Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2019-04-24 Merit Appeals Board Minutes Merit Appeals Board Department of Human Resources 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 102 Hilo, Hawai‘i April 24, 2019 (Wednesday) Call to Order (Item 1) The regular meeting of the Merit Appeals Board, County of Hawaiʻi, was called to order at 9:09 a.m. by Chair Luahiwa Namahoe, at the Department of Human Resources (HR) Conference Room, 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 2, Hilo, Hawaiʻi, on Wednesday, April 24, 2019. Roll Call – Present Ms. Luahiwa Namahoe, Chair Mr. William Chillingworth, Vice-Chair Mr. Mitch Tam, Member Also Present Mr. J Yoshimoto, Deputy Corporation Counsel, Ofc. of the Corp. Counsel Mr. William V. Brilhante, Jr., Director, HR Department Ms. Glynis Yamada, Secretary-Reporter, HR Department Merit Appeals Board April 24, 2019 CHR. NAMAHOE: We are all present and accounted for. And the agenda, right here—so call to order. So, we’re calling this meeting to order, the Merit Appeals at 9:09. Addendum to the Agenda (Item 2) CHR. NAMAHOE: Okay. Do we have any addendums to the agenda? No? MR. BRILHANTE: One request is that— CHR. NAMAHOE: Okay. MR. BRILHANTE: If we could take up Item number—I think it’s Number 8—the Director’s Report, out of order—so that preferably we could move it up on the agenda so that I can provide you with the update prior to me having to leave at 9:45 this morning. So, I make that request. CHR. NAMAHOE: I have no problems with that. Gentlemen? MR. CHILLINGWORTH: Fine. MR. TAM: No problem. CHR. NAMAHOE: Okay. Statements from the Public (Item 3) CHR. NAMAHOE: Okay. Shall we take Statements from the public first before we do that? Okay, so we’re going to move the agenda item up to Number 4—which is statements from the public which is now Number 3? Ma’am do you have any statements to make? MS. TATIANA: No. CHR. NAMAHOE: No? Okay. MS. TATIANA: I’m just observing. MR. TAM: Observing. CHR. NAMAHOE: Observing? Okay. Well, thank you. Approval of Minutes (Item 4) MR. BRILHANTE: We can do approval of the minutes. CHR. NAMAHOE: Okay. Page 2 Merit Appeals Board April 24, 2019 MS. YAMADA: There’s no approval. MR. BRILHANTE: Oh, okay. Director’s Report (Item 8) HR Quarterly Reports: October-December 2018, January-March 2019; and Items of Current Interest MR. BRILHANTE: Thank you very much. CHR. NAMAHOE: Good morning. MR. BRILHANTE: Director’s Report. CHR. NAMAHOE: Very good. MR. BRILHANTE: Thank you very much for accommodating my request. Today, at 10:30 we’ll be boarding the bus and leaving for Waikoloa for the BIIF High School Tennis State Championships starting—well, practice starts this afternoon and the primary round start tomorrow morning at 8 a.m. So, as to the director’s report, there’s some items that we submitted the information under the HR Quarterly Reports for each of our divisions, and it’s pretty—those items are pretty much self- explanatory. Some of—but I will go into detail as it relates to specific information that relates to these reports. First and foremost, I’d like to discuss—just update you on the current negotiations. CHR. NAMAHOE: Okay. MR. BRILHANTE: Within—since our last meeting within that period of time we’ve—as I reported we’re in the middle of arbitration for the Fire Fighters Union—HFFA, Unit 11. And that negotiations went to an arbitrator’s decision. The arbitrator issued his decision and award. And that encompassed, generally, almost a verbatim award, which relates to SHOPO. So, two years ago, SHOPO—police officers entered into a four-year agreement. And the first two years were fine. And then, at the start of the third year, they received a 2%—and a 2% st across-the-board salary increase, so they’re getting that effective July 1, 2019; and then a st second 2% salary increase, effective July 1, 2020. So, the fire fighters were awarded that. The other thing that the police were awarded was a step increase over—that was a four-year period of time of their contract. So, a step increase is based on seniority and if you’re in a position for so many years you automatically progress to the next highest step, which is a 4% Page 3 Merit Appeals Board April 24, 2019 adjustment. So, all of the police officers get that within their final two years of their contract— and that was awarded to fire as well. So, within these next two years, the fire fighters will get a step increase—moving them up to the next step—not the next class, but the next step. So, they’re going up—so they stay within the same class. So, they get that. The other item—cost item that they received is the police officers, because they have a retention—they have a hard time retaining their officers—police officers. And there’s also a— it’s becoming increasingly harder and harder to attract qualified officers for a recruitment. This past January we did a recruitment for police and those were the lowest numbers we’ve seen. And it’s not unique to Hawaiʻi County, it’s nationwide. And I think so much of that is now just the current environment across the nation where the police—for whatever reason the public perception is really down. Morale is down, they had that whole movement with the NFL—with all that negative impact on the police department. So, I think being a police officer is not as attractive