A new lawsuit claims that a large home-based healthcare provider failed to pay hundreds of its hourly workers the full overtime wages required by law, raising questions about payroll practices that could affect many employees. The legal complaint was filed on April 2, 2026, in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan by Asia Steele against V.P.A., P.C., doing business as HarmonyCares Medical Group.
According to the filing, Asia Steele brought the case individually and on behalf of other current and former hourly, non-exempt employees who worked for HarmonyCares Medical Group over the past three years. The suit alleges violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), the Ohio Minimum Fair Wage Standards Act (OMFWSA), and the Ohio Prompt Pay Act (OPPA). Steele claims that she and others were not paid at least one and one-half times their regular rate of pay for hours worked beyond forty in a workweek, as required by federal and state law.
The complaint outlines that HarmonyCares Medical Group operates in at least twelve states across the continental United States and employs over a thousand hourly workers. Steele alleges that all these employees are subject to similar policies regarding how hours worked and compensation are calculated. The suit describes how, during her employment from April 2025 through March 2026 as a “Clinical Partner” in central Ohio, she regularly worked more than forty hours per week but did not receive proper overtime pay due to companywide payroll practices.
Specifically, Steele asserts that while she received an hourly wage, she also earned additional forms of nondiscretionary remuneration such as performance bonuses. According to the complaint, these bonuses should have been included when calculating her regular rate of pay for overtime purposes but were not. For example, during one pay period in November 2025, Steele reports being paid a base hourly wage plus a $1,250 bonus labeled “Fieldopsbon.” However, this bonus was allegedly excluded from her overtime calculation. As stated in the filing: “Defendant failed to include this non-discretionary premium when calculating Named Plaintiff’s regular rate of pay, resulting in unpaid overtime compensation.”
The document argues that this practice violates both federal law—citing specific sections of the FLSA—and Ohio state law requirements for timely payment of all wages earned. It further claims that HarmonyCares Medical Group had access to legal guidance on these requirements but either ignored or disregarded them: “Defendant therefore knew about the overtime compensation requirements of the FLSA and failed to comply with them or acted in reckless disregard as to its obligations under these laws in failing to comply with them.” The suit also alleges failures in recordkeeping related to accurate tracking of time worked and amounts paid.
Steele seeks certification for both a collective action under federal law—covering all current and former hourly employees nationwide who worked more than forty hours per week and received additional remuneration—and a class action under Rule 23 covering those employed in Ohio within two years preceding the lawsuit’s filing date. The complaint estimates several hundred or more individuals may be affected.
The relief requested includes unpaid overtime wages for all affected workers, liquidated damages equal to any unpaid amounts under both federal and state statutes, prejudgment interest, post-judgment interest, attorney fees, expert fees, costs incurred during litigation, statutory penalties where applicable, employer-paid taxes on owed wages, service awards for named plaintiffs remedying alleged payroll issues, court-supervised notice procedures so similarly situated workers can join the case if they choose (“opt-in”), tolling of statutes of limitations during proceedings, as well as any other relief deemed appropriate by the court.
Attorneys representing Asia Steele include Daniel I. Bryant and Esther E. Bryant from Bryant Legal LLC; Kevin J. Stoops and Kathryn E. Milz from Sommers Schwartz PC; all are listed as counsel for both individual plaintiffs and proposed class members. The case is identified as Case No. 2:26-cv-11086-RJW-APP.
Source: 226cv11086_Asia_Steele_v_VPA_Complaint_Eastern_District_of_Michigan.pdf
