Reservists Filed Suit for Unpaid Differential Pay
Federal civilian employees seek back pay for active duty service after a high-court ruling.
Updated on Sept. 23, 2026 in Military Jobs
Live Poll
Should federal agencies be held strictly accountable for failing to pay mandatory employee compensation?
Five military reservists have filed a class action lawsuit before the Merit Systems Protection Board to recover unpaid differential pay for civilian employees who served on active duty. The legal challenge targets the Departments of Defense, Justice, and Veterans Affairs regarding compensation dating back to 2009.
Why it matters
The lawsuit contends that the government failed to bridge the salary gap for employees deployed during declared national emergencies, a practice challenged following a Supreme Court decision. For employers, the case highlights the complex compliance requirements surrounding USERRA obligations and the potential for long-term liability.
The filing involves five plaintiffs seeking compensation for service dating back to 2009, while contrasted with the six-year statute of limitations typically found in the Court of Federal Claims. The action follows an April 2025 Supreme Court ruling that established federal employee eligibility for differential pay.
The players
Merit Systems Protection Board
An independent federal quasi-judicial agency that adjudicates disputes between federal employees and their employing agencies.
Department of Justice
The federal executive department responsible for the enforcement of law and administration of justice, acting here as an employer defendant.
Department of Defense
The federal executive department responsible for providing the military forces needed to deter war and protect the security of the United States.
Department of Veterans Affairs
A federal cabinet-level department that provides integrated life-long healthcare services to eligible military veterans.
The details
The lawsuit asserts that federal agencies incorrectly withheld the difference between civilian salaries and military pay during periods of active duty service. Plaintiffs argue that claims under the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA) are exempt from standard statute of limitations, potentially exposing the government to years of retroactive liability. The filing comes after the Department of Justice rejected specific pay requests, including a denial for plaintiff John Mezzanotte on August 19, 2026.
Timeline
2009: Earliest date for unpaid compensation claims.
2016: Earliest active duty service by named plaintiffs.
April 2025: Supreme Court ruled on differential pay eligibility.
August 19, 2026: Department of Justice denied Mezzanotte's pay request.
September 30, 2026: End date for current active duty orders.
Market Landscape
This litigation follows the Supreme Court ruling in Feliciano v. Department of Transportation, which affirmed that federal employees are entitled to differential pay. The current action represents an attempt to enforce that precedent across multiple departments for service periods spanning over a decade.
Operators managing employees with military service obligations should audit their current differential pay policies against recent legal precedents. Consult with qualified counsel to determine if your leave policies satisfy federal requirements, particularly regarding retroactive compensation.
The takeaway
The case underscores the importance of monitoring judicial rulings that redefine the scope of employment benefits and statutory protections. Businesses should document all pay differentials provided during military leave and track any updates to agency guidelines following the recent Supreme Court decision.
What happens next
Two of the named plaintiffs in the class action are currently scheduled to remain on active duty orders through September 30, 2026.
Further reading
For more on the intersection of service obligations and employment law, visit Military Jobs.
Live Poll
Should federal agencies be held strictly accountable for failing to pay mandatory employee compensation?
