Hawaii Workplace Harassment Laws: Hostile Work Environment (2026)

Workplace harassment is unlawful in Hawaii under Hawaii Revised Statutes § 378-2(a)(1)(A), which makes it an unlawful discriminatory practice for an employer, because of a protected trait, to discriminate against an individual "in compensation or in the terms, conditions, or privileges of employment." The law covers any employer "having one or more employees," including the State and its political subdivisions but not the United States (HRS § 378-1), and the Hawaii Civil Rights Commission's rules define harassment as conduct relating to any protected basis under chapter 378, Part I (Haw. Admin. R. § 12-46-1), with specific rules for sexual harassment and ancestry harassment (§§ 12-46-109 and 12-46-175).

Three Hawaii rules stand out: the one-employee coverage rule, employer responsibility for supervisors' sexual harassment regardless of knowledge, and a one-year deadline to file with the commission since Act 56 of 2026. For other states, see workplace harassment laws by state.

Information last verified on 2026-10-20. This article has not been reviewed by a licensed lawyer.

Jurisdiction scope: This article covers Hawaii state law on workplace harassment by employers, supervisors and coworkers under HRS chapter 378, Part I (chiefly §§ 378-1, 378-2, 378-2.2 and 378-3), the filing provisions of HRS chapter 368, and the Hawaii Civil Rights Commission's rules in Haw. Admin. R. chapter 12-46. It does not cover wrongful firing or the full complaint and lawsuit procedure (see Hawaii wrongful termination), damages estimates, criminal harassment or stalking, harassment outside employment, or federal-employee procedure.

Hawaii harassment rules at a glance

What Hawaii law prohibits

Chapter 378 does not contain a clause that uses the word harassment for every trait. The main prohibition is § 378-2(a)(1)(A), which makes it an unlawful discriminatory practice:

"For any employer to refuse to hire or employ or to bar or discharge from employment, or otherwise to discriminate against any individual in compensation or in the terms, conditions, or privileges of employment;" (HRS § 378-2(a)(1)(A))

The Hawaii Civil Rights Commission (HCRC) fills in the harassment rules through its administrative rules. Section 12-46-109(a) states that "Harassment on the basis of sex is a violation of chapter 378, HRS," and § 12-46-175(a) says the same of harassment on the basis of ancestry.

The commission's definitions section, Haw. Admin. R. § 12-46-1, also defines harassment as verbal, visual, or physical conduct relating to an individual's protected basis under chapter 378, Part I, when the conduct has the purpose or effect of creating an intimidating, hostile, or offensive environment, has the purpose or effect of unreasonably interfering with an individual's performance, or otherwise adversely affects an individual's employment.

Sexual harassment: quid pro quo and hostile environment

Under HCRC rule § 12-46-109(a), unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical conduct or visual forms of harassment of a sexual nature constitute sexual harassment when:

• submission to the conduct is made, explicitly or implicitly, a term or condition of employment;
• submission to or rejection of the conduct is used as the basis for employment decisions affecting the individual; or
• the conduct "has the purpose or effect of unreasonably interfering with an individual's work performance or creating an intimidating, hostile, or offensive working environment."

The first two describe what is often called quid pro quo harassment; the third describes a hostile work environment.

How the commission judges a complaint

The rule does not use the phrase "severe or pervasive," and neither does chapter 378. Instead, § 12-46-109(b) states:

"In determining whether alleged conduct constitutes sexual harassment, the commission will look at the record as a whole and at the totality of the circumstances, such as the nature of the sexual advances and the context in which the alleged incidents occurred. The determination of the legality of a particular action will be made from the facts, on a case by case basis." (Haw. Admin. R. § 12-46-109(b))

Ancestry harassment

Section 12-46-175(b) provides that ethnic slurs and other verbal or physical conduct relating to an individual's ancestry constitute harassment when the conduct has the purpose or effect of creating an intimidating, hostile, or offensive working environment; has the purpose or effect of unreasonably interfering with an individual's work performance; or otherwise adversely affects an individual's employment opportunity.

The same rule gives the employer "an affirmative duty to maintain a working environment free of harassment on the basis of ancestry," makes it responsible for its agents' and supervisory employees' ancestry harassment regardless of authorization or knowledge, and makes it responsible for coworker ancestry harassment it knew or should have known of "unless the employer can show that it took immediate and appropriate corrective action" (§ 12-46-175(c)-(e)). Under § 12-46-175(f), an employer may be held responsible for non-employees' ancestry harassment of employees where it knew or should have known of the conduct and failed to take immediate and appropriate corrective action.

