House Standing Committee on Labor

Hi. Good morning, everyone. OH, good morning, everyone. I'm calling to order the House Committee on Labor Today is April 11, 2025 and we are in Conference Room 309 today. Testimony will be limited to one minute. First on the agenda we have SCR 63 related to a workforce Excellence award.

First to testify is Jade Butay, Director, Department of Labor and Industrial Relations, in person.

Good morning, Chair Sayama. Vice Chair Lee. I'm Jade Butay, Director of the Department of Labor and Industrial Relations. We stand on our testimony in strong support.

Many good jobs don't require a four-year degree. Having a workforce excellence program will allow young people to learn that there are legitimate options that are equal to going to a university. Thank you for the opportunity to testify.

Thank you.

Are there any other testifiers in person or on Zoom? That's all the testimony we got. Okay, moving on. SCR145 related to paid family leave. First up to Testify, Michael Golou Jr. From the Hawaii State LGBTQ Commission on Zoom. Not present.

Not present. Next, Tia Harstock, Director of Office in Wellness and Resilience, in support, in person.

Aloha. Tia Hartsock, Director, Office of Wellness and Resilience. We stand in strong support of this resolution. Thank you for the opportunity to testify.

Thank you. Up Yasmin Chain, Executive Director, the Hawaii State Commission of the Status of Women, in support, in person.

Hi. Yasmine Cheney, Executive Director for the Commission on the Status of Women. I stand on my written testimony and strong support and I'm available for any questions. Thank you.

Thank you. Next up is Brenda Hashimoto, Director of the Department of Human Resources Development. Comments, in person.

Hi, Good morning, Chair and Vice Chair. I'm Brenna Hashimoto, Director of the Department of Human Resources Development. We'll stand on our written testimony providing comments regarding the composition of the employer representatives. Thank you.

Thank you. Next up, Gene Butai, Director of DLIR in support.

Aloha Chair, Vice Chair. Gene Butai for DLIR. You know, we stand on our testimony in support. You know this. The the paid family leave will require careful crafting of the program to ensure that it's positioned for success. As such, we look forward to working with all stakeholders in partnership on this shared endeavor. Thank you.

Thank you. Next up, Kelly Lopez, State Director of AARP, in support, in person.

Aloha. Thank you. Just really excited about the opportunity this resolution provides to all of us and as indicated, appreciate DLIR support. And we're just eager to work with all of the partners and the state departments to finally make paid family Leave available, we hope, passage of legislation in the next session. Thank you very much.

Thank you. Next up, Nicole Wu, Director of Research for HCAD in support on Zoom.

Aloha Chair and Vice Chair, thank you for hearing this resolution. We are in strong support and I'll stand in my written testimony. Thank you.

Thank you. Tina Andrade, President and CEO, Catholic Charities Hawaii in support in person, Aloha Chair and Vice Chair.

I'm Betty Lou Larson representing Catholic Charities Hawaii. We strongly support this because this is the kind of clientele that will come to our agency and we don't like them to we don't want to have them choose between having a job and caring for a loved one, whether it's an elder, a disabled child, a newborn.

All of those are situations with our clients can put them in homelessness because they just don't. They're struggling to pay the basic bills. So we really appreciate this time. We think it's a good time to study it, really get down to the nitty gritty and find what's a fair and financially long term sustainable program would be.

Thank you.

Thank you. Next up, Makuguloyi Junior Pride at Work Hawaii in support on Zoom Michael not present. Next up. Also on Zoom, Michelle Bartel, President and CEO, Aloha United Way in support. Next up, Jamie Morgan, Senior Region Lead, American Heart Association and support in person, Jo Edwards, Wainiha Country Market in support on Zoom.

Aloha Chair, thank you so much for hearing this this today. I've been working with this for several years now. We're so excited to hopefully see this pass legislation next year. As a small business owner, I am in full support. I stand by my comments.

I'm also the chair of the Kauai County Democratic Party and we are also in support but I also want to speak in the fact of our rural and our outer islands where this measure would be so important for us as most of the patients have to fly to these to your island and family Members are left to choose what to do.

