5 U.S.C. § 5546

Pay for Sunday and holiday work

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 5 CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) An employee who performs work during a regularly scheduled 8-hour period of service which is not overtime work as defined by section 5542(a) of this title a part of which is performed on Sunday is entitled to pay for the entire period of service at the rate of his basic pay, plus premium pay at a rate equal to 25 percent of his rate of basic pay. For employees serving outside the United States in areas where Sunday is a routine workday and another day of the week is officially recognized as the day of rest and worship, the Secretary of State may designate the officially recognized day of rest and worship as the day with respect to which the preceding sentence shall apply instead of Sunday.(b) An employee who performs work on a holiday designated by Federal statute, Executive order, or with respect to an employee of the government of the District of Columbia, by order of the District of Columbia Council, is entitled to pay at the rate of his basic pay, plus premium pay at a rate equal to the rate of his basic pay, for that holiday work which is not—(1) in excess of 8 hours; or(2) overtime work as defined by section 5542(a) of this title.(c) An employee who is required to perform any work on a designated holiday is entitled to pay for at least 2 hours of holiday work.(d) An employee who performs overtime work as defined by section 5542(a) of this title on a Sunday or a designated holiday is entitled to pay for that overtime work in accordance with section 5542(a) of this title.(e) Premium pay under this section is in addition to premium pay which may be due for the same work under section 5545(a) and (b) of this title, providing premium pay for nightwork.(Pub. L. 89–554, Sept. 6, 1966, 80 Stat. 488; Pub. L. 90–83, § 1(29), Sept. 11, 1967, 81 Stat. 201; Pub. L. 90–623, § 1(13), Oct. 22, 1968, 82 Stat. 1312; Pub. L. 105–277, div. G, subdiv. B, title XXIII, § 2317(2), Oct. 21, 1998, 112 Stat. 2681–829.)

Historical and Revision Notes
1966 Act
Derivation	U.S. Code	Revised Statutes and Statutes at Large
	5 U.S.C. 922.	June 30, 1945, ch. 212, § 302, 59 Stat. 298.
		May 24, 1946, ch. 270, § 11, 60 Stat. 218.
		Sept. 1, 1954, ch. 1208, § 207, 68 Stat. 1110.
		July 18, 1958, Pub. L. 85–533, § 1, 72 Stat. 377.

In subsections (a) and (b), the word “officer” is omitted as included in “employee”.

In subsections (b) and (c), the word “designated” is substituted for “such a” and “such” in former section 922(b) and (c) to identify the holiday as one designated by statute, Executive order, or the Board of Commissioners of the District of Columbia.

Standard changes are made to conform with the definitions applicable and the style of this title as outlined in the preface to the report.

1967 Act
Section of title 5	Source (U.S. Code)	Source (Statutes at Large)
5546(a)	5 App.: 921a.	July 18, 1966, Pub. L. 89–504, § 405(b)(1), (c), 80 Stat. 297.

In subsection (a), the words “An employee who performs work . . . is entitled to pay . . . at the rate of his basic pay” are coextensive with and substituted for “Any . . . service . . . performed . . . shall be compensated . . . at the rate of basic compensation of the officer or employee performing such work.” The words “section 5542(a) of this title” are substituted for “section 201 of this Act” to reflect the codification of that section in title 5, United States Code. The words “between midnight Saturday and midnight Sunday” are coextensive with and substituted for “within the period commencing at midnight Saturday and ending at midnight Sunday”.

Editorial NotesAmendments

1998—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 105–277 inserted at end “For employees serving outside the United States in areas where Sunday is a routine workday and another day of the week is officially recognized as the day of rest and worship, the Secretary of State may designate the officially recognized day of rest and worship as the day with respect to which the preceding sentence shall apply instead of Sunday.”

1968—Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 90–623, § 1(13)(A), substituted “District of Columbia Council” for “Board of Commissioners of the District of Columbia”.

Subsec. (d). Pub. L. 90–623, § 1(13)(B), substituted “5542(a)” for “5442(a)”.

Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesEffective Date of 1968 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 90–623 intended to restate without substantive change the law in effect on Oct. 22, 1968, but amendment of subsec. (d) of this section by section 1(13)(B) of Pub. L. 90–623 effective as of Sept. 6, 1966, for all purposes, see section 6 of Pub. L. 90–623, set out as a note under section 5334 of this title.

Transfer of Functions

District of Columbia Council, as established by Reorg. Plan No. 3 of 1967, abolished as of noon Jan. 2, 1975, by Pub. L. 93–198, title VII, § 711, Dec. 24, 1973, 87 Stat. 818, and replaced by Council of District of Columbia, as provided by section 401 of Pub. L. 93–198.

