Hawaii Senate Bill SB1358

Hawaii 2025 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/23/25
• Refer: 1/27/25
• Report Pass: 2/7/25
• Refer: 2/7/25

Caption

Relating To Public Employment Cost Items.

Summary

SB1358 is an appropriations bill for Hawaii public employment cost items tied to collective bargaining unit (14) for the 2025-2027 fiscal biennium. It authorizes or appropriates funds through the statewide collective bargaining account (BUF 102) to cover negotiated cost items for unit 14 employees, including salary increases and other adjustments. The bill also extends those same salary and cost adjustments to state officers and employees who are excluded from collective bargaining but are in the same compensation plans as unit 14 members. The bill specifies that any compensation paid from federal, special, or other non-general funds must be charged to those respective funds, and it includes standard lapse language for unspent funds at the end of each fiscal year. It also contains a constitutional expenditure-ceiling declaration, stating that the state’s general fund expenditure ceiling for FY 2025-2026 has already been exceeded and that this measure would further exceed it, while asserting that the appropriations are necessary to serve the public interest. The bill’s effective date is set for July 1, 2050, which is a common placeholder date in draft legislation and indicates the measure is not intended to take effect immediately as written. In practical terms, the bill would affect state budgeting and payroll costs rather than create a new regulatory program. It would require the State of Hawaii to fund negotiated compensation obligations for bargaining unit 14 and comparable excluded employees, with the director of finance responsible for allotting the funds to the appropriate departments. The measure primarily impacts state agencies employing these workers and the state treasury, especially the general fund and any special or federal funds used to pay affected employees. The available voting history suggests the bill was received favorably in committee, passing the Senate Labor and Technology Committee 4-0 with amendments. No committee transcript was provided, so there is no recorded floor discussion to indicate broader debate. Overall, the bill appears to have been treated as a routine labor-appropriations measure rather than a controversial policy proposal. The main point of potential contention is fiscal rather than policy-based: the bill acknowledges that it would contribute to exceeding the state general fund expenditure ceiling. That issue may raise concern among budget hawks or lawmakers focused on constitutional spending limits, while supporters would emphasize that the appropriations are required to fulfill negotiated collective bargaining obligations and maintain parity for excluded employees in the same pay plans.

Impact

SB1358 would amend state spending authority for fiscal years 2025-2026 and 2026-2027 by appropriating funds for collective bargaining cost items for bargaining unit 14 and for excluded employees in the same compensation plans. It does not appear to change substantive labor law, but it directly affects state budget law, payroll administration, and the allocation of funds across general, special, federal, and other sources. The bill also invokes the constitutional expenditure-ceiling exception process under Hawaii law, making it relevant to state fiscal compliance and appropriations practice.

Sentiment

The limited voting history indicates generally positive sentiment toward the bill, as it passed the Senate Labor and Technology Committee unanimously, 4-0, with amendments. The absence of recorded testimony or transcript material makes it difficult to identify detailed arguments, but the measure appears to have been viewed as a standard funding bill supporting negotiated compensation obligations. The overall tone is procedural and supportive rather than contentious.

Contention

The principal area of contention is the fiscal impact, especially the bill’s acknowledgment that it would further exceed the state general fund expenditure ceiling for FY 2025-2026. Critics concerned with budget discipline, constitutional spending limits, or the size of public-sector compensation costs may object on that basis. Supporters, by contrast, would likely argue that the appropriations are necessary to honor collective bargaining agreements and to provide equivalent adjustments to excluded employees who share the same compensation structure.