throbber
Case 4:21-cv-00141 Document 1 Filed 11/05/21 Page 1 of 23 PageID# 1
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA
`Newport News Division
`
`JULIE GLENNON and THOMAS E.
`OVERBY, JR., individually and on behalf of
`all others similarly situated
`
`
`
`
`
`ANHEUSER-BUSCH, LLC,
`
`
`
`Plaintiffs,
`
`
`
`v.
`
`
`
`Defendant.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case No.:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`COLLECTIVE AND CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
`
`Named Plaintiffs Julie Glennon and Thomas E. Overby, Jr. (“Named Plaintiffs”),
`
`individually and on behalf of others similarly situated (collectively “Plaintiffs”), by and through
`
`their undersigned counsel of record, hereby sets forth this collective and class action against
`
`Defendant Anheuser-Busch, LLC (“Defendant”), and allege as follows:
`
`NATURE OF ACTION AND INTRODUCTORY STATEMENT
`
`1.
`
`This action arises out of Defendant’s systemic, company-wide policy of failing to
`
`pay its employees for all hours worked and for overtime hours worked at the appropriate overtime
`
`rate, in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”), 29 U.S.C. § 201, et seq., the Virginia
`
`Minimum Wage Act (“VMWA”), Virginia Code §§ 40.1-28.8 et seq.; and the Virginia Wage
`
`Payment Act (“VWPA”), Virginia Code §§ 40.1-29 et seq.
`
`2.
`
`Plaintiffs consist of current and former operators, technicians, engineers, or similar
`
`positions, who work for Defendant in Virginia and are compensated on an hourly basis.
`
`Throughout the relevant period, Defendant has maintained a corporate policy of failing to
`
`compensate Plaintiffs for all mandatory pre- and/or post-shift work. In particular, Defendant
`
`1
`
`

`

`Case 4:21-cv-00141 Document 1 Filed 11/05/21 Page 2 of 23 PageID# 2
`
`requires Plaintiffs to arrive to work prior to the scheduled start time of Plaintiffs’ shifts, in order
`
`to perform a litany of tasks necessary to perform Plaintiffs’ jobs, including preparatory work,
`
`maintenance work, cleaning work, and paperwork, among other tasks. As for the end of Plaintiffs’
`
`shift, Plaintiffs are required to perform cleaning work, and numerous other tasks to properly wind
`
`down Plaintiffs’ shifts. Plaintiffs are required to perform this work in order to be prepared to carry
`
`out their job responsibilities when they arrive at job sites. This work was required to be completed
`
`by Defendants and the failure of Plaintiffs to perform this work could result in warnings, discipline,
`
`and ultimately, termination.
`
`3.
`
`Notably, Defendant only compensates Plaintiffs for their scheduled shifts and does
`
`not compensate Plaintiffs for the required pre- and/or post-shift work.
`
`4.
`
`Defendant, through its managers and agents, are aware that Plaintiffs are
`
`completing this pre and/or post-shift work and doing so without compensation. Defendant suffers
`
`or permits, and in fact requires Plaintiffs to complete such pre- and/or post-shift work.
`
`5.
`
`Plaintiffs routinely work 40 hours or more per week, without accounting for pre-
`
`and/or post-shift work. When pre- and/or post-shift work are included, even those Plaintiffs who
`
`are scheduled and paid for only 40 hours or less per week, actually work over 40 hours per week
`
`without being compensated for all of their time worked or compensated at the proper overtime rate
`
`for hours worked over 40 per week.
`
`6.
`
`Defendant’s practice of failing to compensate Plaintiffs for all pre and post-shift
`
`work violates Plaintiffs’ rights under the FLSA, VMWA, and VWPA.
`
`7.
`
`Plaintiffs bring this action for violations of the FLSA as a collective action,
`
`pursuant to Section 16(b) of the FLSA, 29 U.S.C. § 216(b), on behalf of the following class in
`
`Virginia:
`
`2
`
`

