IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

EASTERN DIVISION

JOSEPH FORS, )

individually and on behalf of )

a class of persons similarly situated, )

)

Plaintiff, ) 12 CV 4827 

)

v. ) Jury Trial Demanded

)

CONCEPTS AMERICA, INC., )

an Illinois corporation, )

)

Defendant. )

COLLECTIVE AND CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT

Plaintiff Joseph Fors (“Fors” or “Plaintiff”), individually and on behalf of a class of 

persons similarly situated, through his attorneys, complains against Defendant Concepts 

America, Inc., an Illinois corporation (“Defendant”) as follows:

INTRODUCTION

1. Plaintiff is a former employee of Defendant who filed this class and collective

action lawsuit because Defendant did not pay him the full and proper amount of wages for all 

time he worked for Defendant. Defendant’s practice was to improperly manipulate Plaintiff’s 

time records by shaving or deleting time from the time actually worked by Plaintiff, thereby 

failing to pay Plaintiff for all time he worked. Defendant also failed to pay Plaintiff the proper 

amount of overtime wages earned and owed to him, because Defendant paid Plaintiff at a rate of 

1.5 times the reduced, tip-credit rate, rather than 1.5 times the full amount of minimum wage, 

less the tip credit. Plaintiff seeks class certification of the claims under Illinois law brought on 

behalf of similarly situated Illinois employees and collective action certification for those hourly 

employees who worked for Defendant outside of Illinois.

Case: 1:12-cv-04827 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/18/12 Page 1 of 22 PageID #:1
2

THE PARTIES AND JURISDICTION

2. Plaintiff, on behalf of himself and all other similarly situated employees outside 

of Illinois, brings Counts I and II to recover from Defendant unpaid minimum and/or overtime 

wages, liquidated damages, statutory penalties, attorneys’ fees, and costs, pursuant to the Fair 

Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C. § 201 et seq., Plaintiff, on behalf of himself and all other 

similarly situated Illinois employees, seeks to recover from Defendant unpaid minimum and/or

overtime wages, liquidated damages, statutory penalties, attorneys’ fees and costs pursuant to the 

Illinois Minimum Wage Law, 820 ILCS § 105/1 et seq. (Counts III and IV), and the Illinois 

Wage Payment and Collection Act, 820 ILCS § 115/1 et seq. (Counts V and VI).

3. Jurisdiction is conferred by 28 U.S.C. § 1331 and 29 U.S.C. § 216(b), on the basis 

of federal question jurisdiction, as the matter concerns an action arising under the laws of the 

United States. This Court has supplemental jurisdiction over Plaintiff’s state law claims pursuant 

to 28 U.S.C. § 1367.

4. Venue is proper in this Court as the illegal conduct alleged herein occurred in this 

district.

5. Plaintiff Fors is a resident of Wheaton, Illinois and is a former non-exempt

employee of Defendant. Fors worked at Defendant’s restaurant known as The Grillroom located 

in Chicago, Illinois. 

6. Upon information and belief, Defendant Concepts America, Inc. (“Defendant”) is 

an Illinois corporation which operates several restaurants in Chicago and throughout the country, 

which operate under various names including The Grillroom, Midtown, One North, Townhouse, 

Primebar, Red Star Tavern, and Blue Point.

Case: 1:12-cv-04827 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/18/12 Page 2 of 22 PageID #:2
3

7. The paychecks Defendant issued to Plaintiff were issued by Concepts America 

and not The Grillroom. Upon information and belief, paychecks Defendant issued to employees 

who worked at Defendant’s various restaurants reflected that the payor was Concepts America 

rather than the particular restaurant.

8. This lawsuit includes employees who worked at Defendant’s restaurants which 

are now closed but which operated during the relevant statutory period. 

9. Plaintiff Fors is a former employee of Defendant. Plaintiff Fors worked at the 

Defendant’s restaurant known as The Grillroom as a bartender. 

10. At all relevant times, Plaintiff was compensated through hourly wages and, in 

some instances, tips.

11. At all relevant times, Plaintiff has been an “employee” of Defendant as defined by 

Section 3(e) of the FLSA, 29 U.S.C. § 203(e); and Section 3(d) of the IMWL, 820 ILCS § 

105/3(d), and Section 2 of the IWPCA, 820 ILCS § 115/2.

12. Section 3(m) of the FLSA, 29 U.S.C § 203(m), and Section 4(c) of the IMWL, 

820 ILCS § 105/4(c), provide that in computing the minimum wage to be paid to an employee, 

for those employees who qualify as tipped employees under the FLSA or the IMWL, Defendant 

is allowed to treat as wages paid by Defendant tips received by those employees up to a certain 

amount (the “Tip Credit”). Those employees who are or have been paid less than the applicable 

statutory minimum wage because of Defendant’s elections to use the Tip Credit are referred to 

herein as “Tip Credit Employees.” 

