Admiral
Admiral
__________________________________________
Plaintiffs,
v.
Defendants.
I. INTRODUCTION
other exotic dancers who have worked at Admiral Theatre, Inc. d/b/a The Admiral
Theatre (the “Admiral”), an adult entertainment strip club located at 3940 West
Lawrence Avenue, Chicago, Illinois, which is owned and managed by Mr. Sam Cecola.
As described further below, the Admiral has misclassified its exotic dancers as
independent contractors rather than as employees under federal and state law. Dancers
are paid only by receiving tips from customers, which they are required to pay back in
part to the club, as well as to share with other individuals who are not eligible to share in
a tip pool.
2. Plaintiff brings this action on her own behalf, and on behalf of other
Admiral dancers who may choose to opt-in to this case, for not paying minimum wage
as required by the federal Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”), 29 U.S.C. §201 et seq.
Case: 1:18-cv-04749 Document #: 1 Filed: 07/11/18 Page 2 of 11 PageID #:2
and for taking a portion of the dancers’ tips and allowing and requiring dancers to share
3. Plaintiff also brings this action on behalf of herself and a class of other
Civil Procedure, for violating various provisions of Illinois state wage law including: (1)
the Illinois Minimum Wage Law (“IMWL”), 820 ILCS § 105/1, et seq. by failing to pay
dancers the required state minimum wage; and (2) the Illinois Wage Payment and
Collection Act (“IWPCA”) 820 ILCS § 115/1, et seq. by taking deductions from dancers’
pay and requiring dancers to share their tip earnings with other individuals.
II. PARTIES
Illinois. She began working at the Admiral in Chicago, Illinois as a waitress in 2012. She
corporation with its principal place of business at 3940 West Lawrence Avenue in
Chicago, Illinois.
owner of Defendant Admiral. Cecola directed and controlled the payment policies of the
7. This Court has jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331
and 29 U.S.C. § 216(b), because this action is based, in part, on the FLSA.
2
Case: 1:18-cv-04749 Document #: 1 Filed: 07/11/18 Page 3 of 11 PageID #:3
§ 1367, over Plaintiffs’ supplemental state law claims, which are brought pursuant to the
laws of the State of Illinois, because those claims arise out of the same transaction or
Defendants are located within this judicial district and division, and the unlawful labor
practices giving rise to Plaintiff’s claims were committed within this judicial district.
11. The Admiral has exercised extensive control over the manner in which its
exotic dancers perform their jobs and conduct themselves while on the club’s premises,
including where to be on the premises and when, what they are allowed to wear,
requiring certain outfits to coordinate with nightly themes the club chooses, how much
they can receive for private dances and sessions, and how they can interact with
customers. For example, dancers must dance on stage for at least two songs at a time;
they must remove their top during the first ten to fifteen seconds of the first song and
remove their bottom during the first ten to fifteen seconds of the second song; they are
not allowed to carry a phone with them on the floor; and they must receive permission
from management to leave the premises before the end of the night. The dancers have
no control over the customer volume, advertising, or atmosphere at the club, which is
controlled entirely by Defendants. Defendants require dancers to report to the stage and
offer a floor dance and promotional branded T-shirts at least once during the night. On
3
Case: 1:18-cv-04749 Document #: 1 Filed: 07/11/18 Page 4 of 11 PageID #:4
certain nights, Defendants also require dancers to perform “mystery dances” and “two-
12. Defendants retain the power to hire and fire the exotic dancers and have
requirements regarding the manner and means of their work. Specifically, Defendants
charge a fine to dancers or send them home if they are caught chewing gum on the
premises, and Defendants also charge a fine if dancers are late getting on stage at the
required time.
13. At all relevant times, Admiral dancers have not held themselves out to be
in business for themselves. Instead, the dancers are economically dependent on their
to its patrons. Its website advertises “the Best All-Nude Gentlemen’s Club in
Chicagoland” and offers patrons “over 100 beautiful showgirl entertainers.” Thus, the
dancers clearly perform services in the usual course of Defendants’ business, and
without the dancers, the Admiral would have no business, such that the dancers’ work is
15. At all times relevant to this Complaint, Defendants have treated Plaintiff
and their other dancers in a substantially similar manner with respect to their policies
and practices.
16. At all relevant times the federal minimum wage has been $7.25 per hour.
17. At all relevant times the minimum wage in Illinois has been $8.25 per hour.
4
Case: 1:18-cv-04749 Document #: 1 Filed: 07/11/18 Page 5 of 11 PageID #:5
19. Defendants did not pay the exotic dancers who have worked at the
20. The exotic dancers who have worked at the Admiral receive compensation
21. In order to perform their job, the dancers have been required to pay
“house fees” to the Admiral in an amount between $40 and $180 for every shift.
22. The dancers have also been required to share their tips with managers
and with non-service employees or agents of the Admiral, such as “house moms,” disc
23. Plaintiff brings this action individually and as a collective action pursuant
dancer at the Admiral at any time between three years prior to the filing of this lawsuit
and the entry of judgment in this case, who may choose to “opt-in” to join this lawsuit.
25. Plaintiff also brings this action individually and as a class action under
Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, on behalf of all individuals who worked
as exotic dancers at the Admiral at any time between ten years prior to the filing of this
lawsuit and the entry of judgment in this case (with respect to the claims brought under
the IWPCA) and between three years prior to filing this lawsuit and the entry of
5
Case: 1:18-cv-04749 Document #: 1 Filed: 07/11/18 Page 6 of 11 PageID #:6
judgment in this case (with respect to the claims brought under the IMWL).