Which Hawaii employers are covered

Chapter 378 reaches almost every employer in the state. Section 378-1 defines an employer as:

"any person, including the State or any of its political subdivisions and any agent of such person, having one or more employees, but shall not include the United States." (HRS § 378-1)

The one-employee rule is the same for harassment and for every other Part I discrimination claim. By comparison, Title VII of the federal Civil Rights Act applies to employers with "fifteen or more employees for each working day in each of twenty or more calendar weeks in the current or preceding calendar year."

Who counts as working for the employer

Section 378-1 defines employment as "any service performed by an individual for another person under any contract of hire, express or implied, oral or written, whether lawfully or unlawfully entered into." Domestic work in a private home is excluded from that definition except as § 378-2(a)(9) provides. That paragraph separately bars discrimination against a domestic employee "in compensation or in terms, conditions, or privileges of employment" because of race, sex including gender identity or expression, sexual orientation, age, religion, color, ancestry, disability, marital status, or reproductive health decision.

Protected traits in Hawaii

Section 378-2(a)(1) lists race, sex including gender identity or expression, sexual orientation, age, religion, color, ancestry, disability, marital status, arrest and court record, reproductive health decision, and domestic or sexual violence victim status. Victim status is covered "if the domestic or sexual violence victim provides notice to the victim's employer of such status or the employer has actual knowledge of such status."

Several of those terms are defined or extended elsewhere in the chapter:

• Pregnancy: "Because of sex" includes, but is not limited to, "because of pregnancy, childbirth, or related medical conditions" (§ 378-1).
• Genetic information: being regarded as having an impairment includes an employer's consideration of an individual's genetic information, including genetic information of a family member, or the individual's refusal to submit to a genetic test as a condition of initial or continued employment (§ 378-1).
• Other paragraphs of § 378-2(a): separate clauses address national guard absence ((a)(4)), child-support income assignment ((a)(5)), association with a person with a disability ((a)(6)), lactating employees ((a)(7)) and credit history ((a)(8)).

Employer responsibility and the individual harasser

Supervisors, coworkers and non-employees

For sexual harassment, the HCRC rule sets out who answers for what:

• Agents and supervisors: "An employer shall be responsible for its acts and those of its agents and supervisory employees with respect to sexual harassment regardless of whether the specific acts complained of were authorized or even forbidden, and regardless of whether the employer or other covered entity knew or should have known of their occurrence" (§ 12-46-109(c)).
• Coworkers: the employer is responsible "where the employer or its agents or supervisory employees knows or should have known of the conduct and fails to take immediate and appropriate corrective action." An employee harassed by a coworker "should inform the employer, its agent, or supervisory employee," but "an employee's failure to give such notice may not be an affirmative defense" (§ 12-46-109(d)).
• Non-employees: an employer "may be responsible for the acts of non-employees, with respect to sexual harassment of employees at the workplace, where the employer knows or should have known of the conduct and fails to take immediate and appropriate corrective action" (§ 12-46-109(e)).

No Faragher defense under Hawaii law

The Hawaii Supreme Court addressed the federal Faragher affirmative defense in Lales v. Wholesale Motors Co., 133 Haw. 332 (2014):

"We also take this opportunity to clarify that the Faragher affirmative defense is not applicable under Hawaii's anti-discrimination laws because the administrative rules of the Hawai'i Civil Rights Commission hold employers strictly liable for the discriminatory conduct of their agents and supervisory employees."

Can an individual be sued personally?

In the same case, the court held: "we conclude that individual employees are not liable as 'employers' under HRS 378-2(1)(A) and 378-2(2)." The court stated in a footnote that it did "not reach the issue of Marxen's individual liability based on HRS 378-2(3)."

Section 378-2(a)(3) is the aiding-and-abetting clause. It makes it an unlawful discriminatory practice "For any person, whether an employer, employee, or not, to aid, abet, incite, compel, or coerce the doing of any of the discriminatory practices forbidden by this part, or to attempt to do so." Whether that clause supports personal liability for an employee who harasses is a question Lales left open.

Separately, § 378-3(10) states that nothing in Part I precludes an employee "from bringing a civil action for sexual harassment or sexual assault and infliction of emotional distress or invasion of privacy related thereto." The workers' compensation exclusivity statute, HRS § 386-5, makes the same exception for sexual harassment or sexual assault and related infliction of emotional distress or invasion of privacy, "in which case a civil action may also be brought."