And so I urge you to support this and I thank you for your time today. Mahalo.

Thank you. Next to testify, Christian Fern, Executive Director for UPA in support in person. Thank you. Joshua Wish, President of the Holomua Collaborative in support. Thank you. Also have Christian Zulli in support on Zoom.

Aloha Chair, thank you so much for letting us come together and speak on this. I'm also strongly in support of this as I ultimately believe that Hawaii deserves paid family leave.

As heard in my or read in my written testimony, our family was One of those families who, during a really difficult pregnancy with a one year old baby and a husband who is struggling with sleep deprivation, we unfortunately lost his job because of his symptoms and because he was trying to care for me while working close to 60 hours a week.

And had we had been offered paid family leave, I believe that our family would be much better off financially. My husband would not have had to return to shipping. Our children only see him six months out of the year. He has missed many firsts in their lives and it has disrupted our family unit in an irreparable way.

So I would hate to see other families go through this for various reasons and I stand strongly with my written testimony. So thank you so much and we're in support of this. Aloha.

Aloha. Thank you. Is there anyone else in person on Zoom here to testify? Okay.

We also received testimony from Executive Office on Aging, the Hawaii County Council, District 2, the Honolulu County Committee on the Status of Women, Hawaii Family Caregiver Coalition, President and Children Together, Hawaii State Afl, Cio, hgea, the IMUA alliance, the Democratic Party of Hawaii Education Caucus, ACLU, the Health Committee of the Democratic Party of Hawaii, aauw, Hawaii Aloha care, the Americans for Democratic Action, Hawaii Public health Institute, and 42 individuals in support.

Members, any comments or questions.

For DLIR? So I appreciate the supportive intent behind your testimony. You noted in your testimony perhaps the need for a $1.5 million appropriation for legal analysis and study. You broke this down further with a 250k for federal and state law conflicts, 500k for actuarial study, 750k for independent consultant facilitation to implement a paid family leave program.

I'd like if you can elaborate a little bit more on the actuarial study and what this study would perhaps highlight and help your Department understand how to best implement this policy.

Chair, let me ask our Administrator of Disability Compensation Division, Joanne Vidinhar to elaborate.

Thank you. Chair and Vice Chair. Joanne Vidinhar, Administrator, thank you for the question. The actuarial analysis really is to look at the HOI data. And so it's on the workforce, it's the employers as well as the beneficiaries that could be eligible for family paid and medical leave.

Okay. I understand that DLIR is subscribed to, I believe, some kind of data sharing network, the Hawaii employers system. And you know, this shares essentially what you described, right? Employers in Hawaii, the type of employees.

I'm just curious what this actuarial analysis, you know, are you going to RFP the study out, you know, how is this analysis going to take place? How long is it going to take for DLIR to complete the analysis?

It's not something that we have the resources for. So we will be going out for a consultant to do that. So the first thing is the timeline to get a consultant on board.

And so going out for an RFP, as long as we have responses to the RFP, that would take us a couple of months with the state procurement process. And then understanding we actually would step back a little bit and do an RFI.

Because we're requests for information, we look to the experts that do actuarial studies to, to help us to identify what is needed for the proposal. When we do a true analysis on an actuarial study similar to what was done with work comp and TDI through Mr. Reisenfeld or juris Doctrine, Reisenfeld, has.

The Department conducted an actuarial study in another program or existing program or proposed program in recent, maybe, I don't know, years, so that I could get a kind of reference as to how much these studies do cost.

On average, we have not been successful. Back in 2017-2018 the legislators provided us 250,000 to go and do a closed case analysis, an actual analytical report on workers compensations, closed cases. And we did not receive any bidders on the 250,000. And so that was.

That's kind of where I know that some people look at these numbers and say that it's a little high, but for people to do actual analysis, it is in depth. And so we're hoping that we will get something for the 500,000 on what is proposed here.

Okay, very good. For the 750k that was outlined in this 1.5 million, I believe. State of Hawaii had several studies done before. I think most recent one was 2019 where the Legislature appropriated 350,000 to have that conducted. I'm just curious, what do you think will be different?

