FLSA Lawsuit Filed Against the “Tattle Tale” in Atlanta

Last month, a group of dancers filed a dancer lawsuit against the Tattle Tale in Atlanta, Georgia. According to the allegations of the complaint, although the Tattle Tale attempted to pay dancers an hourly wage, the wages were compensated at an improper hourly rate or based on innaccurate time sheets. The Complaint against the Tattle Tale also alleges that House fees (in the amount of $60.00 per shift) and “house mom” fees of $16.00 per shift were charged to Tattle Tale dancers, illegally. Additionally, according to the Complaint against Tattle Tale, Tattle Tale charged dancers 10% of their tips paid by credit card to convert those tips to cash, and allegedly required dancers to pay 10% of their tips to the club DJ. According to the lawsuit, all these charges are, and were, in violation of Federal law.

Read the Tattle Tale lawsuit here.

House fees and forced tip outs are illegal. Are you the victim of wage theft? Fill out the “contact us” form, or call or text Flynn Law Firm at 888-353-5995 today.

_________________________________________________________________

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
ATLANTA DIVISION

 

JANICE CHRISTINE OWEN, Individually and on behalf of those similarly situated,   Plaintiff,   v.   TATTLE TAIL, INC. d/b/a “Tattletale Lounge, DENIS KAUFMAN, and RICHARD R. SCHRONCE,   Defendants.

CIVIL ACTION FILE NO.

 

PLAINTIFF’S COLLECTIVE ACTION COMPLAINT

         Plaintiff Janice Christine Owen (“Owen”), Individually and on behalf of those similarly situated,  brings this Collective Action Complaint against Defendants Tattle Tail, Inc. d/b/a “Tattletale Lounge” or “the Tattle Tale,” Denis Kaufman, and Richard Schronce (collectively “Defendants”) as follows:

INTRODUCTION

1. Plaintiff and the collective she represents are former or current employees of TATTLE TAIL, INC. d/b/a Tattle Tale Lounge or “the Tattle Tale,” DENIS KAUFMAN (“Kaufman”), and RICHARD SCHRONCE (“SCHRONCE”).
2. Defendants herein, TATTLE TAIL, INC, KAUFMAN, and SCHRONCE, own and/or operate an adult entertainment club in Atlanta, Fulton County, Georgia known as the “Tattle Tale” or “Tattletale Lounge.”
3. DENIS KAUFMAN (“Kaufman”) is the owner, CEO, and CFO of  Tattle Tail, Inc and the owner of the Tattle Tale.
4. RICHARD SCHRONCE (“Schronce”) is and was at all times relevant hereto the general manager of the Tattle Tale.
5. Defendants herein failed to pay Plaintiff and other similarly situated entertainers the minimum wage and overtime wage for all hours worked in violation of 29 U.S.C. §§ 206 and 207 of the Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C. § 201 et. seq. (“FLSA”).
6. Defendants also required Plaintiff and similarly situated entertainers to make certain payments to Tattle Tale employees and others which caused Plaintiffs’ (and those similarly situated) wages to drop below the minimum wage and applicable overtime wage, thereby constituting illegal deductions under the FLSA; these unlawful deductions were an illegal retention of earned tips under the FLSA.
7. At times relevant to this action, Defendants took a tip credit on entertainer hourly wages and paid Plaintiff and the collective the tipped wage without establishing a tip pool, dropping Plaintiff and the collective below the minimum wage for all hours worked.
8. As a result of Defendants’ violation of the FLSA, Plaintiff and the similarly situated entertainers she represents seek all unpaid minimum and overtime wages, recovery of unlawful deductions, liquidated damages, interest, and attorneys’ fees and costs pursuant to 29 U.S.C. § 216.

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

9. This Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of this action under 28 U.S.C. § 1331 because this action arises under the FLSA, 29 U.S.C. § 201 et seq.
10. Venue is proper in this District under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b) because all or a substantial portion of the events forming the basis of this action occurred in this District. Defendants’ club is located in this District, and is specifically located in Fulton County, Georgia, and Plaintiff and the collective action members worked in and/or are residents of this District.

