief, the annual
`
`gross revenue of the Employer/Defendant was more than $500,000.00 per annum.
`
`Therefore, there is FLSA enterprise coverage.
`
`28. Plaintiffs and those similarly situated were employed by an enterprise engaged in
`
`interstate commerce. Plaintiffs and those similarly situated through their daily activities
`
`regularly participated in interstate commerce. Plaintiffs handled and worked on goods
`
`and materials that were produced for commerce and moved across State lines at any
`
`time in the course of business. Therefore, there is FLSA individual coverage.
`
`29. Defendants FRIENDS MEAT MARKET, JOSHUA AKREAM, and MOHAMED
`
`WASHAM employed Plaintiff MARCOS J. BRITTON as a non-exempted full-time
`
`hourly employee from approximately February 12, 2022, to April 28, 2022, or 11
`
`weeks. Plaintiff had duties as a supermarket employee, he had multiple duties as a
`
`supermarket attendant, kitchen helper, and maintenance employee. Plaintiff was paid a
`
`salary of $750.00 weekly
`
`30. Defendants FRIENDS MEAT MARKET, JOSHUA AKREAM, and MOHAMED
`
`WASHAM employed Plaintiff ARLYN E. LOPEZ as a non-exempted full-time hourly
`
`
`
`Page 6 of 23
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-21579-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/22/2022 Page 7 of 23
`
`employee from approximately January 24, 2022, to April 28, 2022, or 13 weeks.
`
`Plaintiff has duties as a cook, supermarket attendant, and cleaning employee. Plaintiff
`
`was paid a salary of $720.00 weekly.
`
`31. While employed by Defendants, Plaintiffs worked more than 40 hours every week, but
`
`they were not paid for their wages as required by law.
`
`32. Plaintiffs had a regular and mandatory schedule, and they worked six days per week. a
`
`total of 90 hours. Plaintiffs were unable to take bonafide lunchtime.
`
`33. Plaintiffs worked routinely and consistently 90 hours weekly. However, Defendants
`
`did not pay Plaintiffs for overtime hours, as required by the FLSA.
`
`34. Plaintiffs did not clock in and out, but Defendants were able to monitor the hours
`
`worked by Plaintiffs and other similarly situated individuals. Defendants knew about
`
`the number of hours worked by Plaintiffs.
`
`35. Therefore, Defendants willfully failed to pay Plaintiffs overtime wages at the rate of
`
`time and a half their regular rate for every hour that they worked in excess of forty (40),
`
`in violation of Section 7 (a) of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (29 U.S.C.
`
`207(a)(1).
`
`36. Plaintiffs were paid weekly strictly in cash, without paystubs or any record providing
`
`basic information about the number of days and hours worked, wage rate paid,
`
`employee taxes deducted, etc.
`
`37. The records, if any, concerning the number of hours actually worked by Plaintiffs and
`
`those similarly situated, and the compensation actually paid to such employees should
`
`be in the possession and custody of Defendants. However, upon information and
`
`
`
`Page 7 of 23
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-21579-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/22/2022 Page 8 of 23
`
`belief, Defendants did not maintain accurate time records of hours worked by Plaintiffs
`
`and other employees.
`
`38. Defendants violated the record-keeping requirements of FLSA, 29 CFR Part 516.
`
`39. Defendants never posted any notice to inform employees of their federal rights to
`
`overtime and minimum wage payments as required by the Fair Labor Standards Act
`
`and Federal Law. Defendants violated the Posting requirements of 29 U.S.C. § 516.4.
`
`40. Prior to the completion of discovery and to the best of Plaintiffs’ knowledge, at the
`
`time of the filing of this Complaint, Plaintiffs' good faith estimate of unpaid overtime
`
`wages is as follows:
`
`1.- Overtime Claim or Plaintiff MARCOS J. BRITTON
`
`* Please note that this amount is based on preliminary calculations and that these figures
`are subjected to modifications as discovery could dictate. Plaintiff will adjust his
`calculations as needed.
