Honorable Robert Bunda

President of the Senate

Twenty-Second State Legislature

Regular Session of 2004

State of Hawaii

Sir:

Your Committee on Labor, to which was referred H.C.R. No. 77, H.D. 2, entitled:

begs leave to report as follows:

The purpose of this measure is to request the Department of Labor and Industrial Relations to enforce the provisions of Act 44, Session Laws of Hawaii (SLH) 2003, in accordance with the Legislature's intent.

Testimony in support of this measure was submitted by the Hawaii State AFL-CIO, the ILWU Local 142, and a private citizen.

Testimony in opposition to this measure was submitted by the Department of Labor and Industrial Relations (DLIR).

Your Committee finds that pursuant to Act 44, SLH 2003, an employer who provides sick leave benefits to its employees is required to allow its employees to utilize sick leave for family leave purposes. In effect, this law permits an employee to use a maximum of ten days of sick leave to care for an ill child, spouse, reciprocal beneficiary, or parent. As reflected in the Act, as well as committee reports on the measure, the intent of the Legislature was not to require an employer to provide paid leave in excess of that which an employee had accrued and was available or the amount of leave an employee is entitled to under the Temporary Disability Insurance Law (TDI). Unfortunately, your Committee further finds that DLIR's interpretation of the law has resulted in the denial of the use of sick leave for family leave purposes for many employees.

Although the law clearly states that TDI benefits are not to be used for family leave purposes, any amount of sick leave provided that is in excess of the minimum TDI benefits amount, however, would be available for such purposes. A discrepancy exists in that the statutory minimum amount of TDI benefits required may be less than the minimum amount required under an employer's self-insured plan that is accepted by DLIR. Once accepted by DLIR, no sick leave in excess of the minimum amount specified under the plan may be utilized for family leave purposes, although such is in excess of the statutory minimum amount of TDI benefits. Your Committee believes that this practice appears to be a strategic method for avoiding compliance with the law. Additionally, your Committee determines that the legislative intent behind Act 44, SLH 2003, is not being reflected in DLIR's enforcement of the law, and that DLIR should reexamine and realign its position in accordance with the law's actual intent.

As affirmed by the record of votes of the members of your Committee on Labor that is attached to this report, your Committee concurs with the intent and purpose of H.C.R. No. 77, H.D. 2, and recommends its adoption.