Editorials
Friday, October 16, 1998

‘State of the Unions’
is cause for concern

IN a four-part series of reports entitled "State of the Unions: Is Labor Working for Hawaii?" the Star-Bulletin this week examined the impact of the public employee unions on state and county government.

The articles showed that:

Hawaii's unionized public employees enjoy some of the most generous benefits in the country and that despite the state's economic slump those benefits have remained practically untouchable;

Efforts to get government to become more efficient are stymied by union rules and regulations;

Local governments can be ineffective in essential management functions such as disciplining workers and negotiating contracts when confronted by union opposition;

Significant political change rarely occurs without the support of the two leading public employee unions, the Hawaii Government Employees Association and United Public Workers.

In total, the reports show that Hawaii has a problem. Public employee unions have won concessions from government that in some cases are unjustifiably expensive and make it difficult for managers to discipline employees and institute improvements. The result is a government labor force that is increasingly burdensome in a time when the economy is at a low point.

The explanation for this state of affairs is simple. The public employee unions have become a major factor in Hawaii politics and a principal bulwark of the Democratic Party establishment that has run state government for decades. They have helped elect most members of the Legislature as well as every governor since statehood. The politicians they have put in office -- in effect, electing their own bosses -- are naturally reluctant to defy the unions, so they continue to get their way, sometimes at the expense of the public interest.

If the people of Hawaii want to take back their government from the public employee unions, they will vote for candidates who put the people first and are willing to fight the unions.

State of the Unions Special

Mideast talks

THE summit conference that began yesterday at a retreat on the Eastern Shore of Maryland may be the last chance to avert an eruption of violence between Israel and the Palestinians and salvage prospects for a settlement of their dispute. The agreement negotiated in secret in Oslo, Norway, and signed at the White House in 1993 provided for interim arrangements in the West Bank and Gaza leading up to a permanent settlement.

The accord says a permanent settlement should be in place by the spring of 1999. Yasser Arafat has threatened to declare independence for Palestine if no settlement has been reached by next May. The potential for widespread violence is obvious. The Palestinian leader and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu have been under pressure from Washington to end a 19-month stalemate.

The issue, as it has always been, is the conflict between the Palestinians' demand for autonomy if not total independence in the territory occupied by Israel in the 1967 war, opposed to Israel's demand for firm assurances of security against attack. The negotiations stalled after Netanyahu's election, in part because he has taken tougher positions than his predecessor, the assassinated Yitzhak Rabin, in part because terrorist incidents have continued despite previous assurances from Arafat.

Selection of the Wye River retreat for the talks was reminiscent of the 1978 Camp David talks between Israel and Egypt, brokered by President Carter, and the 1993 Oslo talks, which were also held at a secluded site. Maybe it will work again this time. Perhaps the imminence of the deadline for a settlement will prod the leaders to compromise. Everyone concerned about the future of the much-disputed Holy Land must hope so.

Sidewalk dispensers

ATTEMPTS to stop flea-marketeers from peddling message-bearing T-shirts in Waikiki were successful, but controlling the distribution of handbills and other publications is not as easy. Most of the publications are available on sidewalk racks. Removing the racks would spawn armies of pamphleteers, so the City Council appears headed for the only sensible alternative: restricting the racks.

Distribution of printed material, including commercial publications -- unlike peddling of merchandise -- is protected by the First Amendment, although the leafleting can be subject to controls. The City Council has considered prohibiting distribution of handbills near bus stops, mid-block crosswalks, driveways and street corners because of safety considerations. Such controls are constitutionally acceptable.

The proliferation of publication racks has triggered similar concerns about safety and aesthetics near driveways, bus stops and narrow sidewalk areas -- an estimated 500 racks at 100 locations in Waikiki. Councilman Duke Bainum, who represents Waikiki, has proposed that the city place "enclosures" at 65 locations, similar to about 40 dispensers that were installed on Kalakaua Avenue in the 1980s, to replace the existing stands.

The Council could legally ban sidewalks dispensers, but that would be a mistake. Realizing the consequences of such a ban, Rick Egged of the Waikiki Improvement Association recognizes that Bainum's proposal "provides order where there is currently chaos."

The proposal also has drawn favorable reviews from the Hawaii Newspaper Agency, which publishes Honolulu's two major dailies, and the Hawaii Publishers Association. Those who want to eliminate publication racks altogether fail to appreciate the influx of leafleting that would result.

---

Published by Liberty Newspapers Limited Partnership

Rupert E. Phillips, CEO

John M. Flanagan, Editor & Publisher

David Shapiro, Managing Editor

Diane Yukihiro Chang, Senior Editor & Editorial Page Editor

Frank Bridgewater & Michael Rovner, Assistant Managing Editors

A.A. Smyser, Contributing Editor