Your Letter of Hire: Now you see it, Now you don’t

UHPA filed an appeal in Circuit Court challenging the Hawaii Labor Relations Board order addressing Letters of Hire. In the meantime, UH Manoa Interim Chancellor Bley-Vroman has issued a “Clarification of HLRB’s Ruling on Letters of Hire,” which ironically affirms UHPA’s position. It is clear the University of Hawaii has no qualms choosing which letters or parts of a letter for hire to honor or not honor. The MRI purchasing decision was made in 2012 and now the administration claims there’s no money? When faced with budget deficiencies, the UH now places the blame on a faculty member. Faculty members should be concerned about the whimsical nature of UH meeting its obligations.


This recent move inspired us to create a message below you might share with faculty considering employment at UH:




Now you see it, now you don’t.

You’ll be amazed at the University of Hawaii
administration’s magical wizardry.
Terms and conditions in your letter for hire
suddenly disappear.

You’ll swear the things
they promised were in there.
The UH administration will even try to
make you believe those terms and conditions
were never real to begin with.

Don’t be cast under a hypnotic spell.
Consult an attorney before agreeing to
join the University of Hawaii faculty.

UH Manoa Interim Chancellor’s View: Letters of Hire

Interim Chancellor Bley-Vroman’s Clarification of HLRB’s Ruling on Letters of Hire

On June 16, 2016, the University of Hawai‘i Professional Assembly (UHPA) sent a message to its members regarding a recent Hawai‘i Labor Relations Board (HLRB) ruling on letters of hire, also known as offer letters, for prospective faculty members. The University acknowledges and respects the position UHPA has taken and would like to take this opportunity to provide additional clarification and information on this very important issue.

UH honors offer letters
First and foremost, the University believes letters of hire to be contracts, and has never stated publicly or otherwise that such letters will not be honored or cannot be enforced. Countless faculty members have been hired through letters of hire without significant concerns or litigious disputes. The question raised in this unique situation was whether the HLRB has jurisdiction over the disputes regarding letters of hire.

Hawai‘i Labor Relations Board ruling
The HLRB is the administrative agency responsible for administering and enforcing the laws governing public sector collective bargaining rights in Hawai‘i.

On May 25, 2016, the HLRB clarified the dispute and dismissed all of UHPA’s claims. The board determined that this letter of hire, executed by the dean of the College of Natural Sciences and prospective faculty member before he was ever a University employee or an UHPA member, is a “contract” and not part of a “collective bargaining agreement.” The HLRB followed the definitions and limitations enacted by the Hawai‘i State Legislature and ruled that UHPA’s position was “unsupported by the law, risky and potentially harmful to the collective bargaining process in Hawai‘i.” HLRB concluded that the board lacks jurisdiction and dismissed the prohibited practice complaint.

Letter of hire in question
The specific situation that gave rise to this dispute is related to one particular section of a June 2012 letter of hire regarding the UH’s commitment to purchase an MRI machine for about a million dollars and establish a specialized research facility. No one contested or disagreed that the other portions of the letter of hire were honored, including provisions regarding salary, reduced teaching load and the granting of tenure, all of which were completed. The University believes it acted in good faith to attempt to purchase the MRI machine as outlined in the letter of hire. But before the required specialized facility was prepared to receive the MRI machine that had been ordered as specified in the letter of hire, the manufacturer of the MRI machine notified UH that it was ceasing manufacture and service of the specific model that had been ordered. Thereafter, the purchase and receipt of the MRI machine was cancelled with the full support of the faculty member.

The University then attempted to pursue the purchase of an alternative MRI machine for the faculty member and continues to work diligently to accommodate the faculty member’s needs and desires to ensure he is able to continue his research. Currently, UH pays for travel expenses to the continental United States for the faculty member and his graduate assistants so they will have access to an MRI machine to support their research activities. The University has tried to work cooperatively toward the purchase of another MRI machine and has requested that the faculty member provide a business plan/model that would identify the users and how the operating and maintenance costs of the machine would be addressed.

