Government Affairs, State
I. LABOR
A. Unemployment Insurance
The Maui Chamber of Commerce recommends the original purpose of HRS Sec. 838-30(4) be restored by amending the law to make it clear that employees involved directly in a labor dispute (or strike) are disqualified from receiving unemployment compensation benefits during the entire duration of the labor dispute.
Supporting Statement
Employees in both private and public sector who are on strike should be totally disqualified from unemployment compensation benefits during the strike period. The basic principle to be applied here is simple enough - the unemployment insurance program should not be used to aid either side in a labor dispute. Hawaii law has two provisions on this subject. The first states that an unemployed person drawing benefits need not accept work offered to him which is otherwise suitable if the prospective employers engage in a labor dispute - in other words, the system cannot be used in any way as a strikebreaker. The second provision states that persons employed due to a work stoppage which exists because of a labor dispute shall not be eligible for benefits. This provision was designed to deny benefits to persons on strike as long as the strike continues. However, in practice, striking workers have drawn benefits during a strike if the employer is able to continue his operations to some substantial degree. Under this interpretation of the law, public employees on strike might well be paid unemployment benefits since the state’s business must continue and revenues continue to be collected, strike or no strike. By its nature, the unemployment insurance program must be neutral toward any labor dispute. Accordingly, workers involved in such a dispute should not be eligible for benefits.
B. The Maui Chamber of Commerce recommends amendment to HRS Sec. 383-30(3) to clearly define the terms “good cause” and “suitable work.”
Supporting Statement
Under HRS Sec. 383-30(3), an employee is disqualified in any week in which he fails to apply for available suitable work without good cause when so directed by the Employment Office or fails to accept suitable work which is offered. The phrase “good cause” is not defined in the regulations. The Maui Chamber of Commerce believes that a very strict definition of “good cause” is necessary, since a fundamental requirement of the Unemployment Insurance Law is that for each week an employee is claiming benefits he must be “able to work and available for work”, HRS Sec. 383-29(3). Therefore, “good cause” should be defined as only those situations in which the employee was able, after making all reasonable efforts to apply for work. This would place the burden upon the employee to make every reasonable effort to conduct a job search during the week for which benefits are claimed. After making such an attempt, he can show that he could not apply for work, the employee would be relieved from disqualification. The term “suitable work” is defined in Regulation Section 12-5-55(c) and is normally “limited to work” in the individual’s usual occupation or work “for which the individual is reasonably fitted.” The Maui Chamber of Commerce believes that this definition is far too restrictive and should include any work which the claimant can perform, regardless of whether the claimant has been specially trained for such work. The Maui Chamber of Commerce expects that claimants will attempt to find work in their profession or in areas for which they have received specialized training. However, no claimant for unemployment benefits should enjoy the luxury of being able to pick and choose jobs to apply for if there is no reasonable expectation that they will be able to find work in their specialized field. Additionally, the regulation allows the referee to consider the distance involved in obtaining the new job and the claimant’s prior earnings.
C. Workers Compensation Reform
The Maui Chamber of Commerce believes that meaningful changes need to be made to laws directing Workers Compensation in the state of Hawaii. Businesses face ever increasing payroll costs. To continue to prosper, business must have a climate in which it can operate effectively and profitable. The Maui Chamber of Commerce supports repeal of a Workers Compensation state fund and supports the repeal of Chapter 386A, Hawaii Revised Statutes.
Supporting Statement
A plan underwritten by private enterprise and operating under the supervision of the State best serves the interest of the people of Hawaii, including the workers, the employer, and the taxpayer of the State.
1. The Maui Chamber of Commerce believes in the payment of Workers Compensation benefits for injuries arising from and in the course of employment. However, we do not believe it is consistent with the purpose of the Workers Compensation law that payment of benefits be provided for injuries occurring when an employee is not working and is transacting personal business on his own time away from the employer’s premises or is injured while voluntarily attending and/ or participating in recreational or social activities. The current program must be tightened to eliminate such claims.
2. The Maui Chamber of Commerce recommends that the original intent of the statutory presumption of the compensability be clarified to remove the unfair evidentiary burden which has been placed on employers. Further, judicial rewriting of the law has placed an impossible burden of proof upon employers of employees who have a pre-existing condition, latent or active.
3. The Maui Chamber of Commerce supports the choice of treatment for injured employees. We feel that an injured employee should be able to receive any form of treatment for injuries be that chiropractic, physical therapy, holistic treatment, or the more traditional forms of medicine.
D. Collective Bargaining for Public Employees
Public employees should not have the right to strike. Any dispute regarding public employee compensation should be submitted for final decision to a board of arbitrators chosen from the constituency whose selection and scope of authority should be appropriately defined and limited.
Supporting Statement
Only a few states, including Hawaii, grant public employees a limited privilege of striking. All other states and the federal government prohibit strikes by public employees. One reason often given for granting public employees the right to strike is that they engage in unlawful strikes, even where prohibited by law. This is an unreasonable justification. It is noted that where prohibition of the right to strike exists there are fewer public employee strikes.
II. TORT LIABILITY INSURANCE
The Maui Chamber of Commerce supports reform of the tort liability insurance system.
Supporting Statement
Tort law’s purpose is to take some of the risk out of life and ensure victims of negligence that they will not have to bare the entire cost of others mistakes. Hawaii tort law instead adds to life’s risks by threatening our very sustenance. More and more businesses are going “naked” with their insurance requirements and are contracting their work to independent contractors. They reason that they cannot afford to do otherwise. This exacerbates the costs of doing business for legitimate concerns and will exact its toll among us all.
An attempt was made to reform our tort laws in 1986 by a special session of the Legislature. Liability insurance was the only item on the agenda. The legislation that came out of this special session did little to help the consumer. There is no evidence that fairness and equity have been applied to our system of adjudicating wrongs committed upon another.
The Chamber continues to stress that unpredictable performance in our tort system is placing an ever increasing burden on us all, through increased taxes, increased costs of goods and services consumed, and ever higher insurance premiums.
A. Joint and Several Liability
The Maui Chamber of Commerce believes that the Joint and Several Liability Laws should be amended so that defendants will be responsible only for their degree of negligence.
Supporting Statement
The Joint and Several Liability doctrine can lead to the unfair allocation of payments among defendants that bear no resemblance to their actual fault. The doctrine thus creates a large liability exposure for a “deep-pocket” defendant. In the 1986 legislative special session, Joint and Several liability was abolished with certain exceptions. Among those exceptions is the tort action relating to the recovery of economic and non-economic damages arising out of motor vehicle accidents. NOTE: The largest segment of lawsuits involve motor vehicles. Otherwise if a defendant is less than 25% at fault, the amount recoverable against him will be in direct proportion to the degree of negligence assigned. If 25% or more, defendant can be held responsible for the entire award.
B. Non Economic Damages
The Maui Chamber of Commerce supports a cap on non-economic damages.
Supporting Statement
The Maui Chamber of Commerce supports the concept that a cap should be placed on all non-economic damage awards - including the many exceptions stipulated in the 1986 Reform Act. Non-economic damages are financial awards for conditions such as intangible pain and suffering, mental anguish, and reduction in the quality of life. In all instances, these awards are in addition to medical care, subsistence, property damage, and loss of wages.
C. Punitive Damages
The Maui Chamber of Commerce opposes awarding punitive damages to a plaintiff.
Supporting Statement
The Maui Chamber of Commerce opposes the concept of awarding punitive damages to a plaintiff. In cases of proven negligence, and the court feels an outrage has been committed against society, we support awarding punitive damages to the public’s general fund.
D. Assumption of Risk
The Maui Chamber of Commerce supports the notion of assumption of risk.
Supporting Statement
Even more than procedural change, the Chamber supports a return to the ancient wisdom on tort laws which specifically demanded that individuals accept responsibility for their actions and there shall be no liability without fault.
E. Gaming
The Maui Chamber of Commerce will oppose legalization of all gaming such as gambling 6-5, pari-mutuel off track gambling, cockfighting, casinos.
Supporting Statement
The Chamber of Commerce feels that the cost to our society will far out weigh the revenue returns to the state treasury. We also feel that gaming will attract more crime.
III. GENERAL EXCISE TAX
A. The Maui Chamber of Commerce supports the need to revise the General Excise Tax reporting form to include reporting of revenues generated in all counties, designated by county, i.e. City and County of Honolulu, Hawaii, Kauai and Maui and be mandated by legislation.
Supporting Statement
Currently, revenues are reported on the basis of total gross income no matter the amount generated in each county. This leaves us, at the present time, with no reliable source of information on where the dollars are generated. This information is needed for purposes of economic development, government and private sector planning, verification of true growth factors, etc. This information is already available in the books of reporting companies. Although the end result of reporting gross revenues for the purpose of accessing the general excise tax would be the same, activity in each county would be part of the record.
B. The Maui Chamber of Commerce supports the repeal of General Excise Tax on our health care services.
Supporting Statement
Hawaii is one of the few States to place a tax on health care services. The regressive nature of the excise tax may impede or inhibit access to health care by those who need it most, and may least be able to afford it.
