(a)(1) If an agency reasonably determines that a preparatory or concluding activity is closely related to an employee's principal activities, and is indispensable to the performance of the principal activities, and that the total time spent in that activity is more than 10 minutes per workday, the agency shall credit all of the time spent in that activity, including the 10 minutes, as hours of work.
(2) If the time spent in a preparatory or concluding activity is compensable as hours of work, the agency shall schedule the time period for the employee to perform that activity. An employee shall be credited with the actual time spent in that activity during the time period scheduled by the agency. In no case shall the time credited for the performance of an activity exceed the time scheduled by the agency. The employee shall be credited for the time spent performing preparatory or concluding activities in accordance with paragraph (b) of § 551.521 of this part.
(b) A preparatory or concluding activity that is not closely related to the performance of the principal activities is considered a preliminary or postliminary activity. Time spent in preliminary or postliminary activities is excluded from hours of work and is not compensable, even if it occurs between periods of activity that are compensable as hours of work.
[48 FR 36805, Aug. 15, 1983]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
29
cases (
12 in the last 5 years), 1990–2026 · leading case:
Bull v. United States, 68 Fed. Cl. 212 (Fed. Cl. 2005).
Bull v. United States, 68 Fed. Cl. 212 (Fed. Cl. 2005).
· cites it 4× “282 (1956) (finding that employee time spent sharpening knives while off duty was an “integral part of and indispensable to the various butchering activities for which they were principally employed” because the maintenance of sharp knives was a condition of employment); 5…”
Riggs v. United States, 21 Cl. Ct. 664 (Ct. Cl. 1990).
· cites it 5× “Second, it contends that even if they are, 5 C.F.R. § 551.412 (a)(1) precludes payment for preshift or postshift activities of 10 minutes or less duration.”
Abbey v. United States, 99 Fed. Cl. 430 (Fed. Cl. 2011).
· cites it 2× “at 226 (citing 5 C.F.R. § 551.412 (a)(1)). “When the pleadings and submissions, viewed in the light most favorable to the claimant and analyzed *438 according to these factors, indicate that the claim is for work that is merely de minimis, summary judgment is entirely…”
England v. Advance Stores Co., 263 F.R.D. 423 (W.D. Ky. 2009).
· cites it 3× “Certain federal decisions do undeniably suggest that the de minimis doctrine, by operation 5 C.F.R. § 551.412 (a)(1), does apply to work periods of ten minutes or less per day.”
Abbey v. United States, 82 Fed. Cl. 722 (Fed. Cl. 2008).
· cites it 2× “at 226 (citing 5 C.F.R. § 551.412 (a)(1)). If an agency reasonably determines that a preparatory or concluding activity is closely related to an employee’s principal activities, and is indispensable to the performance of the principal activities, and that the total time spent in…”
Adams v. United States, 65 Fed. Cl. 217 (Fed. Cl. 2005).
“The Circuit Court in USAF considered whether the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) regulation characterizing preliminary and postlimi-nary activities not closely related to a federal employee’s principal work activity as non-compensable, 5 C.F.R. § 551.412 (b), permitted…”
Whalen v. United States, 93 Fed. Cl. 579 (Fed. Cl. 2010).
“1991) (holding that time Air Force employees spent waiting to leave work due to gate obstruction could not be the subject of collective bargaining because it was not compensable pursuant to 5 C.F.R. § 551.412 (b)(2)). These decisions are persuasive and dispositive of plaintiffs’…”
Bridges v. United States, 54 F.4th 703 (Fed. Cir. 2022).
· cites it 2× “5 C.F.R. § 551.412 (b). This princi- pal-activities-based definition of “continuous workday” is also consistent with OPM’s instruction that the boundaries of a workday are “not limited to a calendar day or any other 24-hour period.”
Ketchum v. City of Vallejo, 523 F. Supp. 2d 1150 (E.D. Cal. 2007).
“"If an agency reasonably determines that a preparatory or concluding activity is closely related to an employee’s principal activities, and is indispensable to the performance of the principal activities, and that the total time spent in that activity is more than 10 minutes per…”
Lesane v. Winter, 866 F. Supp. 2d 1 (D.C. Cir. 2011).
“If an employee spends exactly nine uncompensated minutes every day on compensable activities, the time is de minimis under the bright-line rule but perhaps compensable under the three-part test.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.