Tennessee Senate Bill SB0797

Tennessee 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/4/25
• Engrossed: 2/27/25
• Enrolled: 3/25/25
• Passed: 4/3/25
• Chaptered: 4/8/25

Caption

AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 8, Chapter 50, relative to continuing education for state employees.

Summary

SB0797 amends Tennessee law governing continuing education for state employees. Under existing Tennessee Code Annotated § 8-50-114(h), certain full-time employees are covered by continuing education provisions; this bill clarifies that the rule applies to full-time employees of the General Assembly who work more hours each week than are typically required of full-time employment for at least four weeks per year. In effect, the bill extends or confirms continuing education eligibility for a specific category of legislative employees whose schedules regularly exceed standard full-time hours during part of the year. The measure is narrow in scope and does not create a new statewide program. Instead, it modifies the statutory definition or application of an existing continuing education requirement within Title 8, Chapter 50, affecting state employees and, more specifically, employees of the General Assembly who meet the described workload threshold. The bill became Public Chapter No. 121 and took effect upon becoming law.

Impact

The bill amends Tennessee Code Annotated § 8-50-114(h) by adding a clarifying subdivision that expressly includes certain full-time General Assembly employees within the continuing education provision. This changes the application of state employee continuing education law by ensuring that legislative staff who work above typical full-time hours for at least four weeks per year are covered. The practical effect is to align these employees with the continuing education treatment already available under the statute, without otherwise altering broader state personnel law.

Sentiment

The bill appears to have been received positively and without controversy. It passed the Senate State & Local Government Committee 9-0 and later passed the Senate floor 31-0, indicating unanimous support among voting members. The absence of committee transcript discussion suggests the measure was viewed as a straightforward technical or clarifying change rather than a disputed policy proposal.

Contention

No notable opposition or substantive contention is evident in the available record. The only discernible issue is the bill’s targeted application to full-time employees of the General Assembly who exceed typical full-time hours for part of the year, which suggests a narrow definitional clarification rather than a broader debate over employee benefits. Because the bill passed unanimously and no committee discussion is provided, there is no record of disagreement among legislators or stakeholders in the materials supplied.