HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0582.003 1996-1998
r''r
Working Together LOCAL 152. AFL-CIO
for Hawaii ~ 3~~ v / /
Hawaii Government Employees Association-
495 Manono Street, Hilo, Hawaii 96720, Phone (808) 935-6841, NAX (808) 961-2437
December 17, 19 7~~~ 1
CC:'J~ . ~ , ~
Testimony of Gary Yoshiyama, Hawaii Division Chief, in suaaort of Resolution fiTo. 185-97
relatina to fundine cost items for barsainin¢ units 03, 04, 63 and 84
Good morning. My name is Gary Yoshiyama. I serve as the Hawaii Division Chief for the
Hawaii Government Employees' Association. I am speaking in favor of and seek your support of
Resolution No. 185-97 relating to funding cost items for bargaining units 03, 04, 63 and 84.
Our Union has for more than a quarter of a century honored the public policy on settling our
collective bargaining contracts. That public policy is outlined in Chapter 89 of the Hawaii
Revised Statutes.
Time and again we reached mutual agreement with the public employers. The public employers
have submitted the cost items to the appropriate legislative bodies and those legislative bodies
have fixnded our mutual agreements.
We have once again negotiated in good faith with the public employers and reached a mutual
agreement. However at this late juncture in this process a new concern has been raised and
threatens funding for all pending contracts. Some council members have raised the concern that
the County Council has not been provided timely information while the negotiations process was
ongoing and the possibility that the negotiations process is in need of change.
Prior to 1970, Hawaii's Territorial and State public policy was to discuss and approve pay related
matters at the legislative level, be it the Territorial or State legislature, be it the Board of
Supervisors or Council at the County level. There were exceptions whereby a legislative body
authorized the governor or a mayor to study the issue and establish a fair and equitable pay rate or
level. A major shift happened in 1970, the Hawaii Public Sector Collective Bargaining Law
(Chapter 89, Hawaii Revised Statute) was enacted by the State Legislature. From that time to the
present day, discussion, negotiations, and agreements (and sometime final and binding arbitration)
took place between and at the level of the public employers and employees (through the
employees' exclusive representatives).
It is regrettable that you weren't in possession of timely information. The Unions are not able to
explain why you weren't included, why you didn't obtain information or why you weren't provided
information. HGEA has fulfilled its responsibilities in obtaining input from our members prior to
1 ~a Sgz . 03
m. x.. _ rOJ
L!. !bi Preeen/ed ca~u~
iAet Hate DEC 1~
r
the negotiations process, and providing our membership status reports as negotiations progressed.
HGEA has fulfilled its legal responsibilities in meeting with union members and members have
ratified the mutual agreements.
While the negotiations process may be in need of review and possibly change this is not the time
and place. There has been continuous review of and changes to the public sector collective
bargaining law over its twenty-seven (27) year history. The latest significant change came when
final and binding arbitration was substituted for the right to strike in the ] 995 State Legislative
Session for eight (8) collective bargaining units.
There are appropriate times and places for discussion and change. One is during the State
Legislative session. An inappropriate time is when a contract has been negotiated and ratified in
accordance with law.
Do not hold up our contracts because you believe a change in the negotiating process maybe
needed. We do not believe that the legislators role in the negotiations process is a rubber stamp.
Formulating and balancing our County and State budget is not a rubber stamp process. Honoring
commitments, that is living up to and fulfilling negotiated agreements is not a rubber stamp.
L~~ 6
GARY YOSrF~
Hawaii Division Chief
2