STAND. COM. REP. NO. 1253-00

                                 Honolulu, Hawaii
                                                   , 2000

                                 RE: H.C.R. No. 62
                                     H.D. 1




Honorable Calvin K.Y. Say
Speaker, House of Representatives
Twentieth State Legislature
Regular Session of 2000
State of Hawaii

Sir:

     Your Committee on Labor and Public Employment, to which was
referred H.C.R. No. 62 entitled: 

     "HOUSE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION REQUESTING THE LEGISLATIVE
     REFERENCE BUREAU TO CONDUCT A STUDY ON THE ECONOMIC IMPACT
     OF INSTITUTING A LIVING WAGE FOR ALL PERSONS EMPLOYED BY A
     PRIVATE COMPANY UNDER A STATE CONTRACT,"

begs leave to report as follows:

     The purpose of this concurrent resolution is to request the
Legislative Reference Bureau (LRB) to conduct a study on the
economic impact of instituting a living wage for all persons
employed by a private company under a state contract.

     The Hawaii State AFL-CIO and the Welfare & Employment Rights
Coalition testified in support of this measure.  The Chamber of
Commerce of Hawaii testified in opposition to this measure.  The
LRB offered comments on this measure. 

     Your Committee finds that requiring companies that benefit
from state contracts to pay their employees a living wage is a
positive step toward reducing the number of families living below
the poverty line in this State.  

     However, your Committee is concerned that the phrase "living
wage", as defined in the concurrent resolution, may be in
conflict with chapter 104, Hawaii Revised Statutes, which
requires that companies awarded contracts by the State must pay
their employees, at a minimum, the "prevailing wage" which is set

 
 
                                 STAND. COM. REP. NO. 1253-00
                                 Page 2

 
by the Department of Labor and Industrial Relations.  This could
pose a problem as a "living wage" is defined as a wage that will
lift a family of four to the poverty line and this wage may be
higher than what the "prevailing wage" is for certain job
classifications.

     Your Committee has amended this concurrent resolution by:

     (1)  Requesting LRB to:

          (A)  Contact the cities of Baltimore, Chicago, and Los
               Angeles and request any and all pertinent
               information relating to their experience with the
               implementation of the living wage law; and

          (B)  Submit proposed legislation for a living wage law
               for employees of private companies on contract
               with the State;

     (2)  Changing the title to read: "REQUESTING THE LEGISLATIVE
          REFERENCE BUREAU TO COMPILE DATA ON THE NUMBER AND
          PERCENTAGE OF EMPLOYEES OF PRIVATE COMPANIES ON
          CONTRACT WITH THE STATE WHO MAY BE AFFECTED BY THE
          IMPLEMENTATION OF A LIVING WAGE LAW"; and

     (3)  Making technical, nonsubstantive changes for clarity,
          consistency, and style.

     As affirmed by the record of votes of the members of your
Committee on Labor and Public Employment that is attached to this
report, your Committee concurs with the intent and purpose of
H.C.R. No. 62, as amended herein, and recommends that it be
referred to the Committee on Finance in the form attached hereto
as H.C.R. No. 62, H.D. 1.

                                   Respectfully submitted on
                                   behalf of the members of the
                                   Committee on Labor and Public
                                   Employment,



                                   ______________________________
                                   TERRY NUI YOSHINAGA, Chair