as it used to be. So, in order to try and offset some of that, in the contract agreement, the police officers were awarded a 1,800 to $2,000 stst bonus—lump sum bonus for—effective January 1 of 2020; and then January 1 of 2021 and that was for the stated purpose of retention. And for whatever reason, the fire fighters they pressed hard for the arbitrator to give them the same contract that SHOPO got. And so, when the arbitrator issued his decision, he incorporated that lump sum bonuses for the fire fighters as well without giving strong consideration to the purposes of the bonus. When we were on the fire fighter recruit that’s one of our most popular recruit list— MR. CHILLINGWORTH: Absolutely. MR. BRILHANTE: —and we get way more applicants than we have vacancies. MR. CHILLINGWORTH: Right. MR. BRILHANTE: We have—our fire department has the lowest amount of loss of seasoned employees out of any of the departments. When a fire fighter comes in, they stay for the 25 years. Very rarely do they leave. And if they leave, it’s some— CHR. NAMAHOE: Medical. MR. BRILHANTE: Yeah. Or some other kind of crazy aspiration, like, going to law school. MR. CHILLINGWORTH: Did you ask the arbitrator to reconsider the award in connection with the fire fighter’s bonus? MR. BRILHANTE: Because it’s binding arbitration, that’s pretty much where it landed. Unfortunately, when we get into these type of—and this is—I’m going to—I’m not sure if I Page 4 Merit Appeals Board April 24, 2019 should put this off the record but—oftentimes, these awards are politically motivated. So, for us, the State was very desirous of accommodating the fire fighters request. The governor gets four votes. The City and County was very desirous of accommodating the fire fighters because the union strongly supported the current mayor—City and County of Honolulu during his re- election. So—and then, Maui is just so flushed with money that they really didn’t want to upset anybody, so they had the majority of the votes and they were, somewhat, in support of it. Ourselves and County of Kauaʻi were opposed and we raised our objections—but because it’s collective bargaining we just have one vote—the County of Hawaiʻi one vote; Kauaʻi one vote; the governor four votes; City and County one vote; and Maui one vote. So, we were outvoted six to two. And so, there was no descending language submitted to the arbitrator with the decision. MR. CHILLINGWORTH: Wow. MR. BRILHANTE: So— MR. CHILLINGWORTH: Lucky fire fighters. MR. BRILHANTE: Pardon me? MR. CHILLINGWORTH: Lucky fire fighters. MR. BRILHANTE: Yeah. So, what happened was because the award involves cost items, those items have to be approved by council—our county council. So, when the award was sent to the mayor, and the mayor submitted his transmittal for the approving resolution, in that transmittal he recommended that the council reject—come up with an unfavorable recommendation for supporting the cost increases. And that’s going to be for hearing in front of the council—I think committee is the second to the last week of May, and then full council is the first week of June. So, that’s a resolution. So, that’s where we’re at with that. HGEA which is the white-collar government workers, all of their representative—they decided—Randy Perreira decided to have each unit do their independent negotiations with the employers. So, we have Unit 2, we have Unit 3, we have Unit 4—in the County we have Unit— I believe it’s 13 and 14. So, all those units are requesting independent arbitrations. So, unfortunately, the expert witnesses that both the employer and the unions use aren’t available through the summer, so we won’t be starting those arbitrations until August—later this year in August—and they’re going to run independently. So, that’s going to be a task— CHR. NAMAHOE: That’s a sidebar, but what was the rationale? MR. BRILHANTE: What happens is, when you have individual units, the union has to answer to individual panels. So, for Unit 2, they’re made up of Unit 2 members; Unit 3, is only Unit 3 members; Unit 4, is only Unit 4 members—and each of them have their own independent wants Page 5 Merit Appeals Board April 24, 2019 and desires and goals for their unit. And what the information that was provided to us was that the union was getting a lot of push back from the independent units saying that when the group bargains collectively—all together—their independent goals aren’t being addressed. So, they, kind of, get caught up in the overall big picture discussion. So, their members wanted them— they ratified that they go and negotiate independently. So, we don’t have control. They are identified as independent unions—units under the HRS. So, we’re pretty much just dealing with it as we go. The—some of the requests are anywhere from—some of the units want us—want them to be— want a decision or an award similar to what UPW got, which is 2% and step increase. Some of them are asking for 6% increases, so it varies—the wants, the asks, or across-the-board. And we’ll just have to deal with it. Hopefully—well—I’ll tell you what the problem is—is this lump sum bonus has really thrown a wrench in the negotiations. You give one—that’s okay. You give a second one—all of a sudden that’s precedent. CHR. NAMAHOE: Yeah, right. MR. BRILHANTE: So, now, before, each