A recent legal filing alleges that a large automotive supplier failed to properly compensate its hourly workers for overtime by not including certain types of pay in their regular rate calculations, potentially affecting hundreds or thousands of current and former employees across the United States. The complaint was filed on March 18, 2026, in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan by Bert Chavis against Mobis North America, LLC.
According to the collective action complaint, Bert Chavis worked as a material handler at Mobis North America’s Highland Park location from September 2016 to November 2024. He brings this case both individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated who were employed as hourly workers by the company within the past three years. The defendant is described as a Delaware limited liability company with its principal place of business in Plymouth, Michigan. The lawsuit states that Mobis North America manufactures vehicle assembly modules and employs thousands of hourly workers at multiple locations nationwide.
The core allegation centers on how Mobis North America calculated overtime compensation for its hourly employees. The complaint asserts that while these employees received various forms of routine and non-discretionary pay—such as shift differentials—these additional payments were not included when determining their regular rate of pay for overtime purposes. Under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), non-exempt employees are entitled to one-and-a-half times their regular rate for hours worked beyond forty per week. The filing explains: “Defendant failed to properly calculate Plaintiff’s shift differential pay and other non-discretionary remuneration into the regular rate for proper overtime calculation.”
To illustrate this claim, Chavis points to his own August 29, 2025 paystub, which reflected a $0.40 shift differential payment that was allegedly excluded from his regular rate when calculating overtime for that period. The document further details: “Plaintiff’s August 18, 2025 through August 24, 2025 paystub shows 41.4668 hours of work…and an overtime rate of $38.25 (1.5 times the base rate)…The overtime rate did not account for the shift differential pay and, therefore, Defendant violated the FLSA.”
The complaint argues that under federal law and Department of Labor regulations, all forms of remuneration—including shift differentials and non-discretionary bonuses—must be included in an employee’s regular rate unless specifically excluded by statute. It cites several legal precedents supporting this interpretation and maintains that Mobis North America’s payroll practices resulted in “prima facie violations” of the FLSA.
Chavis seeks to represent a collective group consisting of all current and former hourly employees who worked for Mobis North America in any state during the last three years who received similar forms of additional compensation but did not have those amounts factored into their overtime rates. The suit requests court authorization to notify these individuals so they may join the case.
In terms of remedies sought from the court, Chavis asks for designation as representative of a collective action under FLSA Section 216(b), disclosure by Mobis North America of contact information for all affected employees, full back pay owed due to miscalculated overtime rates, liquidated damages equal to backpay amounts, pre-judgment and post-judgment interest, attorneys’ fees and costs, service payment to himself as named plaintiff, and any other relief deemed appropriate by the court.
The complaint also demands a jury trial on all triable issues related to these allegations.
The case is identified as Case No. 2:26-cv-10900-MAG-EAS in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan. Legal representation for Bert Chavis and proposed collective members is provided by Kevin J. Stoops of Sommers Schwartz P.C., based in Southfield, Michigan.
Source: 226cv10900_Bert_Chavis_v_Mobis_North_Complaint_Eastern_District_of_Michigan.pdf
