than ‘overtime’ or ‘minimum wage’ compensation, Plaintiff would have a valid state law cause of action.” Under the FLSA, “Any employer who violates the provisions of section 206 or section 207 of this title shall be liable to the employee or employees affected in .the amount of their unpaid minimum wages, or their unpaid overtime compensation, as the case may be, and in an additional equal amount as liquidated damages.” 29 U.S.C.A. § 216(b). “Courts have consistently held the above statute is the exclusive remedy for enforcing lights created under the FLSA.... As a matter of law, plaintiff cannot circumvent the exclusive remedy prescribed by Congress by asserting equivalent state law claims in addition to the FLSA claim.” Tombrello v. USX Corp., 763 F.Supp. 541, 545 (N.D.Ala.1991) (<HOLDING>). Whether Morrow’s breach-of-contract and
holding that the flsa does not prohibit changes in wage rates it prohibits the payment of overtime at less than one and onehalf times the regular wage rate holding that the flsa preempted plaintiffs wage and invasionofprivacy claims holding that the flsa preempted plaintiffs fraud claim holding under flsa holding flsa enforcement scheme preempted contract negligence and fraud claims