5 U.S.C. § 104
Notwithstanding sections 6103 and 6104 of title 5, United States Code, if any employee on a flexible schedule under this title is relieved or prevented from working on a day designated as a holiday by Federal statute or Executive order, such employee is entitled to pay with respect to that day for 8 hours (or, in the case of a part-time employee, an appropriate portion of the employee’s biweekly basic work requirement as determined under regulations prescribed by the Commission).
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 73
cases (10 in the last 5 years), 1974–2026 · leading case: Peggy Maloney v. Exec. Off. of the President, Off. of Admin., 2022 MSPB 26 (MSPB 2022).
Peggy Maloney v. Exec. Off. of the President, Off. of Admin., 2022 MSPB 26 (MSPB 2022). “The central issue in this appeal is whether OA is an independent establishment within the meaning of 5 U.S.C. § 104 (1). ¶6 An “employee . . .”
Jephunneh Lawrence v. Elmer B. Staats, 640 F.2d 427 (D.C. Cir. 1981). “The term “independent establishment” is previously defined in 5 U.S.C. § 104 of the same statute to include: .”
Pellegrino v. U.S. Transp. SEC. Admin., 896 F.3d 207 (3rd Cir. 2018). “2017) (“5 U.S.C. § 104 provides that the Postal Service is not an ‘independent establishment’—and therefore not an ‘Executive agency’— for the purpose of Title 5.”
A & S Council Oil Co., Inc. v. Philip Lader, in His Off. Capacity as Adm'r of the United States Small Bus. Admin., 56 F.3d 234 (D.C. Cir. 1995). “§ 602 (a), which § 601(2) defines as encompassing not only “executive department[s]” but also (1) “independent establishments]” as defined in 5 U.S.C. § 104 , namely “an establishment in the executive branch [with certain irrelevant exceptions] which is not an Executive…”
Banks v. Merit Sys. Prot. Bd., 854 F.3d 1360 (Fed. Cir. 2017). “an establishment in the executive branch (other than the United States Postal Service .”
Ellsworth Bottling Co. v. United States, 408 F. Supp. 280 (W.D. Okla. 1975). “The term “independent establishment” is not defined in the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949, however, the term is defined by 5 U.S.C. § 104 as: “ . . .an establishment in the executive branch (other than the United States Postal Service or the Postal Rate…”
Milner v. Bolger, 546 F. Supp. 375 (E.D. Cal. 1982). “§ 201 , 5 U.S.C. § 104 . The Veterans’ Administration, unlike the Postal Service, is an “executive agency,” 5 U.”
Minnie M. Honeycutt v. John E. Long, Major Gen. Commander, Army & Air Force Exch. Serv., 861 F.2d 1346 (5th Cir. 1988). “5 U.S.C. § 104 . The AAFES is a part of the Department of Defense.”
Champaign-Urbana News Agency, Inc. v. J. L. Cummins News Co., 479 F. Supp. 281 (C.D. Ill. 1979). “Thus, it is clear that the AAFES is a part of the Department of Army and Air Force and, hence part of the Department of Defense.”
Bernard L. Silver, Cartwright-Mitchell, Inc., a Delaware Corp. v. United States Postal Serv., 951 F.2d 1033 (9th Cir. 1991). “” 5 U.S.C. § 104 . It is only because the Postal Service is “an establishment of the executive branch” as that term is generally understood that the drafters of section 104 found it necessary to make an exception for the Postal Service for certain definitional purposes under…”
U.S. Sec. & Exch. Comm'n v. Syron, 934 F. Supp. 2d 609 (S.D.N.Y. 2013). “See 5 U.S.C. § 104 (defining an “independent establishment” as, among other things, “an establishment in the executive branch .”
Mark Kroll v. United States of Am. & United States Postal Serv., 58 F.3d 1087 (6th Cir. 1995). “5 U.S.C. § 104 (1988). This in turn exempts both organizations from the definition of "Executive agency” for purposes of Title 5, see 5 U.”
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.