Budget realities
As with most UH Mānoa units, the College of Natural Sciences is continuing to address a significant budget deficit that has led to a hiring freeze, despite the fact that some departments within the College are already critically short of instructional faculty. The College has not been able to afford to replace tenure or tenure-track faculty lost to retirement or resignations. Given its financial state, the College had to establish priorities and decided in 2016 not to immediately purchase an MRI machine. In addition to the immediate budget challenges posed by the initial purchase, the University believes it is essential that a business plan/model be developed to address the operating and future maintenance expenses for the next MRI machine. The University has been hopeful that in working with the faculty member on a business plan/model, we will be able to justify the purchase of another MRI machine, even under difficult conditions. This decision to defer this specific acquisition during a major budget crisis for the College, and other difficult decisions, are made in order to address the essential and core services of the College and its many stakeholders, including our students.

UH considers letters of hire to be contracts but not collective bargaining agreements. The University fully intends to continue its commitment to honor the terms and conditions of such letters when hiring new faculty members, as it has done countless times in the past. UH continues to try to work collaboratively with this faculty member to find an agreeable resolution for this difficult situation — a resolution that meets the needs of the faculty member and is fiscally prudent and ethically responsible for the sake of the College and its many stakeholders, including our students.

Thank you for your time and consideration,
Robert Bley-Vroman

UHPA Endorses Representative Cynthia Thielen, House District 50

Representative Cynthia Thielen

As a graduate of University of Hawaii, Manoa and the WSRSL, I’ve represented House District 50 (Kailua, Kaneohe Bay) in the State Legislature since 1990 and am Assistant Minority Floor Leader. I serve as ranking member of the Energy & Environmental Protection, Judiciary, and Water & Land Committees and am a member of the Ocean, Marine Resources & Hawaiian Affairs Committee. I also was prior Co-Chair of the Women’s Legislative Caucus and am a member of the Keiki and Kupuna Caucuses.

I am a strong advocate for our public school system, striving to ensure a healthy learning and working environment for students, teachers, and staff. I believe in strong early education, to give students a jumpstart and create engaged learners who are prepared for and eager to achieve higher education. I consistently vote to support school funding and reduce the teacher-to-student ratio.

In my support of UH faculty, I supported the establishment of the John A. Burns School of Medicine, served as a UH-Manoa Legislator in Residence, and participate in the WSRSL’s annual Moot Court.

As a member of the UH family, I work hard to support its faculty and students, and am very honored to receive UHPA’s endorsement.

Your Faculty Terms of Employment are at Risk

The UH administration has declared war on faculty rights.

It’s time to join together with UHPA and fight back. For 46 years, since the beginning of collective bargaining, letters of hire have established initial salaries, terms, and conditions of employment for UH faculty. There was no reason to doubt these letters were enforceable under normal grievance processes. Until now.In a radical departure from tradition, the UH now contends letters of hire can’t be enforced under the collective bargaining agreement, or at the Hawaii Labor Relations Board. And that UHPA has no role in enforcing them. Under the UH approach, each faculty member would have to bring an individual lawsuit to enforce a letter of hire.

Here’s the background on how this happened to bring you up to speed:

The basic principles of integrity and trust were violated in Fall 2015 when a UH Manoa faculty member, Dr. Kevin Bennett, was denied the purchase of an MRI necessary for his instruction and research duties that he was hired to perform. (Dr. Bennett, in good faith, left his position at the University of Arizona to help the University of Hawaii.) The MRI purchase was promised in the letter of hire issued in 2013 and signed by both the faculty member and College of Natural Sciences Dean William Ditto. Facility problems delayed the purchase of the MRI; however, by August 2015 an MRI purchase and appropriate lab space were approved with the expectation that operations would be underway in a few months.

On September 25, 2015 Interim Dean Kristin Kumashiro, College of Natural Sciences, suddenly and unilaterally declared there would be no purchase of the MRI, and the agreement to establish an MRI center was void. Although funds were available, the Interim Dean had other projects she decided to support.

Now, in an unexpected break with tradition, UH has allowed the decision by Interim Dean Kumashiro, just five weeks into her temporary job, to drastically change the labor relations environment for faculty. It is a demonstration of decentralization run amok that the UH system and President will not reverse even an interim Dean’s random actions affecting the whole system.