A. Unemployment Insurance
The Maui Chamber of Commerce recommends the original purpose of HRS Sec. 838-30(4) be restored by amending the law to make it clear that employees involved directly in a labor dispute (or strike) are disqualified from receiving unemployment compensation benefits during the entire duration of the labor dispute.
Supporting Statement
Employees in both private and public sector who are on strike should be totally disqualified from unemployment compensation benefits during the strike period. The basic principle to be applied here is simple enough - the unemployment insurance program should not be used to aid either side in a labor dispute. Hawaii law has two provisions on this subject. The first states that an unemployed person drawing benefits need not accept work offered to him which is otherwise suitable if the prospective employers engage in a labor dispute - in other words, the system cannot be used in any way as a strikebreaker. The second provision states that persons employed due to a work stoppage which exists because of a labor dispute shall not be eligible for benefits. This provision was designed to deny benefits to persons on strike as long as the strike continues. However, in practice, striking workers have drawn benefits during a strike if the employer is able to continue his operations to some substantial degree. Under this interpretation of the law, public employees on strike might well be paid unemployment benefits since the state’s business must continue and revenues continue to be collected, strike or no strike. By its nature, the unemployment insurance program must be neutral toward any labor dispute. Accordingly, workers involved in such a dispute should not be eligible for benefits.
B. The Maui Chamber of Commerce recommends amendment to HRS Sec. 383-30(3) to clearly define the terms “good cause” and “suitable work.”
Supporting Statement
Under HRS Sec. 383-30(3), an employee is disqualified in any week in which he fails to apply for available suitable work without good cause when so directed by the Employment Office or fails to accept suitable work which is offered. The phrase “good cause” is not defined in the regulations. The Maui Chamber of Commerce believes that a very strict definition of “good cause” is necessary, since a fundamental requirement of the Unemployment Insurance Law is that for each week an employee is claiming benefits he must be “able to work and available for work”, HRS Sec. 383-29(3). Therefore, “good cause” should be defined as only those situations in which the employee was able, after making all reasonable efforts to apply for work. This would place the burden upon the employee to make every reasonable effort to conduct a job search during the week for which benefits are claimed. After making such an attempt, he can show that he could not apply for work, the employee would be relieved from disqualification. The term “suitable work” is defined in Regulation Section 12-5-55(c) and is normally “limited to work” in the individual’s usual occupation or work “for which the individual is reasonably fitted.” The Maui Chamber of Commerce believes that this definition is far too restrictive and should include any work which the claimant can perform, regardless of whether the claimant has been specially trained for such work. The Maui Chamber of Commerce expects that claimants will attempt to find work in their profession or in areas for which they have received specialized training. However, no claimant for unemployment benefits should enjoy the luxury of being able to pick and choose jobs to apply for if there is no reasonable expectation that they will be able to find work in their specialized field. Additionally, the regulation allows the referee to consider the distance involved in obtaining the new job and the claimant’s prior earnings.
C. Workers Compensation Reform
The Maui Chamber of Commerce believes that meaningful changes need to be made to laws directing Workers Compensation in the state of Hawaii. Businesses face ever increasing payroll costs. To continue to prosper, business must have a climate in which it can operate effectively and profitable. The Maui Chamber of Commerce supports repeal of a Workers Compensation state fund and supports the repeal of Chapter 386A, Hawaii Revised Statutes.
Supporting Statement
A plan underwritten by private enterprise and operating under the supervision of the State best serves the interest of the people of Hawaii, including the workers, the employer, and the taxpayer of the State.
1. The Maui Chamber of Commerce believes in the payment of Workers Compensation benefits for injuries arising from and in the course of employment. However, we do not believe it is consistent with the purpose of the Workers Compensation law that payment of benefits be provided for injuries occurring when an employee is not working and is transacting personal business on his own time away from the employer’s premises or is injured while voluntarily attending and/ or participating in recreational or social activities. The current program must be tightened to eliminate such claims.
2. The Maui Chamber of Commerce recommends that the original intent of the statutory presumption of the compensability be clarified to remove the unfair evidentiary burden which has been placed on employers. Further, judicial rewriting of the law has placed an impossible burden of proof upon employers of employees who have a pre-existing condition, latent or active.
3. The Maui Chamber of Commerce supports the choice of treatment for injured employees. We feel that an injured employee should be able to receive any form of treatment for injuries be that chiropractic, physical therapy, holistic treatment, or the more traditional forms of medicine.
D. Collective Bargaining for Public Employees
Public employees should not have the right to strike. Any dispute regarding public employee compensation should be submitted for final decision to a board of arbitrators chosen from the constituency whose selection and scope of authority should be appropriately defined and limited.
