A group of construction workers alleges that their employer systematically failed to pay them required overtime rates and prevailing wages on public projects, raising questions about compliance with federal and state labor laws for hourly workers in the industry. The complaint was filed on March 27, 2026, in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan by Matthew Morrison and over two dozen other named plaintiffs against IHRONE Inc., LGC Global, Inc., and LGC Global Energy FM, LLC.
According to the court filing, the plaintiffs are or were employed by the defendants in various hourly laborer and skilled laborer positions. They claim that “in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act (‘FLSA’), 29 U.S.C. § 201, et seq., and the Michigan Improved Workforce Opportunity Wage Act (‘MIWOWA’), M.C.L. § 408.931, et seq., Defendants pay their hourly workers less than one-and-a-half times their regular rate of pay for hours worked in excess of forty (40) hours in a week depriving Plaintiffs and similarly situated employees…of fair compensation for their labor.” The lawsuit also alleges that on public works projects where state or federal prevailing wage laws apply, employees did not receive at least the minimum required wage rates.
The complaint details how defendants provide labor for construction projects under contracts with federal, state, and local government entities. Plaintiffs allege that despite working on such projects where prevailing wage laws should apply—citing statutes such as 40 U.S.C. § 3141 and MCL § 408.1101—they received “the same rate of pay on projects for which the prevailing wage rate applied as well as projects where the prevailing wage rate did not apply.” It is further alleged that “on projects covered by a prevailing wage rate…Plaintiffs regularly worked in excess of forty (40) hours per week” but received less than one-and-a-half times their regular rate for those overtime hours.
The filing describes a pattern across multiple years involving both current employees—such as Ahmed Almarsoumi, Scott Benson, Robbie Bristow—and former employees—including Matthew Morrison himself—who claim they notified management about these alleged violations but saw no change in policy or pay practices. For example: “Plaintiffs notified Defendants that their failure to pay time-and-a-half their regular rate of pay for overtime hours violates the FLSA, but Defendants did not change their overtime rates.” Similar notifications regarding prevailing wage shortfalls were allegedly ignored.
The legal action is structured as both a collective action under federal law (FLSA) and a class action under Michigan statutes (MIWOWA and PWSPA). The plaintiffs argue that these issues present common questions suitable for class treatment because all affected individuals “have been or are employed in the same or similar positions” by defendants; all “were or are subject to the same or similar unlawful practices”; and all claims are based upon “the same legal theory.” The suit states that more than 100 individuals may be part of this class.
Three main counts are outlined: violation of FLSA due to failure to pay overtime wages; violation of MIWOWA for similar reasons under state law; and violation of Michigan’s Prevailing Wages on State Projects Act (PWSPA) for failing to meet minimum wage requirements on certain public contracts. In each count, plaintiffs assert that defendants’ actions were knowing, intentional, and willful.
As relief from the court, plaintiffs seek certification as a collective action under FLSA allowing others similarly situated to opt-in nationwide; certification as a class action under MIWOWA and PWSPA; back pay representing unpaid overtime premiums; back pay reflecting differences between paid wages/benefits versus what should have been paid under prevailing wage rules; liquidated damages including double damages where allowed; compensatory damages; exemplary damages; punitive damages; an injunction prohibiting further violations; attorneys’ fees; costs; interest up to ten percent per annum where applicable; and any other relief deemed appropriate by the court.
The complaint is signed by attorney Adam M. Taub from Croson, Taub & Michaels PLLC based in Ann Arbor. A jury trial has been demanded by plaintiffs on all triable issues. The case identification number is Case 2:26-cv-11030-SKD-APP.
Source: 226cv11030_Matthew_Morrison_v_Ihrone_Inc_Complaint_Eastern_District_of_Michigan.pdf
