New CCEA-backed scheme would strike out students

The problems with Nevada’s public schools won’t be fixed by teachers spending less time in the classroom. Yet that could be a consequence of a proposal pending in Carson City.

The Senate Government Affairs Committee recently heard Senate Bill 161 and moved it to the floor. The bill would allow teachers unions to petition a court for the ability to strike. It’s now illegal for Nevada public employees to strike.

Under the legislation, a union could justify a strike based on grievances involving class size, the number of teachers in the district or a policy related to the emotional or mental health of teachers. A court could sanction a strike upon a finding that it would “be equally or less detrimental” to students “than the continuance of the alleged policy or condition.”

Further, the bill would remove penalties on teachers who engaged in an illegal strike. Only the union could be punished. And it would redefine the legal definition of “strike” to exclude teachers coordinating sick-outs or walking out of individual schools.

It isn’t hard to figure out who this bill would benefit — and it’s not students.

Fewer than two years ago, the Clark County Education Association attempted to use tactics such as these to pressure the Clark County School District during contentious contract negotiations. The district went to court to prevent the union from striking. A judge ruled against the district, finding there wasn’t enough evidence that the union would initiate a work stoppage. Then several schools couldn’t open because of rolling sick-outs.

“The court finds that a strike has occurred,” District Judge Crystal Eller said in September 2023. She imposed a preliminary injunction, and both school and contract negotiations continued. The district and union eventually agreed to a lucrative pay package for teachers.

But the union wasn’t satisfied. It collected signatures for a ballot measure that would allow teachers to strike. In Nevada, initiatives go to the Legislature before the voters. The union wants to use the threat of that initiative as leverage to pass a bill such as SB161, which is slightly less destructive. In Nevada, enabled by a compliant state Supreme Court, initiative sponsors can withdraw their initiatives.

But this legalized blackmail works only if your opponents believe the initiative will pass. That’s unlikely in this case. There are good reasons to ban public employees from striking. Strikes by public employees are strikes against the public and, in some cases, threaten public safety. Public employees shouldn’t be able to extort concessions from the taxpayers who support them. Nevada’s binding arbitration process is already slanted in favor of the union.

Allowing teachers to strike is bad policy. Democrats should be working to advance the interests of students, not union officials.