HB162 amends Hawaii’s public-sector collective bargaining law governing how the Hawaii Labor Relations Board handles an impasse between a public employer and the exclusive representative for certain bargaining units. Under current law, the board must first appoint a mediator for the first 20 days after impasse, and if the dispute continues, submit it to a three-member arbitration panel. The bill keeps that framework but updates the process for selecting the neutral third arbitrator.
Specifically, if the parties cannot agree on the neutral arbitrator within 30 days, the board may request a list of five qualified and experienced interest arbitrators from the American Arbitration Association, the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service, or their successors. The bill also clarifies that the five-name list may include arbitrators from both organizations. The rest of the arbitration process—party selection of panel members, submission of final positions, hearing timeline, and issuance of a decision—remains largely unchanged.
Impact
The bill makes a targeted amendment to Section 89-11, Hawaii Revised Statutes, affecting impasse resolution procedures for several public employee bargaining units, including education personnel, university and community college employees, nurses, correctional workers, firefighters, police officers, state law enforcement officers, and ocean safety officers. Its practical effect is to broaden and modernize the pool of neutral arbitrators available to the Hawaii Labor Relations Board, potentially improving the speed and flexibility of arbitration panel formation when the parties cannot agree on a chairperson.
Sentiment
The available voting history suggests the bill was broadly supported and noncontroversial. It passed Senate Labor and Technology, Senate Ways and Means, and the conference committees unanimously or near-unanimously, with no recorded dissent in the provided votes. The absence of committee transcript opposition also suggests general agreement that the change is procedural and administrative rather than substantive.
Contention
There is little evidence of major contention in the materials provided. The only discernible policy issue is whether the Hawaii Labor Relations Board should be allowed to draw arbitrator names from both the American Arbitration Association and the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service, rather than relying on a narrower source. Any concern would likely center on arbitrator selection mechanics and administrative efficiency, not on the underlying right to collective bargaining or arbitration itself.