The Hawaii Government Employees Association’s final contract proposal that was issued this week calls for no raises, a 60/40 employer split in worker health benefits and a four-day work week “with no adverse impact on compensation, benefits and working conditions.”

The union clarified on its members-only page today, however, that the plan for a 32-hour, four-day week at the same pay as a current 40-day week was submitted at the start of negotiations last year and that “in all likelihood, this proposal will be removed prior to arbitration.”

The online statement added: “The proposal has nothing to do with the current state of negotiations and discussions regarding furloughs.”

The Lingle administration, which at this point also represents the four counties, the Judiciary and other employers of HGEA’s 29,000-person workforce, is maintaining that it wants to implement a wage reduction of up to 14 percent.

Monday was the deadline for both sides to submit final written proposals to an arbitration panel that is scheduled to begin talks Sept. 4. A decision by the panel is expected by Dec. 21.

In calling for a 60/40 split in employer/employee contributions toward health benefits, which the Lingle administration opposes, HGEA noted the health benefit issue cannot be decided by the arbitration panel and must be decided by the Legislature. That could delay a resolution until January, when the Legislature is next scheduled to meet.

The state is facing an estimated $786 million budget deficit through June 2011. Gov. Linda Lingle has sought to save $688 million through labor cuts.

The administration originally proposed to furlough workers three days a month in an effort to help cut the deficit, but a Circuit Court ruling last month said furloughs for union workers should be subject to collective bargaining.

The administration last week delivered written layoff notices to about 1,100 state workers who were told they will lose their jobs in November.

The HGEA had previously proposed a 5 percent pay cut to help balance the budget but made no mention of the pay cut in the written proposal submitted to the arbitration panel.