AI-assisted research summary: This provision states public policy for government labor relations, including a right for public employees to organize for collective bargaining, a requirement for public employers to negotiate written agreements with exclusive representatives, and creation of a labor relations board.
(a) The legislature finds that joint decision-making is the modern way of administering government. Where public employees have been granted the right to share in the decision-making process affecting wages and working conditions, they have become more responsive and better able to exchange ideas and information on operations with their administrators. Accordingly, government is made more effective. The legislature further finds that the enactment of positive legislation establishing guidelines for public employment relations is the best way to harness and direct the energies of public employees eager to have a voice in determining their conditions of work; to provide a rational method for dealing with disputes and work stoppages; and to maintain a favorable political and social environment. (b) The legislature declares that it is the public policy of the State to promote harmonious and cooperative relations between government and its employees and to protect the public by assuring effective and orderly operations of government. These policies are best effectuated by: (1) Recognizing the right of public employees to organize for the purpose of collective bargaining; (2) Requiring public employers to negotiate with and enter into written agreements with exclusive representatives on matters of wages, hours, and other conditions of employment, while, at the same time, maintaining the merit principle pursuant to section 76-1; and (3) Creating a labor relations board to administer the provisions of chapters 89 and 377. [L 1970, c 171, pt of §2; am L 1985, c 251, §2; am L 2000, c 253, §92] Case Notes The broad policy statements within this section do not impose binding duties or obligations upon any parties but, rather, provide a useful guide for determining legislative intent and purpose; these statements, therefore, do not implicate the prohibited practice provision of refusing or failing to comply with any provision of chapter 89, as set forth in 3(a)(7); thus, employee's claim that employer violated this section properly dismissed. 97 H. 528, 40 P.3d 930. Order by Hawaii public employment relations board not in concert with policy and goals of collective bargaining, and constituted abuse of discretion. 5 H. App. 533, 704 P.2d 917.