Case ID: 1695125
Sanitation Salvage Corp.
421 Manida Street
Bronx, NY 10474
EIN: 13-2973804
This investigation was initiated as the result of
firm does not pay for
7(E); Enforcement Technique
all hours worked. This was substantiated. Firm keeps no record of hours worked. Maintains a schedule of 10 hours
per shift and pays the employees only for these hours of work and according to this method only, regardless if they
actually worked more than their scheduled hours of work.
Prior History - None.
MODO - One establishment of this name and business but other alleged businesses. (Exh D-10)
COVERAGE:
Subject firm is a Commercial waste disposal and recycling business. All employees of the establishment were
covered on an enterprise basis under Section 3(s) for the entire investigative period. The firm's ADV is
$18,440,038.00. In addition, some employees were individually covered during the entire investigation period as
they regularly ordered and received goods from other states. (See Exhibit C-3) The period of investigation was from
06/20/2011 to 06/19/2013. The latest investigation period is 3 years since this is an egregious violation from
08/26/2010 to 08/25/2013, which would most likely have been extended up until this year 2014 from 3 years back,
12/25/2011.
3D employer is Mr. Steven Squitieri, President and the oldest brother of 4 siblings that the firm was left to as a
family business by their father, who founded the business. Mr. Squitieri resides at 4 Carriage Court, Amawalk, New
York 10501. He handles all portions of the business from hiring workers, obtaining licenses and permits, negotiating
contracts and handling all day to day operations. He has been assisted by brothers Andrew and Johnny Squitieri,
who this Investigator saw at the firm's office, who claimed he is just a friend helping out with the guys. As per the
employees that was Johnny. Exhibits B-3 & D-6.
EXEMPTIONS:
Steven Squitieri, President is 541.1 paid well above the required $455 weekly salary, handling all daily operations
of the business.
Andrew Squitieri, Vice President is 541.1 exempt as he is also a salaried, part owner of business and handles to
drivers and helpers of the trucks specifically.
John Squitieri is 541.1 exempt being the 3rd brother that also handles the details daily of the staff both in house
and in the filed as needed, even throughout the night.
These 3 brothers specifically. hiring, firing and acting in direct interest of the company in relations with the
employees.
Dave Ryan Human Resources/Financial Manager 541.2 $455+ weekly manages all the financial portions of
business. Mike Lally 541.2 paid at least $455 weekly handling the supplies and ordering for entire firm.
The above 2 persons are supervisors over entire staff in house and in the field.
STATUS OF COMPLIANCE:
Section 6 - Minimum Wage - No Violations. Firm appears to pay at least the required federal minimum wage.
Employee interviews verify this as well (Exhibits B and D-1)
Section 7 - Overtime – Violations found.
Firm failed to pay any employee for their hours worked in excess of their regularly scheduled workweek. All
employees worked an average of 5 to 6 days per week. All the employees also worked a 10 hour shift per day
besides on Wednesday, which the normal scheduled shift was for 8 hours.
If an employee was scheduled for a 6 day workweek, this employee would have been scheduled for the following
hours:
Example 1
Sunday
10 hours

Monday
10 hours

Tuesday
10 hours

Wednesday
8 hours

Thursday
10 hours

Friday
10 hours

Saturday

 In example 1, the employee would have worked a total of 58 hours for the week. If the employee worked this
schedule, the Firm paid the employee at 40 hours his regular rate plus an additional 18 hours of pay at one and one
half times his regular rate for the additional overtime premium. (See payroll reports exhibits D-O to D-1).

If an employee was scheduled for a 5 day workweek, this employee would have been scheduled for the following
hours, except that the ?rm required any employee who worked this 5 day schedule to work an additional 2 hours
during the week to bring their scheduled hours up from 48 to 50.

Example 2
Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday
10 hours 10 hours 8 hours 10 hours 10 hours

In example 2, the employee would have to work the regular 10 hour shift plus the 8 hour shift on Wednesday, but
during the same workweek, this employee was required by the company to work 2 additional hour to cover a 50
hour workweek. These 2 hours were typically made up either the day before (Tuesday), or the day after
(Thursday).This only occurred if the employee worked the 5 day workweek.

When the employee worked this 5 day workweek, the ?rm paid this employee at 40 hours his regular rate plus an
additional 10 hours of pay at one and one half his regular rate for the additional overtime premium (see payroll
reports D-xx to D-xx).

However, the violation occurred as a result of the ?rm failing to pay for the employees total hours worked for the
entire workweek. During the course of this investigation, employees regularly worked more than their scheduled
hours. When this occurred, the ?rm failed to pay for the employees total and instead paid them only for what they
were scheduled to work.