PARTIES

11. Plaintiff and the other similarly situated entertainers were or are employed as entertainers by Defendants at the Tattle Tale and each of them were and are “employees” as defined by the FLSA, 29 U.S.C. § 203(e)(1).
12. Plaintiff has consented in writing to assert claims under the FLSA. As this case proceeds, it is likely that other individuals will sign consent forms and join this action as opt-in Plaintiffs.
13. The collective action members are current or were former entertainers who are/were employed by Defendants as entertainers at the Tattle Tale from September 27, 2020 through the present.
14. Tattle Tail, Inc. is a Georgia Corporation with its principal place of business located at 2075 Piedmont Road NW, Atlanta, Fulton County, Georgia 30342. At all times mentioned herein, Tattle Tail, Inc. was an “employer” of Plaintiffs and the collective action members within the meaning of the FLSA, 29 U.S.C. § 203(d), (g). Defendant Tattle Tail, Inc. may be served by serving its registered agent, Denis Kaufman at 2075-B Piedmont Road, Atlanta, Fulton County, Georgia, 30324.
15. Defendant Denis Kaufman (“Kaufman”) is the Owner of the Tattle Tale and Owner, CEO, and CFO of Tattle Tail, Inc. He is a resident of Pompano Beach, Florida. Kaufman acted directly or indirectly on behalf of Tattle Tail, Inc. with respect to Plaintiff and the collective action members’ compensation and other terms and conditions of employment and, at all times mentioned herein was an “employer” or joint employer of Plaintiff and the collective action members within the meaning of the FLSA.  Defendant Kaufman may be served at 3270 Lakeview Drive, Pompano Beach, Florida 33062 or wherever he may be found.
16. Defendant Richard Schronce is the General Manager of the Tattle Tale and, upon information and belief, a resident of Dekalb County, Georgia. Schronce acted directly or indirectly on behalf of Tattle Tail, Inc. with respect to Plaintiff and the collective action members’ compensation and other terms and conditions of employment and, at all times mentioned herein was an “employer” or joint employer of Plaintiff and the collective action members within the meaning of the FLSA. Upon information and belief, Defendant Schronce may be served at 1132 Gail Drive, NE, Brookhaven, Georgia 30319 or wherever he may be found.
17. Plaintiff Janice Christine Owen is a resident of Las Vegas, Nevada and has been employed by Defendants at the Tattle Tale from March of 2015 through June 24, 2023. Owen brings this action individually and on behalf of the collective action members.

ENTERPRISE COVERAGE

18. At all times material hereto, Tattle Tail. Inc. had an annual gross volume of sales made or business done of not less than $500,000 (exclusive of excise taxes at the retail level that are separately stated) within the meaning of 29 U.S.C. § 203(s)(1)(A).
19. At all times material hereto, two or more employees of Tattle Tail, Inc. used or handled the following items (among others) that moved in interstate commerce that are necessary for performing its commercial purpose:cash, credit card machines, food, liquor, spirits, computers, office furniture, office technology, beer, and glassware.
20. At all times material hereto, Tattle Tail, Inc. had two or more “employees handling, selling or otherwise working on goods or materials that have been moved in or produced for commerce by any person” within the meaning of 29 U.S.C. § 203(s)(1)(A), including multiple employees regularly selling alcoholic beverages produced and shipped from outside Georgia.
21. At all times material hereto, Tattle Tail, Inc. was an “enterprise engaged in commerce or in the production of goods for commerce” within the meaning of FLSA § 6(a), 29 U.S.C. § 206 (a).
22. At all times material hereto, Tattle Tail, Inc. had an annual gross volume of sales made or business done of not less than $500,000.00 (exclusive of excise taxes at the retail level that are separately stated) within the meaning of 29 U.S.C. § 203(s)(1)(A).