of these guys want that same type of consideration. So, that seems—that’s the problematic area. So, we’ll be doing HGEA starting in August. So that, kind of, affects our budget because what happens is once the award is issued and ratified, then our staff has to go in and do—it’s called a retro of all the pay adjustments. So, everybody who is awarded higher salary under the new collective bargaining agreement, we go back to the last day of the old agreement, which is July stst 31. And then effective July 1 we’re going to have to change everybody’s salary to give them the effective increases. So, that’s a task—that’s additional work for our staff, so that wasn’t really well received. But it is what it is and, fortunately, I have a great staff and they’ll accommodate—they have, in the past. So, that’s for HGEA. UPW which is the largest group of employees in the County as well as the State, they’re under a four-year contract, but in their four-year contract—after the first two years, they had a provision for a re-opening—re-opener. And that re-opener was to give consideration to the fact that UPW does not get step increases. All their employees in the unit, in a particular job class, get the same pay no matter how long they’ve been working in that position—and that’s something that the union bargained for—that was—they want that. So, they wanted that. So, they don’t get step increases. So, what we did was—and this was prior to me coming on board—was the employer and the union agreed to do a one-time recalculation of the salary or a salary adjustment after the two-year period of time in order to allow for an alternative mechanism for a step increase. So, that was on the table. We started meeting about a month ago regarding how much that one-time reallocation was going to be. Page 6 Merit Appeals Board April 24, 2019 The State or us, the Employers group, submitted a 1.2% request. That submittal was initially rejected by the union and came back to us for a counter proposal. They requested a counter proposal. The information we got from UPW was that they wanted 3%—a 3% adjustment. And so, when we had additional negotiations this past—last week Thursday—we were able to sit down and meet with the union and talk story and explain to them why 1.2. And the reason was because if you do a 1.2 annually, at the end of the two-year period of time it comes out to, like, about a 2 point—it’s, 1.2 something. So, about a 2.5% increase—and that is analogous to a step increase for a two-year period of time as opposed to their request for the 3% would have been a 6% over that two-year period of time. So, fortunately, reasonable minds won out and last week Thursday. UPW accepted the 1.2% re- adjustment for this year as well as for next year. So, that just has to be ratified by their members. So, I’ll be going out to ratification this week and next week. SHOPO’s in a four-year contract and we’re good to go. There was no re-opening. SHOPO rejected a request—or didn’t submit a request to re-open negotiations, so they’re good for four years. So, hopefully, by the end of this year everybody will be on a four-year contract. The only drawback with that is—we usually start renegotiating about a year before the contracts expire. So, that doesn’t give us much time—downtime. We’re going to go right back into the mix with re-negotiations. The second area I wanted to touch upon is in regards to these work comp numbers—so it’s my work comp division. I may have mentioned to you at the last meeting that I did a work comp re- org. I was fortunate during this recent period of time, I had held a recruitment for a new supervisory manager for work comp. I was really fortunate, we had an interested application from another department in the County. And she applied, and she interviewed, and she’ll just— head and shoulders above all of the other applicants. She had 11 years of previous private experience in the work comp arena with Hawaiʻi Case Management. And that was a private sector, they did work—they had managed work comp claims and issues and the like for private businesses. And she did that locally for about 11 years before she joined the County three years ago, and her background is tremendous. So, I was fortunate enough she accepted the position. So, she starts—she came on board two months ago—I mean, two weeks ago. And so far, it’s been tremendous. She’s taken the reins of the work comp division and she’s—her thoughts and her goals and what she wants to achieve really aligned with my—what we wanted to achieve as a (inaudible) and she’s already effectuated a lot of those changes. She was—because of her significant background and experience she was well-received by the staff. So, so far, we’ve had a lot of positive—I’ve had a lot of positive feedback from the staff during this transition period of time. I’ve made it a point to go and independently meet with my work comp staff—like, if I see them outside taking a break, I’ll sit down and talk story with them, and just try to get some feedback and information. And one of the things—I guess one of the tidbits of information that they provided me with was the fact that this—the new—Sommer—leads by example. Page 7 Merit Appeals Board April 24, 2019 She’s taken the hardest cases and she’s worked those files, and she’s