The state and teachers union filed final briefs Friday in a prohibited-practice complaint over the state’s decision to impose a contract offer for teachers nearly a year ago.

The Hawaii Labor Relations Board will now weigh the arguments made from both sides in the case.

It’s unclear when the board will issue a ruling. Whatever the decision, it’s likely to be appealed to state court.

The central question before the HLRB is whether the state can unilaterally implement a last, best and final contract under Hawaii labor laws.

In its brief, the state argued nothing in Hawaii’s law prohibits unilateral implementation of a last, best and final contract offer when negotiations have stalled.

"After reaching impasse the employer is entitled, just as much as the union is, to resort to such other remedies that are not prohibited," the state said.

The Hawaii State Teachers Association, meanwhile, said the state’s argument that it had to act to avert layoffs is a weak one.

"The economic necessity defense raised by respondents is no excuse for unlawfulness of their unilateral course of conduct," the brief said.

The state’s implementation of the "last, best" offer was unprecedented in Hawaii public-sector negotiations.

Federal labor law allows a private employer to implement its "last, best" offer if contract talks are determined to be at an impasse, but applying that to public-sector talks in Hawaii is uncharted territory.

The "last, best" offer for teachers, imposed July 1, included wage reductions, furlough days and higher health insurance premiums.