`
`a. Total amount of alleged unpaid O/T wages:
`
`Three Thousand Six Hundred Sixty-Eight Dollars and 50/100 ($3,668.50)
`
`b. Calculation of such wages:
`Total weeks of employment: 11 weeks
`Total relevant weeks of employment: 11 weeks
`Total number of hours worked: 90 hours
`Total number of unpaid overtime hours: 50
`Salary: $750.00:90 hours= $8.33
`FL Min. wage: $10.00 x 1.5= $15.00 O/T rate-$8.33 rate paid=$6.67
`Half-time Overtime rate: $6.67
`
`Half-time O/T rate $6.67 x 50 O/T hours=$333.50 weekly x 11 weeks=$3,668.50
`
`c. Nature of wages (e.g., overtime or straight time):
`
`
` This amount represents unpaid half-time overtime wages.
`
`2.- Overtime Claim or Plaintiff ARLYN E. LOPEZ
`
`Page 8 of 23
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-21579-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/22/2022 Page 9 of 23
`
`* Please note that this amount is based on preliminary calculations and that these figures
`are subjected to modifications as discovery could dictate. Plaintiff will adjust her
`calculations as needed.
`
`a. Total amount of alleged unpaid O/T wages:
`
`Four Thousand Five Hundred Fifty Dollars and 00/100 ($4,550.00)
`
`b. Calculation of such wages:
`Total weeks of employment: 13 weeks
`Total relevant weeks of employment: 13 weeks
`Total number of hours worked: 90 hours
`Total number of unpaid overtime hours: 50
`Salary: $720.00:90 hours= $8.00
`FL Min. wage: $10.00 x 1.5= $15.00 O/T rate-$8.00 rate paid=$7.00
`Half-time Overtime rate: $7.00
`
`Half-time O/T rate $7.00 x 50 O/T hours=$350.00 weekly x 13 weeks=$4,550.00
`
`c. Nature of wages (e.g., overtime or straight time):
`
`
` This amount represents unpaid half-time overtime wage
`
`41. At all times material hereto, the Employers/Defendants failed to comply with Title 29
`
`U.S.C. §207 (a) (1), in that Plaintiffs and those similarly situated performed services
`
`and worked in excess of the maximum hours provided by the Act. Still, no provision
`
`was made by the Defendants to properly pay her at the rate of time and one half for all
`
`hours worked in excess of forty hours (40) per workweek as provided in said Act.
`
`42. Defendants knew and/or showed reckless disregard of the provisions of the Act
`
`concerning the payment of overtime wages as required by the Fair Labor Standards Act
`
`and remain owing Plaintiffs and those similarly situated these overtime wages since the
`
`commencement of Plaintiffs and those similarly situated employee's employment with
`
`Defendants as set forth above, and Plaintiffs and those similarly situated are entitled to
`
`recover double damages.
`
`Page 9 of 23
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-21579-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/22/2022 Page 10 of 23
`
`43. At times mentioned, individual Defendants JOSHUA AKREAM, and MOHAMED
`
`WASHAM were the owners/partners and managers of FRIENDS MEAT MARKET.
`
`The individual Defendants were the employers of Plaintiffs and others similarly
`
`situated within the meaning of Section 3(d) of the "Fair Labor Standards Act" [29
`
`U.S.C. § 203(d)]. In that, these individual Defendants acted directly in the interests of
`
`the Corporation, in relation to its employees, including Plaintiff and others similarly
`
`situated. Defendants JOSHUA AKREAM, and MOHAMED WASHAM had financial
`
`and operational control of the business, they determined the terms and working
`
`conditions of Plaintiffs and other similarly situated employees, and they are jointly and
`
`severally liable for Plaintiffs' damages.
`
`44. Defendants FRIENDS MEAT MARKET, JOSHUA AKREAM, and MOHAMED
`
`WASHAM willfully and intentionally refused to pay Plaintiffs overtime wages at the
`
`rate of time and one half their regular rate, as required by the law of the United States,
`
`and remain owing Plaintiffs these overtime wages since the commencement of
`
`Plaintiffs' employment with Defendants as set forth above.
`
`45. Plaintiffs MARCOS J. BRITTON and ARLYN E. LOPEZ have retained the law offices
`
`of the undersigned attorney to represent them in this action and are obligated to pay a
`
`reasonable attorneys' fee.
