A showdown in court over Gov. Linda Lingle's planned furlough of thousands of government employees has been set for July 2, the day after the governor's plan is set to take effect.

Lawyers for the Hawaii State Teachers Association and the United Public Workers had asked for an expedited hearing before July 1 on their motion for a restraining order that would block the furloughs, at least temporarily.

Following a closed-door status conference yesterday morning with Circuit Judge Karl Sakamoto, state Attorney General Mark Bennett and union lawyer Herbert Takahashi said the judge had expedited the hearing date but only to July 2.

Court rules normally require a delay of 18 days before the scheduling of a hearing. Sakamoto set the date well before that, but still in early July, to give Bennett's office adequate time to file written responses to the unions' request for court intervention. That response deadline is June 29.

The Lingle administration wants to furlough state workers for three days a month for two years. The move would save $688 million in an effort to plug a $730 million state budget shortfall through June 2011.

Russell Pang, a spokesman for Lingle, said that while furlough plans officially take effect July 1, no state agency has scheduled to close for furloughs until July 6, when the State Foundation on Culture and the Arts plans to close.

Many state departments have planned furlough days for Fridays. The first Friday of the month is July 3, a holiday for virtually all state employees to mark the Fourth of July. Other state departments plan to juggle furlough days to reduce disruption of state services.

Takahashi could not be reached for comment yesterday afternoon on the judge's decision to set the hearing date after July 1.

CHALLENGE DETAILS

The unions' legal paperwork made public yesterday repeats many of the arguments already raised against the governor's furlough plans.

Principal among them is the contention that unilaterally imposing furloughs violates protections of the collective bargaining process written into the state Constitution.

"Hawaii is one of five states in the nation which affords constitutional protection for collective bargaining," the motion said, adding that the others are New York, Florida, Missouri and New Jersey.

The motion cited a 2002 state Supreme Court decision which ruled that a unilateral pay freeze for public workers ordered by the state Legislature in 1999 was unconstitutional.

"Here, Gov. Lingle seeks to accomplish by unilateral action precisely what the Supreme Court held was unconstitutional in (another) case that involved a fiscal crisis," the TRO motion said.

After the meeting with Sakamoto yesterday, Bennett said he believes the courts can't be asked to intervene in the dispute until the Hawaii Labor Relations Board first addresses it.

But the HSTA-UPW position is that the issue belongs before the courts "rather than the Hawaii Labor Relations Board because the governor's decision and actions present a constitutional question."

HGEA ALSO FILES

The unions also asked Sakamoto for expedited permission to involve labor lawyers from the San Francisco firm of Altshuler Berzon in the case.

Sakamoto said he would hold a hearing on that request June 29.

Lawyers for a third union, the Hawaii Government Employees Association, also filed for an expedited TRO hearing late yesterday, but copies of that paperwork were not publicly available before the close of business.

Lingle has said that if her plan to implement furloughs is blocked, she will be forced to lay off as many as 2,500 government workers to balance the state budget.

The HGEA went to court Monday seeking to stop any possible layoffs, contending the governor cannot unilaterally impose new layoff procedures without going through the collective bargaining process.