REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

IAIN D. JOHNSTON, Magistrate Judge.

Before the Court is the parties' joint motion for approval of their proposed agreement to settle the claims of the four named plaintiffs brought under the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA") and the Illinois Minimum Wage Law. The proposed settlement agreement is attached as an Exhibit [18-1].

A court must review a proposal to settle claims brought under the FLSA to ensure that the proposal represents "a fair and reasonable resolution of a bona fide dispute." Salcedo v. D'Arcy Buick GMC, Inc., 227 F.Supp.3d 960, 961 (N.D. Ill. 2016). To determine the fairness of the parties' proposal, the Court has reviewed the allegations of the complaint and the terms of the proposed settlement. According to the complaint, the plaintiffs were not paid time and a half for overtime hours work. Based on the alleged rate of pay and hours work, plaintiff Gilberto was underpaid approximately $1,271, plaintiff Eversoll approximately $1,479, plaintiff Mauerman approximately $664, and plaintiff Jones approximately $2,200. The defendant contends the plaintiffs were exempt employees and therefore not entitled to time and a half pay. Under the terms of the settlement agreement, Gilberto will receive a payment of $1,000, Eversoll $1,250, Mauerman $663, and Jones $2,000. On top of those amounts, their attorneys will be paid $4,087. The total settlement amount will be $9,000. The proposed settlement agreement was originally submitted as being confidential, but given that courts cannot make fairness determinations for settlement agreements that are confidential, see id., the parties resubmitted the motion and proposed agreement as public documents.

The Court finds the proposed settlement to be a fair and reasonable compromise over a bona fide dispute. Specifically, the plaintiffs will obtain close to the amount they allege they were underpaid, and those amounts will not be diminished by the award of fees to their attorneys. Accordingly, it is this Court's Report and Recommendation that the parties' joint motion [18] be granted. Any objection to this Report and Recommendation shall be filed by May 18, 2018. Failure to object may constitute a waiver of objections on appeal. See Provident Bank v. Manor Steel Corp., 882 F.2d 258, 260 (7th Cir. 1989).