13. At all relevant times, Plaintiff worked as a Tip Credit Employee for Defendant.

Case: 1:12-cv-04827 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/18/12 Page 3 of 22 PageID #:3
4

DEFENDANT’S POLICY OF FAILING TO PAY 

ITS HOURLY EMPLOYEES FOR ALL TIME WORKED

14. Pursuant to Defendant’s compensation practices, Defendant directed its hourly 

employees, including Plaintiff, to record their time worked for Defendant via Defendant’s 

computerized time-keeping system.

15. Defendant has a policy and practice of failing to pay its hourly employees, 

including Plaintiff, for all time they actually worked, by improperly manipulating the time 

records of its hourly employees and “shaving” or deleting time worked from the employees’ time 

records.

16. Defendant’s policy and practice of shaving time from its hourly employees’ time 

records has resulted in said hourly employees, including Plaintiff, not being paid the full amount 

of wages earned by those employees for all time they worked for Defendant.

17. Defendant’s manipulation of its hourly employees’ time records has caused the 

hourly employees, including Plaintiff, to work without pay, in violation of the Fair Labor 

Standards Act, 29 U.S.C. § 201 et seq. (the “FLSA”) and, with respect to Defendant’s Illinois 

employees, the Illinois Minimum Wage Law, 820 ILCS § 105/1 et seq. (the “IMWL”), and the 

Illinois Wage Payment and Collection Act, 820 ILCS § 115/1 et seq. (the “IWPCA”).

18. Defendant’s failure to compensate Plaintiff and other hourly employees at the full 

amount of their agreed-upon wage for all time worked has caused Plaintiff and other hourly 

employees to suffer harm.

19. Defendant’s hourly employees, including Plaintiff, are entitled to receive the 

proper amount of compensation for all time they worked.

20. Defendant uses a timekeeping system which records its hourly employees’ exact 

clock-in and clock-out times, to the precise minute.

Case: 1:12-cv-04827 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/18/12 Page 4 of 22 PageID #:4
5

21. Defendant improperly manipulated its hourly employees’ time records by 

“shaving” or deleting time from the time records reflecting hours actually worked by them.

22. Upon information and belief, Defendant’s improper manipulations of its hourly 

employees’ time records can be identified via processes available through Defendant’s timekeeping software and programs.

23. The net effect of Defendant’s policies and practices is that Defendant willfully 

failed to pay regular and overtime compensation to its hourly employees, including Plaintiff, and 

willfully failed to keep accurate time records to save payroll costs. Defendant thus enjoyed illgained profits at the expense of its hourly employees.

24. Defendant’s policy and practice of failing to pay its hourly employees, including 

Plaintiff, for all time they actually worked, by improperly manipulating the time records of its 

hourly employees and “shaving” or deleting time worked from their time records, has caused and 

continues to cause Plaintiff and other similarly situated hourly employees to work without pay, 

in violation of Section 6 of the FLSA, 29 U.S.C. § 206, Section 4 of the IMWL, 820 ILCS § 

105/4, and Section 4 of the IWPCA, 820 ILCS § 115/4.

25. Defendant’s policy and practice of failing to pay its hourly employees, including 

Plaintiff, for all time they actually worked, by improperly manipulating the time records of its 

hourly employees and “shaving” or deleting time worked from their time records, has caused and 

continues to cause Plaintiff and other similarly situated hourly employees to work in excess of 

forty hours per week without being properly compensated at a wage of 1.5 times their respective 

hourly rate for such work performed, as required by Section 7 of the FLSA, 29 U.S.C. § 207,

Section 4a of the IMWL, 820 ILCS § 105/4a, and Section 4 of the IWPCA, 820 ILCS § 115/4.

Case: 1:12-cv-04827 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/18/12 Page 5 of 22 PageID #:5
6

26. Defendant’s failure to compensate its hourly employees with the full amount of 

the applicable minimum wage or overtime wage has caused Plaintiff and other similarly situated 

employees to suffer harm.

27. Defendant’s hourly employees are entitled to compensation for all time they 

worked in any given workweek.

DEFENDANT’S FAILURE TO PAY THE PROPER AMOUNT

OF OVERTIME WAGES TO ITS TIP CREDIT EMPLOYEES

28. Plaintiff and other Tip Credit Employees at times worked in excess of forty hours 

per week for Defendant in a given workweek.

29. Defendant has a policy and practice of failing to pay the proper amount of 

overtime wages to its Tip Credit Employees, including Plaintiff, in violation of Section 7 of the 

FLSA, 29 U.S.C. § 207, Section 4a of the IMWL, 820 ILCS § 105/4a, and Section 4 of the 

IWPCA, 820 ILCS § 115/4.

30. Defendant’s failure to pay the correct amount of overtime wages to its Tip Credit 

Employees, including Plaintiff, is apparent from a calculation of the overtime rate reflected on 

Plaintiff’s paycheck stubs. Plaintiff’s paycheck stubs received during his employment by 

Defendant show an incorrect calculation. Defendant paid Plaintiff one and one-half times the 

reduced, tip-credit rate, for all time he worked in excess of forty hours per week, rather than one 

and one-half times the full amount of minimum wage, less the amount of the Tip Credit. 

31. Defendant’s policy and practice of failing to pay its Tip Credit Employees, 

including Plaintiff, the proper amount of overtime wages for all time they worked in excess of 40 

hours per workweek, has caused and continues to cause Plaintiff and other similarly situated Tip 

Credit Employees to work in excess of forty hours per week without being properly compensated 

at a wage of 1.5 times their respective hourly rate for such work performed, as required by 

Case: 1:12-cv-04827 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/18/12 Page 6 of 22 PageID #:6
7

Section 7 of the FLSA, 29 U.S.C. § 207, Section 4a of the IMWL, 820 ILCS § 105/4a, and 

Section 4 of the IWPCA, 820 ILCS § 115/4.

32. Defendant’s failure to compensate its Tip Credit Employees with the full amount 

of the applicable overtime wages due to them has caused Plaintiff and other similarly situated 

employees to suffer harm.

33. Defendant’s Tip Credit Employees, including Plaintiff, are entitled to the full and 

proper amount of overtime compensation due for all time they worked in excess of forty hours in 

any given workweek.

DEFENDANT’S IMPROPER TAKING OF THE TIP CREDIT

34. Section 3(m) of the FLSA, 29 U.S.C. § 203(m), provides:

In determining the wage an employer is required to pay a tipped employee, the 

amount paid such employee by the employee’s employer shall be an amount equal to—

(1) the cash wage paid such employee which for purposes of such 

determination shall be not less than the cash wage required to be paid such an 

employee on August 20, 1996; and 

(2) an additional amount on account of the tips received by such employee 

which amount is equal to the difference between the wage specified in 

paragraph (1) and the wage in effect under section 206 (a)(1) of this title. 

The additional amount on account of tips may not exceed the value of the tips 

actually received by an employee. The preceding 2 sentences shall not apply 

with respect to any tipped employee unless such employee has been informed 

by the employer of the provisions of this subsection, and all tips received by 

such employee have been retained by the employee, except that this 

subsection shall not be construed to prohibit the pooling of tips among 

employees who customarily and regularly receive tips.

35. The Tip Credit provision of the IMWL, 820 ILCS § 105/4(c), provides:

Every employer of an employee engaged in an occupation in which gratuities 

have customarily and usually constituted and have been recognized as part of 

the remuneration for hire purposes is entitled to an allowance for gratuities as 

part of the hourly wage rate provided in Section 4, subsection (a) in an amount 

not to exceed 40% of the applicable minimum wage rate. The Director shall 

Case: 1:12-cv-04827 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/18/12 Page 7 of 22 PageID #:7
8

require each employer desiring an allowance for gratuities to provide 

substantial evidence that the amount claimed, which may not exceed 40% of 

the applicable minimum wage rate, was received by the employee in the 

period for which the claim of exemption is made, and no part thereof was 

returned to the employer.

36. At all relevant times, Plaintiff Fors worked at Defendant’s restaurant known as 

The Grillroom as a bartender, where he was paid pursuant to the Tip Credit provisions of the 

FLSA and the IMWL.

37. Defendant failed to pay the proper amount of wages due to Plaintiff and other Tip 

Credit Employees, due to its practices of improperly manipulating those employees’ time records 

and “shaving” or deleting time worked from their time records, and failing to pay the proper 

amount of overtime wages to its Tip Credit Employees. 

38. Defendant is not allowed to take the Tip Credit because, as alleged herein

Defendant failed to pay the proper amount of wages to Plaintiff and other Tip Credit Employees.

COLLECTIVE ACTION ALLEGATIONS

39. Plaintiff brings Count I of this Complaint as a collective action on behalf of 

himself and all other current and former hourly employees of Defendant who worked outside 

Illinois who Defendant failed to properly pay due to its practice of improperly shaving those 

employees’ time records. 

40. Plaintiff’s counsel seeks to send notice of this lawsuit to the following described 

persons:

All persons who worked for Defendant as employees who were 

compensated, in part or in full, on an hourly basis throughout the United 

States at any time between June 18, 2009 and the present who did not 

receive the full amount of minimum wage and/or overtime wages earned 

and owed to them.