UHPA Took Swift Action

UHPA pushed back with full force to settle the dispute with the Interim Dean and other administrators. However, the UH administration did not even have the courtesy to provide someone with the authority to negotiate a settlement.

UH argues that a Dean is the paramount administrator charged with enforcement for these actions and that Circuit Court lawsuits are the way to resolve claims by aggrieved faculty members. The UH claims that letters of hire, covering salary, tenure, start-up finds, and conditions of work, are not recognized by our collective bargaining agreement.

We were left with a recalcitrant UH administration and a General Counsel whose position remains letters of hire and their provisions can be unilaterally changed at any time by a Dean or other administrator charged with hiring authority.

Presenting Our Case Before the Hawaii Labor Relations Board

UHPA filed a Prohibited Practice Complaint with the Hawaii Labor Relations Board in December 2015, arguing that the cancellation of the MRI was illegal, both as a violation of a past practice on bargainable topics, and as a unilateral implementation of new terms of employment. UH had not negotiated the change with UHPA as required by Hawaii’s collective bargaining law, Chapter 89.

UHPA argued that many, if not all, topics covered in letters of hire have always been bargainable, but, out of deference to tradition, the UH and UHPA have always allowed academic processes to set those terms, both tacitly recognizing them as binding.

Hawaii Labor Relations Board’s Decision

Urged on by the UH, the Hawaii Labor Relations Board found that a letter of hire is not a collective bargaining agreement (“CBA”). This was not surprising; CBAs must be negotiated between the UH and UHPA. What was surprising, was the Board seems to have concluded that letters of hire, even if they establish terms on bargainable topics such as wages, are none of the Board’s business! Furthermore, letters of hire are outside the reach of the labor law! So, letters of hire are also none of an arbitrator’s business! And, the Board cannot interpret or enforce anything other than a formal CBA! This hyper-restrictive approach, which limits the Board to dealing with formal CBAs, implicitly tosses away substantial portions of the Board’s jurisdiction over uncontractualized practices, rendering the Board largely useless.

We have to believe that the Board not only misjudged this case, but also made a doctrinal error that will cripple many aspects of labor relations, if not clarified or reversed. This ruling is in effect until appellate courts reverse it.

This decision represents HLRB’s total abdication of its responsibility to address a critical labor issue. When decisions are badly written, as is the current case, there are consequences that impede the protections faculty members have come to expect, as employees whose rights to collective bargaining are protected by the state constitution.

Key Takeaways: The Impact on Faculty Members

This decision affects all faculty members in the bargaining unit, and those yet to be hired. While this was a UH Manoa case, the HLRB decision has universal applications for all UHPA members on all campuses.

Under the decision, letters of hire can say anything the employer and an incoming employee agree to, so long as no specific literal term of the CBA is contradicted. This could lead to substandard terms and conditions for new employees, who may not have the information needed to negotiate correct terms. Alternatively, the CBA has to be significantly amended to explicitly cover all manner of situations that have been traditionally understood.

Under the decision, if the employer wants to change a letter of hire after its acceptance, the union has no opportunity to oppose that. The employer could try to change nearly anything, such as reducing salary, removing a faculty member from a probationary position, or reducing start-up funds or canceling a spousal hire.

Under the decision, since the union has no opportunity to protect faculty through grievance arbitration, and no opportunity to enforce the letters at the Labor Board, the only way an employee can defend the letter of hire against violation is by a lawsuit in Hawaii courts.

Under the decision, the cancellation of the MRI harms Dr. Bennett’s research career, his ability to obtain grants from government and foundations, adversely impairs the work of graduate students and other UH faculty who had been counting on the MRI facility. But it also undermines existing letters of hire, and may compromise all new hirings, if potential hires understand that UH is asserting that it has a right to reverse or discard terms in letters of hire.

An Ominous Sign of What the Future Holds for Faculty and the UH

This is not merely a labor relations issue. It has grave implications for the future of the University of Hawaii to attract and retain quality faculty. Ultimately, this will affect students and the University of Hawaii’s ability to contribute meaningful research locally, nationally and globally.

