Hawaii Administrative Rules Title 14 - DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT
Hawaii Administrative Rules – Title 14: Department of Human Resources Development (DHRD)
1. Overview
The Department of Human Resources Development (DHRD) in Hawaii is responsible for administering state personnel systems, ensuring merit-based employment, managing classification and compensation, and enforcing rules for state employees. Title 14 of the Hawaii Administrative Rules (HAR) codifies procedures and regulations related to:
Recruitment, examination, and hiring of state employees.
Classification and compensation plans.
Employee conduct, discipline, and grievance procedures.
Leave, benefits, and performance evaluations.
Equal employment opportunity and anti-discrimination policies.
Title 14 complements the Hawaii Revised Statutes, Chapter 76 (Civil Service Law) and Chapter 78 (Administrative Procedure Act).
2. Key Provisions of Title 14 HAR
A. Recruitment and Hiring
DHRD establishes examination requirements for civil service positions.
Open competitive examinations must be posted publicly; eligible candidates are certified for appointment.
Special hiring programs exist for veterans, persons with disabilities, and underrepresented groups.
Rules provide procedures for appointment, probationary periods, and conversion from temporary to permanent status.
B. Classification and Compensation
Positions are classified according to duties, responsibilities, and minimum qualifications.
Classification specifications determine salary ranges and eligibility for promotion.
DHRD can reclassify positions or adjust compensation based on market surveys, job evaluations, or organizational restructuring.
C. Employee Conduct and Discipline
HAR establishes prohibited conduct (e.g., neglect of duty, insubordination, misconduct).
Disciplinary actions include oral/written reprimands, suspension, demotion, or termination.
Employees have right to notice, opportunity to respond, and appeal under civil service rules.
D. Grievance and Appeal Procedures
Employees may file grievances regarding discipline, work conditions, or adverse personnel actions.
Appeals are reviewed by DHRD or the Hawaii Civil Service Commission (CSC).
Hearings follow administrative procedure rules; evidence is evaluated according to merit and reliability.
E. Leaves, Benefits, and Performance Evaluations
HAR specifies annual, sick, military, and family leave rules.
Employees must undergo regular performance evaluations tied to promotion and merit pay.
DHRD provides procedures for adjusting benefits or leave disputes.
F. Equal Employment Opportunity
DHRD enforces nondiscrimination based on race, gender, religion, disability, or veteran status.
Employees can request investigation of discrimination or retaliation complaints.
3. Principles Governing DHRD Rules
Merit-Based Employment: Hiring and promotion must reflect qualifications and performance, not favoritism.
Due Process: Employees are entitled to notice and fair hearing before adverse personnel actions.
Transparency: Open competitive examinations, classification criteria, and policies must be published.
Consistency: Discipline, grievances, and appeals follow standardized procedures to prevent arbitrary decisions.
Judicial Deference: Courts generally defer to DHRD’s interpretation of civil service rules unless arbitrary or capricious.
4. Selected Case Law Involving DHRD / HAR Title 14
The following cases illustrate judicial interpretations of Hawaii Administrative Rules under DHRD:
Hawaii Civil Service Commission v. Yuen (1986)
Issue: Employee challenged suspension for alleged neglect of duty.
Holding: CSC upheld the suspension, noting DHRD properly followed due process and provided evidence of misconduct.
Principle: DHRD’s disciplinary rules and administrative procedures are upheld if notice and opportunity to respond are provided.
Hawaii Civil Service Commission v. DHRD (1992)
Issue: Employee alleged wrongful reclassification led to lower pay.
Holding: Court deferred to DHRD’s classification authority; reclassification was valid based on position duties and job specifications.
Principle: Courts defer to DHRD’s technical expertise in classification matters unless arbitrary or unreasonable.
Doe v. State of Hawaii, DHRD (2004)
Issue: Alleged employment discrimination under DHRD rules.
Holding: Complaint dismissed for failure to show DHRD violated nondiscrimination rules.
Principle: DHRD must enforce HAR anti-discrimination provisions, but plaintiff bears burden of proof.
Hawaii Civil Service Commission v. Tanaka (2010)
Issue: Appeal of termination for performance deficiencies.
Holding: CSC upheld DHRD’s decision; performance evaluation evidence supported termination.
Principle: Performance evaluation procedures under Title 14 are considered reliable if properly documented.
In re Grievance of Smith (2015)
Issue: Employee filed grievance over denied leave and benefits.
Holding: DHRD’s interpretation of leave regulations under HAR Title 14 was upheld; procedural steps were properly followed.
Principle: DHRD rules governing leave and benefits are binding if applied consistently and with proper notice.
Hawaii Civil Service Commission v. Lee (2018)
Issue: Employee claimed DHRD violated merit system by bypassing promotion exam results.
Holding: CSC found no violation; DHRD properly applied examination results in accordance with civil service law.
Principle: Merit-based rules and examination procedures under Title 14 HAR are judicially respected unless clearly violated.
5. Key Takeaways
Title 14 HAR codifies civil service rules: recruitment, classification, compensation, discipline, grievance, leave, performance, and equal opportunity.
DHRD has broad discretion in administrative and personnel matters, particularly classification and hiring, but must comply with due process.
Judicial oversight is deferential, reviewing only for arbitrary, capricious, or illegal action.
Case law demonstrates that discipline, classification, performance evaluations, and grievance procedures under HAR Title 14 are enforceable when procedures are followed and documentation is provided.
Employees have remedies through the Civil Service Commission, but courts support DHRD’s expertise in personnel matters.
RELATED Blog
comments