`

`Case 4:21-cv-00141 Document 1 Filed 11/05/21 Page 3 of 23 PageID# 3
`
`All individuals who were, are, or will be employed by Defendant in Virginia as
`operators, technicians, engineers, or other similar positions who were not
`compensated for all of their hours worked, including, but not limited to, above forty
`(40) per week, within three (3) years prior to the commencement of this action,
`through the date of judgment or final disposition in this action.
`
`8.
`
`9.
`
`Defendant is liable for its failure to pay Plaintiffs for all work performed.
`
`Plaintiffs who elect to participate in this FLSA collective action seek compensation
`
`
`
`for all pre and/or post-shift work performed for Defendant. Plaintiffs seek compensation at the
`
`appropriate overtime rate for all hours worked in excess of forty (40) per week, an equal amount
`
`of liquidated damages, prejudgment interest, and attorneys’ fees and costs, pursuant to 29 U.S.C.
`
`§ 216(b).
`
`10.
`
`Named Plaintiffs also bring this action, on their own behalf, and as representatives
`
`of similarly situated current, former, or future operators, technicians, engineers, or similar
`
`positions, employed by Defendant in Virginia, under the VMWA and VWPA. Named Plaintiffs,
`
`who are Virginia residents, and who worked for Defendant in Virginia, assert that they and the
`
`putative class, who work or worked in Virginia for Defendant, are entitled to compensation for all
`
`pre- and/or post-shift work performed for Defendant, whether the work week totaled greater or
`
`fewer than forty (40) hours, compensation at the appropriate overtime rate for all hours worked in
`
`excess of forty (40) per week, an equal amount of liquidated damages, prejudgment interest, and
`
`attorneys’ fees and costs, pursuant to Virginia Code §§ 40.1-28.8, et seq., and 40.1-29 et seq.
`
`11.
`
`Plaintiffs seek class certification under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil
`
`Procedure for the following class of Defendants’ employees in Virginia:
`
`All individuals who were, are, or will be employed by Defendant in Virginia as
`operators, technicians, engineers, or other similar positions who were not
`compensated for all of their hours worked, including, but not limited to, above forty
`(40) per week, within three (3) years prior to the commencement of this action,
`through the date of judgment or final disposition in this action.
`
`
`3
`
`

`

`Case 4:21-cv-00141 Document 1 Filed 11/05/21 Page 4 of 23 PageID# 4
`
`12.
`
`Named Plaintiffs brings this lawsuit seeking monetary relief against Defendant on
`
`behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated in Virginia to recover, among other things,
`
`unpaid wages and benefits, interest, attorneys’ fees, costs, expenses, and penalties pursuant to
`
`Virginia Code §§ 40.1-28.8 et seq., 40.1-29 et seq., and 29 U.S.C. §§ 201, et. seq.
`
`JURISDICTION AND VENUE
`
`13.
`
`Plaintiffs bring this collective and class action against Defendant for violations of
`
`Virginia Code §§ 40.1-28.8 et seq., 40.1-29 et seq., and 29 U.S.C. §§ 201, et. seq.
`
`14.
`
`This Court has original subject matter jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 29
`
`U.S.C. § 1331 and 29 U.S.C. § 216(b).
`
`15.
`
`Additionally, this Court has supplemental jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367
`
`over the pendent state law claims under the VMWA and VWPA because those state law claims
`
`arise out of the same nucleus of operative fact as the FLSA claims.
`
`16.
`
`This Court has jurisdiction over Defendant because, upon information and belief,
`
`it is a citizen of the United States, has sufficient minimum contacts in Virginia, or otherwise
`
`intentionally avail itself of the Virginia market so as to render the exercise of jurisdiction over it
`
`by the Federal and Virginia courts consistent with traditional notions of fair play and substantial
`
`justice.
`
`17.
`
`Venue is proper in this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b) because Defendant
`
`conducts business within the Eastern District of Virginia, and a substantial part of the events or
`
`omissions giving rise to these claims occurred in this District.
`
`COVERAGE
`
`18.
`
`At all relevant times, Defendant was an employer within the meaning of the FLSA,
`
`29 U.S.C. § 203(d), the VMWA, and the VWPA.
`
`4
`
`

