Imagine a classroom where the focus is on every student’s success, with teachers and administrators working together to meet each child’s unique needs. Now, picture a new law that could shift all the focus to endless negotiations, budget battles, and inconsistent standards across Nevada’s schools. That’s the risk posed by Assembly Bill 155 (AB 155), a proposal that sounds well-intentioned but could harm the very students it claims to help. Here’s why Nevada’s students deserve better.
What is AB 155?
AB 155 is a proposed bill in Nevada that would add pupil-to-teacher and pupil-to-specialist ratios to the list of mandatory subjects in collective bargaining agreements for school districts. Currently, Nevada’s collective bargaining framework already covers critical areas like salaries, sick leave, employee safety, working conditions, and more. By including class-size ratios in these negotiations, AB 155 would give unions significant influence over staffing decisions, collective bargaining contracts, and budgetary planning—decisions that are better handled through careful, data-driven planning by lawmakers and education experts.
Why AB 155 is a Bad Fit for Nevada Students
1. It Shifts Focus Away from Student Achievement
Nevada’s top priority should be ensuring every student has the opportunity to thrive. While the debate of the benefit of smaller class sizes is still ongoing, making them a bargaining issue risks turning them into a negotiation tactic rather than a strategic goal. AB 155 could lead unions to push for staffing levels that don’t align with a district’s budget or student needs, diverting attention from what matters most: improving educational outcomes.
2. It Creates Budget Strains Without Solutions
Here’s a critical point: AB 155 doesn’t provide additional funding to hire more teachers or specialists to achieve lower class sizes. Instead, it allows unions to demand specific ratios during negotiations, potentially forcing cash-strapped districts to make tough choices—cutting programs, reducing resources, or increasing taxes. This approach places an unfair burden on schools already struggling to balance their budgets.
3. It Undermines Statewide Standards
Nevada’s State Board of Education sets staffing ratio recommendations based on data and broader policy goals to ensure consistency and quality across all districts. AB 155 would allow school district boards to ignore these recommendations if a collective bargaining agreement exists. This exemption could lead to uneven standards, with some districts adopting ratios that don’t serve students’ best interests, weakening efforts to create a cohesive, high-quality education system.
4. It Limits Flexibility for Schools
Every school is unique, with different student populations, resources, and challenges. Addressing class sizes requires a holistic approach that considers local needs, not rigid mandates set at the bargaining table. AB 155 ties the hands of administrators, limiting their ability to adapt to changing classroom dynamics or allocate resources effectively.
A Better Path Forward
Nevada can prioritize student achievement without AB 155. Class size is a complex issue that demands legislative action, thoughtful budgeting, and input from education experts—not union negotiations. By opposing AB 155, Nevada can preserve administrative flexibility, maintain statewide standards, and keep the focus where it belongs: on building an education system that puts students first.
AB 155 may seem like a step toward better classrooms, but it risks creating more problems than it solves. For the sake of Nevada’s students, we need policies that support smart, sustainable solutions—not bargaining battles that strain budgets and sideline student success.
Stay in the Loop
Stay informed and take action! Sign up now to receive weekly email updates spotlighting policies that impact the freedom, opportunity, and prosperity of our citizens and businesses. Don’t miss your chance to stay ahead of the issues that matter most—join our list today and be part of shaping Nevada’s future!