Retaliation for complaining

Section 378-2(a)(2) makes it an unlawful discriminatory practice for any employer, labor organization or employment agency to discharge, expel or otherwise discriminate against an individual "because the individual has opposed any practice forbidden by this part or has filed a complaint, testified, or assisted in any proceeding respecting the discriminatory practices prohibited under this part." Firings after a complaint, and how they fit with the state's default employment rule, are covered on the Hawaii at-will employment and Hawaii wrongful termination pages.

Deadlines and where to file

The Hawaii Civil Rights Commission takes complaints under chapter 378. Its FAQ explains that a complainant can start by filling out a Pre-Complaint Questionnaire, after which "an intake investigator will review your form and contact you for an interview."

• HCRC deadline: one year. Act 56 of 2026 (S.B. 2727), which became law on May 28, 2026, lengthened the filing period. The HCRC's notice states that the Act "extends the statute of limitations to file complaints with the Hawai'i Civil Rights Commission to one (1) year from when an alleged unlawful discriminatory practice occurred, or of the last occurrence in a pattern of ongoing discriminatory practice," and that it "applies to claims that had not yet expired on the date of enactment."
• Older printed text: the online text of HRS § 368-11(c) still reads "one hundred eighty days." The HCRC's Act 56 notice describes the current one-year rule.
• Going to court: the commission "may issue a notice of right to sue upon written request of the complainant," and the complainant may sue "Within ninety days after receipt of a notice of right to sue" (HRS § 368-12).
• Sexual harassment civil actions: under § 378-3(10), when the commission determines that a civil action alleging similar facts has been filed in circuit court, it "shall issue a right to sue on a complaint filed with the commission."
• Federal charge: the EEOC states that its "180 calendar day filing deadline is extended to 300 calendar days if a state or local agency enforces a law that prohibits employment discrimination on the same basis." The HCRC reports that it "has workshare agreements with both the EEOC and HUD, and typically, complaints that are filed with the EEOC or HUD are dual-filed with the HCRC if the protected category is protected at both the state and federal level." The EEOC's Honolulu office lists the HCRC as a fair employment practices agency and gives 300 days from the date of alleged harm to file a charge against an employer with 15 or more employees in the state of Hawaii (20 or more for age).

The steps between filing and suit are on the Hawaii wrongful termination page, which also covers remedies. The Hawaii employment discrimination settlement calculator is an estimating tool, not a prediction of any outcome.

Training and written policies

Chapter 378, Part I contains no requirement that private employers provide harassment training or adopt a written harassment policy. The HCRC rule frames prevention as guidance:

"Prevention is the best tool for the elimination of sexual harassment. Employers should affirmatively raise the subject, express strong disapproval, develop appropriate sanctions, inform employees of their right to raise and how to raise the issue of sexual harassment, and take any other steps necessary to prevent sexual harassment from occurring." (Haw. Admin. R. § 12-46-109(g))

NDAs about sexual harassment

Hawaii limits nondisclosure agreements that silence sexual harassment and sexual assault. Section 378-2.2, enacted in 2020 and amended in 2022, provides:

"(a) No employer shall enter into or require an employee to enter into a nondisclosure agreement that prevents the employee from disclosing or discussing sexual harassment or sexual assault occurring in the workplace, at work-related events, between employees, or between an employer and an employee. (b) No employer shall retaliate against an employee for disclosing or discussing sexual harassment or sexual assault." (HRS § 378-2.2)

The section does not apply to human resources employees who are expected to keep an investigation confidential as part of their official duties, to employees who are asked to keep an ongoing human resources investigation confidential, or to proceedings under HRS § 624-25.5 (§ 378-2.2(c)).

Federal law adds limits for sexual harassment disputes: the Speak Out Act makes nondisclosure and nondisparagement clauses agreed to before a dispute arises judicially unenforceable where the conduct is alleged to violate federal, tribal or state law, and the Ending Forced Arbitration Act lets the person alleging sexual harassment elect court over a predispute arbitration agreement. Both are explained on the workplace harassment laws hub.

Is workplace bullying illegal in Hawaii?

Chapter 378 reaches harassment because of the traits it lists. It contains no provision on general workplace bullying that is not tied to one of those traits.