Case: 1:12-cv-04827 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/18/12 Page 8 of 22 PageID #:8
9

41. Plaintiff brings Count II of this Complaint as a collective action on behalf of 

himself and all other current and former Tip Credit Employees of Defendant who were not paid 

all overtime wages earned and owed to them. 

42. Plaintiff’s counsel seeks to send notice of this lawsuit to the following described 

persons:

All persons who worked for Defendant as Tip Credit Employees

throughout the United States at any time between June 18, 2009 and the 

present who did not receive the full amount of overtime wages earned and 

owed to them.

43. There are questions of law or fact common to the employees described in 

paragraphs 40 and 42.

44. Plaintiff is similarly situated to the employees described in paragraphs 40 and 42, 

as Plaintiff’s claims are typical of the claims of those persons.

45. Plaintiff’s claims or defenses are typical of the claims or defenses of the persons

described in paragraphs 40 and 42.

46. This is not a collusive or friendly action. Plaintiff has retained counsel 

experienced in complex employment litigation, and Plaintiff and his counsel will fairly and 

adequately protect the interests of the persons described in paragraphs 40 and 42.

47. A collective action is the most appropriate method for the fair and efficient 

resolution of the matters alleged in Counts I and II.

48. At all relevant times, Defendant employed Plaintiff and the persons described in 

paragraphs 40 and 42.

49. At all relevant times, Defendant paid Plaintiff and the persons described in 

paragraphs 40 and 42 to work.

Case: 1:12-cv-04827 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/18/12 Page 9 of 22 PageID #:9
10

50. At all relevant times, Defendant has been an “employer” as defined by Section 

3(d) of the FLSA, 29 U.S.C. § 203(d). 

51. At all relevant times, Plaintiff and the persons described in paragraphs 40 and 42 

have been “employees” of Defendant as defined by Section 3(e) of the FLSA, 29 U.S.C. § 

203(e).

CLASS ACTION ALLEGATIONS

52. Plaintiff brings Counts III and V as a class action pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 23 

on behalf of himself and all other current and former hourly Illinois employees of Defendant 

who Defendant failed to properly pay due to its practice of improperly shaving those employees’ 

time records. 

53. Plaintiff seeks certification of the following class pursuant to Count III:

All persons who worked for Defendant as employees who were 

compensated, in part or in full, on an hourly basis in Illinois at any time 

between June 18, 2009 and the present who did not receive the full amount 

of regular or overtime wages earned and owed to them (the “IMWL Time 

Shaving Sub-Class”).

54. Plaintiff seeks certification of the following class pursuant to Count V:

All persons who worked for Defendant as employees who were 

compensated, in part or in full, on an hourly basis in Illinois at any time 

between August 16, 2002 and the present who did not receive the full 

amount of regular or overtime wages earned and owed to them pursuant to 

Defendant’s promises (the “IWPCA Time Shaving Sub-Class”).

55. Plaintiff brings Counts IV and VI as a class action pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 23 

on behalf of himself and all other current and former Tip Credit Employees of Defendant who 

were not paid the full amount of overtime wages earned and owed to them. 

56. Plaintiff seeks certification of the following class pursuant to Count IV:

All persons who worked for Defendant as Tip Credit Employees in Illinois 

at any time between June 18, 2009 and the present who did not receive the 

Case: 1:12-cv-04827 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/18/12 Page 10 of 22 PageID #:10
11

full amount of overtime wages earned and owed to them (the “IMWL Tip 

Credit Employee Sub-Class”).

57. Plaintiff seeks certification of the following class pursuant to Count VI:

All persons who worked for Defendant as Tip Credit Employees in Illinois 

at any time between August 16, 2002 and the present who did not receive 

the full amount of overtime wages earned and owed to them (the “IWPCA 

Tip Credit Employee Sub-Class”).

58. There are questions of law or fact common to the employees described in 

paragraphs 53, 54, 56 and 57.

59. Plaintiff believes that the number of employees who fall within the class 

definitions as set forth in paragraphs 53, 54, 56 and 57 exceeds 100. Therefore, the number of 

persons in the putative Sub-Classes described in paragraphs 53, 54, 56 and 57 is so numerous 

that joinder of all members is impracticable.

60. Plaintiff is similarly situated to the employees in paragraphs 53, 54, 56 and 57 as 

Plaintiff’s claims are typical of the claims of those persons.

61. Plaintiff’s claims or defenses are typical of the claims or defenses of the persons

described in paragraphs 53, 54, 56 and 57.

62. This is not a collusive or friendly action. Plaintiff has retained counsel 

experienced in complex employment litigation, and Plaintiff and his counsel will fairly and 

adequately protect the interests of the persons described in paragraphs 53, 54, 56 and 57.

63. A class action is the most appropriate method for the fair and efficient resolution 

of the matters alleged in Counts III through VI.

