Riley v. Tastee Pattee, Ltd., and Thomas Patterson, individually, and Michael A. Patterson, individually, Civil Case No.: 18-cv-05562
On October 4, 2018, Plaintiff, Mr. Riley, on behalf of himself, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated, filed a class and collective action lawsuit in the United States District Court Eastern District of New York against TASTEE PATTE, LTD. (hereinafter “Tastee Pattee”), THOMAS PATTERSON, individually, and MICHAEL A. PATTERSON, individually, (collectively as “Defendants”), alleging upon knowledge as to himself and his own actions and upon information and belief as follows:
Mr. Riley worked for Defendants, a corporation operating a chain of popular Jamaican restaurants in Brooklyn, New York, and the corporation’s owners and day-to-day overseers – – from around October 28, 2015 until May 7, 2018, first as a cashier and server and subsequently as a member of the kitchen staff. Plaintiff’s primary duties as a cashier and server were cashing out customers and serving food, as well as having responsibility for cleaning his work station and other areas inside and outside of the restaurant and placing garbage in outside trash bins. Around April 2016, Defendants reassigned Plaintiff to the kitchen staff in the role of assistant to the chef, in which position his primary duty was to prepare and cook food for the restaurant’s customers. Plaintiff worked in that position until his employment with Defendants ended on May 7, 2018. Throughout his employment, Defendants required Plaintiff to work seven days per week, without a scheduled or uninterrupted break each day. Regardless of how many hours Plaintiff worked in a week, Defendants paid Plaintiff a flat weekly rate of $420.00 from October 28, 2018 until December 31, 2016, yielding a regular rate of $10.50; and $467.00 from January 1, 2017 until May 7, 2018, yielding a regular rate of $11.68.
Throughout Plaintiff’s employment, Defendants willfully failed to pay Plaintiff the overtime provisions lawfully due to him under the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”), the New York Labor Law (“NYLL”) and the N.Y. Comp. Codes R. & Regs. (“NYCRR”). Even though Defendants required Plaintiff to work, and Plaintiff did, in fact, work beyond forty hours in a workweek but failed to compensate Plaintiff at the statutorily-required overtime rate of time and one-half his straight-time rate of pay for any hours that he worked per week in excess of forty, and instead paid Plaintiff at his regular rate of pay for all hours worked. Additionally, in violation of NYLL and NYCRR, Defendants failed to pay Plaintiff at least at the minimum wage rate for any hours worked; provide Plaintiff with accurate wage statements on each payday; or provide Plaintiff with any wage notice at hire, let alone an accurate one.
Defendants paid and treated all non-managerial workers in this same manner. Accordingly, Plaintiff brings this lawsuit against Defendants pursuant to the collective action provisions of the FLSA, on behalf of himself and on behalf of all others similarly-situated who suffered damages because of Defendants’ willful violations of the law.
If any individual is or has previously been an employee of the Defendants named in the lawsuit and/or has information that may be relevant to this case, please contact Borrelli & Associates, P.L.L.C. as soon as possible through one of our websites, www.employmentlawyernewyork.com or www.516abogado.com, or any of our phone numbers: (516) 248–5550, (516) ABOGADO, or (212) 679–5000.
The U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) recently faced a significant legal setback as a federal…
If you’ve been offered a severance agreement, chances are you’re dealing with a challenging situation.…
May 2024 Valdez et al. v. Michpat & Fam, LLC d/b/a Dairy Queen Grill &…
New Action filed in the United States District Court Southern District of New York On…
Workers’ compensation is designed to protect employees who are injured on the job. It provides…
January 2024 Hiciano et al. v. Joyeria Elizabeth I, Corp., et al. Docket No: 21-cv-4508…