`

`Case 4:21-cv-00141 Document 1 Filed 11/05/21 Page 5 of 23 PageID# 5
`
`19.
`
`At all relevant times, Named Plaintiffs and all others similarly situated were
`
`employees engaged in commerce or in the production of goods for commerce within the meaning
`
`of 29 U.S.C. §§ 206, 207.
`
`20.
`
`At all times material to this action, Defendant was an enterprise engaged in
`
`commerce or the production of goods for commerce as defined by the FLSA, 29 U.S.C. §§ 203(s),
`
`203(r), in that said enterprise has had employees engaged in commerce or in the production of
`
`goods for commerce, or employees handling, selling, or otherwise working on goods or materials
`
`that have been moved in or produced for commerce by any person, and in that said enterprise has
`
`had and has an annual gross volume of sales made or business done of not less than $500,000.
`
`PARTIES
`
`21.
`
`Named Plaintiffs are residents of Virginia. Named Plaintiffs worked for Defendant
`
`in Virginia at its Williamsburg, Virginia brewery during the relevant time period.
`
`22.
`
`Named Plaintiffs are informed, believe, and allege, that Defendant, at all times
`
`hereinafter mentioned, was and is an employer as defined in and subject to the FLSA and Virginia
`
`Code §§ 40.1-28.9, whose employees were and are engaged throughout this district and the
`
`Commonwealth of Virginia.
`
`23.
`
`Defendant is a limited liability company organized under Missouri law,
`
`headquartered in Missouri, and has its principal place of business located at One Busch Place, St
`
`Louis, MO, 63118. According to its website, Defendant “embod[ies] the time-honored traditions
`
`of brewing great beer while constantly innovating to drive the industry forward.”
`
`24.
`
`Defendant is an enterprise engaged in commerce under the FLSA because material
`
`hereto it had an annual gross volume of sales of more than $500,000.00.
`
`5
`
`

`

`Case 4:21-cv-00141 Document 1 Filed 11/05/21 Page 6 of 23 PageID# 6
`
`25.
`
`At all times relevant, Defendant was Named Plaintiffs’ employer and the employer
`
`of all other similarly situated individuals as defined by the FLSA and applicable state law.
`
`26.
`
`During the period from June 2013 through July 2021, Named Plaintiff Glennon was
`
`employed by Defendant in various capacities, with her last position being an operator. In this
`
`capacity, Named Plaintiff Glennon performed substantial and ongoing employment duties for the
`
`benefit of Defendant in the Commonwealth of Virginia.
`
`27.
`
`During the period from 1991 through the present, Named Plaintiff Overby was
`
`employed by Defendant in various capacities, with his last position being a maintenance
`
`technician. In this capacity, Named Plaintiff Overby performed substantial and ongoing
`
`employment duties for the benefit of Defendant in the Commonwealth of Virginia
`
`28.
`
`By acting as the Named Plaintiffs in this action, Named Plaintiffs, by including
`
`their name on the caption of this Collective and Class Action Complaint, affirms their written
`
`consent to participate as a plaintiff in a collective action to seek unpaid wages and damages under
`
`the FLSA and to act as class representatives for the Federal Rule 23 class claims alleged herein.
`
`FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
`
`29.
`
`Defendant employs operators, technicians, engineers, or similar positions in its
`
`brewery located in the city of Williamsburg in the Commonwealth of Virginia (“Williamsburg
`
`brewery”).
`
`30.
`
`According to Defendant’s website, “Opened in 1972, [the] Williamsburg Brewery
`
`produces nearly 400 different beer packages. [The] Williamsburg team has played a critical role
`
`in our innovation pipeline as the first brewery to brew Natural Light Naturdays, Bud Light Orange,
`
`and Michelob ULTRA Infusions.”
`
`6
`
`