engaged herself in negotiations—and taking the hard files and reassigning them to herself. But, yet, she affords a lot of, I guess, positive information and responses and just a clear direction going forward. And I think the staff appreciates that. So, for now, I’m going to keep monitoring it. We’re still in the honeymoon stage. I meet regularly with Sommer and we’re just, kind of, addressing that. What I like is she’s already starting to ensure that cases get closed. As you know, we currently have 400—well, not as you know, but what’s been reported—we have 468 open cases, which seems to be—it’s a high amount of open cases for an employer who only has 2,800 employees. So, she’s addressing that—that’s one of our priorities. We sat down. We listed our priorities and she’s addressing it, and I appreciate her expertise and knowledge. She hit the ground running. And the other—the second part that she brought to the table is that her experience with the County for the past few years has been in the financial—she was an account clerk—and so, she has that County financial background. So, she can pull up numbers—pull up information. She’s familiar with our FRESH accounting system within the County. And she has such a tremendous amount of resourcefulness and understanding of the finances. So, it just makes, it just puts the (inaudible) everything—it just makes everything else so much easier going forward. So— CHR. NAMAHOE: Bill, quick question— MR. BRILHANTE: Sure. CHR. NAMAHOE: —not to interrupt you. What’s the roster of doctors that are willing to take work comp like—on this island? MR. BRILHANTE: We have our—that’s our—that’s one of our largest problematic areas is because we don’t have enough care providers. So, oftentimes, if we can’t find a care provider here on the Big Island, we have to send them to Oahʻu. And under the statute, we have to cover all that expense. So, every time we send, for example, a work comp claimant to Oahʻu for a psych. treatment because we can’t find any psychiatrist or psychologist here, locally, we cover the airfare, the— we do the taxi ride— CHR. NAMAHOE: Yeah. MR. BRILHANTE: Fortunately, we kind of keep in mind that we try not have them stay overnight because, if they did, then we would cover the hotel. And sometimes we just can’t help it, but if a claimant has an appointment and the only thing that’s available is first thing in the morning—sometimes we just have to send them the day before just to ensure that they make that first (inaudible). Page 8 Merit Appeals Board April 24, 2019 Logistically, the Big Island—across-the-board—we don’t have enough healthcare providers and it shows up in our work comp arena as well. So, good question, but it’s just a problem that we just deal with it as best we can. It costs us more money—no doubt about it—to accommodate. So, in addition to bringing Sommer on board as a supervisor claims—supervising claims adjustor, we’re also going to do an internal re-org. with the current positions we have. And we’re going to move—we’re going to increase our claims adjusting staff. We’re going to take a technician position and we’re moving her up to an adjustor. She—that position, historically, even though it’s a technician—has handled a large amount of claims—have been assigned to her in the past. So, we’re just expanding her role and clear—better defining her responsibilities. So—yet, we’re in the process of getting that re-allocation finalized. And then, the final thing we were going to do is, we have a HR assistant, who is kind been of working part-time on HR/work comp—I’m sorry—part-time on work comp and safety. She did the clerical work for the safety office. So, we’re going to move that position permanently to work comp. And that, kind of, leads me into my next subject area and, fortunately, the last one so far is my budget submittal or budget reviews. So, last week Thur.—last week—when was—this past Tuesday— MS. YAMADA: Wednesday—last week. MR. BRILHANTE: Oh, yeah, yeah, yeah. Yeah, yeah—last week Wednesday was my budget review. We submitted our budget to council, we went in front of council—it was well-received. For the most part, my budget is status quo. No significant increases, no significant reductions. We did—at the end of the year we will be realizing a change—a reduction in our salary and wages. Primarily, because I had a senior staff, Gabe Cabanas—she had nearly 40 years of st service. She retired last year, effective December 1 and because of her years of service, her salary was really high. She was at the almost the top scale of her class. I mean, she retired, I brought Waylen, we was so fortunate to get Waylen Leopoldino back with us. But because he has so much less years of service, he started at a much lower step on the salary scale—so, that’s a realized savings for our department. So, that came across-the-board and we actually had a small little reduction in our operating budget, especially for salary and wages. But that doesn’t mean I’m—I was comfortable with that. What I did was I submitted a supplemental budget. And in my supplemental request I requested three positions. And the first position was for a clerical position in my work comp division. And that will come in and that’ll help somebody—that will help with our monthly reconciliation for each