Assemblymember Yuwing Wing introduced Assembly Bill 112 on behalf of Assembly District 8, telling the Assembly Committee on Commerce and Labor that the measure would remove an exemption that keeps some workers covered by collective bargaining agreements from using accrued sick leave to care for family members.

The bill would change language first adopted in 2021 (AB 190) so that employers who provide sick leave must allow employees to use that leave to care for an immediate family member even if the employee is covered by a collective bargaining agreement, subject to an amendment the sponsor circulated that preserves existing agreements and other laws that offer “the same or more generous leave.”

Why it matters: supporters said the change would prevent workers from having to “lie” about the reason they miss work and would protect employees who now face discipline when they call out to care for children, parents or other relatives.

Workers, union leaders and family-advocacy groups filled both the in-person and virtual queues. Maria Theresa Hank, a shop steward for Transport Workers Union Local 556, testified she has worked 35 years as a flight attendant and said, “No one in Nevada should have to choose between their job security and their family’s well-being.” Mark Ellis, president of CWA Local 9413, told the committee, “We’re not asking for anything extra. We’re just asking that we don’t have to lie to our employers.”

Supporters supplied multiple personal examples of employees who said they were disciplined after using sick time to care for relatives. Speakers included representatives from the Communication Workers of America, Teamsters, Culinary, SEIU, National Nurses United, Moms Rising Together and Make It Work Nevada.

Several employer groups — including the Las Vegas Chamber, Nevada Resort Association and Retail Association of Nevada — said they were in active discussions with the sponsor and stakeholders and indicated the sponsor’s proposed amendment could resolve many concerns. Opponents expressed particular concern about preserving the mechanics of existing collective bargaining agreements and ensuring employers retain reasonable operational flexibility.

Sponsor Yuwing Wing said the amendment would make clear the bill “establishes a floor” and would not diminish benefits provided by a collective bargaining agreement, employer policy, contract or other law. The amendment also states the bill’s mandatory provisions would not apply during the current term of any collective bargaining agreement entered before Oct. 1, 2025, but would apply to extensions, renewals or agreements entered on or after that date.

There was no vote; the committee took testimony and the sponsor said she would continue stakeholder discussions before the bill returns to committee.