EMPLOYMENT RELATIONSHIP

23. At all times relevant hereto, Tattle Tale, Inc. and Kaufman owned and operated a night club under the trade name “Tattle Tale” located at 2075 Piedmont Rd. NW Atlanta, Georgia
24. At all times relevant hereto, the Tattle Tale featured entertainment in the form of nude or semi-nude female dancing.
25. As an exotic dancer at the Tattle Tale, Plaintiff Owen and the collective she represents was/were responsible for entertaining patrons by performing nude or semi-nude dances.
26. At all times relevant hereto, Defendants shared control of their employees, including Plaintiff and the collective.
27. At all times relevant hereto, Plaintiff and the collective have been under the direct or indirect control of all Defendants with respect to their duties at the Tattle Tale.
28. At all times relevant hereto, Defendants have exercised joint control over Plaintiff and the collective she represents, including significant decisions affecting the employment and compensation of Plaintiff and the collective action members, including the decisions to no pay Plaintiff and the collective minimum wage as required by the FLSA and seize their tips in violation of the TIP and the FLSA.
29. At all times relevant hereto, Defendants acted directly or indirectly in the interest of each other with respect to Plaintiff and the collective.
30. At all times relevant hereto, Tattle Tale, Inc., was an “employer” of Plaintiff Owen and the collective within the meaning of FLSA § 3(d), 29 U.S.C. § 203(d).
31. At all times relevant hereto, Plaintiff Owen and the collective was/were an “employee” of Tattle Tale, Inc. within the meaning of FLSA § 3(e)(1), 29 U.S.C. § 203(e)(1).
32. At all times relevant hereto, Kaufman was an “employer” of Plaintiff Owen and the collective within the meaning of FLSA § 3(d), 29 U.S.C. § 203(d).
33. At all times relevant hereto, Plaintiff Owen and the collective was/were an “employee[s]” of Kaufman within the meaning of FLSA § 3(e)(1), 29 U.S.C. § 203(e)(1).
34. At all times relevant hereto, Schronce was an “employer” of Plaintiff Owen and the collective within the meaning of FLSA § 3(d), 29 U.S.C. § 203(d).
35. At all times relevant hereto, Plaintiff Owen and the collective was/were an “employee” (or employees) of Schronce within the meaning of FLSA § 3(e)(1), 29 U.S.C. § 203(e)(1).
36. At all times relevant hereto, Mr. Kaufman was a corporate officer of Tattle Tale, Inc..
37. At all times relevant hereto, Mr. Kaufman was the owner of Tattle Tale, Inc.
38. At all times relevant hereto, Kaufman was involved in the day-to-day operations of the Tattle Tale and Tattle Tale, Inc.
39. At all times relevant hereto, Mr. Schronce was involved in the day-to-day operations of the Tattle Tale and Tattle Tale, Inc.
40. At all times relevant hereto, Schronce had the power to hire and fire dancers at the Tattle Tale.
41. At all times relevant hereto, Kaufman held himself out publicly as the owner of the Tattle Tale.
42. At all times relevant hereto, Schronce held himself out as the general manager of Tattle Tale.
43. At all times relevant hereto, Kaufman exercised managerial authority with respect to Plaintiff and the members of the collective.
44. At all times relevant hereto, Schronce exercised managerial authority with respect to Plaintiffs and the members of the collective.
45. At all times relevant hereto, Mr. Kaufman scheduled Plaintiffs’ working hours or supervised the scheduling of Plaintiffs’ working hours.
46. At all times relevant hereto, Schronce scheduled Plaintiffs’ working hours or supervised the scheduling of Plaintiffs’ working hours.
47. At all times relevant hereto, Kaufman exercised managerial authority over the work rules at Tattle Tale.
48. At all times relevant hereto, Schronce exercised managerial authority over the work rules at Tattle Tale.
49. At all times relevant hereto, Kaufman exercised managerial authority over Plaintiffs’ compensation.
50. At all times relevant hereto, Schronce exercised managerial authority over Plaintiffs’ compensation.