64. At all relevant times, Defendant employed Plaintiff and the persons described in 

paragraphs 53, 54, 56 and 57.

Case: 1:12-cv-04827 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/18/12 Page 11 of 22 PageID #:11
12

65. At all relevant times, Defendant paid Plaintiff and the persons described in 

paragraphs 53, 54, 56 and 57 to work.

66. At all relevant times, Defendant has been an “employer” as defined by Section 

3(c) of the Minimum Wage Law, 820 ILCS § 105/3(c), and Section 2 of the IWPCA, 820 ILCS § 

115/2. 

67. At all relevant times, Plaintiff and members of the putative Sub-Classes have been 

“employees” of Defendant as defined by Section 3(d) of the Minimum Wage Law, 820 ILCS § 

105/3(d), and Section 2 of the IWPCA, 820 ILCS § 115/2.

COUNT I – FLSA

(Improper Time Shaving of Employee Records)

68. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference Paragraphs 1 through 51 as 

Paragraph 68 of this Count I.

69. Plaintiff and the other members of the class described in paragraph 40 seek to 

recover from Defendant unpaid minimum wages and/or overtime wages, liquidated damages, 

attorneys’ fees, and costs pursuant to Section 16 of the FLSA, 29 U.S.C. § 216. 

70. At all times relevant, Defendant has been an “employer” as that term is defined by 

Section 3(d) of the FLSA, 29 U.S.C. § 203(d).

71. At all times relevant, Plaintiff and the other members of the class described in 

paragraph 40 have been “employees” of Defendant, as that term is defined by Section 3(e) of the 

FLSA, 29 U.S.C. § 203(e).

72. During the relevant period, and at Defendant’s request, Plaintiff and the other 

members of the class described in paragraph 40 performed labor for Defendant. 

73. In exchange for said labor, Defendant promised to pay and was otherwise 

obligated to pay Plaintiff and each other member of the class described in paragraph 40 the 

Case: 1:12-cv-04827 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/18/12 Page 12 of 22 PageID #:12
13

applicable minimum wage for all hours worked up to forty hours in any given workweek, and 

time and a half for all hours worked in excess of forty hours in any given workweek.

74. Plaintiff and the other members of the class described in paragraph 40 are entitled 

to be paid at least minimum wage for all hours worked, and time and a half for all hours worked 

in excess of forty hours per workweek, pursuant to Sections 6 and 7 of the FLSA, 29 U.S.C. §§ 

206, 207.

75. Defendant has failed to pay Plaintiff and the other members of the class described 

in paragraph 40 minimum wage and the full amount due for all overtime hours worked, because 

Defendant improperly manipulated the time records of Plaintiff and the other members of the 

class described in paragraph 40 by “shaving” or deleting time worked from those time records, 

and therefore did not pay them for all time worked, in violation of Sections 6 and 7 of the FLSA, 

29 U.S.C. §§ 206, 207.

76. Defendant’s violation of the FLSA was willful.

77. Plaintiff and the other members of the class described in paragraph 40 have been 

damaged by not being paid minimum wage due to them for all time worked up to forty hours per 

workweek and/or the full amount of overtime wages due to them for all time worked in excess of 

forty hours per workweek, in an amount not presently ascertainable, for the relevant time period.

WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff demands a trial by jury on this and all counts so triable, and 

prays that this Court award him the following relief under Count I: (a) grant Plaintiff’s counsel 

leave to send notice of this lawsuit to the members of the class described in paragraph 40 and 

allow them the opportunity to opt-in as party plaintiffs pursuant to Section 16 of the FLSA, 29 

U.S.C. § 216; (b) award Plaintiff and all persons who opt-in all unpaid minimum or overtime 

wages they earned, including the amount of the Tip Credit, where applicable, plus liquidated 

Case: 1:12-cv-04827 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/18/12 Page 13 of 22 PageID #:13
14

damages; (c) award Plaintiff and all persons who opt-in their attorneys’ fees and costs; and (d) 

grant such further relief as this Court deems equitable and just.

COUNT II – FLSA

(Failure to Pay Proper Overtime Wages)

78. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference Paragraphs 1 through 51 as 

Paragraph 78 of this Count II.

79. Plaintiff and the other members of the class described in paragraph 42 seek to 

recover from Defendant unpaid overtime wages, liquidated damages, attorneys’ fees, and costs 

pursuant to Section 16 of the FLSA, 29 U.S.C. § 216. 

80. At all times relevant, Defendant has been an “employer” as that term is defined by 

Section 3(d) of the FLSA, 29 U.S.C. § 203(d).

81. At all times relevant, Plaintiff and the other members of the class described in 

paragraph 42 have been “employees” of Defendant, as that term is defined by Section 3(e) of the 

FLSA, 29 U.S.C. § 203(e).

