A lawsuit has been filed alleging that a major automotive manufacturer failed to protect an employee from repeated sexual harassment and retaliation in the workplace, raising concerns about workplace safety and equal treatment under federal law. The complaint was submitted by Tashona Davis on March 13, 2026, in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois against Ford Motor Company.
According to court documents, Davis began working for Ford Motor Company as a Production Worker/Auto Assembler on or about October 14, 2019. She remains employed in this capacity. Davis asserts that she is a member of a protected class based on her sex and alleges that she was subjected to different terms and conditions of employment compared to male colleagues.
The complaint states that starting around 2021 and continuing into November 2024, Davis’s team lead and direct supervisor, James Tolbert, allegedly engaged in repeated acts of sexual harassment. The filing describes specific incidents where Tolbert made explicit comments such as telling Davis he wanted to “fuck [her],” publicly commenting on her underwear in front of coworkers, staring at her suggestively while making remarks about her body, and claiming he had “a big dick” he could “throw… over Plaintiff’s shoulder.” Davis claims these actions created an egregious hostile work environment.
Davis reports that she opposed Tolbert’s behavior directly but says it continued despite her objections. The complaint further alleges that Tolbert did not fulfill his supervisory responsibility to address or report the harassment. Instead, Davis contends that Tolbert encouraged others to participate in similar conduct. In November 2024, another male coworker reportedly began making comparable comments about Davis’s underwear. Around the same time, a female coworker allegedly touched Davis inappropriately on the waist.
The lawsuit states that in early November 2024, Davis formally complained about Tolbert’s behavior to Ford’s Employee Relations for Manufacturing department. She described feeling uncomfortable due to being watched and harassed by Tolbert and others who were allegedly encouraged by him. Shortly after filing her complaint, Davis’s supervisor Chris Butler reportedly told her that Tolbert was attempting to sabotage her work assignment as retaliation for reporting him.
On November 15, 2024, Ford interviewed Davis regarding her complaint. She provided additional details during this interview and was assured an investigation would follow. However, according to the filing, she received no further communication until March 13, 2025—when she was informed via email that the investigation had been closed without any explanation or remedial action taken.
After returning from medical leave in June 2025 following unrelated surgery, Davis claims the harassment continued and escalated. She alleges being targeted with false write-ups related to job performance orchestrated by Tolbert or his associates—including one incident involving a coworker named Laquisha who filed what Davis describes as a false human resources report against her. When Davis sought support from her union representative regarding this incident, she says she was discouraged from filing a counter-report out of concern it might be viewed as retaliatory.
Davis also reports being suspended for two weeks following an investigation into Laquisha’s report—a suspension she characterizes as retaliatory given what she describes as an inadequate investigation process favoring non-objective witnesses supportive of Laquisha.
The complaint further details ongoing issues into February 2026 when another shift lead placed Davis next to Laquisha on the factory line despite prior complaints about feeling unsafe working near her due to previous incidents.
Davis argues that these events constitute violations of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 concerning sexual harassment (Count I), sex-based discrimination (Count II), and retaliation (Count III). She claims Ford knew or should have known about the harassment but failed to take prompt or effective action despite multiple complaints.
As relief from the court, Davis seeks back pay with interest; front pay; compensatory damages for emotional pain; pre-judgment and post-judgment interest; injunctive relief; liquidated damages; punitive damages; reasonable attorney’s fees; costs; and any other relief deemed just by the court.
Attorneys Nathan C. Volheim (IL Bar No.: 6302103) and Sophia K. Steere (KY Bar No.: 100481) from Sulaiman Law Group Ltd., located at 2500 S. Highland Avenue Suite 200 in Lombard, Illinois represent Tashona Davis in this matter under case number 1:26-cv-02877.
Source: 126cv02877_Tashona_Davis_v_Ford_Motor_Complaint_Northern_District_of_Illinois.pdf