Interview statements were taken with several of the employees of the ?rm. The interview statements state that they
regularly worked between 12 hours, and in some cases, as high as 16 hours per week.

According the Pe'sma' PriVacY statement (exhibit B-1), he states that he regularly worked as much as 12 hours
per day and was not paid for the hours in excess of his schedule.

Pam states that he worked an average of12 hours per day and was not also paid for those hours. (See
exhibit B-Z).

Please see additional interview statements of Pm? Him, Mr. 51 year old (refused name on telephone

interview), PM PMCY (Exhibits B-3, B-4, B-6 whom also state the same information as 
and Paw-q .

In addition to the interview statements, Wage Hour Investigatormm'? obtained copies of dump tickets that were
provided the ?rm. These dump tickets provided Wage Hour with actual times in which the trucks dumped their
waste at the dump sites. Each truck, on average, was required to ?dump? at these sites at least twice a day. The
dump tickets also show the actual license plate and route number per truck. The dump tickets show many
instances where the daily shifts lasted much longer than their scheduled 10 hours shift. Some routes took 12 hours
to ?nish their route, and in some cases, took as much as 18 hours to finish their route. (Exhibit 0-13)

In order to compute, the following back wage method and average hours of work were used for this investigation.
An average of 12 hours per day was used based upon the interview statements that were taken through the
investigation that showed that the employees of the firm regularly worked more than the 10 hours shift per day that
they were scheduled for. In addition, the dump tickets were also used to help compute the employees back wages,
which also showed that the employees range of hours exceed their regularly scheduled shift.

Back wages computed as follows:
1. Number of days worked per week 12 hours= Hours worked per week
2. Hours worked per week subtracted by the Hours paid by the ?rm (5 or 6 day workweek) Total OT hours
unpaid.
3. Total OT hours unpaid Regular Rate 1.5= Total premium due per week.

4. Total premium due per week 104 weeks= Total due for 2 year period.
5

Section 11 - Record Keeping Violations found

Firm failed to maintain any record of employees hours worked both daily and weekly hours, although they did show
vacation, sick, personal and holiday time taken (used). The payroll did show pay for the OT premium when only an
employee worked four 10 hour days. If so, the payroll would have shown as such.

Example, 32 worked 8 OT premium and 8 personal leave. (Exhibit 0-1)

Firm has a union that allegedly represents employees but no information furnished regarding a signed contract.
Even for FMLA purposes as the ?rm maintains the union has an article that discusses FMLA. (Exhibits D- 7)

Section 12 - Child Labor - No violations. Firm does not hire anyone less than 18 years of age even for of?ce work.
They maintain that most workers have driver licenses and many CDL (commercial driver license).

Enforcement Technique due an unknown amount in Bws, since all
records were not made available. The amount computed from the records received is $1,044 from the 12 months of
records received. (Exhibit A-1)

DISPOSITION:

An appointment letter was taken to the ?rm for initial conference meeting on June 19, 2013. Records were alleged
to have been kept by the firm at the corporate of?ce. Mr. David Ryan, Director of Human Resources stated that he
could not allow this Wage Hour Investigator (WHI) to review records, as management would want to be present and
requested to reschedule the meeting at another date. This complied since this was a walk-in attempt to begin
audit. I provided Mr. Ryan with all the information including the Initial Conference Notes form and Appointment
letter explaining all information required as well as HRG and fact sheets #44 and 77A.

On June 26, 2013, one week later this WHI showed up at the firm and Mr. Ryan gave WHI the ?lled out information
on Initial Conference Notes, along with 2 weeks payroll and we set an appointment for the following week, July 3,
2013.

On this date Mr. Ryan was not there, he was contacted in approximately 45 minutes by at least 3 people in the
of?ce and claimed that we had no appointment. The owner/manager would not see the WHI without him (Mr. Ryan)
there, and also, Mr. Ryan would not be there until later today. He then gave a telephone number to contact his
Attorney, Denise Forte of

Trivella Forte, LLP

1311 Mamaroneck Avenue, Suite 170
White Plains, NY 10605

Tel: 914-949-9075

Fax: 914-949-4752

I called Attorney Forte and was told that the information had to be reviewed. forward the appointment letter and
information to Attorney Forte, as she had just been obtained by ?rm to head the audit. I explained that Mr. Ryan
claimed he sent her the letter and she would get the information to me. The next day or two I sent an e-mail and
was answered that the records would be forwarded as soon as possible.