`
`PRAYER FOR RELIEF
`
`WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs MARCOS J. BRITTON and ARLYN E. LOPEZ, and those similarly
`
`situated respectfully request that this Honorable Court:
`
`A. Enter judgment for Plaintiffs MARCOS J. BRITTON and ARLYN E. LOPEZ and
`
`other similarly situated individuals and against the Defendants FRIENDS MEAT
`
`
`
`Page 10 of 23
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-21579-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/22/2022 Page 11 of 23
`
`MARKET, JOSHUA AKREAM, and MOHAMED WASHAM, based on Defendants'
`
`willful violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C. § 201 et seq.; and
`
`B. Award Plaintiffs MARCOS J. BRITTON and ARLYN E. LOPEZ actual damages in
`
`the amount shown to be due for unpaid overtime compensation for hours worked in
`
`excess of forty weekly, with interest; and
`
`C. Award Plaintiffs an equal amount in double damages/liquidated damages; and
`
`D. Award Plaintiffs reasonable attorneys' fees and costs of suit; and
`
`E. Grant such other and further relief as this Court deems equitable and just and/or
`
`available pursuant to Federal Law.
`
`JURY DEMAND
`
`Plaintiffs MARCOS J. BRITTON and ARLYN E. LOPEZ demand a trial by jury of all issues
`
`triable as of right by jury.
`
`COUNT II:
`F.L.S.A. WAGE AND HOUR FEDERAL STATUTORY VIOLATION: FAILURE TO
`PAY MINIMUM WAGE; AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS
`
`46. Plaintiffs MARCOS J. BRITTON and ARLYN E. LOPEZ re-adopts every factual
`
`allegation as stated in paragraphs 1-24 of this Complaint as if set out in full herein.
`
`47. This action is brought by Plaintiffs MARCOS J. BRITTON and ARLYN E. LOPEZ
`
`and those similarly situated to recover from the Employer FRIENDS MEAT MARKET
`
`unpaid minimum wages, as well as an additional amount as liquidated damages, costs,
`
`and reasonable attorney's fees under the provisions of 29 U.S.C. § 201 et seq., and
`
`specifically under the provisions of 29 U.S.C. §206.
`
`48. Defendant was and is engaged in interstate commerce as defined in §§ 3 (r) and 3(s) of
`
`the Act, 29 U.S.C. § 203(r) and 203(s)(1)(A). Defendant is a supermarket and cafeteria.
`
`
`
`Page 11 of 23
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-21579-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/22/2022 Page 12 of 23
`
`Defendant had more than two employees recurrently engaged in commerce or the
`
`production of goods for commerce. Defendant uses the instrumentalities of interstate
`
`commerce to accept and solicit funds from non-Florida sources by using electronic
`
`devices to authorize credit card transactions. Upon information and belief, the annual
`
`gross revenue of the Employer/Defendant was more than $500,000.00 per annum.
`
`Therefore, there is FLSA enterprise coverage.
`
`49. Plaintiffs and those similarly situated were employed by an enterprise engaged in
`
`interstate commerce. Plaintiffs and those similarly situated through their daily activities
`
`regularly participated in interstate commerce. Plaintiffs handled and worked on goods
`
`and materials that were produced for commerce and moved across State lines at any
`
`time in the course of business. Therefore, there is FLSA individual coverage.
`
`50. 29 U.S.C. §206 states (a) "Every employer shall pay to each of his employees who in
`
`any workweek is engaged in commerce or the production of goods for commerce, or is
`
`employed in an enterprise engaged in commerce or the production of goods for
`
`commerce, wages at the following rates:
`
` (1) except as otherwise provided in this section, not less than—
`
` (A) $5.85 an hour, beginning on the 60th day after May 25, 2008;
`
` (B) $6.55 an hour, beginning 12 months after that 60th day; and
`
` (C) $7.25 an hour, beginning 24 months after that 60th day
`
`51. Defendants FRIENDS MEAT MARKET, JOSHUA AKREAM, and MOHAMED
`
`WASHAM employed Plaintiff MARCOS J. BRITTON as a non-exempted full-time
`
`hourly employee from approximately February 12, 2022, to April 28, 2022, or 11
`
`weeks. Plaintiff had duties as a supermarket employee, he had multiple duties as a
`
`
`
`Page 12 of 23
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-21579-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/22/2022 Page 13 of 23
`
`supermarket attendant, kitchen helper, and maintenance employee. Plaintiff was paid a
`
`salary of $750.00 weekly
`
`52. Defendants FRIENDS MEAT MARKET, JOSHUA AKREAM, and MOHAMED
`
`WASHAM employed Plaintiff ARLYN E. LOPEZ as a non-exempted full-time hourly
`
`employee from approximately January 24, 2022, to April 28, 2022, or 13 weeks.