26. This action on behalf of the Rule 23 class satisfies the requirements of
b. There are questions of law and/or fact common to the members of the
least minimum wage for their work, and (3) effectively making illegal
employees.
c. The claims of Plaintiff Wisniewska are typical of the claims of the proposed
class and she has the same interests as the other members of the class; and
d. Plaintiff Wisniewska will fairly and adequately protect the interests of the class
as she has retained able counsel experienced in class action litigation, and
her interests are coincident with, and not antagonistic to, the interests of the
27. In addition, this action satisfies the requirements of Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(b),
because the questions of law and/or fact common to the members of the proposed
class predominate over any questions affecting only individual members, and a class
action is superior to other available methods for the fair and efficient adjudication of the
controversy because joinder of all class members is impractical. The class is readily
6
Case: 1:18-cv-04749 Document #: 1 Filed: 07/11/18 Page 7 of 11 PageID #:7
definable and prosecution of this action as a class action will eliminate the possibility of
repetitive litigation. There will be no difficulty in the management of this action as a class
action.
COUNT I
Failure to Pay Minimum Wage in Violation of the FLSA
“employer” for purposes of the Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C. §203(s), because it
has annual gross sales or business of at least $500,000 and has employees engaged in
U.S.C. § 203(d) because he has acted directly or indirectly in the interests of Defendant
Admiral in relation to its employees, including Plaintiff and other exotic dancers who
30. Plaintiff and the members of the proposed class are employees of
Defendants for purposes of the Fair Labor Standards Act during all times relevant to this
Complaint. Defendants have failed to pay Plaintiff and the members of the proposed
class an hourly rate of at least the federal minimum wage of $7.25 per hour as required
31. Further, Defendants are not permitted to take the tip credit against the
minimum wage (and thus pay the reduced hourly rate for tipped employees of $2.13 per
hour) because it did not provide the required notice to the dancers in order to take the
tip credit and because the dancers have not been allowed to retain all tips they have
7
Case: 1:18-cv-04749 Document #: 1 Filed: 07/11/18 Page 8 of 11 PageID #:8
received, but instead have been required to share their tips with management and with
other employees or agents of Defendants who are not among employees who
customarily and regularly receive tips, and not pursuant to a valid tip pooling or sharing
32. Plaintiff and the members of the proposed class are entitled to back
wages at the minimum wage rate of $7.25 per hour for every hour worked, pursuant to
the FLSA, 29 U.S.C. § 216(b). The failure of Defendants to compensate Plaintiff and the
members of the class at least minimum wage was knowing, willful, intentional, and done
in bad faith. Defendants knew or should have known that Plaintiff and the other dancers,
performing the same job functions, were being improperly misclassified as independent
contractors given the wealth of case law that has concluded similarly-situated exotic
33. Plaintiff and the members of the proposed class are also entitled to
liquidated damages equal to the amount of unpaid minimum wages due to them under
COUNT II
Failure to Pay Minimum Wage, 820 ILCS § 105/1, et seq.
34. At all times relevant herein, Plaintiff and the members of the proposed
class were employed by Defendants as “employees” within the meaning of the IMWL,
8
Case: 1:18-cv-04749 Document #: 1 Filed: 07/11/18 Page 9 of 11 PageID #:9
36. Plaintiff and the members of the proposed class were not paid proper
minimum wages under the IMWL, 820 Ill. Comp. Stat. 105/1, et seq., during their
37. Pursuant to 820 Ill. Comp. Stat. 105/4, Plaintiff and the other members of
the proposed class were entitled to be compensated at the applicable State minimum
38. Defendants’ willful conduct in failing to ensure that its exotic dancers receive
the Illinois state minimum wage constitutes a violation of 820 ILCS § 105/1, et seq. This
claim is brought on behalf of all dancers who have worked at the Admiral in the last
three years prior to the date of filing of this Complaint until the date of judgment in this
COUNT III
Failure to Pay Minimum Wage, Chicago Minimum Wage Ordinance
39. Plaintiff and the members of the proposed class were not paid proper
minimum wages under the Chicago Minimum Wage Ordinance, during their employment
with Defendants.
40. Pursuant to the Chicago Minimum Wage Ordinance, Plaintiff and the other
members of the proposed class were entitled to be compensated at the minimum wage
41. Defendants’ willful conduct in failing to ensure that its exotic dancers receive
the Chicago minimum wage constitutes a violation of the Chicago Minimum Wage
Ordinance. This claim is brought on behalf of all dancers who have worked at the Admiral
9
Case: 1:18-cv-04749 Document #: 1 Filed: 07/11/18 Page 10 of 11 PageID #:10
COUNT IV
Failure to Pay Wages and Illegal Deductions 820 ILCS § 115, et seq.
42. At all relevant times, Plaintiff and the members of the proposed class were
43. At all relevant times, Defendants were employers of Plaintiff and the
44. Defendants have violated the Illinois Wage Payment and Collection Act, 820
Ill. Comp. Stat. 115/1 et seq., by misclassifying their exotic dancers as independent
contractors, requiring them to pay fees in order to perform their jobs, and requiring them to
make payments to other individuals (such as managers, “house moms,” disc jockeys,
security, and makeup artists). This claim is brought on behalf of all dancers who have
worked at the Admiral in the last ten years prior to the date of filing of this Complaint until
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff requests that the Court enter the following relief:
former employees of Defendant Admiral Theatre who are potential members of the
collective action under the Fair Labor Standards Act, giving them the opportunity to opt-
in to this action;
violated the minimum wage provisions of the FLSA, and has deprived Plaintiff and the
employees, not independent contractors under both the FLSA and Illinois state law;
accounting of all the wages to which Plaintiff and members of the class are entitled;
the form of back pay for unpaid minimum wages, together with liquidated damages in an
month pursuant to the formula set forth in the IMWL and IWPCA that are due to Plaintiff
and failure to receive all wages due to them under the IMWL and IWPCA;
11