ADDITIONAL FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS

51. Plaintiff and the collective were employed by Defendants as entertainers during the past three (3) years.
52. At all times relevant to this Complaint, Plaintiff and the collective were treated as W-2 “employees” of the Tattle Tale, Inc.  
53. Upon information and belief, until approximately early 2021, the Tattle Tale paid entertainers a “tipped wage” of $2.13 per hour but did not use a tip credit to make up the difference between the hourly wage and the minimum wage under the tip credit provisions of the FLSA. Upon information and belief, Defendants never formed or utilized a tip pool. Upon information and belief, sometime in 2021, Tattle Tale began paying Plaintiff and similarly situated entertainers $7.25 per hour for some of the hours on the job. The Defendants did not accurately keep or record all hours worked by Plaintiff and the collective, and did not pay Plaintiff or the collective for all hours worked.
54. At all times relevant to this Complaint, Plaintiff worked approximately four to five night shifts per week.
55. Plaintiff and the collective action members who worked nights began each night shift by approximately 9:00pm  and remained at work until checkout was completed at or after  approximately 3:30 am.   
56. When Plaintiff and the collective arrived at work, her/their arrival time was allegedly noted by the House Mom on duty. However, Defendants did not pay the entertainers, including the collective action members, for all time spent on the job.
57. After the club closed at 3:00 am on each night shift, Defendants required Plaintiff and the collective dancers to go through a check-out process at the end of each shift, during which the entertainer is required to make certain payments club management, house mom, and the DJ.
58. Defendants knew that entertainers, including the Collective Action Plaintiffs and collective action members, were not being compensated for the time incurred on the job during the club’s business hours or after the club closed each night.  
59. At all times relevant to this action, Defendants required each entertainer, including Plaintiff and the collective, to pay a ten percent fee (10%) to convert customer tips paid by credit card into cash.
60. The 10 percent (10%) fee was retained by the Defendants.
61. In each week Plaintiff or any collective member paid the required ten percent (10%) “credit card to cash conversion fee,” the entertainer’s wages were dropped below the minimum wage.
62. To the extent Defendants were attempting to maintain a “tip pool” and pay 2.13 per hour, the tip pool was invalid. Tattle Tale is not entitled to a tip credit for the difference between the hourly wage of $2.13 and the minimum wage of $7.25 per hour.
63. At all times relevant to this complaint, entertainers were required to pay a $60.00 house fee for each shift worked; at the end of each shift, entertainers were required to pay the “house mom” $16.00 per shift.
64. Payments of the “house fee” and the “house mom fee” each shift were, and are, unlawful deductions under the FLSA.
65. For each workweek in which a House Fee or House Mom Fee was paid by an entertainer, the entertainer’s wages dropped below the minimum wage.
66. At all times relevant to this complaint, entertainers were required to pay ten percent (10%) of their gross tips to the club DJ at the end of each shift.
67. Payments of the DJ fee each shift were, and are, unlawful deductions under the FLSA.
68. For each workweek in which the club DJ was paid 10% of an entertainers tips, the entertainer’s wages dropped below the minimum wage.
69. The house fee, house mom fee, DJ fee, “credit card to cash conversion fee”, and failure to fully compensate each entertainer for all hours worked caused Plaintiff and the collective action members’ wages to drop below the minimum wage; the various fees charged Plaintiff and the collective members violate the free and clear requirement of the FLSA and constitute an illegal kick back under the FLSA.
70. The amounts paid to Tattle Tale entertainers by its customers are not included in Tattle Tale, Inc.’s gross receipts or accounting records, are not taken into possession by Defendants and distributed to Tattle entertainers, and Plaintiff and the collective were required to pay Defendants and others to work at the Tattle Tale.
71. At all times relevant to this Complaint, Plaintiff and the collective were not exempt from the maximum hour requirements of the FLSA by reason of any FLSA exemption.
72. At all times relevant to this Complaint, Defendants did not employ Plaintiff or any member of the collective in a bona fide professional capacity within the meaning of 29 USC 213 (a)(1).
73. At all times material hereto, Defendants did not employ Plaintiffs or any member of the collective in a bona fide executive capacity within the meaning of 29 U.S.C. 213 (a)(1).
74. At all times material hereto, Defendants did not employ Plaintiff or any member of the collective in a bona fide administrative capacity within the meaning of 29 U.S.C. 213(a)(1).
75. At all times material hereto, Plaintiff and/or the collective action members did not supervise two or more employees.
76. At all times material hereto, Defendants did not employ Plaintiff or any member of the collective in the capacity of an “outside salesman” so as to be exempt from the minimum and maximum hour requirements of 29 USC 213(a)(1).
77. Upon information and belief, either Defendants failed to maintain, or Defendants maintained inaccurate records of, house fees, house mom fees, credit card conversion fees, DJ fees, time sheets,  and records reflecting actual hours worked at the Tattle Tale as to each entertainer, including Plaintiff and the collective.
78. Defendants maintain, and maintained incomplete records of time worked by Plaintiff and the collective.
79. Defendants willfully disregard and purposefully evade record keeping requirements of the FLSA by failing to maintain proper and complete timesheets and payroll records for entertainers. Defendants’ failure to maintain records of the time worked and amounts paid as fines, tips, gratuities and service charges violate the record keeping requirements of 29 CFR Part 516
80. Defendants knew, or showed reckless disregard for the fact that their compensation policies violated the FLSA.

