Teachers union looks to lawmakers to allow court-authorized strikes, reform arbitration process

The Clark County teachers union is pushing legislation to speed up the arbitration process and allow teachers to petition in district court to allow them to legally go on strike.

If the Legislature doesn’t pass the proposal — or if Gov. Joe Lombardo vetoes it — the union says it is prepared to make their case directly to Nevada voters through their “right to strike” initiative, which is already slated to appear on the 2026 General Election ballot.

Clark County Education Association, which represents the approximately 18,000 teachers and licensed professionals within the Clark County School District, is backing Senate Bill 161. The bill would establish an expedited arbitration process for teachers unions and school districts, which could kick in if a contract has not been reached 75 days before the start of a new school year.

More controversially, the bill would also establish a pathway for K-12 public school teachers to legally go on strike, something they are currently prohibited from doing.

The bill, which was given an exemption from standard legislative deadlines, received its first hearing Wednesday night in the Senate Committee on Government Affairs. The bill was immediately passed out of committee on a 5-2 vote and is headed to the full Senate for possible consideration.

State Sen. Rochelle Nuygen, the Las Vegas Democrat sponsoring the bill, told the committee that the threshold set in SB 161 to authorize a strike is high. Teachers would have to make the case that their proposed strike would be “equally or less detrimental” to students than remaining in schools that are failing them through existing policies or conditions.

The strike would also not apply to special education services, food services, mental health counseling, and after-school supervision.

Nguyen characterized it as a nuanced approach that meets the spirit of the state’s existing anti-strike law while addressing the established pattern of prolonged arbitration between the fifth largest school district in the country and its largest bargaining unit.

In contrast, the right-to-strike ballot initiative would be a “blunt instrument,” she argued. Nevada state law prohibits legislators from altering a law established through the initiative petition process for two regular sessions (so, four years) after it is approved by voters, so lawmakers couldn’t quickly alter it if issues arose.

“That’s the choice,” CCEA Executive Director John Vellardita told the Nevada Current in an interview. “The choice is: This is going to be on the ballot in ‘26. We have the resources to run a successful campaign. We’ve done field research. We have the support.”

Bradley Schrager, an attorney who represented the teacher’s union in numerous cases two years ago, pointed out in the bill hearing that CCSD and CCEA have reached a negotiation impasse and gone into arbitration four times in the past decade.

“There’s only five two-year cycles in a decade,” he added.

The pattern of prolonged arbitration means teachers are routinely beginning the academic year without new contracts in place, which can be demoralizing and lead to poor teacher retention, argued CCEA members who spoke in support of the bill.

That was the case in 2023, when the Legislature and Lombardo approved a K-12 education budget they routinely described as “historic” in its funding levels, only to see another impasse and months of public bickering between the district and union. That year, a contract agreement was reached in December, halfway through the school year.

That fall, a significant percentage of teachers at a handful of schools coordinated “sickouts,” leading to those schools closing for one day. The court ruled it strike activity, which put the union at risk of punishment.

SB 161 “forces cooperation at a very early time,” said Schrager, and evens the playing field between the union and district.

But not everyone agrees with that sentiment.

Tom Clark, a lobbyist representing the Nevada Association of School Boards and the Reno+Sparks Chamber of Commerce, suggested teachers strikes would wreak havoc on communities, make national news, and cause pain and suffering to families. Tens of thousands of children could be left without childcare, he added.

“That’s the leverage the strike gives to one side of the equation,” he said. “That imbalance does nothing for negotiations, does nothing for the benefits of students, the teachers, the families, the people in our community that rely on the vital public service that our teachers and our schools provide.”

The Nevada State Education Association, whose affiliate units include teachers in non-Clark counties and support staff in CCSD, is opposed to the bill on the grounds it would give teacher’s unions an unfair advantage over other bargaining groups. NSEA and CCEA have an antagonistic relationship with one another.

The Nevada Association of School Superintendents is also opposed, with lobbyist Mary Pierczynski arguing that states like Nevada have outlawed teacher strikes “for very good reason.”

“The emphasis tonight has been on Clark County and CCEA but there are 17 school districts in our state and they will all be impacted,” she added.

CCSD did not participate in the hearing and has not expressed a public position on the bill. When contacted by the Current for comment, the district’s media relations department stated it is tracking the bill.

“District staff work with legislators to monitor changes made to the language in bill drafts. CCSD provides public comment on bills as appropriate throughout the process as the legislation progresses,” continued the statement.

Nguyen in her presentation emphasized the bill is not a criticism of Jhone Ebert, CCSD’s new superintendent, who started last month. Nguyen said she and others working on the bill are “rooting for her success.”

This year’s legislative session is scheduled to end on June 2. That leaves SB 161 a little over three weeks to pass both chambers of the Legislature and make it to the governor’s desk.