82. During the relevant period, and at Defendant’s request, Plaintiff and the other 

members of the class described in paragraph 42 performed labor for Defendant. 

83. In exchange for said labor, Defendant promised to pay and was otherwise 

obligated to pay the Plaintiff and each other member of the class described in paragraph 42 the 

proper amount of overtime wages for all time worked in excess of forty hours in any given 

workweek.

84. Plaintiff and the other members of the class described in paragraph 42 are entitled 

to be paid the proper amount of overtime wages for all time worked in excess of forty hours per 

workweek pursuant to Section 7 of the FLSA, 29 U.S.C. § 207.

Case: 1:12-cv-04827 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/18/12 Page 14 of 22 PageID #:14
15

85. Defendant has failed to pay Plaintiff and the other members of the class described 

in paragraph 42 the full amount due for all overtime hours worked, because Defendant paid 

Plaintiff and the other members of the class described in paragraph 42 one and one-half times the 

reduced, tip-credit rate, for all time worked in excess of forty hours per week, rather than one and 

one-half times the full amount of minimum wage, less the amount of the Tip Credit, and 

therefore did not pay them the proper amount of overtime wages for all time worked in excess of 

forty hours per workweek, in violation of Section 7 of the FLSA, 29 U.S.C. § 207.

86. Defendant’s violation of the FLSA was willful.

87. Plaintiff and the other members of the class described in paragraph 42 have been 

damaged by not being paid the full amount of overtime wages due to them for all time worked in 

excess of forty hours per workweek, in an amount not presently ascertainable, for the relevant 

time period.

WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff demands a trial by jury on this and all counts so triable, and 

prays that this Court award him the following relief under Count II: (a) grant Plaintiff’s counsel 

leave to send notice of this lawsuit to the members of the class described in paragraph 42 and 

allow them the opportunity to opt-in as party plaintiffs pursuant to Section 16 of the FLSA, 29 

U.S.C. § 216; (b) award Plaintiff and all persons who opt-in all unpaid overtime wages they 

earned, including the amount of the Tip Credit, plus liquidated damages; (c) award Plaintiff and 

all persons who opt-in their attorneys’ fees and costs; and (d) grant such further relief as this 

Court deems equitable and just.

COUNT III – ILLINOIS MINIMUM WAGE LAW

(Improper Time Shaving of Employee Records)

88. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference Paragraphs 1 through 38 and 52

through 67 as Paragraph 88 of this Count III.

Case: 1:12-cv-04827 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/18/12 Page 15 of 22 PageID #:15
16

89. Plaintiff, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, seeks to 

recover from Defendant unpaid minimum and overtime wages, statutory penalties, attorneys’ 

fees, and costs pursuant to Section 12(a) of the Illinois Minimum Wage Law, 820 ILCS § 

105/12(a).

90. At all times relevant, Defendant has been an “employer” as that term is defined by 

Section 3(c) of the IMWL, 820 ILCS § 105/3(c).

91. At all times relevant, Plaintiff and the other members of the putative IMWL Time 

Shaving Sub-Class have been “employees” of Defendant, as that term is defined by Section 3(d) 

of the IMWL, 820 ILCS § 105/3(d).

92. At all times relevant, and at Defendant’s request, Plaintiff and the other members 

of the putative IMWL Time Shaving Sub-Class performed labor for Defendant.

93. Defendant’s practice of requiring and/or permitting Plaintiff and the other

members of the putative IMWL Time Shaving Sub-Class to work for Defendant but failing to 

pay the full amount of minimum wages for such time worked up to forty hours per workweek 

has resulted in Plaintiff and the other members of the putative IMWL Time Shaving Sub-Class

not being paid the full amount of minimum wages owed to them, in violation of Section 4 of the 

IMWL, 820 ILCS § 105/4. 

94. Defendant’s practice of requiring and/or permitting Plaintiff and the other

members of the putative IMWL Time Shaving Sub-Class to work for Defendant in excess of 

forty hours per workweek but failing to pay them 1.5 times their hourly rate for such time 

worked has resulted in Plaintiff and the other members of the putative IMWL Time Shaving 

Sub-Class not being paid the full amount of overtime wages owed to them, in violation of 

Section 4a of the IMWL, 820 ILCS § 105/4a. 

Case: 1:12-cv-04827 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/18/12 Page 16 of 22 PageID #:16
17

95. Plaintiff and the other members of the putative IMWL Time Shaving Sub-Class

have been damaged by not being paid the proper amount of minimum and/or overtime wages due 

to them, in an amount not presently ascertainable, for the relevant time period.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated,

demands a trial by jury on this and all counts so triable, and prays that this Court award him the 

following relief under Count III: (a) certify the class defined in paragraph 53 pursuant to Fed. R. 