What's something new that you expect to find in this new study?

We're hoping with the new study that we'll have Hawaii specific data as well as understanding the interplays between the federal and the state code of federal rules as well as the state laws.

And so I thought that's what the 250,000 was for, is to look at the federal and state laws and how they may conflict or complement each other.

And then the part of the study would provide for the language.

Okay.

And so it's kind of a breakdown. We have a legal and regulatory review, comparative analysis which is the compliance requirements and then facilitation, eligibility criteria, benefit duration and payments.

So really studying the different states on that have the programs and what their benefit duration is and the payments that are paid out, what is covered, as well as the claims process and the appeals, we want to be able to, once we have a program in place, be able to start and not still trying to figure out what that process would look like.

And so if we have all of the processes in place, as well as the implementation framework, which is how many program staff is really needed. We know what we've estimated according to what our Unemployment Insurance division has. But what is the actual amount that a consultant would feel as well as what is needed for the IT programs?

We have currently a program that has also a portal factor with it. And so how are we going to start this off? It's the IT development, public awareness and reporting requirements.

Okay. And setting aside the substance and appropriations of this request. Right. Best case scenario, a few months for the RFP to be out, you guys get some interest, and then the study would actually begin, which I assume would sounds like a lot of work. So I assume, best case scenario, a year. Right.

So that's a year and a half. So this would be done, what, 2028?

2028. We would have best case scenario. Yes, we come in 2026 and we start it. Once we get the RFP in place in my thoughts is for the study to begin.

We would like this working group to meet with the consultants to be able to give their expertise or their understanding of their positions from the different employer employees, the labor unions, so that the consultants themselves kind of understand where we are here in Hawaii, what understanding we have.

So when they go out and do their studies and their analysis, they know what to be looking at. Look a little bit more in depth into certain areas that I think we have gaps in.

Okay. No, thank you. I think that helped clarify some of the concerns there, though. I admittingly, you know, I do still have some concerns of. Right. Just redoing the previous work that we've already done. And I do have concerns about. Right.

The consultants that we do contract with and comparing their work to, say, work that we could be doing in the meantime, reaching out to other states that do have a paid family leave program. Right. I think, yes, consultants are great, but they are expensive.

And I think it's up to our responsibility, too, to do the due diligence, not only for the Department, but for the rest of the state that obviously really wants this program in place. But I Could appreciate the. You want to do the best prep work you can before embarking on this really complicated and expensive program.

Thank you. No further questions.

Thank you.

Members, any other comments or questions?

Thank you.

Thank you. Okay, Moving on to SCR 55 related to the review for boiler and elevator inspection grants. First to testify is Jade Butay, Director of DLIR in support, in person.

Thank you, Chair, Vice Chair and Representative Jeanne Kapela. We stand on our testimony in strong support. There are 10,000 boilers and pressure vessels and 8,000 elevators that we have to inspect statewide.

It's a responsibility that we do not take lightly. This is a public safety issue where when one hurt, we all hurt. We want to prevent tragedies like what happened at the UH Manoa lab. Thank you for the opportunity to testify.

Thank you. Next up, Brenna Hashimoto, Director of DHRD with comments in person.

Good morning again Chair and Vice Chair. Brenna Hashimoto from DHRD. I'll stand on our written testimony providing comments. And I would just like to reiterate that we believe the appropriate agency to, to spearhead this study would be the Department of Labor, since it is their program.

However, we're of course willing and able to help them with the HR analysis. That's the, the compensation and the classification issues. We stand ready to support them in that part of the study.

Thank you. Next to testify, Javier Pomeranz, Otis Elevator Company in support, in person.

Javier with Otis Elevator, I stand in support.

Next up, Billy Taylor, Director of Government Affairs for the National Elevator Industry, in support on Zoom.

Hi, Mr. Chairman and Members of the. Committee, my name is Billy Taylor and I'm the Director of Government Affairs for the National Elevator Industry, or NEI.

