This is a Fair Labor Standards Act collective action filed in the Southern District of Indiana on behalf of safety professionals who alleged they were not paid overtime for hours worked above forty in a workweek. The case was filed in 2023 and resolved by a court-approved settlement in December 2025. The settlement agreement was reviewed and approved by United States District Judge Sarah Evans Barker as fair and reasonable in all respects.
What was Cooper v. Intact about?
Two named plaintiffs, Shon Cooper and Jackie Read, sued Intact Professional Health & Safety Services, Inc. for unpaid overtime under the Fair Labor Standards Act. They alleged that Intact failed to pay them at one and one-half times their regular rate of pay for hours worked over forty in a workweek. They brought the case as a collective action under 29 U.S.C. § 216(b), and other former Intact safety managers filed written consents to join the lawsuit as opt-in plaintiffs.
Where was the case filed and who was the judge?
The case was filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, New Albany Division. The case number is 4:23-cv-00140-SEB-KMB. United States District Judge Sarah Evans Barker presided over the case, and United States Magistrate Judge Kellie M. Barr handled pretrial proceedings.
What was the procedural history?
After the complaint was filed in 2023, the parties exchanged written discovery and worked toward a negotiated resolution. The parties jointly moved for conditional certification of the collective, which the Court denied without prejudice in September 2024 with directions on the evidentiary showing required at the notice stage. The parties then continued discovery, additional opt-in plaintiffs joined, and a Notice of Settlement was filed in April 2025. Plaintiffs then filed an unopposed motion for approval of the FLSA collective action and settlement agreement.
How was the case resolved?
On December 8, 2025, the Court entered an Order granting Plaintiffs' Unopposed Motion for Approval of FLSA Collective Action and Settlement Agreement. The Court found the settlement agreement fair and reasonable in all respects under § 216 of the FLSA, finally certified the collective consisting of the individuals receiving payments under the settlement, approved service awards for the named plaintiffs, and approved the requested attorneys' fees and costs. The case was dismissed without prejudice with the Court retaining jurisdiction to enforce the settlement.
Why does this case matter for workers owed overtime?
A court-approved settlement under § 216 of the Fair Labor Standards Act is the typical way wage and hour collective actions resolve. Settlements involving disputed overtime claims generally require court approval to make sure the settlement is fair to the workers who are giving up their statutory rights. In Cooper, the Court's approval order reflects the standard analysis: review of the record, review of the parties' settlement agreement, and a finding that the terms are fair and reasonable. The case is one example of how a § 216(b) collective action proceeds from filing through court-approved resolution in federal court.
What kind of workers were in the collective?
The collective members were current and former safety managers of Intact Professional Health & Safety Services, Inc. who alleged they worked over forty hours in a workweek and were not paid overtime at one and one-half times their regular rates. The Court finally certified the collective as part of its December 8, 2025 approval order.
Why I file these cases
I file unpaid overtime collective actions because the statute was written to be enforced one case at a time by the workers who lived the violation. When a settlement reaches the court-approval stage and the Court signs off as fair and reasonable, that record is what shows the system worked. Cooper is one example of that path from filing through approved resolution in federal court.