Workers had
right to attend
‘informational’ rallyGovernor's speech to state
By James Takushi
and city workers wasn't
'blatantly political'The Star-Bulletin's Sept. 3 editorial, "Campaign rally during state working hours," which criticized a government workers' meeting as a "blatantly political" Democratic campaign rally, failed to double check one important fact regarding First Amendment rights.
State law permits all county and state employers to give their workers two hours off to attend "informational or educational" meetings with their duly authorized representatives.
The law does not define "informational or educational" and does not allow the employer to censor, prescreen or authorize what information the union will impart.
In particular, unions have taken the position that, because of the First Amendment, there are freedom of speech considerations. To this date, we have not been able to clarify what subjects may be discussed in these "informational and educational" meetings conducted by the union.
Under Chapter 76-103 and current collective bargaining agreements, the union normally requests time off for their meetings. In this case, I approved the two unions' requests to release employees to attend the unions' "Workers Appreciation" assembly.
As state human resources director, I ask department heads to use their judgment in releasing specific employees, as long as there is adequate operational coverage. This is legally authorized, and such authorization language is spelled out in both Hawaii state law relating to public employees and in the various collective bargaining unit contracts which have been in existence for many years.
I understand few state and county employees attended. The majority of the attendees were AFSCME members attending their national convention at the new Hawaii Convention Center.
If the chairwoman of the Republican Party doesn't know by now, Republican mayors signed contracts that allowed their employees to take two hours off to attend these union meetings.
I was informed that the purpose of the meeting was to gather state and city HGEA and UPW employees in one joint AFSCME meeting, for two hours as allowed by law, so that Governor Cayetano could read his proclamation of Worker Appreciation Day, and to enable national and local AFSCME leadership to address local public employees.
The traditional option would have been to hold a dozen or so meetings each with fewer employees. The two unions asked for one meeting instead. It was an extremely rare occasion for AFSCME leadership to all be in Honolulu, so the unions' special request was considered.
I have felt for a long time that state employees don't receive due recognition. It was good that the governor paid tribute to the workers and also expressed his appreciation for their dedication, hard work and, in some cases, going without a pay increase for four years.
Governor Cayetano thanked employees for their hard work and cited several instances in which state employees were recognized by federal agencies for exemplary accuracy or work. Some of the examples cited were the Department of Human Services' food stamp program and social workers, national recognition for business and economic development programs, and Hawaiian Home Lands for its historic federal agreement.
He also thanked employees for all the work they have done through these years in coping with the state budget problems, layoffs, cuts in resources, etc.
From a discussion on collective bargaining issues, the governor also said that it appears we will have a budget balance this year and next, and that he will resubmit the signed union contract to the Legislature for funding.
Of course, in order for any governor to send a budget to next year's legislative session, he would have to be re-elected. He indicated that, if re-elected, he would support the pay raise.
I did not perceive the governor's extemporaneous speech as "blatantly political" because he spoke about labor-management issues, state budget projections, and recognizing the employees for their dedication. These are topics that unions would probably discuss in their informational and educational meetings.
Your editorial implies that I knew what would occur at the event, but I swear that I did not. I arrived mid-point through the gathering, in time to hear the governor, lieutenant governor and national AFSCME leadership speak. I was surprised to see that the majority of people were mainland conventioneers who came by buses.
It is my understanding that the State Ethics Commission has jurisdiction over only state employees, officers, officials and certain other individuals. I question if the Ethics Commission has jurisdiction over outside individuals who make seemingly "political" speeches.
James Takushi is the state human resources director.