Records were sent and surveillance had been initiated and was continuing. was given rescheduling authority to
visit the ?rms dump site and began surveillance on trucks. After speaking with several individuals, they became
very leery of an investigation and became suspicious. They thought that this WHI was with management in a ploy
to ?nd out who was talking to the DOL about the company. After word of mouth went around that this WHI was
indeed with US DOL and wanted the best for employees, cooperation came in. Call after call, from the employees,
came in providing and giving extensive details about hours worked and more about the union local and its
President being indicted. (Exhs B) This WHI along with did surveillance and followed different
routes on different nights. found employees exactly where they were in the route, received copies of
routes and the DOT check list sheets, scanned and took pictures, and down loaded on a disk then printed (Ex's E-
4 and E- 5) Attorney Denise Forte was sent e-mail for details of principals in management and the exact ownership
percentage as well as the other exempt persons in the corporation on 8/20/2013. She had not gotten back to WHI
timely. WHI mailed a package of Reg 516, 785, 788 and Employment Relationship with HRG, FLSA Poster and the
Hours Worked regulation to Attorney Forte and to the ?rm, although the HRG, FLSA and fact sheets 44 and 77A
were left at ?rm when appointment letter left June 19, 2013.

Many letters were sent in between the initial conference and the withdrawal of USDOL from this investigation. (Exh
D-5). The attorneys of the ?rm continually stalled with one thing after the other. WHI received a voice mail
message that the ?rm will seek assistance from a well-known accounting ?rm, Price Waterhouse. The Attorneys of
the ?rm stated that the GPS system was allegedly broken most of the time and this ?rm specialized in bringing up
the actual employee times. They also stated that they would also be able to show the times where the employees
were idle for more than a half hour. They stated that their client believed that employees didn't work the 12 - 14
hours to do the job, but rather, met with their friends, ran errands and such things that should be done outside of
work hours.

The Price Waterhouse intervention was acceptable by this WHI, then Attorney Forte came up with another delay.
They now stated that the drivers and helpers were exempt under the motor carrier section of the Act. A letter was

by the firms Attorney, which was forwarded to RSOL (regional solicitors for department of labor) and research
began on case history, etc.(Exhibit D- 5) A letter was sent to my office that was okayed to be forwarded to Attorney
Forte with questions of ownership of businesses involved, where trash started, stopped, what other companies
used the dump site, who owned it, who owned the other companies, the trucking companies that removed the
compacted trash and recycling materials. Letters and e-mails went back and forth. This process took about 6
months, until USDOL confirmed that the firms' drivers and helpers were not exempt under the motor carrier act.
(Exhibit D-6) The firm then was requested to send remaining records, as received were a 6 month period for 2
different years 2011 and 2012 and dump ticket records for periods in 2011 and 2012 to be sampled. (Exhibit D-2)
See Exhibit D-0, a CD of records.
A final conference with Attorney Forte and Mr. Steven Squitieri, Owner was held on the telephone on October, 27,
2014. All violations were discussed in detail. Attorney's stated that the reason the violations occurred is that no
violations occurred, the employees exaggerated their hours worked in an attempt to cause problems for the
employer. The firm did make changes like maintain hours by renting a time keeping attendant, changing the
schedule for employees to report to work and claimed to minimize the number of stops per truck. Firm also
maintained that the employees of the firm were exempt under the motor carrier act and were exempt from over time
premiums because the employees of the firm move trash in interstate commerce, the final resting place of the trash
7(C); Personal Priv
is Ohio and Japan. WHI
stated that US DOL's position was that the trash, the employees handled, came to
7(C); Personal Priva
rest at these dump sites and was co-mingled with other trash. WH
also stated that the trash was all
dumped at the Metropolitan Transfer Station and then picked up by tractor trailer. This business was believed to be
owned by a different owner. The Attorney's did not answer any questions regarding ownership of MTS or MMR, the
trucking company that actual packed and moved the goods (trash) in commerce.
All the participants were advised that to comply in the future the firm must:
1) Pay all non-exempt employees at least the minimum wage
2) Pay all non-exempt employees at least T-1/2 for hours worked in excess of forty in a workweek, while
accurately calculating the hours worked.
3) Keep and maintain records as required by Part 516.
4) Comply with all applicable CL regulations.
Mr. Steven Squitieri refused to fully comply in the future with all applicable provisions of the FLSA through
Attorney's Forte and Trivella.
The complainant was advised of the results of this investigation on 11/10/14. A 16B letter sent to pursue litigation
personally. (Exhibit D-3)
Publications provided and discussed: HRG, FLSA Poster, FLSA, Reg Part 516, 785, 788, Employment
Relationship, Fact Sheets 44 & 77A.
Recommendations: Liquidated damages were recommended as this is a gross violation of employees pay while in
a union, being that RSOL will not have time to get case into federal court since they are already in court.
Recommend admin close.
7(C); Personal Privacy

Wage & Hour Investigator
August 22, 2013
December 24, 2013
January 16, 2015