Judge grants Conditional Certification of Collective Action in the United States District Court Eastern District of New York

Brown, Miranda, and Garcia v. Powerline Auto Repair. d/b/a Powerline Auto Repair, and Khemlall Bisember a/k/a Ken Summer, individually, Docket No.: 23-8740 (KAM)(PK)

Plaintiffs, Brown, Miranda, and Licona Garcia on behalf of themselves, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly-situated, filed a collective action lawsuit in the United States District Court District Eastern District of New York against POWERLINE AUTO REPAIR. d/b/a POWERLINE AUTO REPAIR, and KHEMLALL BISEMBER a/k/a KEN SUMMER, individually, (collectively, where appropriate, as “Defendants”), alleging violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”), the New York Labor Law (“NYLL”), and the New York Comp. Codes, Rules, and Regulations (“NYCCRR”), including the failure of Defendants to compensate Plaintiff for overtime wages.  The claims of the case are as follows:

• Plaintiffs worked for Defendants – – a New York corporation that operates an auto-repair shop in Jamaica, New York, and its owners and day-to-day overseer.  Plaintiff Brown worked for Defendants as a full-service technician from in or around February 2021 to December 7, 2021.  Plaintiff Miranda worked for Defendants as a body-technician from in or around November 2019 to in or around December 2020, with the exception of when the business was closed during the height of the pandemic.  Plaintiff Licona worked for Defendants as a full-service technician from October 12, 2015 to March 2023;

• Specifically, Defendants required Plaintiffs, and Plaintiffs did work, beyond forty hours in a workweek. However, with respect to Brown, Defendants paid him on an hourly basis at his regular rate for all hours worked, including those hours that he worked in a week in excess of forty.  And with respect to Miranda and Licona, Defendants paid them a fixed weekly salary that did not include overtime premiums;

• Additionally, Defendants did not compensate Plaintiffs at the statutorily-required overtime rate of one and one-half times their respective regular rates of pay for all hours that they worked in a week over forty.
• Furthermore, Defendants further violated the NYLL by failing to furnish Plaintiffs with any wage statement on each payday or with any wage notice at the times of their hire, let alone an accurate notice or statement.

• Defendants paid and treated all their non-managerial employees, including full-service technicians, body-technicians, painters, cashiers, and mechanics, in the same manner.

Defendant violated Plaintiffs’ rights guaranteed to them by the overtime provisions of the FLSA, the NYLL and the NYCCRR.  Additionally, Defendants violated the NYLL by failing to provide Plaintiffs with any wage notice upon hire or throughout the relevant period; and provide Plaintiffs with an accurate wage statement on each payday.

Certification of Collective Action

In this case, pursuant to the request of the Plaintiffs, the Judge reviewed claims that the Plaintiffs brought forward alleging that there are additional workers in the same “class” (performing the same or similar duties) whose rights have been violated.  On December 3, 2024, the Court ordered the approval of a collective action for, allowing the case to proceed as a collective action enabling any current and former employees who were not paid properly to join the lawsuit and seek redress for Defendants’ failure to compensate them in accordance with the law.

If you or a person you know worked for the Defendants named in the lawsuit during the time period of February 2022 – present or has information that may be relevant to this case, contact Borrelli & Associates, P.L.L.C. as soon as possible through one of our websites, www.employmentlawyernewyork.com, www.516abogado.com or any of our phone numbers: (516) 248-5550, (516) ABOGADO, and (212) 679-5000.