COLLECTIVE ACTION ALLEGATIONS – 29 U.S.C. § 216(b)

81. Defendants maintained a policy and practice of not compensating entertainers for the time they spent at work.
82. Defendants maintained a policy and practice of not compensating entertainers for all time spent at the Tattle Tale, including (but not limited to) time spent working during the hours the club was open and during the check-out process at the end of each shift.
83. Defendants maintained a policy and practice of requiring entertainers to pay house fees, house mom fees, DJ Fees, and credit card/cash conversion charges.
84. Prior to early 2021, Defendants only paid entertainers $2.13 per hour, and thus maintained a policy and practice of requiring entertainers to participate in an unlawful (or nonexistent) tip pool.

         85..    Like Plaintiff, there are members of the putative Collective action who are or were subject to the same FLSA violations. These individuals would benefit from the issuance of court-supervised notice of this lawsuit and the opportunity to join by filing their written consent. Defendants can readily identify these similarly situated entertainers through their business records and produce their contact information to Plaintiffs’ counsel.

86. The putative class includes:

All entertainers who were employed by Defendants at any time during the three years prior to the date of filing of this lawsuit.  

 

 

 

 

                                             COUNT I

MINIMUM WAGE CLAIM (Claims for Violation of 29 U.S.C. § 206)

 

87. The allegations of paragraphs 1 – 86 above are incorporated herein by reference.
88. Each Defendant is an “employer” or joint employer of Plaintiffs and all others similarly situated within the meaning of the FLSA, 29 U.S.C. § 203(d).
89. Defendants are engaged in “commerce” and/or in the production of “goods” for “commerce” as those terms are defined in the FLSA.
90. Tattle Tail, Inc. operates an enterprise engaged in commerce within the meaning of the FLSA, 29 U.S.C. § 203(s)(1), because it has employees engaged in commerce, and because its annual gross volume of sales made is more than $500,000.
91. At all times material hereto, Plaintiff and the collective action members were or are employees covered by the FLSA and entitled to the minimum wage protections set forth in FLSA, 29 U.S.C. § 206; Plaintiff consents to sue in this action pursuant to 29 U.S.C. § 216(b) and the consent to sue executed by Plaintiff is attached to Complaint.
92. Defendants willfully disregarded and purposefully evaded record keeping requirements and failed to maintain proper, complete, and accurate timesheets and work records of Plaintiff and the collective; as a result of Defendants’ failure to make, keep and maintain records under the FLSA, such records do not exist or insufficient to determine wages, hours, forced tip-outs, fees, fines, and other conditions of employment.
93. Defendants failed to pay Plaintiff and all others similarly situated the minimum wage for all hours worked in violation of 29 U.S.C. § 206.
94. At all times material hereto, Defendants required Plaintiff to pay kickbacks to Defendants and their managers, as described herein.
95. Defendants’ requirement that fees (including, but not limited to, house fees of $60 per shift, house mom fees each shift, DJ fee of 10% each shift, and credit card/cash conversion fees of 10% each shift) be paid by Plaintiff and collective action members to Defendants and their agents and employees violated the “free and clear” requirement of 29 CFR 531.35.
96. Plaintiff and the collective are entitled to payment of minimum wages for all hours worked in an amount to be determined at a trial by jury, in accordance with FLSA § 16(b), 29 U.S.C. § 216(b).
97. Plaintiff and the collective are entitled to reimbursement of all kickbacks paid to Defendants and their agents and employees, in addition to all other unpaid wages.
98. Plaintiff and the collective are entitled to liquidated damages in an amount equal to their unpaid wages and kickbacks paid in accordance with FLSA § 16(b), 29 U.S.C. § 216(b).
99. As a result of their underpayment of minimum wages as alleged herein, Defendants are jointly and severally liable to Plaintiff and the collective action members for their litigation costs, including their reasonable attorney’s fees in accordance with FLSA § 16(b); 29 U.S.C. § 216(b).
100. Based upon the conduct alleged herein, Defendants knowingly, intentionally and willfully violated the FLSA by not paying Plaintiffs and the collective action members the minimum wage under the FLSA.
101. Throughout the relevant period of this lawsuit, there is no evidence that Defendants’ conduct that gave rise to this action was in good faith and based on reasonable grounds. In fact, at all times relevant to this action, Defendants willfully violated the FLSA knowing that their wage scheme, compensation policies, and required kickbacks were illegal.
102. Due to Defendants’ FLSA violations, Plaintiff and the collective action members are entitled to recover from Defendants, minimum wage  compensation and an equal amount in the form of liquidated damages, as well as reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs of the action, including interest, pursuant to 29 U.S.C. § 216(b).