Supporting Statement
Only a few states, including Hawaii, grant public employees a limited privilege of striking. All other states and the federal government prohibit strikes by public employees. One reason often given for granting public employees the right to strike is that they engage in unlawful strikes, even where prohibited by law. This is an unreasonable justification. It is noted that where prohibition of the right to strike exists there are fewer public employee strikes.
II. TORT LIABILITY INSURANCE
The Maui Chamber of Commerce supports reform of the tort liability insurance system.
Supporting Statement
Tort law’s purpose is to take some of the risk out of life and ensure victims of negligence that they will not have to bare the entire cost of others mistakes. Hawaii tort law instead adds to life’s risks by threatening our very sustenance. More and more businesses are going “naked” with their insurance requirements and are contracting their work to independent contractors. They reason that they cannot afford to do otherwise. This exacerbates the costs of doing business for legitimate concerns and will exact its toll among us all.
An attempt was made to reform our tort laws in 1986 by a special session of the Legislature. Liability insurance was the only item on the agenda. The legislation that came out of this special session did little to help the consumer. There is no evidence that fairness and equity have been applied to our system of adjudicating wrongs committed upon another.
The Chamber continues to stress that unpredictable performance in our tort system is placing an ever increasing burden on us all, through increased taxes, increased costs of goods and services consumed, and ever higher insurance premiums.
A. Joint and Several Liability
The Maui Chamber of Commerce believes that the Joint and Several Liability Laws should be amended so that defendants will be responsible only for their degree of negligence.
Supporting Statement
The Joint and Several Liability doctrine can lead to the unfair allocation of payments among defendants that bear no resemblance to their actual fault. The doctrine thus creates a large liability exposure for a “deep-pocket” defendant. In the 1986 legislative special session, Joint and Several liability was abolished with certain exceptions. Among those exceptions is the tort action relating to the recovery of economic and non-economic damages arising out of motor vehicle accidents. NOTE: The largest segment of lawsuits involve motor vehicles. Otherwise if a defendant is less than 25% at fault, the amount recoverable against him will be in direct proportion to the degree of negligence assigned. If 25% or more, defendant can be held responsible for the entire award.
B. Non Economic Damages
The Maui Chamber of Commerce supports a cap on non-economic damages.
Supporting Statement
The Maui Chamber of Commerce supports the concept that a cap should be placed on all non-economic damage awards - including the many exceptions stipulated in the 1986 Reform Act. Non-economic damages are financial awards for conditions such as intangible pain and suffering, mental anguish, and reduction in the quality of life. In all instances, these awards are in addition to medical care, subsistence, property damage, and loss of wages.
C. Punitive Damages
The Maui Chamber of Commerce opposes awarding punitive damages to a plaintiff.
Supporting Statement
The Maui Chamber of Commerce opposes the concept of awarding punitive damages to a plaintiff. In cases of proven negligence, and the court feels an outrage has been committed against society, we support awarding punitive damages to the public’s general fund.
D. Assumption of Risk
The Maui Chamber of Commerce supports the notion of assumption of risk.
Supporting Statement
Even more than procedural change, the Chamber supports a return to the ancient wisdom on tort laws which specifically demanded that individuals accept responsibility for their actions and there shall be no liability without fault.
E. Gaming
The Maui Chamber of Commerce will oppose legalization of all gaming such as gambling 6-5, pari-mutuel off track gambling, cockfighting, casinos.
Supporting Statement
The Chamber of Commerce feels that the cost to our society will far out weigh the revenue returns to the state treasury. We also feel that gaming will attract more crime.
III. GENERAL EXCISE TAX
A. The Maui Chamber of Commerce supports the need to revise the General Excise Tax reporting form to include reporting of revenues generated in all counties, designated by county, i.e. City and County of Honolulu, Hawaii, Kauai and Maui and be mandated by legislation.
Supporting Statement
Currently, revenues are reported on the basis of total gross income no matter the amount generated in each county. This leaves us, at the present time, with no reliable source of information on where the dollars are generated. This information is needed for purposes of economic development, government and private sector planning, verification of true growth factors, etc. This information is already available in the books of reporting companies. Although the end result of reporting gross revenues for the purpose of accessing the general excise tax would be the same, activity in each county would be part of the record.
B. The Maui Chamber of Commerce supports the repeal of General Excise Tax on our health care services.
Supporting Statement
Hawaii is one of the few States to place a tax on health care services. The regressive nature of the excise tax may impede or inhibit access to health care by those who need it most, and may least be able to afford it.