claim. Every month we have to look at the claims and we have to do—kind of, like, a tabulation as to how much money we spend on doctor’s bills, medication, and stuff and—in regards to how much money we have set aside for each claim. So, we do that for each case on a monthly basis—that hasn’t been done as well as I would have liked it to have been done. Page 9 Merit Appeals Board April 24, 2019 So, the request is for this person to assist with that as well as assist with opening new cases, taking phone calls. Every day we have to go and collect the mail for that division because that’s how our billing statements come in from a majority of healthcare providers. And we only have a set period of time to time to process those bills and get the payments out 30 days. So, the mail in that division is tremendously important, so every day somebody has to go through the mail— collect—get the mail, go through the mail, set it aside. Are these bills? Are these just regular correspondences—and the like. So, this clerical person would help assist with that, and it’s much needed. And we’re hoping that the administration and the council agrees to the creation of this new position. The second position I requested is, as I mentioned earlier, I took the HR assistant who was doing part-time work for workers comp, and health and safety. So, I took that position and I made it 100% work comp. So, I want to backfill that position—again, with that clerical position—where that clerical person will be able to come in and they’ll help the safety—health and safety division, so that they have the recordkeeping of all the training. One of the things the safety office does is they do the annual contractual agreements for safety equipment whether it be safety boots or safety—respirators or the like—that’s all handled within our office. And then, they also ensure that all the annual trainings are being logged, monitored, and being provided so that clerical staff would be responsible for inputting all that information. So, that’s the second position we requested from council. And then, the third position is a clerical position for our HR staff here. As you know, administration submitted a request for the creation of 72 new positions. It’s very simple for each department to say, “Yeah, I need ten”—“I need 20”—“I need 30”—but our department is responsible for doing all those recruitments, for doing all those on-boarding, providing all the new hiring orientations—and all that type of stuffs. So, I submitted a—my third request is a clerical person to help us here—my HR side of the world—here with processing all those, again, clerical—documenting, inputting information, and the like. So, that’s my third request for that position. The total amount of salaries associated with that was—it’s going to be approximately $68,000 and—for all three of those positions. So, again, that’s my request to council. I got positive feedback. Again, I was—my presentation was well received. I took my entire management staff to the presentation. I introduced all of them to the council members as part of my presentation. And I just briefly described their areas of responsibility because we have so much new council members, and I think they appreciated that. And one of the things I really—I feel strongly about is continued open dialogue, communication between us and council because as—so much of what I feel ends up being problems is because of the failure to properly communicate and just ask questions. Page 10 Merit Appeals Board April 24, 2019 Yesterday was a great example with Kuawa Park. The council asked the parks and recreation director to come in and give specific responses and answer questions as to why Kuawa Park— the issues were there. CHR. NAMAHOE: That’s the baseball field? MR. BRILHANTE: Yeah. Down— CHR. NAMAHOE: Okay. MR. BRILHANTE: And when I looked at it, I said, “Why didn’t the councilperson just call the director and ask those exact same questions?” So, that’s how I want to do it—that’s the type of relationships I want to formulate with council is—you have a question or there’s a problem or something you don’t understand and you want additional clarification—call me. Just pick up the phone, call me up—I’ll be happy to explain it to you. And so, that’s why I think open, continuous communication, formulating good relationships is real important. I think we get better traction and we get a lot more done as it relates to (inaudible). So, going along—so, I’ll be continuing to monitor even my supplemental budget submittal. So far nobody has raised any concerns—like I said, it was well-received—but, at the end of the day, we’ll see what happens. It’s a decision that’s out of my control. One of the questions I was asked during the budget review process was—related to the County’s internship program. And I just wanted to explain to you—and just one of the discussion we had earlier is that the County does have a formal internship program. It’s called our CVE student internships. And, right now, we’re in agreement with Hawaiʻi Community College. We have about 15 positions—paid positions that students currently attending Hawaiʻi Community College and are in the business arena can come in and they fill various intern positions within the County. Those are college students. And, right now, I’d