We're the trade association for those major elevator manufacturers and service companies. And in fact, several of our member companies are in the room with you today to share their experiences from a local operations perspective.

NEI submitted a detailed written statement for the record, which I encourage you to review. But I'd like to make just a quick couple key points, and there's no other way to put it but the lack of available elevator inspectors is having a negative impact to the state's business environment.

Our companies are facing significant impediments to their operations. The issue has resulted in what is now unmanageable wait times for inspections - sometimes three to four months in some cases - which is creating a growing backlog in new installation turnover and is making modernizations increasingly difficult.

For these reasons, NEI urges this Committee to support SCR 55 in obtaining the information needed to improve the elevator program. Thank you for your time and consideration.

Thank you. Is there anyone else here to testify on this resolution in person or on Zoom? Thank you. Please state your name for the record.

Yes, my name is Darren Hamasaki. I am the Operations Manager for Schindler Elevator and we are here in support of this resolution. Thank you. Thank you.

Good morning. Michael Nagao, General Manager, KONE Elevators and Escalators. 30 years of elevator industry experience. KONE is a member of NEI and is in full support of Senate Concurrent Resolution 55.

The challenges and hardships in scheduling and completing required inspections and tests are real and in turn negatively impacts and causes frustration to homeowners associations, business owners, and the general public. So mahalo. We humbly ask for your support.

Thank you. Anyone else to testify? Go ahead.

Morning, everyone. Thank you very much for having us. I am Chuck Decoito. I am the Hawaii Branch Operations Manager for TK Elevator.

My experience in this industry has been slightly less than 45 years in this business and have been on full support of NEI, Billy Taylor, the rest of our elevator contractors here in the State of Hawaii, as we represent pretty much a huge variety of homeowners associations, hotels, resort locations and condominiums, where not only does it put an impact on the industry as far as getting inspections and valid permits and etc...

It also puts the burden on the homeowners association of these facilities and hotel communities. TK, as well as everybody else here are in full support of the SCR 55. I thank you.

Thank you.

Hi. Yasmine Cheney. I'm going to testify in my personal capacity. There are two elevators in the State Office Tower building that I work in that are out of order and the other elevators regularly break down.

And I am usually quite worried when I get in the elevator that I will be stuck and unable to perform my job duties. So any support you could lend to this industry would be greatly appreciated.

Thank you. Anyone else? Okay. Any comments or questions? Members? Moving to- Moving on to SCR 667 SD1 related to mental health. First to testify is Bren Hashimoto, DHRD, in support.

Good morning again. Brenna Hashimoto for DHRD. I'll stand on our written testimony and support. Thank you.

Thank you. Katherine Amer, Council Chairperson for the State Council on Mental Health and Department of Health. In support, in person.

Hi. Katherine Amer, Chair of the State Council on Mental Health. I'm offering our testimony in strong support of Senate Concurrent Resolution 67. Our council recognizes that the ongoing workforce shortage in Hawaii's public mental health system is not merely an HR issue. It is a community health crisis.

Critical vacancies across the departments, including Health and Education, Human Services, Corrections and Judiciary, are preventing residents from accessing timely, appropriate mental health services. These shortages directly contribute and exacerbate staff burnout, service disruptions and widening health disparities, especially in our rural and neighboring islands.

We support the resolutions call for greater collaboration across state agencies and the Department of Health and Human, excuse me, Human Resources Development to modernize the hiring practices. Mahalo for your consideration and for your support, especially in strengthening our mental health care system. And we're here for any comments or questions. Thanks.

Thank you. Anyone else here to testify in person or on zoom? We also received testimony from one individual. Members, any comments or questions? Okay, moving on to SCR 135 related to wellness and resiliency and data sharing. We have Tia Hartsock, Director of Office of Wellness and Resilience in support.

Aloha Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee, we want to stand on our testimony and support and we also want to further discuss the data dashboards that we've created, the social determinants of health dashboards that we've created, which could conceivably really help support the further analysis of these dashboards and look at collaborating further with the departments.

Thank you for this opportunity to testify.

