U.S. Code
»
Title 38
» Part PART V— BOARDS, ADMINISTRATIONS, AND SERVICES › Chapter CHAPTER 74— VETERANS HEALTH ADMINISTRATION—PERSONNEL › Subchapter SUBCHAPTER IV— PAY FOR NURSES AND OTHER HEALTH-CARE PERSONNEL
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
12
cases (
4 in the last 5 years), 2005–2026 · leading case:
Adams v. United States, 93 Fed. Cl. 563 (Fed. Cl. 2010).
Adams v. United States, 93 Fed. Cl. 563 (Fed. Cl. 2010).
· cites it 9× “Since January 1, 2004, Plaintiffs have received “additional pay,” pursuant to 38 U.S.C. § 7454 (b)(3), 4 in the amount of 25% of their regular hourly wages for work performed on Saturdays, but not Sundays.”
Curry v. United States, 81 Fed. Cl. 328 (Fed. Cl. 2008).
· cites it 4× “Hybrids are eligible to be designated to receive nighttime additional pay, 38 U.S.C. § 7454 (b)(1), and, beginning January 23, 2002, are entitled to receive weekend additional pay.”
Curry v. United States, 66 Fed. Cl. 593 (Fed. Cl. 2005).
· cites it 5× “Physician assistants and EFDAs are entitled to this same additional nighttime and weekend pay, per 38 U.S.C. § 7454 (a). Hybrids are currently entitled to the same additional weekend pay under 38 U.”
Demons v. United States, 119 Fed. Cl. 345 (Fed. Cl. 2014).
· cites it 9× “Since July 1, 2012, Plaintiffs have received “additional pay,” pursuant to 38 U.S.C. § 7454 (b)(3), 3 in the amount of 25% of their regular hourly wages, for work performed on Saturdays, but not Sundays.”
Adams v. United States, 99 Fed. Cl. 700 (Fed. Cl. 2011).
· cites it 10× “2042 , 2058 (codified as amended at 38 U.S.C. § 7454 (b)(3) (2006)). When the employees elected to use authorized accrued “leave with pay” 3 on Saturdays, they were only compensated at their basic pay rate.”
Athey v. United States, 132 Fed. Cl. 683 (Fed. Cl. 2017).
“§ 7464 (b); (6) ‘additional pa/ for night, Friday and Saturday hours for all ‘hybrid’ employees pursuant to 38 U.S.C. § 7454 (b) from January 1, 2002 forward to the date of Final Judgment issued by this Court; [[Image here]] (9) overtime pay under 38 U.”
Austin v. United States, 128 Fed. Cl. 314 (Fed. Cl. 2016).
· cites it 2× “§ 7453 (d), 38 U.S.C. § 7454 (a) or 38 U.S.C. § 7454 (b)(1) for each and every hour of such service .”
Carson, Jr. v. United States, No. 18-1902 (Fed. Cl. Sept. 9, 2022).
· cites it 14× “This litigation centers around Congress’s December 2003 amendment to 38 U.S.C. § 7454 (b), which added the following text: “(3) Employees appointed under section 7408 of this title shall be entitled to additional pay on the same basis as provided for nurses in section 7453(c) of…”
Garcia v. United States, No. 13-1024 (Fed. Cl. Apr. 9, 2015).
· cites it 11× “Stern, United States Department of Justice, Civil Division, Washington, D.”
Austin v. United States, No. 13-446 (Fed. Cl. Sept. 2, 2021).
· cites it 4× “§ 7453 (d), 38 U.S.C. § 7454 (a), and 38 U.S.C. § 7454 (b)(1).”
Crawley v. United States, No. 18-1804, 2021 WL 252838 (Fed. Cl. Jan. 25, 2021).
· cites it 3× “) In 2019, the defendant moved under RCFC 12(b)(1) and (b)(6) to dismiss the Hines plaintiffs’ claims on two grounds: (1) 38 U.S.C. § 7454 (b)(1) is not money-mandating; and (2) the plaintiffs failed to allege that the VA had approved them for premium pay on the same basis as…”
ALLEN v. United States, No. 22-400 (Fed. Cl. June 1, 2026).
“With respect to PAs, 38 U.S.C. § 7454 , which creates their entitlement to overtime pay “on the same basis as provided for nurses,” authorizes the VA Secretary to “prescribe by regulation standards for compensation and payments under this section.”
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.