2023 Hawaii Revised Statutes
Title 7. Public Officers and Employees
89. Collective Bargaining in Public Employment
- 89-1 Statement of findings and policy.
- 89-2 Definitions.
- 89-3 Rights of employees.
- 89-3.5 Religious exemption from support of employee organization.
- 89-4 Payroll deductions.
- 89-5 Hawaii labor relations board.
- 89-5.1 Hearing notice.
- 89-6 Appropriate bargaining units.
- 89-7 Elections.
- 89-8 Recognition and representation; employee participation.
- 89-8.5 Negotiating authority; Hawaii health systems corporation.
- 89-9 Scope of negotiations; consultation.
- 89-10 Written agreements; enforceability; cost items.
- 89-10.5 Collective bargaining and local school initiatives. Notwithstanding any other law to the contrary, any collective bargaining agreement concerning public school employees may include terms that would allow an employee to work a longer period each day and a longer school year. Consideration of a longer school day or longer school year shall be related to state and local school initiatives and may be included in proposals submitted in connection with the incentive and innovation grant review process. [L 1993, c 364, pt of §11, §31; am L 1994, c 272, §34(2)]
- 89-10.55 Charter school collective bargaining; bargaining unit; employer; exclusive representative.
- 89-10.6 Schools; waiver of policies, rules, or procedures.
- 89-10.8 Resolution of disputes; grievances.
- 89-11 Resolution of disputes; impasses.
- 89-12 Strikes, rights and prohibitions.
- 89-13 Prohibited practices; evidence of bad faith.
- 89-14 Prevention of prohibited practices.
- 89-15 Financial reports to employees.
- 89-16 Public records and proceedings.
- 89-16.5 Access to personal records by an employee organization.
- 89-16.6 Disclosure to an exclusive representative. (a) The appropriate government agencies shall, upon written request, disclose to an exclusive representative information relating to employees within their respective bargaining unit as follows: name; mailing address; physical worksite address; date of change of physical worksite address; organizational structure, including name and codes for department, division, branch, section, and unit, or equivalent, as applicable; worksite telephone number; job title; job description; position number; employee identification number; appointment type; civil service status; social security number; bargaining unit; date of change in bargaining unit status of the employee; full-time equivalence of the employee; the employee's leave without pay status with effective dates and duration; basic rate of pay; types and effective dates of personnel actions that affect the amount and payment of the basic rate of pay; salary scale and range or equivalent; salary step or equivalent; amounts and dates of differential pay; amounts and dates of dues deductions; and amounts and dates of other authorized voluntary payroll deductions remitted to the exclusive representative; except that this provision shall not apply to information regarding present or former employees involved in an undercover capacity in a law enforcement agency. (b) Information disclosed to the exclusive representative under this section shall be provided within a reasonable time after receipt of the written request. (c) Information regarding new hire employees under this section shall be provided to the appropriate exclusive representatives within two payroll periods. (d) An exclusive representative receiving government records pursuant to this section shall be subject to the same restrictions on disclosure of the records as the originating agency. (e) Information disclosed pursuant to this section shall be provided in a form conducive to electronic data processing; provided the employer possesses appropriate data processing capab
- 89-17 List of employee organizations and exclusive representatives.
- 89-18 Penalty.
- 89-19 Chapter takes precedence, when.
- 89-20 Chapter inoperative, when.
- 89-23 Classroom cleaning; exception.
Rules of Court
Applicability of Hawaii Rules of Civil Procedure, see HRCP rule 81(b)(12).
Case Notes
Chapter 92F not a "conflicting statute on the same subject matter" as this chapter, within the meaning of 89-19, and thus is not preempted by this chapter or any collective bargaining agreement negotiated under it. 83 H. 378, 927 P.2d 386.
Under this chapter, a public employee pursuing an individual grievance exhausts his or her administrative remedies when the employee completes every step available to the employee in the grievance process and a request to the employee's exclusive bargaining representative to proceed to the last grievance step, which only the representative can undertake, would be futile. 97 H. 528, 40 P.3d 930.
The Act 355, L 1997 amendment to 78-13, which essentially altered the dates when public employees are to be paid, did not violate article XIII, 2 of the Hawaii constitution nor this chapter inasmuch as they did not prohibit a state employer from changing the pay dates of its employees; thus, the Act 355 amendment was not unconstitutional. 111 H. 168, 140 P.3d 401.
As 84-13 prohibited the posting of campaign materials on a union bulletin board on the fourth floor of a state building, and nothing in this chapter was explicitly contrary to, or inconsistent with, that construction, there was no conflict between 84-13 and 89-3. 116 H. 73, 170 P.3d 324.
The Hawaii labor relations board (HLRB) had exclusive original jurisdiction over the statutory issues raised in public employees' union's complaint, and the circuit court erred in addressing the constitutional issues without first giving the HLRB the opportunity to address the issues arising under this chapter. 124 H. 197, 239 P.3d 1.
Circuit court erred by failing to allow the Hawaii labor relations board to decide the issues relating to this chapter before deciding the constitutional issues in the case where the plain language of 89-14 supported the conclusion that the board had exclusive original jurisdiction over the plaintiffs' claims and that the case was a "controversy concerning prohibited practices" that must first be submitted to the board. 126 H. 318, 271 P.3d 613.
The intermediate court of appeals erred in staying union's privatization claims to pursue administrative remedies before the Hawaii labor relations board under the primary jurisdiction doctrine; this chapter does not require that the Hawaii labor relations board first pass on controversies related to privatization. 133 H. 188, 325 P.3d 600 (2014).
Granting the labor relations board exclusive original jurisdiction over plaintiff's action under 89-14 did not violate plaintiff's equal protection right; as plaintiff's fundamental right was not implicated, and plaintiff did not argue that public employees were a suspect class, the board's exclusive original jurisdiction over public sector prohibited practice controversies was rationally related to the public policy of this chapter. 125 H. 317 (App.), 260 P.3d 1135.
Granting the labor relations board exclusive original jurisdiction over plaintiff's action under 89-14 did not violate plaintiff's substantive due process rights; as plaintiff's fundamental right was not implicated, granting the board exclusive original jurisdiction over public sector prohibited practice controversies was rationally related to the public policy of this chapter - that it would be more effective in promoting harmonious governmental employer-employee relations and assuring the effective operation of government for these controversies to be first decided by the board rather than the courts. 125 H. 317 (App.), 260 P.3d 1135.
Section 89-14, by vesting the labor relations board with exclusive original jurisdiction over plaintiff's action, did not violate the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, as the administrative dispute resolution process set forth in this chapter did not preclude plaintiff from seeking redress from the courts; plaintiff could appeal an unfavorable decision issued by the board to the circuit court and was thus not deprived of reasonable access to the courts. 125 H. 317 (App.), 260 P.3d 1135.
Section 89-14 did not violate plaintiff's procedural due process rights where: (1) this chapter afforded plaintiff the opportunity to present plaintiff's action to the labor relations board in an administrative hearing; (2) the decision of the board required a majority vote of its three members, and one member each must be representative of management, labor, and the public; and (3) any person aggrieved by a decision of the board could appeal that decision to the circuit court. 125 H. 317 (App.), 260 P.3d 1135.
To the extent that there may be a conflict between the jurisdictional provisions of this chapter and chapter 658A, this chapter takes precedence over chapter 658A. 132 H. 492 (App.), 323 P.3d 136 (2014).
Discussed: 133 H. 188, 325 P.3d 600 (2014).