Thank you, Director. That's all the testimony we have. Was there anyone else testifying on Zoom or in person? Members, any comments or questions?

Director, can you talk about if you how your partnership is going with departments like DOE and what that looks like and if something like this would be helpful and I guess bridging and building more gap or I guess bridging and filling the gaps that we're certainly seeing along like wellness and resilience in our like rural DOE schools?

Yeah, yeah, thank you for that question. I think the partnership between most of the departments has been great. People are very interested in the data. They're interested in finding ways to continue the conversation around sharing data. There has been challenges over years because of concerns around privacy and HIPAA regulations.

And so some of the efforts that have been happening for several years have been assisting those conversations to further this type of information in this reso could help continue the conversation and open up more opportunities for the departments in our office to find creative, innovative ways to share data.

I think it's been an interest in Departments for years, not only within the Departments, but outside the Departments to more comprehensively understand how services can be better appropriated, better delivered and better comprehensive continuum across that care system. So I think it could, it could help support those additional conversations.

There's a lot of data out there, and oftentimes we really look at apples to oranges, and finding ways to look at apples to apples could be more helpful. Yeah, thank you for that question.

Thank you for the work you're doing.

Any other comments or questions? Okay, moving on to SCR 163 SD1 relating to land use efficiency. First to testify, Keith Rogan, Comptroller for DAGS and support, in person. Not here. We also received testimony from the Grassroots Institute of Hawaii. Is there anyone else here to testify in person or on Zoom? Questions or comments, members? Okay.

And lastly, Moving on to SCR 143 related to performance reviews for executive directors or similar exempt positions. We received no testimony for this one. Members, comments or questions? Okay, we're going to recess for decision making. Thank you. Okay, we're reconvening the House Committee on Labor for decision making. First, we have SCR 63.

My recommendation is to pass, as is. Members, any comments? Vice chair for the vote.

Voting on SCR 63. Chair's recommendation is to pass, as is. Chair, vice chair vote aye. Representative Garrett excused. [roll call]. Thank you, chair. Your recommendation is adopted.

Thank you. Moving on to SCR 145 SD1. Recommendation is to pass, as is. Members, any comments? Vice chair for the vote.

Voting on SCR 145 SD1. Chair's recommendation is to pass, as is. Note the excuse absence of Representative Garrett. Any members voting with reservations? Any members voting no. Thank you, chair. Your recommendation is adopted.

Yep. Thank you. Next up is SCR 55. Recommendation is to pass, as is. Members, any comments? Seeing none. Vice chair for the vote.

Voting on SCR 55. Chair's recommendation is to pass, as is, noting the excuse absence of Representative Garrett. Any members voting with reservations? Any members voting no? Thank you, chair. Your recommendation is adopted.

Thank you. Next, SCR 67 SD1. Recommendation is to pass, as is. Members, any comments? Chair for the vote.

Voting on SCR 67 SD1. Chair's recommendation is to pass, as is, noting the excuse absence of Representative Garrett. Any members voting with reservations? Any members voting no? Thank you, chair. Your recommendation is adopted.

Thank you. Next up, SCR 135 SD1. Recommendation is to pass, as is. Members, any comments? Seeing none. Chair for the vote.

Voting on SCR 135 SD1. Chair's recommendation is to pass, as is, noting the excuse absence of Representative Garrett. Any members voting with reservations? Any members voting no? Thank you, chair. Recommendation is adopted.

Thank you. SCR 163 SD1. Recommendation is to pass, as is. Members, any comments? Seeing none. Chair for the vote.

Voting on SCR 163 SD1. Chair's recommendation is to pass, as is noting the excuse absence of Representative Garrett. Any members voting with reservations? Any members voting no? Thank you, chair. Your recommendation is adopted.

Lastly, SCR 143 recommendation is to pass as is. Members, Any comments? Seeing none. Chair for the vote.

Voting on SCR 143 SD1. Chair's recommendation is to pass, as is, noting the excused absence of Representative Garrett. Any members voting with reservations? Any members voting no? Thank you, chair. Your recommendation is adopted.

Thank you. This committee is adjourned.