say we have 15—we’ll always have a smaller amount of applicants than we do departments that want help. So, what we’re doing is we’re in the process of—and this started about a year ago—we’ve started the process of meeting with UH Hilo. UH Hilo has a business major—major in business and economics—University of Hawaiʻi at Hilo. So, we’re engaged with them and we’re looking to expand the CVE process to include the UH Hilo students, currently, in that area of study. So, that’s ongoing. And then, each department has the ability to start and effectuate their own internship program. And what I mentioned to council was that when we were at Corp. Counsel—J knows this—we have a summer law clerk program which is a paid internship program for current law students— various law students whether it be at UH or schools on the mainland—and I think they hire about two interns each summer and those are, again, paid positions. So, each department—and we would be more than happy to assist in creating those type of internship program. So, that’s what we’re looking at. Page 11 Merit Appeals Board April 24, 2019 So, in a nutshell, that’s pretty much where we’re at for my HR report. Happy to answer any questions. MR. TAM: I have none. MR. CHILLINGWORTH: I have none. CHR. NAMAHOE: I’ve asked them along the way. So, thank you so much for your time on this, Mr. Brilhante. MR. BRILHANTE: Oh, thank you very much. And then, I’m not going to be rude, but I’ll be leaving about quarter to. CHR. NAMAHOE: Thank you very much, Mr. Brilhante. Before we let you go—and I don’t know—J, do we discuss this communication in front of him at this time? MR. YOSHIMOTO: We can go back for this— CHR. NAMAHOE: So, we took it out of order—we took the director’s report, but if we go back to the agenda then we’re up in front of Number 5. MR. YOSHIMOTO: Number 5— CHR. NAMAHOE: Which is Communication number 19-3. MR. YOSHIMOTO: Yeah. No—it’s a public discussion item. CHR. NAMAHOE: Okay. So, thank you for the report. We don’t need to make a motion, do we, to accept the report? MR. YOSHIMOTO: Which report are you talking about this— CHR. NAMAHOE: The HR report. MR. YOSHIMOTO: No, we should, yeah. MR. BRILHANTE: Yeah, the quarterly reports. MR. YOSHIMOTO: Yeah. Motion to accept and file. MR. TAM: I make a motion to accept and file Mr. Brilhante’s report. MR. CHILLINGWORTH: Second. Page 12 Merit Appeals Board April 24, 2019 CHR. NAMAHOE: All in favor? AYES: Board Members Chillingworth, Tam, and Chair Namahoe – 3 NOES: None. ABSENT: None EXCUSED: None. CHR. NAMAHOE: Thank you. MR. BRILHANTE: Thank you. Communication(s) (Item 5) Communication No. 19-03, received on March 19, 2019, from Hawaiʻi County Salary Commission Chair George W. Campbell, inviting the Merit Appeals Board to do a presentation before their Commission concerning factors they should consider and any recommendations regarding the Board’s respective department head and deputy salaries CHR. NAMAHOE: Okay, so—Communication—so, we’re at Section 5 of the agenda. MR. BRILHANTE: Would you allow me to speak to that— CHR. NAMAHOE: Please do. MR. BRILHANTE: —briefly? So, as you may know or may not know, the department head and deputy’s salaries for the County of Hawaiʻi as well as the administrative staff and the county council members are set by the Hawaiʻi County Salary Commission. I sit on that Commission as an Ex-Officio member so I can provide information, but I don’t partake in any of the voting as it relates to whether or not they can increase a salary, they can decrease a salary, or they can maintain status quo—and that’s completely their decision. I just provide information on an “as needed” or “as requested” basis. The Commission had a meeting about three months ago, and I think— MS. YAMADA: Yeah. MR. BRILHANTE: Yeah. They decided and they approved a plan to conduct a review for each of the department heads and deputies, agencies, departments—salaries. So, they sent a request to each of the—to the administration regarding the department heads that are appointed by the mayor. And they also sent separate information request to each of the departments which are supervised by a commission and in that regards that would be the fire—the Fire Commission; for police, Police Commission; for liquor, the Liquor Commission; and for HR, the Merit Appeals Board. Those are the departments that are supervised by commissioners. Page 13 Merit Appeals Board April 24, 2019 And in that request they submitted, they made that request for each of the commissions to provide information for the Salary Commission to consider as they review and come up with a plan regarding the current or their respective department head and deputy salary. So, that’s the request that was made to you, the Merit Appeals Board, was to provide information—come and provide information to the Salary Commission regarding my—and, well, my vacant deputy position salary. So, that’s where they’re at. That’s the basis of this. And because—J can explain to you the rules of the Board as to why it’s a formal agendized item. CHR. NAMAHOE: So, I admit I was confused when I saw the e-mail because of the specifics of this particular Board—was it really for Mr. Brilhante or was it about salaries in general for the County. MR. BRILHANTE: No, it’s specific to my salary— CHR. NAMAHOE: And