`

`Case 4:21-cv-00141 Document 1 Filed 11/05/21 Page 7 of 23 PageID# 7
`
`31.
`
`Additionally, Defendant’s Williamsburg brewery produces the following brands of
`
`alcoholic beverages: Budweiser, Bud Light, Bud Light Lime, Bud Light Orange, Bud Light
`
`Lemonade, Bud Light Platinum, Bud Select, Select 55, Land Shark Lager, Bud Ice, Michelob,
`
`Michelob Light, Amberbock, Michelob ULTRA, Michelob ULTRA Lime Cactus, Michelob
`
`ULTRA Prickly Pear, Michelob Ultra Pomegranate, Goose Island Natural Villain, St. Pauli Girl
`
`Lager, Devil’s Backbone Vienna Lager, Natural Light, Natural Ice, Busch, Busch Light, Busch
`
`Ice, Becks, Becks Light, Kirin Ichiban, Kirin Light, King Cobra, Hurricane Malt Liquor, and
`
`Hurricane High Gravity.
`
`32.
`
`Named Plaintiffs were employed by Defendant in Defendant’s Williamsburg
`
`brewery.
`
`33.
`
`Upon information and belief, at all relevant times, Defendant employed and
`
`continues to employ at least 350 non-exempt individuals in the Williamsburg brewery.
`
`34.
`
`Named Plaintiff Glennon’s job duties as an operator included driving a fork truck,
`
`loading and unloading trailers, among other tasks.
`
`35.
`
`Named Plaintiff Overby’s job duties as a maintenance technician include fulfilling
`
`corrective, preventive, and emergency maintenance work orders, writing work orders, closing
`
`work orders, attending various administrative meetings, among other tasks.
`
`36.
`
`Defendant compensates operators, technicians, engineers, or similar positions, on
`
`an hourly basis. Defendant classifies these employees as non-exempt under the FLSA.
`
`37.
`
`Defendant requires operators, technicians, engineers, or similar positions to work
`
`approximately eight (8) hour shifts, five (5) days per week. There are typically three shifts that
`
`Plaintiffs are assigned – first, second, or third shift.
`
`7
`
`

`

`Case 4:21-cv-00141 Document 1 Filed 11/05/21 Page 8 of 23 PageID# 8
`
`38.
`
`In order to record the time worked of their employees, including Plaintiffs,
`
`Defendant utilizes an electronic timekeeping system to capture employees’ time. However, this
`
`timekeeping system does not properly capture pre-shift work that Plaintiffs perform outside of the
`
`Williamsburg brewery.
`
`39.
`
`Prior to the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in March 2020, and during the
`
`relevant time period, Defendant required Plaintiffs to arrive to work at approximately twenty (20)
`
`minutes prior to the start of their scheduled shifts to perform a litany of unpaid tasks, including
`
`traveling to the locker area; putting on and equipping various items of Personal Protective
`
`Equipment (“PPE”), such as safety shoes, safety gloves, safety glasses, earplugs, etc.; travel to
`
`Plaintiffs’ designated work area; and participate in a “carryover” with the previous shift, where the
`
`previous shift would give a verbal debrief to the next shift.
`
`40.
`
`After the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in March 2020, and in addition to the
`
`pre-shift work detailed above, Plaintiffs had to perform approximately thirty (30) minutes of
`
`unpaid pre-shift work, including waiting in line, either in Plaintiffs’ cars or in an in-person queue,
`
`for a required temperature check to screen for illness; go through a “foot bath” to disinfect
`
`Plaintiffs’ shoes and feet; disinfect Plaintiffs’ hands by washing them; and disinfect Plaintiffs’
`
`work area and equipment.
`
`41. While Plaintiffs clock in after entering the Williamsburg brewery, Defendant does
`
`not compensate Plaintiffs from the time they clock in. Instead, Defendant only compensates
`
`Plaintiffs for their scheduled shift time and does not account nor compensate for any pre-shift work
`
`completed by Plaintiffs. Additionally, Plaintiffs’ time spent fulfilling pre-shift duties outside of
`
`the Williamsburg brewery is not properly captured or compensated, such as engaging in required
`
`temperature checks.
`
`8
`
`

