Haw. Rev. Stat. » Haw. Rev. Stat. / Chapter 76
Hawaii Revised Statutes

Haw. Rev. Stat. § 76-14 (2026)

  Merit appeals board; duties, and jurisdiction

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section HI-LEGcapitol.hawaii.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

     §76-14  Merit appeals board; duties, and jurisdiction.  (a)  The merit appeals board of each jurisdiction shall decide appeals from any action under this chapter taken by the chief executive, the director, an appointing authority, or a designee acting on behalf of one of these individuals, relating to:

     (1)  Recruitment and examination;

     (2)  Classification and reclassification of a particular position, including denial or loss of promotional opportunity or demotion due to reclassification of positions in a reorganization;

     (3)  Initial pricing of classes; and

     (4)  Other employment actions under this chapter, including disciplinary actions and adverse actions for failure to meet performance requirements, taken against civil service employees who are excluded from collective bargaining coverage under section 89-6.

     (b)  Any person suffering legal wrong by an action under subsection (a)(1) or aggrieved by such action shall be entitled to appeal to the merit appeals board.  Any employee covered by chapter 76 suffering legal wrong by an action under subsection (a)(2) or (3) shall be entitled to appeal to the merit appeals board.  Only employees covered by chapter 76, who are excluded from collective bargaining, suffering legal wrong by an action under subsection (a)(4) shall be entitled to appeal to the merit appeals board.  Appeals under this section shall be filed within time limits and in the manner provided by rules of the merit appeals board.

     (c)  The rules adopted by the merit appeals board shall provide for the following:

     (1)  The merit appeals board shall not act on an appeal, but shall defer to other authority, if the action complained of constitutes a prohibited act that is subject to the jurisdiction of another appellate body or administrative agency or the grievance procedure under a collective bargaining agreement;

     (2)  The merit appeals board shall not proceed on an appeal or shall hold proceedings in abeyance if there is any controversy regarding its authority to hear the appeal until the controversy is resolved by the Hawaii labor relations board;

     (3)  The merit appeals board shall prescribe time limits for filing an appeal that require exhaustion of all internal complaint procedures, including administrative review and departmental complaint procedures, before an appeal is filed; and

     (4)  The merit appeals board shall use the conditions listed in section 76-41(b) in reaching a decision on whether actions taken by the appointing authority based on a failure by the employee to meet the performance requirements of the employee's position is with or without merit.

     (d)  Notwithstanding the provisions of this section, the merit appeals board shall have the authority to hear and decide appeals pending before the state civil service commission as of June 30, 2002, in accordance with the jurisdictional requirements and procedures applicable to the state civil service commission as of June 30, 2002.

     (e)  This section shall be construed liberally to determine whether the appeal falls within the jurisdiction of the merit appeals board. [L 1955, c 274, pt of §1; RL 1955, pt of §3-17; am L Sp 1959 2d, c 1, §11; HRS §76-14; am L 1994, c 56, §21; am L 2000, c 253, §12; am L 2001, c 123, §10; am L 2005, c 34, §1]

 

Cross References

 

  Authority of commission, generally, see §26-5.

 

Case Notes

 

  Defendant's argument that the primary jurisdiction doctrine required referral of union's privatization claims to merit appeals board was devoid of merit; the privatization claims were not subject to this section.  133 H. 188, 325 P.3d 600 (2014).

 

 

