Matthew Purushotham
Wed., May 7, 2025
On April 30, 2025, the United States Supreme Court ruled in Feliciano v. Department of Transportation, U.S. No. 23-861, that a Coast Guard reservist was entitled to differential pay when he was called to active duty from his civilian job as an air traffic controller with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). The differential pay makes up for the difference between his federal civilian employee pay and the lower pay he received while called up to Coast Guard service.
The Supreme Court reversed and remanded a 2023 decision by the U.S. Circuit Court for the Federal Circuit, which concluded that the statutory provision providing for differential pay (5 U.S.C. § 5538) only applied to employees activated in support of Department of Defense contingency operations and that Mr. Feliciano was called up pursuant to different statutory provisions. The Federal Circuit concluded that the plaintiff was, therefore, not eligible for differential pay. However, the Supreme Court concluded that “the statutory language means what its terms most naturally suggest. A federal civilian employee called to active duty pursuant to ‘any other provision of law . . . during a national emergency’ is entitled to differential pay without having to prove that his service was substantively connected in some particular way to some particular emergency.”
The Supreme Court’s ruling opens the door for other federal civilian employees and reservists to receive differential pay owed to them for their active-duty service.
MSE has handled numerous cases involving federal employee pay, including, recovering hazardous duty pay, and correcting the miscalculation of federal employees’ regular rates.
If you are concerned that your employer has violated your rights in any of these areas, contact us at [email protected].
