The document discusses the impact of the Supreme Court's Janus v. AFSCME ruling on public sector unions and collective bargaining. It summarizes arguments made in the case, including that collective bargaining is inherently political and that non-union members should not be required to pay union dues. The document also discusses the ruling's implications, including unions still being required to represent all employees but only being able to provide services to dues-paying members. Additionally, it discusses concerns that weakening unions could negatively impact research and jobs at public universities in Hawaii by making it harder for faculty to advocate effectively.

1. STATE OF HAWAII
GOVERNOR DAVID IGE
LABOR MANAGEMENT RELATIONS
CURRENT ISSUES
Janus v. AFSCME, Council 31
United States Supreme Court
No. 16-1466, 585 U.S. __, __ S.Ct. __ (June 27, 2018)
A DIFFERENT TAKE
ON THE U.S. SUPREME COURT “JANUS” RULING
University of Hawaii Professional Assembly (UHPA)
By Lynne Wilkens, UHPA President
July 2, 2018, accessed July 11, 2018
https://www.uhpa.org/opinion/a-diferent-take-on-the-u-s-supreme-court-janus-ruling/
This past week's U.S. Supreme Court decision on Janus v. AFSCME
(American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees) has
created a stir across the nation.
The ruling overturns the Supreme Court's 1977 ruling on Abood v.
Detroit Board of Education that has served as a precedent for more than
40 years. Janus serves as a new landmark case and is causing concern
over the loss of employee rights and a weakened collective voice in the
workplace. There has also been not-so-subtle gloating about renewed
power for employers with a legal way to defund and cripple unions.
Backers of Mark Janus, the Illinois child worker, argued collective
bargaining is inherently political in nature. Therefore, union members
should no longer have to pay member dues because any assertions by
unions violate the First Amendment rights of its members.

2. Yet in Hawaii, there is a diferent tenor and tone in response to Supreme
Court's decision. Over the past 18 months, the University of Hawaii
Professional Assembly (UHPA) armed its members with accurate
information to brace them for the anticipated ruling and will continue to
update its members as the new law is implemented in our state.
Hawaii embedded collective bargaining in its statutes to “promote
harmonious and cooperative relations between government and its
employees and to protect the public by assuring efective and orderly
operations of government.” This establishes joint decision-making
between government and its employees to create a win-win
environment that supports Hawaii’s cultural values, our economy
and our future.
University of Hawaii faculty members know that with UHPA as their
designated union, they can speak with a strong, unifed voice to negotiate
with the UH administration and governor at the bargaining table. As a
unifed group, they can persuade legislators to release funds for wages in
ratifed contracts. All of this may seem overtly political because of the
way the faculty contracts are approved and funded.
Under the Janus ruling, UHPA will continue to ensure contracts
provide equitable and satisfactory terms of employment for all
faculty, regardless of whether they are union members. However,
support for grievances and other services will no longer be available
to non-paying members. This is fair for the paying member.
The broader community also benefts from a healthy equilibrium of
power in the workplace. There is a UH professor who generates $35
million in non-state research funding and 450 jobs. This is only possible
because the 4,000 faculty members at the 10 University of Hawaii
campuses across the state represented by UHPA can focus on quality
teaching, research, and community service due to the good contract they
have in place.

3. Take away faculty's voice and rights, and these community benefts also
go away. Faculty members will not stay at the UH if they are treated
unfairly, especially if they are ofered a much more attractive
compensation package from another university — another type of brain
drain.
UHPA has a solid record of efective representation of UH faculty over
the past 40 years. The union provides signifcant value for the dollar in
contract negotiations, grievance settlements, and representation of
faculty interests. This high-performance service has only been possible
because of the collaboration between UHPA and its membership and we
are confdent this partnership will continue to play a vital role in the
future.
_______________________
SB 410 DESIGNED TO RAISE THE BAR OF ACCOUNTABILITY
UHPA https://www.uhpa.org/category/opinion/
Defend mediocrity or improve higher education?
Who Governor David Ige hires, and who he chooses to discipline is
strictly his prerogative. It is not our place to tell him how to run his state
departments.
However, if he vetoes SB 410, it will be a clear indication he defends
mediocrity in our state — hardly the quality we want in a leader.
SB 410 will allow UHPA faculty to continue to provide quality higher
education, research, and community service to the people of Hawai'i.
[Emphasis Supplied}

