Summary

Portrait of Tom C. Clark Tom C. Clark United States v. Bergh — Opinion of the Court

Should the respondents' interpretation prevail, it would result in a double standard of pay for per diem employees working on holidays. On those holidays included in the 1885 Resolution, the employees would receive double pay, while on holidays included in or created pursuant to the authority provided by the 1938 Resolution alone they would receive only single pay. This result is required because the 1938 Resolution permits no holiday pay when the employee is required to work.
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of Tom C. Clark Tom C. Clark United States v. Bergh — Opinion of the Court

The Commission suggested the language that might be inserted in a Resolution that 'would give permanent statutory authority' for holiday pay. In addition, the Commission's reference to the 'accounting authorities' revealed that the Comptroller General had advised the Secretary of the Navy on December 20, 1937, that under existing law (a) per annum employees suffered no loss of income as the result of holidays, whether declared by statute or executive order, where as per diem employees received pay only for those holidays enumerated in the 1885 Resolution
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of Tom C. Clark Tom C. Clark United States v. Bergh — Opinion of the Court

But, even though not specifically adverted to, it would seem that a similar discrimination was also apparent as to work days in that per annum employees would receive no extra pay, while per diem employees would receive not only their regular wage but an equal amount as holiday pay.↑ Moreover, the Schedule of Wages here provided for 50% additional pay for work required on holidays not included in the regular tour of duty and 125% additional for work in excess of eight hours on such days.↑ 18 Comp.Gen.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature