My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2025-07-18 Merit Appeals Board Minutes
PublicDocuments
>
Human Resources
>
Merit Appeals Board
>
Minutes
>
2025
>
2025-07-18 Merit Appeals Board Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/2/2025 2:10:07 PM
Creation date
12/2/2025 1:34:41 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
80
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 />Merit Appeals Board July 18, 2025 <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />So, again, do we have the jurisdiction to hear this appeal? I think we’ve, kind of, heard both <br />sides—their arguments. And I think it’s time for the Board to go into executive session and we <br />can ask questions of our attorneys—Mr. Halvorson and Ms. Gibo, in an executive session. <br /> <br />So, at this point, can I—so I need to—before I ask for the motion I’m going to read this verbiage. <br />You can stay, Mr. Enriquez and Mr. Hong. <br /> <br />MR. THOMAS: I have one more question, too. <br /> <br />CHR. CABANAS: You have a question? <br /> <br />MR. THOMAS: Go ahead. <br /> <br />CHR. CABANAS: Okay. The Merit Appeals Board anticipates convening one or more <br />executive meetings regarding the above matter pursuant to HRS, Sections 92-4, 92-5(a)(2), and <br />92-5(a)(4), for the purpose of evaluating an officer or employee of the County of Hawai ʿ i where <br />the consideration of matters affecting privacy will be involved and consulting with the Board’s <br />attorney on questions and issues pertaining to the Board’s powers, duties, privileges, immunities, <br />and liabilities. A two-thirds vote of the members present pursuant to HRS, Section 92-4, is <br />necessary to hold an executive meeting. <br /> <br />You have a question, Mr. Thomas? <br /> <br />MR. THOMAS: Like the rest of you, I got involved in the weeds in this case and I don’t intend <br />to do that now because I’m still trying to get off of Floor 1 of this jurisdictional question. <br /> <br />The appeal form has a box that you check that says that an employment is taken under 76 by <br />someone who must be a civil service employee. Can somebody speak to the question of who is a <br />civil service employee—can you be classified as a civil service employee if you’re in a <br />probationary status? <br /> <br />CHR. CABANAS: No. <br /> <br />MR. DISHER: Yeah, I discussed it, actually in the first— <br /> <br />MR. THOMAS: I read that. <br /> <br />MR. DISHER: And—no, you don’t meet the definition of a civil service employee until you <br />pass probation. <br /> <br />CHR. CABANAS: Mm-hmm. That’s when you obtain civil service status. <br /> <br />MR. THOMAS: So, to me, that’s the First Floor of this case or am I missing something here? <br /> <br />MR. DISHER: That’s also why it’s my first argument. <br />Page 20 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.