the vacant position— MR. BRILHANTE: Yeah. CHR. NAMAHOE: —okay. Did you, gentlemen, receive that—or have you read it? It’s in here, correct? I don’t know how to discuss this. MR. YOSHIMOTO: In terms of—do you have a legal question? We can go into executive session—there’s four of us—oh, well, if it’s a non-legal question, then we can have an open discussion. MR. BRILHANTE: Let me clarify this a little bit more. So, the commission is just requesting that a member from the Merit Appeals Board come and testify to them at their next hearing to provide information regarding what you, as a Board, would recommend the salary of the Department of HR—the Department of HR be. The reason it has to be formal is because for a board member to come and give that information, it would have to be through a vote of the Merit Appeals Board authorizing that member to officially go and make a statement—and that’s why it’s on the agenda. CHR. NAMAHOE: So, then, this is something that should be taken into executive session because, really, any discussion might start covering legal territory. MR. YOSHIMOTO: Possibly, depending on the question that you ask. We could start there and then see where we go. CHR. NAMAHOE: And then, afterwards, (inaudible). Page 14 Merit Appeals Board April 24, 2019 MR. YOSHIMOTO: Then you would vote in the regular session as far as what the path or what decisions you make in terms of how you respond to this. CHR. NAMAHOE: Okay. Well, we should let you go— MR. BRILHANTE: Okay. Well, thank you very much. I appreciate you guys braving the weather to come and meet today. And then, I’ll be able to get all the information from Glynis or— MR. TAM: Good luck, this weekend. MR. BRILHANTE: Oh, we’ll need it. Thank you very much. CHR. NAMAHOE: Yeah, bring home the HHSA thing. MR. BRILHANTE: We’ll see you guys. CHR. NAMAHOE: Thank you so much. Aloha. MR. YOSHIMOTO: You got to go make a motion—to make a motion to go into executive session. CHR. NAMAHOE: So, may I ask if we could take a minute. We take a five-minute break first, and then when we come back, then we can go into session? Okay, thank you so much. RECESS: The Chair called for a recess at 9:45 a.m. RECONVENE: The meeting reconvened at 9:55 a.m. CHR. NAMAHOE: So, we are now back in session. It is now 9:55, and I will entertain a motion to enter executive session. MR. CHILLINGWORTH: So moved. MR. TAM: Second. CHR. NAMAHOE: All in favor. AYES: Board Members Chillingworth, Tam, and Chair Namahoe – 3 NOES: None. ABSENT: None EXCUSED: None. CHR. NAMAHOE: Thank you. Page 15 Merit Appeals Board April 24, 2019 RECESS: The Chair called for a recess at 9:55 a.m. to convene executive session. RECONVENE: Open session reconvened at 10:17 a.m. CHR. NAMAHOE: So, now that we are in open session. Okay, so now that we’re in open session—is the issue at hand, is there—are any of you gentlemen interested to present in front of the Salary Commission? MR. CHILLINGWORTH: I’m not. MR. TAM: Yeah, I’m not really interested. CHR. NAMAHOE: Given the way that it’s been discussed so far, do we consider that presenting in front of the Salary Commission is a decision that we should make—that we should agree to do? MR. CHILLINGWORTH: So, the question is—should we make a presentation to the Salary Commission? I think we should. CHR. NAMAHOE: Okay. That’s a question. Mitch? MR. TAM: I’m sorry? Yes, we should. CHR. NAMAHOE: Okay, thank you. MR. TAM: I just was confirming my (inaudible). CHR. NAMAHOE: All right. So, to make that presentation, I mean, we discussed one key element. But that’s—is there any other elements that should be entertained or brought up? MR. CHILLINGWORTH: When you say “elements” are you talking about in addition to the fact that we think that the position should be bumped up to a position on a parity with corporation counsel? CHR. NAMAHOE: Correct. Outside of that—no? MR. CHILLINGWORTH: I don’t have anything else beyond that. MR. TAM: No. CHR. NAMAHOE: Okay. So, then, we do agree that the presentation for the Salary th Commission will occur on May 16—and I’ll look at my schedule to attend it. And that the focus of it will be to present to the Salary Commission that we believe the HR director—the County HR director should be on parity with the director of corporation counsel, given the duties of this department. Page 16 Merit Appeals Board April 24, 2019 MR. CHILLINGWORTH: So moved. MR. TAM: Second. CHR. NAMAHOE: All in favor? AYES: Board Members Chillingworth, Tam, and Chair Namahoe – 3 NOES: None. ABSENT: None EXCUSED: None. CHR. NAMAHOE: Thank you. MR. CHILLINGWORTH: And then, they can take it where they want to. CHR. NAMAHOE: Right. Okay, very good. New Business (for discussion and appropriate action) (Item 6) CHR. NAMAHOE: All right new business. Is there any new business? None? Unfinished Business (for discussion and appropriate action) (Item 7) FY 2018-2019 Annual Performance Evaluation of the Director of Human Resources: Execution and timeline for the evaluation process (i.e. anticipated dates for the implementation of the survey to departments) CHR. NAMAHOE: Glynis, so the questions that correlate to the evaluation? MS. YAMADA: Did you want to see the questions again? CHR. NAMAHOE: Should we—I mean— MS. YAMADA: ‘Cause you folks approved this already. CHR. NAMAHOE: Right. MS. YAMADA: And