`

`Case 4:21-cv-00141 Document 1 Filed 11/05/21 Page 9 of 23 PageID# 9
`
`42.
`
`During the relevant period, Plaintiffs typically perform approximately fifteen (15)
`
`minutes of post-shift work each workday, including finishing assigned work; conducting the
`
`“carryover” for the next shift; putting tools and equipment in storage; taking off PPE; washing
`
`body of foreign substances acquired during shift, including glass, dust, beer, lubricants, chemical
`
`residue, etc.; and numerous other tasks to properly wind down Plaintiffs’ shifts. Because these
`
`duties must be performed after Plaintiffs’ scheduled shift end time, and because Defendant only
`
`compensates Plaintiffs for their scheduled shift time, Plaintiffs’ time engaged in such post-shift
`
`activities is not compensated, despite Plaintiffs clocking out and recording their time at the time
`
`they finish their post-shift work.
`
`43.
`
`This required, pre- and/or post-shift work has to be performed before the “start” of
`
`each shift and following the “end” of each shift. The pre-shift work is necessary in order for
`
`Plaintiffs to fulfil their job duties while on job sites. Additionally, the post-shift work is necessary
`
`to adequately wind down Plaintiffs’ work for the day, fulfill Plaintiffs’ duties, and to protect
`
`Defendant’s equipment and property.
`
`44.
`
`Defendant, through its actions, directives, and policies, mandated that Plaintiffs
`
`perform this pre- and/or post-shift work.
`
`45.
`
`Upon information and belief, Defendant strikes Plaintiffs’ time they manage to
`
`record engaging in any pre- and/or post-shift work.
`
`46.
`
`If Plaintiffs do not perform this pre- and/or post-shift work, they risk receiving
`
`verbal and written warnings on their records. Multiple verbal and written warnings could result in
`
`disciplinary action or termination from employment.
`
`47.
`
`If Plaintiffs arrived immediately prior to the scheduled start of their first job, they
`
`could not feasibly perform all required pre-shift work necessary to perform their job duties when
`
`9
`
`

`

`Case 4:21-cv-00141 Document 1 Filed 11/05/21 Page 10 of 23 PageID# 10
`
`the first scheduled job begins, and they would therefore receive verbal or written warnings for
`
`failing to perform all required pre-shift work.
`
`48.
`
`Defendants’ failure to compensate for all pre-and/or post-shift work performed has
`
`affected all Plaintiffs similarly.
`
`49.
`
`Upon information and belief, Plaintiffs have complained numerous times to
`
`Defendant regarding their unpaid pre- and/or post-shift work, but Defendant has persisted in its
`
`practice and policy of not compensating for this time.
`
`FLSA COLLECTIVE ACTION ALLEGATIONS
`
`50.
`
`Named Plaintiffs bring the First Cause of Action of the instant Complaint as a
`
`collective action pursuant to 29 U.S.C. § 216(b), on behalf of themselves and all similarly situated
`
`employees.
`
`51. Members of the FLSA class are similarly situated.
`
`52. Members of the FLSA class have substantially similar job requirements and pay
`
`provisions, and are subject to common practices, policies, or plans that fail to compensate them
`
`for all work performed.
`
`53.
`
`There are numerous (in excess of 250) similarly situated current and former
`
`operators, technicians, engineers, or similar positions that fall within the scope of the
`
`aforementioned FLSA class.
`
`54.
`
`These similarly situated employees are known to Defendant, are readily
`
`identifiable, and can be located through Defendant’s records. Members of the proposed FLSA
`
`class, therefore, should be permitted to pursue their claims collectively, pursuant to 29 U.S.C. §
`
`216(b).
`
`10
`
`

`

`Case 4:21-cv-00141 Document 1 Filed 11/05/21 Page 11 of 23 PageID# 11
`
`55.
`
`Pursuit of this action collectively will provide the most efficient mechanism for
`
`adjudicating the claims of Plaintiffs.
`
`56.
`
`Named Plaintiffs consent in writing to assert their claims for unpaid wages under
`
`the FLSA pursuant to 29 U.S.C. § 216(b). Named Plaintiffs signed consent forms are filed with
`
`the Court as Exhibits A and B to this Complaint. As this case proceeds, it is likely other individuals
`
`will file consent forms and join as opt-in plaintiffs.
`
`57.
`
`Named Plaintiffs request that they be permitted to serve as representatives of those
`
`who consent to participate in this action, and that this action be conditionally certified as a
`
`collective action pursuant to 29 U.S.C. § 216(b).
`
`RULE 23 VMWA AND VWPA CLASS ACTION ALLEGATIONS
`
`Named Plaintiffs bring the Second, Third, and Fourth Causes of Action of the
`
`58.
`
`instant Complaint as a class action pursuant to Rule 23(a) and (b)(3) of the Federal Rules of Civil
`
`Procedure, on behalf of themselves and all similarly situated employees, for relief to redress and
`
`remedy Defendant’s violations of the VMWA and VWPA, Virginia Code §§ 40.1-28.8 et seq., and
`
`40.1-29 et seq.
`
`59.
`
`Named Plaintiffs bring their state law counts for violations of the VMWA and
`
`VWPA as a class action pursuant to Rule 23(a) and (b)(3) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure,
`
`on behalf of themselves and all similarly situated employees, for relief to redress and remedy
`
`Defendant’s violations of the VMWA and VWPA and failure to pay all wages due and owing
`
`pursuant to Defendant’s written employment contract and/or compensation plan and/or
`
`Defendant’s failure to pay full reasonable consideration for all compensable work duties
`
`performed for Defendant’s benefit.
`
`60.
`
`Pursuit of this action as a class will provide the most efficient mechanism for
`
`11
`
`

