Comment on the Role of Grievance Arbitration in Public-Sector Bargaining in Hawaii (From Arbitration Issues for the 1980s, P 230-234, 1982, James L Stern and Barbara D Dennis, ed. - See NCJ-96502)

• NCJ Number: 96512
• Author(s): E H Nakamura
• Date Published: 1985
• Length: 5 pages
• Sale Source: Bureau of National Affairs
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America

Annotation

Public employers are asking the courts in Hawaii to reshape the broad powers heretofore entrusted to arbitrators into a much narrower concept of collective bargaining, one that allows little room for grievance resolution with the aid of neutral third parties.

Abstract

The ostensible basis for these pleas is the 1968 Hawaii Public Employment Relations Act whose essential provisions generally follow the private sector model. Under this law, negotiated agreements have closely resembled private sector agreements. Public employers, particularly in the field of higher education, perceive differences in the laws governing the private and public sectors that could diminish the scope of bargaining and circumscribe the arbitrator's authority. Specifically, they contend that resorting to arbitration on matters such as tenure denials and promotions is foreclosed by the law. This view is based on language in the Act's section titled 'Scope of Negotiations,' which some public employers interpret as saying that management reserves all meaningful personnel actions unto themselves. Some judges have agreed with this theory, and the Hawaiian Supreme Court is scheduled to pass on the matter soon. To influence the course of public sector collective bargaining, arbitrators must supply reasoned opinions in this area consistent with the concepts of collective bargaining which they helped develop in the private sector.