Condition of Performance

Pub. L. 105–277, div. A, § 101(h) [title VI, § 624], Oct. 21, 1998, 112 Stat. 2681–480, 2681–518, provided that: “Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no part of any funds provided by this Act or any other Act beginning in fiscal year 1999 and thereafter shall be available for paying Sunday premium pay to any employee unless such employee actually performed work during the time corresponding to such premium pay.”

Similar provisions were contained in the following prior appropriations act:

Pub. L. 105–61, title VI, § 636, Oct. 10, 1997, 111 Stat. 1316.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 34 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1989–2021 · leading case: Fathauer v. United States, 566 F.3d 1352 (Fed. Cir. 2009).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Fathauer v. United States, 566 F.3d 1352 (Fed. Cir. 2009). · cites it 14× “, Laurie Nisbit, and Richard Thoman (collectively, "Appellants") appeal the United States Court of Federal Claims's decision denying their claims for Sunday premium pay under 5 U.S.C. § 5546 (a). Because we conclude that the court erred by finding ambiguity in the word…”

Fathauer v. United States, 82 Fed. Cl. 509 (Fed. Cl. 2008). · cites it 22× “Plaintiffs, who are part-time employees, claim that they are entitled to the 25 percent Sunday pay differential set forth in the Sunday premium pay statute, 5 U.S.C. § 5546 (a). They have been denied Sunday premium pay pursuant to the applicable Office of Personnel Management…”

Yanko v. United States, 127 Fed. Cl. 682 (Fed. Cl. 2016). · cites it 12× “405 (Holiday for Part-Time Employees on Flexible Work Schedules); 5 U.S.C. § 5546 (b) (Holiday Pay); 5 U.S.”

Gross v. United States, 106 Fed. Cl. 369 (Fed. Cl. 2012). · cites it 7× “Plaintiff, an employee of the United States Census Bureau (“Census Bureau”), contends that he is entitled to Sunday premium pay under 5 U.S.C. § 5546 (a). He brought this suit on behalf of himself and those similarly situated, and now moves for class certification.”

John Doe, on Behalf of Themselves & All Others Similarly Situated v. United States, 463 F.3d 1314 (Fed. Cir. 2006). · cites it 2× “§ 5545 (c)(2), and holiday pay pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 5546 (b). We discern no such error and therefore affirm the judgment of the Court of Federal Claims dismissing the Doe plaintiffs’ complaint.”

Jones v. United States, 118 Fed. Cl. 728 (Fed. Cl. 2014). · cites it 7× “Most executive agency employees are entitled to Sunday premium pay pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 5546 (a). See 5 C.F.R. §§ 550.”

Curry v. United States, 66 Fed. Cl. 593 (Fed. Cl. 2005). · cites it 4× “2d at 748 (quoting 5 U.S.C. § 5546 (a) (adding emphasis)). The government’s argument that the Sunday premium pay statute “requires that only ‘[a]n employee who performs work’ is eligible to receive Sunday premium *599 pay,” id.”

Austin v. United States, 124 Fed. Cl. 410 (Fed. Cl. 2015). · cites it 6× “Like section 7453(d), 5 U.S.C. § 5546 (b) also requires that employees be paid a twice their rate of basic pay for work performed “on a holiday designated by Federal statute or Executive order.”

Yanko v. United States, 869 F.3d 1328 (Fed. Cir. 2017). · cites it 2× “5 U.S.C. § 5546 (b). The rate of premium pay for holiday work is equal to the employee’s rate of basic pay, id.”

Nat'l Air Traffic Controllers Ass'n v. United States, 160 F.3d 714 (Fed. Cir. 1998). “Congress subsequently enacted the Department of Transportation and Related Agencies Appropriations Act for fiscal year 1995, which contained a provision forbidding any of the appropriated funds to be used to provide premium pay under 5 U.S.C. § 5546 (a) “to any Federal Aviation…”

Jones v. United States, 126 Fed. Cl. 165 (Fed. Cl. 2016). · cites it 4× “288 , 297-98 (1966) (codified as amended at 5 U.S.C. § 5546 (a)). The Premium Pay Statute applies to the majority of executive agency employees and to “prevailing rate” government employees.”

Armitage v. United States, 23 Cl. Ct. 483 (Ct. Cl. 1991). · cites it 4× “§ 5542 for all hours worked in excess of eight hours in a day or 40 hours in a week, and receive premium pay for hours worked on Sundays and holidays pursuant to 5 U.S.C. §§ 5546 (a) and 5546(b). The China Lake plaintiffs accrue annual and sick leave pursuant to 5 U.”

Show all 34 citing cases →

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.