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7 cases (5 in the last 5 years), 2002–2025 · leading case: United Pub. Workers, AFSCME, Local 636, AFL-CIO v. Abercrombie., 325 P.3d 600 (Haw. 2014).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
United Pub. Workers, AFSCME, Local 636, AFL-CIO v. Abercrombie., 325 P.3d 600 (Haw. 2014). · cites it 44× “36 HRS § 76-14 provides the duties and the jurisdiction of the MAB.”
Grievance Arbitration Between State of Hawai'i Org. of Police Officers ex rel. Mejia v. Hawai'i Cnty. Police Dep't, 61 P.3d 522 (Haw. App. 2002). · cites it 7× “2001 (section effective until June 30, 2002)) and also embodied in HRS § 76-14 (1993 & Supp.2001 (section effective until June 30, 2002)), excludes classification issues from arbitration under the CBA.”
Lucas v. Civil Serv. Comm'n (Haw. App. 2025). · cites it 20× “" 10 NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAIʻI REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER HRS § 76-14 (2012) 6 establishes jurisdiction for the merit board appeal of each county, including issues related to initial class pricing.”
Dep't of Pub. Saf. v. Forbes. Dissenting Opinion by Ginoza, J. ICA s.d.o., filed 03/15/2024 [ada], 154 Haw. 85. Application for Writ of Certiorari, filed 05/14/2024. S.Ct. Order Accepting Application for Writ of Certiorari, filed 07/10/2024 [ada]. (Haw. 2025). · cites it 10× “HRS § 76-14 (2012). HRS § 76-47(a) provides that “[e]ach jurisdiction shall establish a merit appeals board that shall have exclusive authority to hear and decide appeals relating to matters set forth in section 76-14 concerning the civil service of the jurisdiction.”
McShane v. Dep't of Parks & Rec., City & Cnty. of Honolulu (D. Haw. 2021). · cites it 2× “HRS § 76-14(a); Civ. Serv. R., Ex. J to City’s Mot.”
Pladera v. Cnty. of Maui, 526 P.3d 649 (Haw. App. 2023). “See HRS[]§§ 76-14, 76-47 & 76-71. Its jurisdiction and rules encompass appointments for all civil service positions in Maui County.”
State of Hawai'i, Dep't of Pub. Saf. v. Forbes, 545 P.3d 574 (Haw. App. 2024). “(c) The merit appeals board shall adopt rules of practice and procedure consistent with section 76-14 and in accordance with chapter 91.”
— Haw. Rev. Stat. § 76-14(a) — 2 cases
McShane v. Dep't of Parks & Rec., City & Cnty. of Honolulu (D. Haw. 2021). “HRS § 76-14(a); Civ. Serv. R., Ex. J to City’s Mot.”
Lucas v. Civil Serv. Comm'n (Haw. App. 2025). “" 10 NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAIʻI REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER HRS § 76-14 (2012) 6 establishes jurisdiction for the merit board appeal of each county, including issues related to initial class pricing.”
— Haw. Rev. Stat. § 76-14(a)(1) — 1 case
United Pub. Workers, AFSCME, Local 636, AFL-CIO v. Abercrombie., 325 P.3d 600 (Haw. 2014). “36 HRS § 76-14 provides the duties and the jurisdiction of the MAB.”
— Haw. Rev. Stat. § 76-14(a)(2) — 1 case
United Pub. Workers, AFSCME, Local 636, AFL-CIO v. Abercrombie., 325 P.3d 600 (Haw. 2014). “36 HRS § 76-14 provides the duties and the jurisdiction of the MAB.”
— Haw. Rev. Stat. § 76-14(a)(4) — 1 case
United Pub. Workers, AFSCME, Local 636, AFL-CIO v. Abercrombie., 325 P.3d 600 (Haw. 2014). “36 HRS § 76-14 provides the duties and the jurisdiction of the MAB.”
— Haw. Rev. Stat. § 76-14(a)(l) — 1 case
United Pub. Workers, AFSCME, Local 636, AFL-CIO v. Abercrombie., 325 P.3d 600 (Haw. 2014). “36 HRS § 76-14 provides the duties and the jurisdiction of the MAB.”
— Haw. Rev. Stat. § 76-14(b) — 1 case
United Pub. Workers, AFSCME, Local 636, AFL-CIO v. Abercrombie., 325 P.3d 600 (Haw. 2014). “36 HRS § 76-14 provides the duties and the jurisdiction of the MAB.”
— Haw. Rev. Stat. § 76-14(b)(1) — 1 case
United Pub. Workers, AFSCME, Local 636, AFL-CIO v. Abercrombie., 325 P.3d 600 (Haw. 2014). “36 HRS § 76-14 provides the duties and the jurisdiction of the MAB.”
— Haw. Rev. Stat. § 76-14(b)(l) — 1 case
United Pub. Workers, AFSCME, Local 636, AFL-CIO v. Abercrombie., 325 P.3d 600 (Haw. 2014). “36 HRS § 76-14 provides the duties and the jurisdiction of the MAB.”
— Haw. Rev. Stat. § 76-14(c)(1) — 1 case
Lucas v. Civil Serv. Comm'n (Haw. App. 2025). “" 10 NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAIʻI REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER HRS § 76-14 (2012) 6 establishes jurisdiction for the merit board appeal of each county, including issues related to initial class pricing.”
— Haw. Rev. Stat. § 76-14(e) — 1 case
Lucas v. Civil Serv. Comm'n (Haw. App. 2025). “" 10 NOT FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST'S HAWAIʻI REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER HRS § 76-14 (2012) 6 establishes jurisdiction for the merit board appeal of each county, including issues related to initial class pricing.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.