SB337 amends Hawaii’s public-sector collective bargaining law to change how impasses are resolved for several bargaining units, including many state and county employee groups such as blue- and white-collar workers, education personnel, university staff, nurses, correctional workers, firefighters, police officers, professional and scientific employees, law enforcement officers, and ocean safety officers. The bill keeps the existing two-step process of mediation followed by interest arbitration if an impasse is not resolved within 20 days, but it revises the procedure for selecting the neutral third arbitrator on the three-member panel.
Under the bill, if the parties cannot agree on the neutral arbitrator within 30 days, the Hawaii Labor Relations Board must request a list of five qualified interest arbitrators from the American Arbitration Association, the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service, or their successors. The bill also clarifies that the list may include arbitrators from both organizations. The parties then alternate striking names until one remains, who is appointed as the neutral chair of the arbitration panel. The bill also preserves and restates the timelines for hearings, final positions, and issuance of the arbitration decision.
Impact
SB337 would amend section 89-11 of the Hawaii Revised Statutes, which governs impasse resolution in public-sector collective bargaining. Its practical effect is to expand and clarify the sources from which the Hawaii Labor Relations Board may obtain a list of potential neutral arbitrators, adding the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service alongside the American Arbitration Association and allowing a mixed list from both organizations. The bill does not change which bargaining units are covered or the overall mediation/arbitration framework, but it may affect how quickly and from where neutral arbitrators are selected in disputed negotiations.
Sentiment
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 or hearing debate to indicate broader public controversy. The amended version and unanimous committee vote suggest general support for a technical or procedural improvement to the arbitration process rather than a major policy shift.
Contention
The main point of potential contention is procedural rather than substantive: who supplies the list of neutral interest arbitrators and whether the Hawaii Labor Relations Board should rely on the American Arbitration Association alone or also use the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service. The bill resolves that issue by expressly authorizing both sources and allowing a combined list. Because the bill otherwise leaves the collective bargaining impasse process intact, there is little evidence of broader disagreement over the underlying labor relations framework in the materials provided.