Nevada students are already facing enough challenges—falling test scores, pandemic learning loss, and high teacher absentee rates. The last thing they need is more missed class time. But that’s exactly what Senate Bill 161 (SB 161) would deliver.
This bill would give teachers unions a new legal path to strike, opening the door to widespread classroom disruptions across the state. It replaces stability with uncertainty, puts pressure on school districts to cave quickly, and uses students’ education as a bargaining chip. For families, taxpayers, and most of all students, SB 161 is a step in the wrong direction. Here’s why.
Nevada Teachers Already Have Strong Protections
Teachers in Nevada already have powerful collective bargaining rights. That means they negotiate for fair pay, work hours, and classroom conditions—and if those talks stall, there’s a built-in solution: binding arbitration. That process helps settle disputes without disrupting the classroom.
SB 161 would add a new right for teachers to strike if they collect enough signatures and get a judge’s permission. That’s a huge shift from solving problems through talks and arbitration to threatening walkouts and shutting down classrooms.
Strikes Hurt Students First
We’ve already seen what this looks like. In October 2023, some Clark County teachers organized “rolling sickouts”—large groups calling in sick at the same time to protest their contract situation. That forced at least eight schools to shut down for the day, over the course of a week. It may not have been called a “strike,” but it had the same effect: kids lost classroom time.
SB 161 would make this kind of disruption even easier and more frequent, hurting students’ academic progress just when they need stability the most.
Nevada Already Struggles with Teacher Absences
Even without the right to strike, Nevada has some of the highest teacher absentee rates in the country. In fact, back in 2016, we were second only to Hawaii. That problem didn’t go away during the pandemic—and it still remains today.
Instead of making it easier for teachers to miss school, shouldn’t we be doing everything we can to encourage perfect attendance from educators?
This Bill Pressures Schools, Not Helps Them
SB 161 also shortens the timeline for contract negotiations. If talks don’t wrap up fast enough, it triggers the option to strike. That kind of pressure could push school districts into rushed decisions or bad deals—just to avoid a walkout. That’s not good-faith negotiation. It’s using students’ learning as a bargaining chip.
Bottom Line: SB 161 Puts Unions Over Students
Teachers’ unions already have a strong voice in Nevada. Giving them the legal right to strike tilts the scale too far. It threatens to take the focus off students and puts families and taxpayers in a tough spot.
If we want better outcomes for Nevada kids, we should focus on keeping classrooms open, reducing teacher absences, and making sure schools can negotiate fairly and responsibly—not adding more chances for disruption.
SB 161 would hurt students. Nevada should say no.
