HB2446 would authorize the Department of Labor and Industrial Relations to create a Community Wage Theft Enforcement Partnership Program under Hawaii’s wage and hour law (chapter 387, HRS). The program would allow the department to contract or enter into memoranda of agreement with qualified community-based organizations to educate workers about wage and hour rights, help document possible violations, refer suspected cases to the Wage Standards Division, and provide navigation and language-access support. The bill expressly states that these organizations would not have enforcement authority or conduct investigations themselves.
The measure also provides that information gathered through the program may be used by the department to support investigations, audits, and enforcement actions, and it adds an anti-retaliation protection for workers who participate in or receive assistance through the program. The department would be required to submit an annual report to the legislature on partnerships, workers assisted, and wages recovered. The bill includes an unspecified general fund appropriation for fiscal year 2026-2027 and would amend chapter 387 by adding a new section to the wage and hour law.
Impact
If enacted, HB2446 would expand the state’s wage theft enforcement infrastructure by adding a community-partnered outreach and referral mechanism to existing DLIR enforcement tools. It would not replace the current complaint-driven process or the department’s authority, but it would supplement chapter 387 by formally authorizing partnerships with nonprofit community-based organizations and by creating a new statutory anti-retaliation protection tied to participation in the program. The bill would also require state funding and annual reporting, affecting both DLIR operations and employers subject to wage and hour enforcement.
Sentiment
The bill’s stated purpose and structure suggest generally supportive sentiment toward stronger worker protections and improved wage theft enforcement, especially for low-wage, immigrant, and other vulnerable workers who may face language barriers or fear retaliation. The committee record provided does not include recorded testimony or votes, but the last action indicates the House Judiciary and Hawaiian Affairs committee recommended deferral, suggesting at least some hesitation or unresolved issues in committee. Overall, the bill appears framed as a targeted enforcement enhancement rather than a broad regulatory expansion.
Contention
The main points of potential contention are likely the use of community-based organizations in the enforcement process, the scope of state spending for the new program, and whether the approach could create additional compliance concerns for employers. Supporters would emphasize improved access, trust, and recovery of stolen wages, while skeptics may question the need for a new program when existing complaint and enforcement mechanisms already exist. The bill attempts to address some concerns by limiting community organizations from exercising enforcement authority and by stating that the program will not limit or replace DLIR’s existing processes.