A consent judgment is a court order that records an agreement the parties have already reached to resolve a case. Instead of the judge deciding who is right after a trial, both sides negotiate a settlement, put it in writing, and ask the judge to approve it. Once approved, it becomes a binding, enforceable judgment like any other. Unlike a typical judgment entered after a contested hearing or trial, a consent judgment is based on the parties’ consent, usually contains no findings after an evidentiary dispute, and is generally not appealable except in narrow situations (such as fraud or mutual mistake). In the Collum Roofing case, the Department of Labor and the company (and its operators) agreed to a consent judgment that the court entered on July 11, 2025.
Robert L. Collum and Michael J. Collum are the individual operators of Collum Roofing Inc. The Department of Labor’s complaint and news release identify them as defendants along with the company, and the consent judgment was entered “against Collum Roofing operators Robert and Michael Collum.” That means they were in charge of running the business and its pay practices, and the court held them personally responsible, along with the corporation, for the Fair Labor Standards Act violations and payment of back wages, liquidated damages, and penalties.
Under piece-rate pay, a worker is paid a set amount for each unit of work completed (for example, per roof or per square of shingles) instead of by the hour. The FLSA allows piece-rate pay, but employers still must: (1) ensure total earnings at least equal the minimum wage for all hours worked, and (2) pay overtime for hours over 40 in a workweek. To calculate overtime, the employer must figure the worker’s “regular rate” each week by dividing total piece‑rate earnings by total hours worked, then pay at least an extra one-half of that rate for each hour over 40, on top of the piece earnings. This makes accurate time records essential. If the employer does not track all hours spent on piece‑rate jobs, it cannot properly show that minimum wage and overtime were paid, which is why piece-rate systems make overtime calculations and recordkeeping more complex. In the Collum Roofing case, the company paid both hourly and piece rates but failed to keep time records for the piece‑rate work, preventing proper overtime compliance.
Key FLSA overtime provisions:
Key FLSA recordkeeping provisions:
For FLSA enforcement, a violation is considered “willful” when the employer either knew its conduct was against the law or showed “reckless disregard” for whether it was legal. This standard comes from the Supreme Court’s McLaughlin v. Richland Shoe decision and is written into the Department of Labor’s regulations. Reckless disregard includes situations where an employer should have investigated whether its pay practices complied with the FLSA but failed to do so. When DOL classifies violations as willful, the statute of limitations for back wages expands from two years to three, and the agency can assess higher civil money penalties. In the Collum Roofing case, DOL described the company’s actions as willful and assessed a $12,320 civil money penalty on top of the back wages and liquidated damages.
The Wage and Hour Division offers multiple support and compliance tools for employers, including:
Workers can check whether the Wage and Hour Division is holding back wages for them by using the online Workers Owed Wages (WOW) application. The steps are:
The PAID (Payroll Audit Independent Determination) program is a voluntary Department of Labor program that lets employers work with the Wage and Hour Division to quickly resolve certain wage‑and‑hour violations and avoid litigation. Under PAID: