§89-19 Chapter takes precedence, when. This chapter shall take precedence over all conflicting statutes concerning this subject matter and shall preempt all contrary local ordinances, executive orders, legislation, or rules adopted by the State, a county, or any department or agency thereof, including the departments of human resources development or of personnel services or the civil service commission. [L 1970, c 171, pt of §2; am L 1994, c 56, §15]

Cross References

Merit appeals board, see §26-5.

Attorney General Opinions

Ombudsman has no jurisdiction over employee complaints covered by collective bargaining agreements. Att. Gen. Op. 73-6.

Case Notes

Mentioned with respect to applicability of chapter 380. 54 H. 531, 511 P.2d 1080.

Chapter 92F not a "conflicting statute on the same subject matter" as chapter 89, within the meaning of this section, and thus is not preempted by chapter 89 or any collective bargaining agreement negotiated under it. 83 H. 378, 927 P.2d 386.

Although an application of §84-13 was necessary to decide the union's complaint under §89-13, it could not be said that the question arose under chapter 84; where union filed the complaint with the board under this section, the board had "exclusive original jurisdiction" to determine prohibited practice complaints and the ethics commission would not have had jurisdiction to make that determination; thus, the board had the power to apply §84-13 in order to decide whether a prohibited practice violation actually occurred and it did not exceed its jurisdiction in ruling that a violation did not occur based on the application of §84-13. 116 H. 73, 170 P.3d 324.

Employee must fully exhaust the remedies covered in collective bargaining agreement before employee can bring action in circuit court. 2 H. App. 50, 625 P.2d 1046.

To the extent that there may be a conflict between the jurisdictional provisions of this chapter and chapter 658A, this chapter takes precedence over chapter 658A. 132 H. 492 (App.), 323 P.3d 136 (2014).