2025-03-13 Merit Appeals Board Minutes

Home

Merit Appeals Board March 13, 2025 language, but it's in relation to the Personnel Order, as the Board noted —and I acknowledged I didn't provide the original. CHR. CABANAS: Mm. MS. TAVARES: I asked the Fire Department for the original —and the difference was that the original just had the four individuals, be amended, indicated everyone's repositioning because as a part of the promotion, some peoples' assignments were changed. And so, they needed to be relocated as well to the prior beach, I guess, you could call it —that they were located at. So, the amended version just simply had eight people who were impacted due to the recruitment. CHR. CABANAS: Mm-hmm. MS. TAVARES: So, this language that there is an actual documentation that was circulated indicating that Mr. Kaye was demoted, it —kind of, is far-reaching. I just want to point that out to the Board and you can make a decision as to what you want to do with that, but I just don't think that that is an accurate finding based on the facts that were presented. And the other thing that I'm quite alarmed about is really what Mr. Hong addresses in his memo —and that is that the remedy that the Board is suggesting need be applied, is going to effectively impact Mr. Kaye even greater if he is not part of the individuals who will, essentially, be promoted because of the application of the 5%—that is within the jurisdiction, again, of Collective Bargaining Agreement and labor laws. The remedy that was reached, while we were precluded from going into details —it has to do with alleged violation of the Collective Bargaining Agreement —and that, I thought was made clear during the hearing, it was not about the 5% there was a lot more that was litigated, adjudicated —whatever words you want to apply in that process —in the grievance process. And the statute that authorizes MAB and gives MAB jurisdiction, essentially limits MAB's jurisdiction. And I would just point to HRS 76-14and it says, "MAB shall not act on an appeal but shall defer to the authority "specifical ly, in this case, that authority is the grievance procedure under the Collective Bargaining Agreement —and a remedy was reached —and MAB is, essentially, overturning that. So, we're objecting to the contents of it. We agree with the objections that Mr. Hong has presented to the Board this morning regarding MAB's jurisdiction and that's just the position that we have at this time. CHR. CABANAS: Okay, thank you. Mr. Hong. MR. HONG: Madam Chair, if I may briefly. I think the Board —it has three options the first option would be to, obviously, take on this —or adopt the proposed Findings of Fact, as circulated; the second option would be to attempt —based on our objections to rewrite it and submit it at a later time; or the third option —and I hate to volunteer myself and Ms. Tavares, but Page 9