Workers accuse Rockwell Automation of skipping bonuses in overtime calculations
Rockwell Automation is under fire after allegations surfaced that it shortchanged hourly workers on overtime pay across several states.
Filed on November 13, 2025, in federal court in Wisconsin, the case centers on claims brought by Gregory Perkins, a former hourly employee, who says Rockwell failed to properly pay overtime to him and other non-exempt workers. The lawsuit covers current and former employees who worked for Rockwell in Ohio and other states over the past three years.
At the heart of the case are accusations that Rockwell did not include certain bonuses—like its Annual Employee Incentive Program and Bravo reward bonuses—when calculating overtime pay. According to the filing, these bonuses are tied to performance metrics and should be counted as part of a worker’s regular pay rate. By leaving them out, the suit claims, Rockwell paid less than what the law requires for overtime hours.
Perkins, who was paid hourly at a rate of $21.46, says he routinely worked more than 40 hours a week. He points to specific examples: a $3,368 bonus from the company’s incentive program in December 2023 and a $94.96 Bravo reward in July 2025. The suit alleges neither was factored into his overtime pay, a move that, if true, could have shortchanged not just Perkins but a large group of employees.
The allegations go further, claiming Rockwell also failed to pay for all hours worked, including time before and after scheduled shifts and during unpaid meal breaks. The suit describes these as unpaid wages and overtime, asserting that these practices affected all current and former non-exempt employees who worked for Rockwell in Ohio at any point in the three years before the case was filed.
The legal action seeks to recover unpaid wages, additional damages, and attorney’s fees, and asks the court to require Rockwell to change its pay practices. No final decision has been made, and Rockwell has yet to respond publicly to the claims.
For HR professionals, this case is a timely reminder of the risks tied to wage and hour compliance—especially when it comes to overtime calculations and incentive pay. The details highlight how payroll practices can run afoul of federal and state laws, even for large employers. With wage and hour lawsuits a continuing concern, companies may want to review how they handle bonuses and overtime, ensuring that all forms of non-discretionary pay are included in the regular rate.
As the case unfolds, HR leaders across the country will be watching closely. The outcome could have implications for payroll policies and compliance strategies in organizations with hourly workforces spread across multiple states.
