U.S. Code » Title 5 » Part PART III— EMPLOYEES › Subpart Subpart F— Labor-Management and Employee Relations › Chapter CHAPTER 75— ADVERSE ACTIONS › Subchapter SUBCHAPTER I— SUSPENSION FOR 14 DAYS OR LESS

5 U.S.C. § 7503

Cause and procedure

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 5 CasesGoogle Scholar
(a) Under regulations prescribed by the Office of Personnel Management, an employee may be suspended for 14 days or less for such cause as will promote the efficiency of the service (including discourteous conduct to the public confirmed by an immediate supervisor’s report of four such instances within any one-year period or any other pattern of discourteous conduct).(b) An employee against whom a suspension for 14 days or less is proposed is entitled to—(1) an advance written notice stating the specific reasons for the proposed action;(2) a reasonable time to answer orally and in writing and to furnish affidavits and other documentary evidence in support of the answer;(3) be represented by an attorney or other representative; and(4) a written decision and the specific reasons therefor at the earliest practicable date.(c) Copies of the notice of proposed action, the answer of the employee if written, a summary thereof if made orally, the notice of decision and reasons therefor, and any order effecting 11 So in original. Probably should be “affecting”. the suspension, together with any supporting material, shall be maintained by the agency and shall be furnished to the Merit Systems Protection Board upon its request and to the employee affected upon the employee’s request.(Added Pub. L. 95–454, title II, § 204(a), Oct. 13, 1978, 92 Stat. 1135.)Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesEffective Date

Section effective 90 days after Oct. 13, 1978, see section 907 of Pub. L. 95–454, set out as an Effective Date of 1978 Amendment note under section 1101 of this title.

Information on Appeal Rights

Pub. L. 115–91, div. A, title X, § 1097(b)(2), Dec. 12, 2017, 131 Stat. 1617, provided that:“(A)In general.—Any notice provided to an employee under section 7503(b)(1), section 7513(b)(1), or section 7543(b)(1) of title 5, United States Code, shall include detailed information with respect to—“(i) the right of the employee to appeal an action brought under the applicable section;“(ii) the forums in which the employee may file an appeal described in clause (i); and“(iii) any limitations on the rights of the employee that would apply because of the forum in which the employee decides to file an appeal.“(B)Development of information.—The information described in subparagraph (A) shall be developed by the Director of the Office of Personnel Management, in consultation with the Special Counsel, the Merit Systems Protection Board, and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.”

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 53 cases (10 in the last 5 years), 1980–2025 · leading case: United States Postal Serv. v. Gregory, 534 U.S. 1 (2001).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
United States Postal Serv. v. Gregory, 534 U.S. 1 (2001). · cites it 4× “Title 5 U. S. C. § 7503 (b), for instance, sets forth the basic procedural protections to which employees receiving minor discipline are entitled pursuant to the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 (CSRA).”
Elgin v. Dep't of the Treasury, 132 S. Ct. 2126 (2012). · cites it 2× “” 5 U. S. C. §§7503 (a), 7513(a). Employees entitled to review are those in the “competitive service” and “excepted service” who meet certain requirements regarding proba- 2 ELGIN v.”
Bush v. Lucas, 462 U.S. 367 (1983). · cites it 2× “For example, there are no provisions for appeal of either suspensions for 14 days or less, 5 U. S. C. § 7503 (1982 ed.), or adverse actions against probationary employees, § 7511.”
Nixon v. Fitzgerald, 457 U.S. 731 (1982). · cites it 2× “" 5 U. S. C. §§ 7503 , 7513, and 7543 (1976 ed.”
Ghaly v. United States Dep't of Agric., 228 F. Supp. 2d 283 (S.D.N.Y. 2002). “The plaintiff also was not entitled to the more minimal procedural protections set forth in 5 U.S.C. § 7503 (b), which applies only to “suspensions for 14 days or less,” id.”
Louis A. Carducci v. Donald T. Regan, Sec'y, U.S. Treasury Dep't, 714 F.2d 171 (D.C. Cir. 1983). “1966-1970 Comp, at 861, 874 (1969), with 5 U.S.C. §§ 7503 , 7513 (Supp. V 1981); and in its prohibition of administrative supplementation of these status and tenure protections through collective bargaining agreements, 5 U.”
Loyce E. Hayes v. Dep't of the Navy, 727 F.2d 1535 (Fed. Cir. 1984). “Of course, 5 U.S.C. § 7503 (1982) does require that the agency state in its notice the reasons for the proposed action and provides an opportunity for oral and written replies, as well as representation by counsel.”
Michelle Kaszowski v. Dep't of the Air Force, 2023 MSPB 15 (MSPB 2023). · cites it 2× “The 2018 NDAA codified, with respect to an action taken under 5 U.S.C. §§ 7503 (b)(1), 7513(b)(1), or 7543(b)(1), an agency’s obligation to notify an employee of her right to appeal an action brought under one of the applicable sections, the forums in which she may file her…”
Feds for Med. Freedom v. Biden, 63 F.4th 366 (5th Cir. 2023). “See 5 U.S.C. § 7503 ; Fausto, 484 U.S. at 446 .”
Janice R. Lachance, Dir., Off. of Pers. Mgmt. v. Larry Devall, & Merit Sys. Prot. Bd., 178 F.3d 1246 (Fed. Cir. 1999). “” 8 5 U.S.C. § 7503 (a) (1994). Whether such agency action indeed promotes efficiency of the service is within the province of the Board, but even so, pursuant to 5 U.”
Douglas A. Brook, Dir., Off. of Pers. Mgmt. v. Eugene J. Corrado, & Washington Area Metal Trades Council, 999 F.2d 523 (Fed. Cir. 1993). “1984) (interpreting 5 U.S.C. § 7503 (b), which contains a nearly identical notice provision, to be satisfied when employee “knew what charge he had to defend”).”
Refaei v. United States, 129 Fed. Cl. 1 (Fed. Cl. 2016). “§ 2302 (1988); Chapter 43 covers removals and reductions in grade and pay based on unacceptable performance, 5 U.S.C. § 4303 (1988); and Chapter 75 covers “adverse personnel actions”—removal, suspension, furlough, reduction in grade and pay— taken to “promote the efficiency of…”
Show all 53 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.