COUNT II

UNLAWFUL TAKING OF TIPS (Violation of 29 U.S.C. § 203)

 

103. The allegations of paragraphs 1 – 102 above are incorporated by reference.
104. Each Defendant is an “employer” or joint employer of Plaintiff and each collective action member within the meaning of the FLSA, 29 U.S.C. § 203(d).
105. Defendants engaged in “commerce” and/or in the production of “goods” for “commerce” as those terms are defined in the FLSA.
106. Defendants operate an enterprise engaged in commerce within the meaning of the FLSA because they have employees engaged in commerce and because its annual gross revenue of sales made is more than $500,000.00.
107. Under TIPA:

[a]n employer may not keep tips received by its employees for any purpose including allowing managers or supervisors to keep any portion of employees tips, regardless of whether or not it takes a tip credit.

 

29 U.S.C. § 203.

 

109. Defendants kept a portion of tips paid to Plaintiff and the collective action members by Defendants’ customers in the form of fees to the club, management, supervisors, house moms, the Club DJ, and others in violation of TIPA.
110. As a result of Defendants’ willful violation of TIPA, Plaintiff and the collective are entitled to recover, under the FLSA and TIPA, all tips kept by the employer, any tip credit claimed by Defendants, an equal amount in liquidated damages and attorney’s fees.

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Individually and on behalf of the collective she represents, respectfully prays that this Court grant relief as follows:

1. Certify this as a collective action and issue notice to collective action members;
2. As to Count I award Plaintiff and each collective action member who joins this action judgment for wages at the minimum rate, including the recovery of all payments reducing wages below the minimum wage, as well as liquidated damages, interest and attorneys’ fees as provided for under the FLSA, against the Defendants jointly and severally;
3. That Plaintiff and each collective action member who joins this action be awarded the “kickbacks” charged by Defendants in violation of the FLSA and an additional like amount in liquidated damages, against the Defendants jointly and severally;
4. As to Count II award Plaintiff and any collective member who joins this lawsuit judgment for the recovery of all tips kept by the employers, the amount of any tip credit claimed by Defendants, an equal amount in liquidated damages and reasonable attorney’s fees under the FLSA and TIPA against the Defendants jointly and severally;
5. Award Plaintiffs costs of this action, including expert fees;
6. Grant Plaintiffs and the collective action members who join this action a jury trial on all issues so triable; and
7. Award Plaintiff such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and proper.

 

[signature page to follow]

Respectfully submitted this  27^th day of September, 2023.

 

 

FLYNN LAW FIRM, LLC

 

                                                               /s/ Jonah A. Flynn                  

                                                               Jonah A. Flynn                                                                                                Georgia Bar No. 266555

                                                               Counsel for Plaintiffs

4200 Northside Parkway NW

Building One, Suite 100

Atlanta, GA 30327

Phone/FAX: 404-835-9660

e-mail: jflynn@flynnfirm.com