Two employers sued for alleged FLSA violations

By
|
Posted on Sep 11 2004
Share

An employee has sued his two former employers for alleged failure to pay his overtime work and breach of contract.

Mohammed Sayed, in a lawsuit filed with the U.S. Federal Court, accused Nathanael Business Marketing and its president, Sang Kuk Kim, of non-payment of overtime from December 2002 to December 2003, as well as Saipan Lucky Corp. and its officer, Cho Jung Duk, from Dec. 2004 to May 2004.

Sayed, a former poker attendant of J.J. Enterprises, was transferred to NBM on February 2, 2002, receiving $3.05 an hour. His job with NBM was to provide change for customers and assist them if there is a poker machine malfunction.

On Dec. 2, 2002, Sayed said that NBM required him to work for Saipan Lucky, which also operates poker machines. He said that from Dec. 2, 2002 to May 30, 2003, he worked as poker machine attendant, cashier, and security guard.

As a security guard, he received additional duty of keeping the keys to open machines “to pay in and pay out” at Saipan Lucky in Susupe from 12 midnight to 8am.

From June 1, 2003 to Dec. 7, 2003, he worked as cashier and poker attendant for Saipan Lucky at its Finasisu Poker and Market in Finasisu from 10pm to 9am.

By December 2003, Sayed became in immediate relative through marriage and he was hired directly by Saipan Lucky as cashier and machine attendant.

From Dec. 8, 2003 to May 2, 2004, Sayed worked for Saipan Lucky at his Finasisu business from 10pm to 9am.

Sayed said Saipan Lucky failed to pay him overtime from Dec. 9, 2003 to May 2004.

From Dec. 2, 2002 to Dec. 7, 2003, Sayed said he worked for the two defendants.

In his lawsuit, he said that both defendants failed to keep adequate records and failed to provide him with pay slips reflecting his work time and compensation.

Disclaimer: Comments are moderated. They will not appear immediately or even on the same day. Comments should be related to the topic. Off-topic comments would be deleted. Profanities are not allowed. Comments that are potentially libelous, inflammatory, or slanderous would be deleted.