Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> lIJ ,J aa 1...,. (.t1 <br /> 1 <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> Richard D. Nurdeman, Esq. <br /> David Z. Arakawa, Esq. <br /> J. P. Schmidt, Esq. <br /> August 4, 1998 <br /> Page 6 <br /> A uniform practical construction given to a statute for <br /> a considerable period of time by an executive <br /> department of a government which is charged to carry <br /> out such a statute, although not controlling, is <br /> entitled to much weight in cane of doubt as to the <br /> meaning of the statute. <br /> Reller v. Thom9zm, 56 Saw. 183, 190 (1975). <br /> It is noteworthy that in Hawaii F+refjyhters v. Ariyoshl, 2 <br /> HPERB at 299 -300, the Hawaii Labor Relations Board found that <br /> the rejection of cost items by the Legislature had bean a <br /> disaster for collective bargaining and invited the Legislature to <br /> consider the true worth of the arbitration mechanism contained in <br /> subsection 89-11(d). Despite this invitation, the Legislature <br /> has left intact the legislative approval requirement for cost <br /> items contained in both sections 89-10(b) and 89-11(d), PM8. in <br /> 1995, the Legislature amended section 89-11(d), HR9, to expand <br /> the number of bargaining units subject to binding arbitration but <br /> left unchanged the approval requirement. <br /> In err*o v. Dannnn era, 74 Haw. 75 (1992), the Hawaii <br /> Supreme Court looked at legislative inaction as an expression of <br /> legislative intent. <br /> This court has previously said that where the <br /> legislature fails to act in response to our statutory <br /> interpretation, the consequence is that the statutory <br /> interpretation of the court must be considered to have <br /> the tacit.approval of the legislature and the effect of <br /> legislation. <br /> 74 Haw. at 83. <br /> Even though legislative inaction in response to an <br /> administrative board's ruling may not be considered in the some <br /> light as legislative inaction in response to a Supreme Court <br /> ruling, we believe that the Intimacy with which the Legislature <br /> is involved in the approval or rejection of cost items in public <br /> employee collective bargaining coupled with the fact that the <br /> findings of the Hawaii Labor Relations Hoard have been left <br /> undisturbed for nearly twenty years together give weight to the <br /> argument that the legislature has given tacit approval to the <br /> Board's interpretation of the effect of legislative inaction on <br /> cost items. <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> 08/04/98 17:23 TX/RX N0.8856 P.007 <br />