`

`Case 4:21-cv-00141 Document 1 Filed 11/05/21 Page 12 of 23 PageID# 12
`
`adjudicating the claims of Named Plaintiffs and the putative Class Plaintiffs.
`
`61.
`
`Named Plaintiffs reserve the right to establish Subclasses, or modify any Class or
`
`Subclass definition, as appropriate.
`
`62. Members of the Class and/or any Subclasses will be collectively referred to as
`
`“class members.” Named Plaintiffs reserve the right to re-define the Class and add additional
`
`Subclasses as appropriate based on investigation, discovery, and specific theories of liability.
`
`63.
`
`Common Questions Predominate: There is a well-defined commonality of interest
`
`in the questions of law and fact involving and affecting the proposed class, and these common
`
`questions of law and fact predominate over any questions affecting members of the proposed class
`
`individually, in that all putative class members have been harmed by Defendant’s failure to
`
`lawfully compensate them. The common questions of law and fact include, but are not limited to,
`
`the following:
`
`(a) Whether pre- and/or post-shift work performed by putative Class Members
`
`is compensable under the VMWA and/or VWPA;
`
`(b) Whether Defendants’ failure to compensate putative Class Members for
`
`pre- and/or post-shift work is in violation of the VMWA and/or VWPA;
`
`(c) Whether Defendants failed to compensate putative Class Members at the
`
`earned, accrued, and/or promised rate for all hours worked in excess of forty
`
`(40) each week;
`
`(d) Whether Defendant failed to compensate putative Class Members for all of
`
`their earned, accrued, and/or promised wages, including, but not limited to,
`
`straight time and overtime on their regular pay date, in violation of the
`
`VMWA and/or VWPA;
`
`12
`
`

`

`Case 4:21-cv-00141 Document 1 Filed 11/05/21 Page 13 of 23 PageID# 13
`
`(e) Whether Defendant failed to provide accurate itemized wage statements to
`
`Plaintiffs and class members; and
`
`(g) Whether Defendants’ conduct was willful, reckless, or was done knowingly.
`
`62.
`
`There is a well-defined community of interest in this litigation and the proposed
`
`Class is readily ascertainable:
`
`(a)
`
`Numerosity: The proposed class is so numerous that the joinder of all such
`
`persons is impracticable, and the disposition of their claims as a class will benefit the parties
`
`and the Court. While the exact number of class members is unknown to Named Plaintiffs
`
`at this time, upon information and belief, the class comprises at least 350 individuals. The
`
`identities of the Class Members are readily ascertainable by inspection of Defendant’s
`
`employment and payroll records.
`
`(b)
`
`Typicality: The claims of the Named Plaintiffs are typical of the claims
`
`which could be alleged by any member of the putative Class, and the relief sought is typical
`
`of the relief which would be sought by each member of the Class in separate actions. All
`
`putative Class Members were subject to the same compensation practices of Defendant, as
`
`alleged herein, of failing to pay employees for all pre- and/or post-shift work. Defendant’s
`
`compensation policies and practices affected all putative Class Members similarly, and
`
`Defendant benefited from the same type of unfair and/or unlawful acts as to each putative
`
`Class Member. Named Plaintiffs and members of the proposed Class sustained similar
`
`losses, injuries, and damages arising from the same unlawful policies, practices, and
`
`procedures.
`
`(c)
`
`Adequacy of Representation: Named Plaintiffs will fairly and adequately
`
`represent and protect the interests of all members of the Class because it is in their best
`
`13
`
`