Civ. p. 23; (b) award Plaintiffs all unpaid minimum and overtime wages they earned, including 

the amount of the Tip Credit, where applicable, plus statutory penalties; (c) award Plaintiffs their

attorneys’ fees and costs; and (d) grant such further relief as this Court deems equitable and just.

COUNT IV – ILLINOIS MINIMUM WAGE LAW

(Failure to Pay Proper Overtime Wages)

96. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference Paragraphs 1 through 38 and 52

through 67 as Paragraph 96 of this Count IV.

97. Plaintiff, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, seeks to 

recover from Defendant unpaid overtime wages, statutory penalties, attorneys’ fees, and costs 

pursuant to Section 12(a) of the Illinois Minimum Wage Law, 820 ILCS § 105/12(a).

98. At all times relevant, Defendant has been an “employer” as that term is defined by 

Section 3(c) of the IMWL, 820 ILCS § 105/3(c).

99. At all times relevant, Plaintiff and the other members of the putative IMWL Tip 

Credit Employee Sub-Class have been “employees” of Defendant, as that term is defined by 

Section 3(d) of the IMWL, 820 ILCS § 105/3(d).

100. At all times relevant, and at Defendant’s request, Plaintiff and the other members 

of the putative IMWL Tip Credit Employee Sub-Class performed labor for Defendant.

Case: 1:12-cv-04827 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/18/12 Page 17 of 22 PageID #:17
18

101. Defendant’s practice of requiring and/or permitting Plaintiff and the other

members of the putative IMWL Tip Credit Employee Sub-Class to work for Defendant in excess 

of forty hours per workweek but failing to pay them 1.5 times their hourly rate for such time 

worked has resulted in Plaintiff and the other members of the putative IMWL Tip Credit SubClass not being paid the full amount of overtime wages owed to them, in violation of Section 4a 

of the IMWL, 820 ILCS § 105/4a. 

102. Plaintiff and the other members of the putative IMWL Tip Credit Employee SubClass have been damaged by not being paid the proper amount of overtime wages due to them, in 

an amount not presently ascertainable, for the relevant time period.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, 

demands a trial by jury on this and all counts so triable, and prays that this Court award him the 

following relief under Count IV: (a) certify the class defined in paragraph 55 pursuant to Fed. R. 

Civ. p. 23; (b) award Plaintiffs all unpaid overtime wages they earned, including the amount of 

the Tip Credit, plus statutory penalties; (c) award Plaintiffs their attorneys’ fees and costs; and 

(d) grant such further relief as this Court deems equitable and just

COUNT V – ILLINOIS WAGE PAYMENT AND COLLECTION ACT

(Improper Time Shaving of Employee Records)

103. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference Paragraphs 1 through 38 and 52 

through 67 as Paragraph 103 of this Count V.

104. Plaintiff, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, brings this 

Count V to recover from Defendant unpaid wages, overtime compensation, statutory penalties, 

attorneys’ fees, and costs, pursuant to Section 14(a) of the Illinois Wage Payment and Collection 

Act, 820 ILCS § 115/14(a).

Case: 1:12-cv-04827 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/18/12 Page 18 of 22 PageID #:18
19

105. At all times relevant, Defendant has been an “employer” as that term is defined by 

Section 2 of the IWPCA, 820 ILCS § 115/2.

106. At all times relevant, Plaintiff and the other members of the putative IWPCA 

Time Shaving Sub-Class have been “employees” of Defendant, as that term is defined by Section 

2 of the IWPCA, 820 ILCS § 115/2.

107. At all times relevant, and at Defendant’s request, Plaintiff and the other members 

of the putative IWPCA Time Shaving Sub-Class performed labor for Defendant.

108. Plaintiff and the other members of the putative IWPCA Time Shaving Sub-Class

are entitled to be paid the specified rates agreed upon for all hours they worked pursuant to 

Section 4 of the IWCPA, 820 ILCS § 115/4.

109. Defendant entered into an agreement to pay Plaintiff and the other members of the 

putative Time Shaving IWPCA Sub-Class at an hourly rate agreed upon between each such 

person and Defendant for all work Plaintiff and the other members of the putative IWPCA Time 

Shaving Sub-Class performed. Defendant also promised to pay Plaintiff and the other members 

of the putative IWPCA Time Shaving Sub-Class an amount of 1.5 times their agreed-upon and 

proper hourly rate for all time they worked in excess of forty hours per workweek. 

110. Defendant’s policy and practice of improperly manipulating the time records of 

Plaintiff and the other members of the putative IWPCA Time Shaving Sub-Class by “shaving” or 

deleting time worked from those time records caused them to work without pay, in violation of 

the IWPCA.

111. Defendant has failed to pay Plaintiff and the other members of the putative 

IWPCA Time Shaving Sub-Class the full amount due for all time worked, in violation of the 

IWPCA, 820 ILCS § 115/4.