4. MEASURE STATUS – HAWAII LEGISLATURE
http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/Archives/measure_indiv_Archives.aspx?
billtype=SB&billnumber=410&year=2017
SB410 SD1 HD1
Measure Title: RELATING TO COLLECTIVE BARGAINING
Report Title: Collective Bargaining; Negotiations
Description: Clarifes the allowable scope of collective bargaining
negotiations regarding the rights and obligations of a
public employer. (SB410 HD1)
Companion: HB232
Package: None
Current Referral: LAB, FIN
Introducer: SENATOR GILBERT KEITH-AGARAN
4/28/2017 S Enrolled to Governor.
6/23/2017 H Notice of intent to veto (Gov. Msg. No. 1161)
6/23/2017 S Notice of Intent to veto dated 06-23-17
(Gov. Msg. No. 1161)
7/11/2017 H Vetoed (Gov. Msg. No. 1268).
7/11/2017 S Vetoed on 07-11-17 - Returned from the Governor
without approval (Gov. Msg. No. 1268).
GOVERNOR'S OFFICE NEWS RELEASE
GOVERNOR RELEASES INTENT TO VETO LIST
June 23, 2017, accessed July 11, 2018
https://governor.hawaii.gov/newsroom/governors-ofce-news-release-governor-releases-intent-to-veto-list/
SB 410 RELATING TO COLLECTIVE BARGAINING

5. This measure broadens the scope of collective bargaining negotiations by
requiring negotiations on the implementation of terms and conditions of
employment, including making these violations grievable by employees
who disagree with such working conditions.
Rationale: This bill directly impacts the ability of state departments to
efectively manage its workforce by negating management rights to direct
its workforce and requiring union consent on such matters as assignment,
transfer and discipline.
_______________________
NEW YORK STATE BAR ASSOCIATION
Janus v. AFSCME
May 10 – May 11, 2018, accessed July 11, 2018
http://www.nysba.org/WorkArea/DownloadAsset.aspx?id=82424
The Impact on Management Organizations
Not only will a decision by the Supreme Court determining that
compelled agency fees regimes are unconstitutional have a major impact
on unions, but it will also afect management organizations and
government employers. The United States Supreme Court has already
recognized an employer's interest in dealing with an exclusive
representative when establishing workplace terms and conditions.
The Court specifcally noted in Minnesota State Board for Community
Colleges v. Knight that “the goal of reaching agreement makes it
imperative for an employer to have before it only one collective view of
its employees when negotiating.” The Court in Abood also noted that
“confusion and confict” could result from negotiating with multiple
groups of employees.

6. Exclusive representation provides many benefts to employers that will be
lost if agency fees are declared unconstitutional, such as consolidation of
the “process of bargaining about individual terms and conditions of
employment into a single collective endeavor,” preventing strikes in the
public sector, and efciently resolving workplace disputes and labor
issues through an experienced union representative.
Management's ability to efciently resolve labor issues, particularly
grievances, will be injured if agency fees are declared unconstitutional
because experienced and knowledgeable union representatives help
facilitate a timely and satisfactory resolution of the dispute since they
organize and prioritize employees’ concerns in the
workplace.
An exclusive representative is specifcally benefcial to the collective
bargaining process because he/she efciently and reliably conveys
information about employee preferences to government employers by
organizing and channeling the concerns and priorities of employees,
and reconciling conficting views. Furthermore, exclusive representatives
enable the government and other employers to establish employment
terms in a more durable and stable manner than if those terms were
imposed unilaterally.
Under the exclusive representation model of collective bargaining, unions
must equally, and in good faith, represent every employee in a
bargaining unit, whether the employer is a union member or not.
Although not sought in Janus, if exclusive representation is ultimately
eliminated by the Supreme Court in a subsequent case, or by state
statutory amendment of bargaining duties, then the duty of fair
representation likely gets eliminated with it.