A separate civil route exists for harassment of any kind. Under HRS § 604-10.5(c), "Any person who has been subjected to harassment may petition the district court for a temporary restraining order and an injunction from further harassment." The section defines harassment as physical harm, bodily injury, assault or the threat of imminent physical harm, bodily injury or assault, or "An intentional or knowing course of conduct directed at an individual that seriously alarms or disturbs consistently or continually bothers the individual and serves no legitimate purpose; provided that such course of conduct would cause a reasonable person to suffer emotional distress." That injunction is a general remedy, not a workplace-specific one.

Documenting harassment and workplace monitoring

The rules on recording a conversation at work, including a conversation with a harasser, are on the Hawaii workplace recording laws page. Employer monitoring of email, devices and workspaces is covered on the Hawaii employee monitoring laws page.

Recent changes to Hawaii harassment law

• 2014: the Hawaii Supreme Court decided Lales v. Wholesale Motors Co., holding that individual employees are not liable as employers under § 378-2(1)(A) and (2) and that the Faragher defense does not apply under Hawaii law.
• 2020: § 378-2.2 limited nondisclosure agreements covering sexual harassment and sexual assault (L 2020, c 17); it was amended in 2022 (L 2022, c 288).
• 2026: Act 56 (S.B. 2727) lengthened the HCRC filing deadline to one year, effective May 28, 2026; the HCRC applies it to claims not yet expired on that date.

Related pages

• Workplace harassment laws by state
• Hawaii wrongful termination
• Hawaii at-will employment laws
• Hawaii employee monitoring laws
• Hawaii workplace recording laws

This article provides general legal information about Hawaii workplace harassment law under HRS chapters 368 and 378 and the Hawaii Civil Rights Commission's rules as of 2026-10-20. It is not legal advice. For advice about a specific situation, contact a lawyer licensed in Hawaii or the Hawaii Civil Rights Commission.

Last updated: 2026-10-20.

Frequently Asked Questions

Is workplace harassment illegal in Hawaii?

HRS § 378-2(a)(1)(A) bars employers from discriminating in the terms, conditions or privileges of employment because of a protected trait. The Hawaii Civil Rights Commission's rules define harassment as conduct relating to any protected basis under chapter 378, Part I (Haw. Admin. R. § 12-46-1), and §§ 12-46-109 and 12-46-175 state that sexual harassment and ancestry harassment violate chapter 378.

Does Hawaii harassment law apply to small employers?

Yes. HRS § 378-1 defines an employer as any person, including the State and its political subdivisions, having one or more employees; the United States is excluded. The same one-employee rule applies to harassment and other discrimination claims under chapter 378, Part I.

How long do you have to file a harassment complaint in Hawaii?

Under Act 56 (2026), a complaint with the Hawaii Civil Rights Commission is due within one year from the alleged practice or the last occurrence in a pattern of ongoing practice. The Act took effect May 28, 2026, and the HCRC states that it applies to claims that had not yet expired on that date. The printed text of HRS § 368-11(c) still shows 180 days.

Is a Hawaii employer liable for a supervisor's sexual harassment?

HCRC rule § 12-46-109(c) makes an employer responsible for sexual harassment by its agents and supervisory employees regardless of whether the acts were authorized or even forbidden and regardless of whether it knew or should have known of them, and the Hawaii Supreme Court held in Lales (2014) that the federal Faragher defense does not apply under Hawaii law.

Can you sue a coworker or supervisor personally for harassment in Hawaii?

In Lales v. Wholesale Motors Co. (2014), the Hawaii Supreme Court held that individual employees are not liable as employers under HRS § 378-2(1)(A) and (2). The court did not decide liability under the aiding-and-abetting clause, § 378-2(a)(3), which applies to any person.

Does Hawaii require sexual harassment training?

Chapter 378, Part I sets no harassment-training or written-policy requirement for private employers. HCRC rule § 12-46-109(g) says employers should raise the subject, express disapproval, develop sanctions and tell employees how to raise the issue.

Can a Hawaii employer make you sign an NDA about sexual harassment?

HRS § 378-2.2 bars an employer from entering into or requiring a nondisclosure agreement that prevents an employee from disclosing or discussing sexual harassment or sexual assault, with exceptions for human resources investigation confidentiality and proceedings under HRS § 624-25.5.

Is workplace bullying illegal in Hawaii?

Chapter 378 reaches harassment tied to the traits it lists, such as sex, race and ancestry, and contains no provision on general bullying unconnected to those traits. HRS § 604-10.5 separately lets any person subjected to harassment, as that section defines it, petition the district court for an injunction.