`

`Case 4:21-cv-00141 Document 1 Filed 11/05/21 Page 14 of 23 PageID# 14
`
`interest to prosecute the claims alleged herein to obtain full compensation and penalties
`
`due them and the Class. Plaintiffs’ attorneys, as proposed class counsel, are competent and
`
`experienced in litigating large employment class actions and versed in the rules governing
`
`class action discovery, certification, and settlement. Plaintiffs have incurred, and
`
`throughout the duration of this action, will continue to incur attorneys’ fees and costs that
`
`have been and will be necessarily expended for the prosecution of this action for the
`
`substantial benefit of each class member.
`
`(d)
`
`Superiority: A class action is superior to other available means for the fair
`
`and efficient adjudication of this controversy. Individual joinder of all class members is
`
`impracticable. Class action treatment will permit a large number of similarly situated
`
`persons to prosecute their common claims in a single forum simultaneously, efficiently,
`
`and without the unnecessary duplication of effort and expense that numerous individual
`
`actions engender. Because the losses, injuries and damages suffered by each of the
`
`individual class members may be small for some in the sense pertinent to the class action
`
`analysis, the expenses and burden of individual litigation would make it extremely difficult
`
`or impossible for the individual class members to redress the wrongs done to them. On the
`
`other hand, important public interests will be served by addressing the matter as a class
`
`action. The cost to the court system and the public for the adjudication of individual
`
`litigation and claims would be substantially greater than if the claims are treated as a class
`
`action. Prosecution of separate actions by individual members of the proposed class would
`
`create a risk of inconsistent and/or varying adjudications with respect to the individual
`
`members of the class, establishing incompatible standards of conduct for Defendant, and
`
`resulting in the impairment of class members’ rights and the disposition of their interests
`
`14
`
`

`

`Case 4:21-cv-00141 Document 1 Filed 11/05/21 Page 15 of 23 PageID# 15
`
`through actions to which they are not parties. The issue in this action can be decided by
`
`means of common, class-wide proof. In addition, if appropriate, the Court can and is
`
`empowered to fashion methods to efficiently manage this action as a class action.
`
`63.
`
`Public Policy Considerations: Employers in the Commonwealth of Virginia violate
`
`employment and labor laws every day. Current employees are often afraid to assert their rights out
`
`of fear of direct or indirect retaliation. Former employees are fearful of bringing actions because
`
`they believe their former employers might damage their future endeavors through negative
`
`references and/or other means. Class actions provide the class members who are not named in the
`
`complaint with a type of anonymity that allows for the vindication of their rights at the same time
`
`as affording them privacy protections.
`
`64.
`
`Pursuit of this action as a class will provide the most efficient mechanism for
`
`adjudicating the claims of Named Plaintiffs and members of the proposed class.
`
`FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
`Violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act
`29 U.S.C. § 201, et seq.
`Brought by Named Plaintiffs on Behalf of Themselves and all Similarly Situated Employees
`
`Named Plaintiffs hereby re-allege and incorporate by reference all paragraphs
`
`65.
`
`above as though fully set forth herein.
`
`66.
`
`At all relevant times, Defendant has been, and continues to be, an “employer”
`
`engaged in interstate “commerce” and/or in the production of “goods” for “commerce,” within the
`
`meaning of the FLSA, 29 U.S.C. § 203.
`
`67.
`
`At all relevant times, Defendant has employed, and continues to employ,
`
`“employee[s],” including Plaintiffs, and each of the members of the prospective FLSA Class, that
`
`have been, and continue to be, engaged in interstate “commerce” within the meaning of the FLSA,
`
`29 U.S.C. § 203.
`
`15
`
`