`
`Plaintiff has duties as a cook, supermarket attendant, and cleaning employee. Plaintiff
`
`was paid a salary of $720.00 weekly.
`
`53. While employed by Defendants, Plaintiffs worked more than 40 hours every week, but
`
`they were not paid for their wages as required by law.
`
`54. Plaintiffs had a regular and mandatory schedule, and they worked six days per week.
`
`Plaintiffs a total of 90 hours weekly. Plaintiffs were unable to take bonafide lunchtime.
`
`55. The fixed amount paid weekly to Plaintiffs divided by 90 working hours per week,
`
`resulted in a wage rate lower than the minimum wage rate required by law.
`
`56. Plaintiffs did not clock in and out, but Defendants were able to monitor the hours
`
`worked by Plaintiffs and other similarly situated individuals. Defendants knew about
`
`the number of hours worked by Plaintiffs.
`
`57. Furthermore, Plaintiffs were fired on or about April 28, 2022. At the time of their
`
`termination, Defendants refused to pay Plaintiff their last 2 weeks of work.
`
`58. There is a substantial number of working hours that were not paid to Plaintiffs at any
`
`rate, not even at the minimum wage rate as required by law.
`
`59. Plaintiffs did not clock in and out, but Defendants could track the number of hours
`
`worked by Plaintiffs and other regularly situated individuals. Defendants were in
`
`
`
`Page 13 of 23
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-21579-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/22/2022 Page 14 of 23
`
`complete control of the Plaintiffs' schedule, time records, and they knew the real
`
`number of hours that Plaintiff and other similarly situated individuals were working.
`
`60. Therefore, Defendants willfully failed to pay Plaintiffs minimum wages in violation of
`
`29 U.S.C. §206 states (a) of the Fair Labor Standards Act.
`
`61. Plaintiffs were paid weekly strictly in cash, without paystubs or any record providing
`
`basic information about the number of days and hours worked, wage rate paid,
`
`employee taxes deducted, etc.
`
`62. The records, if any, concerning the number of hours worked by Plaintiffs and all other
`
`similarly situated employees and the compensation paid to such employees should be
`
`in the possession and custody of Defendants. However, upon information and belief,
`
`Defendants did not maintain accurate and complete time records of hours worked by
`
`Plaintiffs and other employees in the asserted class.
`
`63. Defendants violated the record-keeping requirements of FLSA, 29 CFR Part 516.
`
`64. Defendants never posted any notice, as required by the Fair Labor Standards Act and
`
`Federal Law, to inform employees of their federal rights to overtime and minimum
`
`wage payments. Defendants violated the Posting requirements of 29 U.S.C. § 516.4.
`
`65. At the time of the filing of this Complaint, the Plaintiffs' good faith estimate of unpaid
`
`wages is as follows:
`
`1.- Minimum Wage Claim of Plaintiff MARCOS J. BRITTON
`
`*Florida minimum wage is higher than the federal minimum wage. As per FLSA
`regulations, the higher minimum wage applies.
`
`
`a. Total amount of alleged unpaid wages:
`
`One Thousand Five Hundred Thirty-Four Dollars and 80/100 ($1,534.80)
`
`
`b. Calculation of such wages:
`
`
`
`Page 14 of 23
`
`

`

`Case 1:22-cv-21579-XXXX Document 1 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/22/2022 Page 15 of 23
`
`
`
`Total weeks of employment: 11 weeks
`Total relevant weeks of employment: 11 weeks
`Total hours worked: 40 hours weekly
`Reg