My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
COM 0945.000 1996-1998
ClerkCouncil
>
Council Records
>
Communications
>
1996-1998
>
COM 0945.000 1996-1998
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/12/2008 1:35:10 AM
Creation date
5/10/2008 8:12:38 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Communications
Communications - Type
COM
Communications - Council Term
1996-1998
Communication
0945
Point
000
Author
James E. Halvorson, Deputy Attorney General, State of Hawaii
Communications - Referred To
COUNCIL
Comments
Presented: Council - 8/5/98
Communications - File Code
POS
Document Relationships
AGE COUNCIL 08/05/1998 1996-1998
(Related)
Path:
\Council Records\Agendas\1996-1998\Council
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
11
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> Richard D. Nurdemaa, ga9- <br /> David S. Arakawa, Req. <br /> J. p. Schmidt, Esq. <br /> August 6, 1998 <br /> Page 7 <br /> <br /> Another question asked is the status of the non-cost items <br /> when the cost items are rejected. Section 89-10(b), HRS, states <br /> only that rejected cost items will be returned to the parties for <br /> additional bargaining. Non-cost items are not mentioned. <br /> In Attorney General Opinion No. 72-10, the Attorney General <br /> opined that non-cost items in a collective bargaining agreement <br /> are not affected by the Legislature's action or inaction on cost <br /> items and thus may be implemented without further legislative <br /> approval. in a April 12, 1979 informal Attorney General opinion, <br /> we reiterated that if 'a legislative body rejects a cost item, <br /> all cost items are returned to the parties for further <br /> bargaining. However, non-coat items are not re-negotiated." <br /> The legislative intent as expressed in the comm1970 ittee areports <br /> at the time S 89-10(b), HRS, was passed <br /> the conclusion that non-cost items were to be unaffected by the <br /> rejection of the cost items. The Conference Committee Report <br /> (23-70) on Senate Sill No. 1696-70, B.D. 1, H.D_ 3, C.D. 1, <br /> expressly incorporated the intention contained in House Standing <br /> Committee Report No. 761-70, which states as follows: <br /> Your Committee has made the following <br /> amendments: <br /> 6. =.egislative ratification. under d. a. <br /> Mo. 1696-70, S. D. 1, H. D. 1, if the State <br /> Le islature or the legislative body of any county <br /> releets any of the cost items submitted to them, <br /> all cost items shall be returned to the parties <br /> for further bargaining and either party may reopen <br /> all or a part of the remainder of the agreement. <br /> Your Coned ttee fools that reopening all issues <br /> upon the rejection by legislative body may <br /> unnecessarily result in negation of all points of <br /> agreement. [Emphasis in the original.] <br /> Specifically, the language in S.B. No. 1696-70, S.D. 1, H.D. <br /> a previous draft, had read in relevant part as follows: <br /> If the State legislature or the legislative body of any <br /> county rejects any of the cost items submitted to them, <br /> all cost items submitted shall be returned to the <br /> parties for further art of theriromainder of the agreement. <br /> reopen all or r part <br /> [Emphasis added.] <br /> <br /> <br /> 08/04/98 17:23 TX/RX N0.8856 P.008 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.