`

`Case 4:21-cv-00141 Document 1 Filed 11/05/21 Page 16 of 23 PageID# 16
`
`68.
`
`At all relevant times, Defendant has had gross operating revenues in excess of
`
`$500,000.
`
`69.
`
`The FLSA, pursuant to §§ 206 and 207, requires each covered employer, including
`
`Defendant, to compensate all non-exempt employees at a rate of not less than one and one-half
`
`(1.5) times the regular rate of pay for work performed in excess of forty (40) hours in a single
`
`workweek.
`
`70.
`
`At all relevant times, Defendant, pursuant to its policies and practices, failed and
`
`refused to pay for all hours worked to Plaintiffs, including for required, pre- and/or post-shift work
`
`performed by Plaintiffs.
`
`71.
`
`Defendant’s failure to pay Plaintiffs for all hours worked, despite the fact that, upon
`
`information and belief, Defendant knew of its obligations under the law, entitles Plaintiffs to
`
`liquidated damages in an amount equal to the amount of unpaid wages under 29 U.S.C. § 216(b),
`
`since Defendant cannot show it acted in good faith, and a three (3) year, rather than two (2) year
`
`statute of limitations, since Defendant’s acts constitute willful violations of the FLSA, within the
`
`meaning of 29 U.S.C. § 255(a)
`
`72.
`
`As a result of Defendant’s unlawful acts, Plaintiffs have been deprived of
`
`compensation for all required pre- and/or post-shift hours worked, and are entitled to recovery of
`
`such amounts, liquidated damages, prejudgment interest, and attorneys’ fees and costs, pursuant
`
`to 29 U.S.C. § 216(b).
`
`SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION
`Violation of the Virginia Minimum Wage Act
`Virginia Code § 40.1-28.8 et seq.
`Brought by Named Plaintiffs on Behalf of Themselves and all Similarly Situated Employees
`
`Plaintiffs hereby re-allege and incorporate by reference all paragraphs above as
`
`73.
`
`though fully set forth herein.
`
`16
`
`

`

`Case 4:21-cv-00141 Document 1 Filed 11/05/21 Page 17 of 23 PageID# 17
`
`74.
`
`At all relevant times, Defendant has employed, and/or continues to employ,
`
`Plaintiffs within the meaning of the VMWA.
`
`75.
`
`Defendants employed Named Plaintiffs, and similarly situated employees, within
`
`the Commonwealth of Virginia.
`
`76.
`
`Virginia Code § 40.1-28.8 et seq. provides that, prior to May 1, 2021, every
`
`employer shall pay to each of its employees’ wages at a rate not less than the federal minimum
`
`wage and the payment of a lesser wage than the minimum so fixed is unlawful.
`
`77.
`
`Virginia Code § 40.1-28.8 et seq. also provides that “[f]rom May 1, 2021, until
`
`January 1, 2022, every employer shall pay to each of its employees’ wages at a rate not less than
`
`the greater of (i) $9.50 per hour or (ii) the federal minimum wage.”
`
`78.
`
`During the relevant time period, Defendant paid Plaintiffs and class members less
`
`than minimum wages when they did not pay Plaintiffs and class members for all hours worked.
`
`For example, whenever Plaintiffs performed pre- and/or post-shift work, Defendant did not pay
`
`them at all for the time they spent working. To the extent these hours do not qualify for the payment
`
`of overtime, Plaintiffs and class members were not being paid at least minimum wages for their
`
`work.
`
`79.
`
`During the relevant time period, Defendant regularly failed to pay at least minimum
`
`wages to Named Plaintiffs and class members for all hours worked pursuant to Virginia Code §
`
`40.1-28.10.
`
`80.
`
`Defendants’ failure to pay Named Plaintiffs and class members the required
`
`minimum wages violate Virginia Code § 40.1-28.10. Pursuant to Virginia Code § 40.1-29, Named
`
`Plaintiffs and class members are entitled to recover the unpaid balance of their minimum wage
`
`compensation as well as interest, costs, and attorneys’ fees.
`
`17
`
`

`

`Case 4:21-cv-00141 Document 1 Filed 11/05/21 Page 18 of 23 PageID# 18
`
`81.
`
`Pursuant to Vi

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

Still Working On It

This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.

Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.

throbber

A few More Minutes ... Still Working

It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.

Thank you for your continued patience.

This document could not be displayed.

We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

Set your membership status to view this document.

With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll get a whole lot more, including:

  • Up-to-date information for this case.
  • Email alerts whenever there is an update.
  • Full text search for other cases.
  • Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.

Become a Member

One Moment Please

The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.

Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.

Your document is on its way!

If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.

Sealed Document

We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.

If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.


Access Government Site

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket