Nevada Assembly Bill AB112

Nevada 2025 Regular Session

• Refer: 1/23/25
• Introduced: 2/4/25
• Report Pass: 4/21/25
• Engrossed: 4/28/25
• Refer: 4/28/25
• Report Pass: 5/15/25
• Enrolled: 5/29/25
• Vetoed: 6/5/25

Caption

Removes an exemption from provisions providing certain employees with the right to use sick leave to assist family members. (BDR 53-318)

Summary

AB 112 amends Nevada’s sick leave law to remove the existing exemption for employees covered by a valid collective bargaining agreement. Under current law, private employers that offer sick leave must let employees use accrued leave to care for an immediate family member with an illness, injury, medical appointment, or other authorized medical need, but that requirement does not apply to unionized employees covered by a collective bargaining agreement. This bill makes that family-care sick leave right apply to those employees as well. The bill also clarifies that it does not reduce any employer obligation under a collective bargaining agreement, employment contract, employer policy, or other law that already provides the same or a more generous benefit. It preserves the existing rule that employers may limit the amount of family-care sick leave used to at least the amount accrued over a six-month period, and it keeps the anti-retaliation protections for employees who use or try to enforce the benefit. The bill’s effective application is phased in: it does not override the current term of collective bargaining agreements entered into before October 1, 2025, but it applies to renewals, extensions, and agreements entered into on or after that date.

Impact

AB 112 would amend NRS 608.01975 by expanding the statutory right to use accrued sick leave for family-care purposes to employees covered by collective bargaining agreements, eliminating the prior carve-out for unionized workers. In practical terms, private employers that provide sick leave would need to extend this benefit to more employees unless a contract or policy already provides an equal or better benefit. The bill also creates a transition rule protecting existing collective bargaining agreements through their current term if they were entered into before October 1, 2025, while ensuring the new rule applies to future agreements and renewals.

Sentiment

The voting record suggests the bill had meaningful but not unanimous support. It passed the Assembly 29-13 and the Senate 15-6, indicating a clear majority in favor but with a notable minority opposed. The overall sentiment appears supportive of expanding sick leave access for workers, especially for family caregiving needs, while still recognizing existing labor agreements and employer arrangements.

Contention

The main point of contention is the removal of the collective bargaining agreement exemption. Supporters likely view the exemption as an unequal limitation that denies unionized employees the same family-care sick leave rights available to other workers, while opponents may see the change as an intrusion into collectively bargained terms and employer-labor negotiations. The delayed applicability to existing agreements before October 1, 2025, suggests an effort to address concerns about retroactively altering negotiated contracts and to soften the impact on current labor agreements.