Case: 1:12-cv-04827 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/18/12 Page 19 of 22 PageID #:19
20

112. Plaintiff and the other members of the putative IWPCA Time Shaving Sub-Class

have been damaged by not being paid the full amount of wages due to them for all time worked, 

in an amount not presently ascertainable, for the relevant time period.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated,

demands a trial by jury on this and all counts so triable, and prays that this Court award him the 

following relief under Count V: (a) certify the class defined in paragraph 54 pursuant to Fed. R. 

Civ. P. 23; (b) award Plaintiffs all unpaid wages they earned, including the amount of the Tip 

Credit, where applicable, plus applicable statutory penalties; (c) award Plaintiffs their attorneys’ 

fees and costs; and (d) grant such further relief as this Court deems equitable and just.

COUNT VI – ILLINOIS WAGE PAYMENT AND COLLECTION ACT

(Failure to Pay Proper Overtime Wages)

113. Plaintiff re-alleges and incorporates by reference Paragraphs 1 through 38 and 52 

through 67 as Paragraph 113 of this Count VI.

114. Plaintiff, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, brings this 

Count VI to recover from Defendant unpaid overtime compensation, statutory penalties, 

attorneys’ fees, and costs, pursuant to Section 14(a) of the Illinois Wage Payment and Collection 

Act, 820 ILCS § 115/14(a).

115. At all times relevant, Defendant has been an “employer” as that term is defined by 

Section 2 of the IWPCA, 820 ILCS § 115/2.

116. At all times relevant, Plaintiff and the other members of the putative IWPCA Tip 

Credit Employee Sub-Class have been “employees” of Defendant, as that term is defined by 

Section 2 of the IWPCA, 820 ILCS § 115/2.

117. At all times relevant, and at Defendant’s request, Plaintiff and the other members 

of the putative IWPCA Tip Credit Employee Sub-Class performed labor for Defendant.

Case: 1:12-cv-04827 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/18/12 Page 20 of 22 PageID #:20
21

118. Plaintiff and the other members of the putative IWPCA Tip Credit Employee SubClass are entitled to be paid the agreed upon and proper amount of wages for all hours they 

worked pursuant to Section 4 of the IWCPA, 820 ILCS § 115/4.

119. Defendant promised to pay Plaintiff and the other members of the putative Tip 

Credit Employee IWPCA Sub-Class at an hourly rate agreed upon between each such person and 

Defendant for all work Plaintiff and the other members of the putative IWPCA Tip Credit 

Employee Sub-Class performed. Defendant also promised to pay Plaintiff and the other

members of the putative IWPCA Tip Credit Employee Sub-Class an amount of 1.5 times their 

agreed-upon and proper hourly rate for all time they worked in excess of forty hours per 

workweek, and promised that such hourly rate for all overtime worked would equal 1.5 times the 

full amount of the minimum wage in effect at the time, less the amount of the Tip Credit. 

120. Defendant’s policy and practice of failing to pay Plaintiff and the other members 

of the putative IWPCA Tip Credit Employee Sub-Class the proper amount of overtime wages 

has caused those employees not to be paid the full amount of wages promised to them, in 

violation of the IWPCA.

121. Defendant has failed to pay Plaintiff and the other members of the putative 

IWPCA Tip Credit Employee Sub-Class the full amount due for all time worked, in violation of 

the IWPCA, 820 ILCS § 115/4.

122. Plaintiff and the other members of the putative IWPCA Tip Credit Employee SubClass have been damaged by not being paid the full amount of wages due to them for all time

worked, in an amount not presently ascertainable, for the relevant time period.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, 

demands a trial by jury on this and all counts so triable, and prays that this Court award him the 

Case: 1:12-cv-04827 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/18/12 Page 21 of 22 PageID #:21
22

following relief under Count VI: (a) certify the class defined in paragraph 57 pursuant to Fed. R. 

Civ. P. 23; (b) award Plaintiffs all unpaid wages they earned, including the amount of the Tip 

Credit, plus applicable statutory penalties; (c) award Plaintiffs their attorneys’ fees and costs; and 

(d) grant such further relief as this Court deems equitable and just.

Respectfully submitted,

JOSEPH FORS, individually and on behalf

of a class of persons similarly situated

/s/ James X. Bormes

One of Plaintiff’s Attorneys

James X. Bormes Peter E. Converse

Law Offices of James X. Bormes, P.C. Converse Law Offices, LLC

8 South Michigan Avenue 8 South Michigan Avenue

Suite 2600 Suite 2600

Chicago, Illinois 60603 Chicago, Illinois 60603

(312) 201-0575 (312) 789-9700

Case: 1:12-cv-04827 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/18/12 Page 22 of 22 PageID #:22