At no time did the UH General Counsel recognize the collateral damage to the integrity of the institution by failing to honor commitments made in letters of hire for any faculty member. Counsel continued to advance the premise that this Interim Dean must be supported at all costs. There was simply no attention given to the risks attached to the breach of trust within the UH academic community and potential consequences in the recruitment and retention of faculty. Sadly, it is not just the UH faculty that are paying attention to this. Faculty around the world have cast a wary eye on the UH, dismissing our cherished institution of higher learning as a potential employer.

UHPA: Our Five-Prong Plan of Attack

On June 4, 2016, UHPA’s Board of Directors adopted a plan to action to address the crisis created by the UH administration and Hawaii Labor Relations Board:

  • In an unprecedented move, UHPA has decided to represent an individual faculty member, Dr. Bennett, in circuit court litigation, to rectify the violation of his letter of hire.
  • UHPA will inform and engage its members, the university community, public officials and other interested parties on the uncertainty and ambiguity the UH administration has created and hold them accountable for honoring their commitments. Why would funding agencies continue to support faculty and placement of funds with UH under these conditions?
  • UHPA will reach out to new hires, to help them achieve enforceable terms in their letters of hire.
  • UHPA will submit a demand to bargain and propose specific language that ensures letters of hire are protected by the collective bargaining agreement. Negotiations for our new contract begin in 2017. We need more members to stand and be counted with us.
  • UHPA will appeal the adverse decision, and seek to reverse it.

What Can Faculty Members Do?

While we pursue litigation, there are a number of actions faculty can take:

  • Notify new hires that they are subject to unilateral changes in their conditions of employment and they will need to seek counsel to assist in the negotiations of their hiring letters.
  • If unilateral action is taken to change your conditions of hire notify UHPA so your situation can be evaluated.
  • Inform your Dean that these actions by UH are harmful to the institution and impede the ability to hire and retain faculty. Encourage them to tell the General Counsel that this situation needs resolution with UHPA now.
  • If you are not an official, dues-paying UHPA member, now is the time to join. No one can afford to stand on the sidelines, unprotected, at a time like this. Visit the UHPA website, and submit an application today.  Don’t put this off. We need everyone’s kokua.

Dr. Bennett’s situation demonstrates that an injury to one becomes an injury to all. UHPA is committed to seeing this situation through. We believe that our position will prevail. With your help, we will be able to establish a path by which letters of hire will be respected and enforced.

Mahalo for your support.

Lynne Wilkens                 Kristeen Hanselman
Board President               Executive Director

Political Action Fund Objection

UHPA has an active Political Endorsement Committee that has participated in state & federal elections through political endorsements, contributions to candidates and independent expenditures on behalf of our endorsed candidates.  The UHPA Board of Directors has taken action to allocate from the dues of all Bargaining Unit 7 members an amount of $5.00 a month to be placed in a Political Action Fund.  The Fund will be subject to the accounting requirements and used for purposes consistent with the Hawaii State Election and Federal Election laws.

Although all faculty members in the UH System are members of Bargaining Unit 7, not all faculty members choose to be members of UHPA.  However, they are still required to pay an amount equivalent to member dues.  These non-members are given an opportunity each year to object to certain expenditures made by UHPA that are unrelated to our duties under HRS Chapter 89, including political action contributions.  They can receive a rebate of these funds based upon objections made annually.

Our policy will allow members of UHPA to object to the $5.00 per month allocation to the Political Action Fund.  This will not lower your total dues, but it will not add to the total amount of funds allocated for partisan political purposes with respect to candidate endorsements and contributions.  If a member chooses to object to this funding, they will not be allowed to vote on any recommendation for candidate endorsements made by the Board of Directors.

The request to withhold funding from the Political Action account must be made each year.  If you do not wish to contribute to the “candidate endorsement” fund for fiscal year 2016-2017, then you must sign, date, and return an UHPA Allocation Objection Form by August 1, 2016.

The UHPA Board of Directors has taken this action in response to the strong feelings held by some members that the union should not participate in making candidate endorsements or political contributions.  However, we believe it is essential for a public sector union to maintain a political presence since the fundamental work of our bargaining with the State of Hawaii is ultimately subject to legislative approval.


Save a bundle on your next vehicle with UHPA

JN Automotive has joined UHPA’s membership benefits network and now you can purchase your next vehicle at 3% above dealer cost and get personalized VIP treatment along the way.