then, the questions were approved “as is.” CHR. NAMAHOE: Okay. So, no discussion on that? The questions are great. MS. YAMADA: But for future agendas, you’d like to know the—you mentioned the 360— CHR. NAMAHOE: Eval? Page 17 Merit Appeals Board April 24, 2019 MS. YAMADA: Yeah, you used that term. So, you wanted it on a future agenda to discuss those type of questions? CHR. NAMAHOE: So, that the employees can also—all right, so 360 evaluation—right. Okay. MS. YAMADA: And then, on the message to all the department heads, there was discussion that you wanted it only to department heads and to delete “program administrators” and “HR representatives”—so I just wanted to confirm— MR. CHILLINGWORTH: Right. MS. YAMADA: —do only to HR (sic.) directors? CHR. NAMAHOE: Okay. So, right now, the decisions to make—with respect to this section of the agenda—executive and timeline. Okay, so we have the merit—we have the MAB meeting set, the survey is set to go out, questions remain “as is”— So, is there any possible amendments to the survey questions and/or evaluation form that we choose to do? MS. YAMADA: It was decided at the last meeting that it would be kept “as is.” CHR. NAMAHOE: Okay, I’m just reading this right here. MS. YAMADA: Oh. CHR. NAMAHOE: Just to see— MS. YAMADA: Okay. CHR. NAMAHOE: —there’s nothing to add ‘cause we decided already that it’s “as is.” So— execution and timeline for the evaluation—I’m trying to see what’s the unfinished part of the business. MS. YAMADA: Oh, just to confirm that these dates—target dates, are okay with you folks? May 17 to send out the survey, and then the deadline for them to respond would be by May st 31—and that we’ll be sending the survey only to department heads and not their representatives/HR reps./assistants. CHR. NAMAHOE: So, basically, no changes. MR. TAM: No changes. CHR. NAMAHOE: No changes. We’re on schedule. Gentlemen, concerns? Page 18 Merit Appeals Board April 24, 2019 MR. CHILLINGWORTH: So, we approve the performance evaluation process that’s recommended. CHR. NAMAHOE: I will take that motion. MR. TAM: Second. CHR. NAMAHOE: All in favor “aye.” AYES: Board Members Chillingworth, Tam, and Chair Namahoe – 3 NOES: None. ABSENT: None EXCUSED: None. Director’s Report (Item 8) HR Quarterly Reports: October-December 2018, January-March 2019; and Items of Current Interest Note: This matter was previously taken out of order. Schedule Next Meeting Date (Item 9) CHR. NAMAHOE: Okay—and schedule next meeting date. nd MS. YAMADA: In May, on May 22 we have the Walpole and Keopuhiwa hearing scheduled at the Puna Conference Room. And in June I’ll be on vacation—actually, I’m on vacation from ththth May 28 till June 14. So, if you guys have a meeting, can it be during the week of June 24, because I’d have to post the agenda six days prior to the meeting—if you decide to have a meeting in June. And then, we have a tentative hearing scheduled for Keopuhiwa, if the motion to dismiss is not th approved. So, that’s on July 17 at 9 o’clock. And then, just for information, Bill’s on vacation rdth July 5 and July 8; and then from July 23 to August 6. CHR. NAMAHOE: Do we need to meet in June? MS. YAMADA: To discuss the, I guess, the— CHR. NAMAHOE: Results— MR. TAM: Results. CHR. NAMAHOE: —of the survey. Page 19 Merit Appeals Board April 24, 2019 MS. YAMADA: ‘Cause we’ve done it later because of scheduling conflicts. It’s up to you folks if you guys just want to get it done in June—the last week of June. ndth MR. YOSHIMOTO: I’m not here from June 22 to the 27—so I would be available on the Friday of June 28, but you said Bill is out from July— thth MS. YAMADA: He’ll be out on July 5 and 8—Friday and Monday. And then, Bill will be rdth out, again, from July 23 to August 6. And we have a tentative MAB hearing on Keopuhiwa th on July 17. thth MR. YOSHIMOTO: But you’re looking at June 20—the week of June 26—not 24? th MS. YAMADA: The 28 is the only day you’re available. MR. YOSHIMOTO: Yeah. th MS. YAMADA: June 28. MR. YOSHIMOTO: But then, if you wanted any other day, I can have—or I can ask someone from my office to cover for me. I’m not essential, so—I’m replaceable. CHR. NAMAHOE: Okay. MR. YOSHIMOTO: You guys are not. CHR. NAMAHOE: God bless. June is always a rough month—May and June are difficult for me because these are my July open enrollments. MS. YAMADA: Unless you can just say “to be determined” and we can see the outcome of the Keopuhiwa case. CHR. NAMAHOE: And set it at that time? MS. YAMADA: Yeah. CHR. NAMAHOE: Yeah? MR. YOSHIMOTO: Yeah, why don’t we do that? That sounds good. MR. CHILLINGWORTH: Why don’t we do that. MR. YOSHIMOTO: Yeah. CHR. NAMAHOE: Okay. Page 20 Merit Appeals Board April 24, 2019 MR. CHILLINGWORTH: Sounds good. CHR. NAMAHOE: Okay. So, we will table setting the meeting until May 22nd. Very good. MS. YAMADA: So,just to clarify, we have to let the Salary Commission know that we—you are available. So, is it okay,just to do a short letter or memo to them notifying them that you will be appearing before them? CHR. NAMAHOE: Correct. MS. YAMADA: Okay. Adjournment (Item 10) CHR. NAMAHOE: Pay them more. Okay—sorry. It's now 10:30 and the Merit Appeals Board meeting is adjourned. Respectfully submitted, Glynis Yamada, Secretary-Reporter APPROVED: Luahiwa Namahoe, Chair Merit Appeals Board Page 21