RELATING TO WAREHOUSE WORKERS.
HB1791 would create a new Hawaii law called the Warehouse Worker Protection Act. The bill applies to certain large warehouse distribution centers and related logistics operations, including warehousing, wholesale distribution, e-commerce fulfillment, and courier/express delivery facilities. It requires covered employers to give workers written notice of any productivity quota they are subject to, including the number of tasks or amount of material expected within a defined time period and any discipline that may result from failing to meet the quota. Employers must also update workers quickly when quotas change and provide the applicable quota if an adverse employment action is taken.
The bill also limits the use of quotas that interfere with meal breaks, rest periods, or bathroom use, and it states that breaks generally cannot be counted as productive time unless the employee is required to remain on call. It creates recordkeeping obligations for employers to maintain individual and aggregated employee work-speed data and quota descriptions, and it gives current and former employees the right to request those records at no cost within specified deadlines. The measure further prohibits retaliation against workers who request information or complain about quota practices, and it creates a rebuttable presumption of retaliation for adverse action taken within 90 days of protected activity. Enforcement authority would be placed with the Director of Labor and Industrial Relations, with civil penalties available and authority for the Attorney General to bring civil or criminal actions.
If enacted, HB1791 would add a new chapter to the Hawaii Revised Statutes regulating warehouse productivity quotas and employer monitoring practices. It would impose disclosure, recordkeeping, anti-retaliation, and enforcement requirements on covered employers meeting the bill’s employee thresholds, while also creating new employee access rights to quota and work-speed records. The bill would directly affect warehouse operators, wholesalers, e-commerce fulfillment centers, and courier/express delivery businesses, and it would expand the role of the Department of Labor and Industrial Relations in oversight and rulemaking.
The bill’s stated purpose and structure reflect a strong pro-worker, workplace-safety orientation, with the legislature finding that quota systems can increase injury risk, undermine rest and bathroom access, and pressure workers to prioritize speed over safety. The available context shows no recorded floor debate or vote tally, but the committee status indicates the labor committee recommended deferral, suggesting the measure did not advance at that stage. Overall, the bill appears to have been framed as a worker-protection measure rather than a broad labor-market reform.
The main points of contention are likely to be the bill’s limits on employer quota systems, the breadth of its recordkeeping and disclosure requirements, and the potential compliance burden on large logistics employers. Employers may object to the definition of quota, the requirement to preserve and produce work-speed data, and the rebuttable presumption of retaliation tied to protected activity. Supporters, by contrast, are likely to emphasize worker safety, bathroom and meal-break access, transparency, and protection from discipline based on undisclosed or unsafe productivity standards.