Hawaii House Bill HB219

Hawaii 2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/17/25
• Refer: 1/21/25

Caption

RELATING TO PAID FAMILY LEAVE.

Summary

HB219 would create a new paid family leave benefit for eligible state and county employees in Hawaii. The bill entitles covered employees to five days of paid leave each calendar year for family leave purposes described in existing law, including time related to birth, adoption, fostering a child, or caregiving for a family member during illness. The leave must be paid at the employee’s regular rate of pay and cannot be charged against accrued vacation or sick leave. The bill defines an eligible employee as someone who has worked for the state or a county for at least six consecutive months. It also specifies that the leave is provided notwithstanding chapter 398, meaning it operates alongside and overrides any conflicting provisions in the existing family leave framework to the extent necessary for this new benefit. The measure is set to take effect on July 1, 2025.

Impact

HB219 would amend chapter 78 of the Hawaii Revised Statutes by adding a new section establishing a paid family leave entitlement for state and county employees. It would create a statutory benefit separate from existing accrued leave banks, require payment at regular wages, and protect employees from losing seniority or other earned accumulations when using the leave. The bill would directly affect state and county employers, human resources administration, and public employees eligible under the six-month service requirement.

Sentiment

The bill’s stated purpose and framing are strongly supportive of family caregiving and employee retention, presenting paid family leave as a workforce investment and a model-employer policy. Because there are no committee transcripts or recorded votes provided, there is no documented opposition or debate in the available materials. The available context suggests a generally favorable policy posture, at least at introduction and referral.

Contention

The main policy issue inherent in the bill is the cost and administrative impact on state and county employers, since it requires paid time off in addition to existing leave benefits. Another possible point of contention is scope: the bill applies only to state and county employees, not private-sector workers, and it limits eligibility to employees with six consecutive months of service. No specific objections, amendments, or opposing viewpoints are included in the provided record.