STAND. COM. REP. 148

Honolulu, Hawaii

, 2003

RE: H.B. No. 969

H.D. 1

 

 

 

Honorable Calvin K.Y. Say

Speaker, House of Representatives

Twenty-Second State Legislature

Regular Session of 2003

State of Hawaii

Sir:

Your Committee on Labor and Public Employment, to which was referred H.B. No. 969 entitled:

"A BILL FOR AN ACT RELATING TO COLLECTIVE BARGAINING,"

begs leave to report as follows:

The purpose of this bill is to maintain the process of arbitration mutually agreed upon by public employees and employers and maintain the process to:

(1) Summon employees as witnesses to procure relevant information and documents;

(2) Confirm, vacate, modify, or correct arbitration awards;

(3) File notices of motion to vacate, modify, or correct an arbitration award; and

(4) Enter into judgement of arbitration awards with the court and record such motions, by incorporating, in part, language from chapter 658, Hawaii Revised Statutes (HRS), which had been in effect since 1925 but was repealed in 2002.

The Department of the Attorney General, Hawaii State Teachers Association, County of Maui Department of Personnel Services, and City and County of Honolulu Department of Human Resources testified in support of this measure. The Department of Human Resources Development testified in support of the intent of the measure. The Hawaii Fire Fighters Association testified in opposition to this measure. The Office of Collective Bargaining offered comments.

The enactment of chapter 658A, HRS,(the Uniform Arbitration Act or UAA) significantly altered the long-standing arbitration process negotiated between public employers and public employee unions. Further, amendments made in 2002 to UAA are unclear as to whether public sector arbitration awards are covered under chapter 658A, HRS. Currently, it is the understanding of both public employers and the exclusive representatives of the public employees that arbitrated awards are final and binding on the two parties.

Moreover, the changes made by UAA resulted in arbitration proceedings taking on the characteristics of a litigation practice, becoming more costly and tending to exclude nonlawyers such as labor relations specialists and union business agents from being advocates at arbitration hearings.

Your Committee notes that the existing arbitration process negotiated between public employers and the public employee unions in chapter 89, HRS, is a less formal and less costly process than the arbitration process presently provided for in UAA. Accordingly, your Committee has amended this measure by:

(1) Deleting its contents and replacing it with language that excludes public sector employees from certain sections of UAA; and

(2) Making technical, nonsubstantive changes for purposes of clarity, conformity, and style.

As affirmed by the record of votes of the members of your Committee on Labor and Public Employment that is attached to this report, your Committee is in accord with the intent and purpose of H.B. No. 969, as amended herein, and recommends that it pass Second Reading in the form attached hereto as H.B. No. 969, H.D. 1, and be referred to the Committee on Judiciary.

 

Respectfully submitted on behalf of the members of the Committee on Labor and Public Employment,

 

____________________________

MARCUS R. OSHIRO, Chair