U.S. Code » Title 38 » Part PART V— BOARDS, ADMINISTRATIONS, AND SERVICES › Chapter CHAPTER 74— VETERANS HEALTH ADMINISTRATION—PERSONNEL › Subchapter SUBCHAPTER I— APPOINTMENTS

38 U.S.C. § 7408

Appointment of additional employees

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 38 CasesGoogle Scholar
(a) There shall be appointed by the Secretary under civil service laws, rules, and regulations, such additional employees, other than those provided in section 7306 and paragraphs (1) and (3) of section 7401 of this title and those specified in sections 7405 and 7406 of this title, as may be necessary to carry out the provisions of this chapter.(b) The Secretary, after considering an individual’s existing pay, higher or unique qualifications, or the special needs of the Department, may appoint the individual to a position in the Administration providing direct patient-care services or services incident to direct patient-services at a rate of pay above the minimum rate of the appropriate grade.(Added Pub. L. 102–40, title IV, § 401(b)(2), May 7, 1991, 105 Stat. 229; amended Pub. L. 103–446, title XII, § 1201(e)(21), Nov. 2, 1994, 108 Stat. 4686.)Editorial NotesPrior Provisions

Provisions similar to those in this section were contained in section 4111 of this title prior to the repeal of that section as part of the complete revision of chapter 73 of this title by Pub. L. 102–40.

Amendments

1994—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 103–446 substituted “civil service” for “civil-service”.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7 cases (6 in the last 5 years), 2011–2024 · leading case: Boyer v. United States, 97 F.4th 834 (Fed. Cir. 2024).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Boyer v. United States, 97 F.4th 834 (Fed. Cir. 2024). · cites it 5× “§ 5333 and 38 U.S.C. § 7408 . These stat- utes do not apply to Dr.”
Adams v. United States, 99 Fed. Cl. 700 (Fed. Cl. 2011). · cites it 6× “The third category of VHA employees are General Schedule civil service employees, hired under 38 U.S.C. § 7408 (2006). The terms and conditions of their employment, rights, and associated benefits are governed by title 5.”
Boyer v. United States (Fed. Cir. 2024). · cites it 5× “§ 5333 and 38 U.S.C. § 7408 . These stat- utes do not apply to Dr.”
Boyer v. United States (Fed. Cl. 2022). · cites it 4× “” 38 U.S.C. § 7408 (emphasis added). Although this provision does not directly apply to the appointment of VA pharmacists, the principle is nonetheless the same: Congress has statutorily allowed pay to be determined through consideration of existing pay alone even after passage…”
Boyer v. United States, 98 F.4th 1073 (Fed. Cir. 2024). “This reading of § 5333, however, fails to appreciate that the provision doesn’t just say that prior pay may be considered; it clearly says that prior pay may be considered alone through the 6 See also 38 U.S.C. § 7408 ; Dep’t of Def., Instruction 1400.”
Carson, Jr. v. United States (Fed. Cl. 2022). “§ 7454 (b)(3), in combination with its interpretation of 38 U.S.C. § 7408 , enactment of section 7454(b)(3) alone was not sufficient to trigger an employee’s entitlement to weekend premium pay; rather, additional administrative action by the VA was required to determine which…”
Henderson v. Adkins (E.D. Mo. 2023). “38 U.S.C. § 7408 (b) (emphasis added). First, Henderson admits that she is a VCS—rather than a VHA—employee appointed under section 7802, and that she is in the NA pay plan.”
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.