Did Honda and Adecco Short Hourly Workers on PPE and Overtime?
/
A newly filed federal lawsuit alleges that American Honda Motor Co., Inc. and Adecco USA, Inc. required hourly workers to put on and remove required PPE off the clock, and then calculated overtime in a way that allegedly failed to include certain nondiscretionary bonuses in the “regular rate.” The case is in its earliest phase. At this point, these are allegations only, and the court has not made findings.
Case: Mayes v. American Honda Motor Co., Inc., et al.
Court: U.S. District Court, Central District of California
Case No.: 2:25-cv-11253
The Plaintiff: Mayes v. American Honda
Fareed Mayes, the plaintiff, is a former hourly employee of American Honda.
The Defendants: Mayes v. American Honda
The defendants in the case are American Honda Motor Co., Inc. and Adecco USA, Inc.
Case History: Mayes v. American Honda
According to the public docket, the case was filed on November 24, 2025, in the Central District of California as an FLSA matter. The docket reflects the complaint and initial filing paperwork, which is typical at the start of a federal wage-and-hour lawsuit.
The Main Question in the Case:
If hourly workers must put on required protective gear before clocking in and remove it after clocking out, is that time “work” that must be paid and counted toward overtime? And if workers receive certain attendance or shutdown bonuses, must those bonuses be included when calculating the “regular rate” for overtime?
The Allegations: Mayes v. American Honda
Based on published reporting summarizing the filing, the lawsuit’s core allegations include:
Unpaid PPE time (donning/doffing): Workers allegedly had to don company-required gear at the worksite before clocking in, and remove it after clocking out. The claimed time is roughly 10–15 minutes pre-shift and 10–15 minutes post-shift, which the lawsuit frames as off-the-clock work that should be compensable.
Pressure through policies: The suit alleges attendance/adherence policies effectively pushed workers to complete PPE-related steps off the clock.
Overtime “regular rate” issue: The lawsuit also challenges overtime calculations, alleging the companies did not include certain nondiscretionary bonuses (described as “Shutdown” and “Monthly Attendance” bonuses) when computing the regular rate used for overtime.
Scope and format of the case: The action is described as a proposed FLSA collective action and also a Rule 23 class action for related state-law theories (as reported).
Why “PPE Time” Can Become a Real Legal Fight:
Federal wage-and-hour law has a whole vocabulary for this: “principal activities,” “integral and indispensable,” and what counts as “preliminary/postliminary” time.
The Supreme Court has held that some pre-shift and post-shift activities can be compensable when they’re tightly connected to an employee’s principal work activities.
At the same time, the Court has also emphasized limits, rejecting compensation for activities that are not “integral and indispensable” to the job’s core productive work (even if the employer requires them).
There’s also a union-contract carveout in some workplaces (29 U.S.C. § 203(o)) that can affect whether “changing clothes” time is paid, depending on the facts and whether a collective bargaining agreement applies.
FAQ: Mayes v. American Honda
Q: What is “donning and doffing” time?
A: It’s the time spent putting on (donning) and taking off (doffing) required gear such as uniforms or safety equipment, often around the start and end of a shift.
Q: Does the FLSA always require employers to pay for PPE time?
A: Not always. Whether it’s compensable can depend on whether the activity is considered integral and indispensable to the employee’s principal work, and on other legal and workplace factors.
Q: What’s the “integral and indispensable” test?
A: It’s a standard the Supreme Court has used to determine whether certain pre- or post-shift activities are part of the employee’s principal activities and therefore potentially compensable
Q: What is the “regular rate,” and why does it matter for overtime?
A: Overtime is generally calculated based on an employee’s regular rate of pay. Certain forms of compensation must be included in that regular rate, which can increase overtime owed.
Q: Do nondiscretionary bonuses affect overtime calculations?
A: Often, yes. The U.S. Department of Labor explains that nondiscretionary bonuses are generally included in the regular rate unless a specific exclusion applies.
Q: Has the court decided whether Honda or Adecco did anything wrong here?
A: No. The case was filed on November 24, 2025, and at this stage the public record reflects initial filings. Allegations are not findings.
If you believe you were required to perform off-the-clock work, were not paid for all time worked, or your overtime rate didn’t reflect all required compensation, the employment law attorneys at Blumenthal Nordrehaug Bhowmik De Blouw LLP can help. Contact one of our offices in Los Angeles, San Diego, San Francisco, Sacramento, Riverside, or Chicago today to learn how to hold your employer accountable.