7. “Without [the] duty of fair representation, government employers would
lose the beneft of bargaining with a single party that represents all
employees, and would be faced with the workplace dissension and
resentment that predictably would arise if unions could act solely in the
interests of their own members.”
[Citations Omitted]
_______________________
REVISITING SB 410
The employer and the exclusive representative shall not agree to any
proposal which would be
inconsistent with the merit principle OR
the principle of equal pay for equal work pursuant to section 76-1 OR
which would interfere with the rights and obligations of a public
employer to:
(1) Direct employees;
(2) Determine qualifcations, standards for work, and the nature
and contents of examinations;
(3) Hire, promote, transfer, assign, and retain employees in
positions;
(4) Suspend, demote, discharge, or take other disciplinary action
against employees for proper cause.
(5) Relieve an employee from duties because of lack of work or
other legitimate reason.
(6) Maintain efciency and productivity, including maximizing the
use of advanced technology, in government operations;

8. (7) Determine methods, means, and personnel by which the
employer’s operations are to be conducted; and
(8) Take such actions as may be necessary to carry out the missions
of the employer in cases of emergencies.
This subsection shall not be used to invalidate provisions of collective
bargaining agreements in efect on and after June 30, 2007, and shall
not preclude negotiations over either the procedures and criteria on
promotions, transfers, assignments, demotions, layofs, suspensions,
terminations, discharges, or other disciplinary actions during
collective, bargaining negotiations or negotiations over a memorandum of
agreement, memorandum of understanding, or other supplemental
agreement.
NOTES, SUPPLIED
SB 410 is internally inconsistent. Please refer to sections highlighted in
RED
SB 410 is in direct confict with Hawaii Revised Statutes Chapter 377
Hawaii Employment Relations Act – Management Rights
SB 410 is in direct confict with Title 5 United States Code §7106 –
Management Rights. Specifcally,
(a) Subject to subsection (b) of this section, nothing in this
chapter shall afect the authority of any management ofcial of
any agency —
(1) to determine the mission, budget, organization, number of
employees, and internal security practices of the agency; and

9. (2) in accordance with applicable laws—
(A) to hire, assign, direct, layof, and retain employees in the
agency, or to suspend, remove, reduce in grade or pay, or take
other disciplinary action against such employees;
(B) to assign work, to make determinations with respect to
contracting out, and to determine the personnel by which
agency operations shall be conducted;
(C) with respect to flling positions, to make selections for
appointments from—
among properly ranked and certifed candidates for promotion;
or and any other appropriate source: and
to take whatever actions may be necessary to carry agency
mission during emergencies. [Emphasis Supplied]
(b) Nothing in this section shall preclude any agency and any labor
organization from negotiating—
(1) at the election of the agency, on the numbers, types, and
grades of employees or positions assigned to any organizational
subdivision, work project, or tour of duty, or on the technology,
methods, and means of performing work;
(2) procedures which management ofcials of the agency will
observe in exercising any authority under this section; or
(3) appropriate arrangements for employees adversely afected by
the exercise of any authority under this section by such management
ofcials. [Emphasis Supplied]

10. GOVERNOR DAVID IGE
Interview with David Ige, Hawaii Governor
NHK NEWSLINE
https://www3.nhk.or.jp/nhkworld/nhknewsline/hawaii/interviewwithdavidige/
THE MODERN HAWAII THAT WE KNOW
There is no more diverse community in the world where there is no
majority. And I think most importantly, everyone is encouraged to stay
connected to their roots to their countries of origin and encouraged to
share the culture and traditions that are so important to them. And it
creates this diverse cultural mix here in the islands that is unique to
anywhere in the world.
My father grew up in a plantation, but he became a construction worker.
He was a steelworker and was very much involved with a lot of the
building of Hawaii. But when the bombs fell on Pearl Harbor, it defnitely
changed his life and changed the life of many Japanese Americans here
on the island. And he defnitely felt compelled to volunteer to serve in
the 100 battalion at that time and really wanted to prove his loyalty to
America as he was an American citizen.
NHK: What's your message, especially for the younger generation?
GOVERNOR IGE: I would challenge them to really continue the legacy,
the legacy of values, the sense of community, the commitment to hard
work, their commitment to add value and build a stronger community
that truly celebrates the diversity of immigrants of all backgrounds who
have come to Hawaii and call Hawaii home.