A new battle is brewing in Nevada over government-mandated employee benefits, as Democratic lawmakers push to expand paid family and medical leave requirements for businesses across the Silver State. This latest proposal comes despite previous warnings about economic impacts and Governor Joe Lombardo’s concerns about burdening employers.

How We Got Here

In a surprising turn of events, although Governor Lombardo (R) vetoed the original paid leave bill, the requirement found its way into law through an unexpected route – the Oakland A’s stadium funding bill passed during a special legislative session in June 2023.

This legislative maneuver effectively bypassed the governor’s veto, requiring companies with more than 50 employees to provide paid family and medical leave if they want state tax breaks.

Current Impact on Business

Tom Burns, Executive Director of the Governor’s Office of Economic Development (GOED), recently revealed to lawmakers that the policy is already causing problems. One company with 150 employees specifically chose not to relocate its headquarters to Nevada because of the mandate.

“They’re not willing to provide a benefit to a set of folks in one state and not having it in another state,” Burns explained. “So they have elected to move their headquarters elsewhere.”

What’s Being Proposed Now

Despite these concerns, Assemblymember Selena La Rue Hatch (D-Reno) has introduced a new bill draft request that would further expand paid family and medical leave mandates. The proposal would cover parental leave for childbirth and adoption, serious medical conditions, military leave, and leave for domestic violence victims.

Governor’s Previous Warnings

When vetoing the original bill in 2023, Governor Lombardo predicted these exact problems.

In his veto message, he warned that such requirements would “place Nevada at a severe disadvantage in its work to bring desirable businesses within its borders.”

The governor specifically noted that, adding :

“preconditions to abatements that would require abated companies to endure a significant year-over-year increase in payroll expenditures compared to other markets of interest would signal worldwide that Nevada is not open for business.”

Economic Impact Concerns

Las Vegas Global Economic Alliance President Tina Quigley confirms these fears are becoming reality, noting that requests for tax abatements have “dried up” since the mandate took effect.

The current law requires affected companies to pay workers at least 55% of their salary for up to 12 weeks of leave.

The Other Side

Supporters defend the requirements. State Senator Edgar Flores (D) argued:

“To claim businesses refuse to come here because they do not want to give workers earned time off signals that we are not attracting the best business partners.”

Progressive groups, health advocacy organizations, and labor unions continue to push for expansion.

Hidden Taxpayer Costs

The paid leave mandate isn’t the only concern for Nevada’s economic competitiveness.

During previous legislative hearings, lawmakers raised questions about the broader costs of benefit requirements to taxpayers. State Senator Fabian Donaté (D) highlighted that major companies receiving tax breaks, including Amazon and Tesla, have significant numbers of employees enrolled in Medicaid – effectively shifting healthcare costs to Nevada taxpayers.

This suggests that even with existing benefit requirements, many workers at tax-abated companies still rely on state assistance, raising questions about whether expanding mandates would further strain both businesses and public resources.

What Comes Next

Conservative business owners and taxpayers concerned about this proposal can:

•  Contact their state representatives
•  Join or support local chambers of commerce opposing the mandate
• -Share their stories about how such requirements would impact their businesses
• -Attend legislative hearings when the bill is formally introduced

As Nevada continues to compete with other states for business development, the debate over mandated benefits versus economic growth remains crucial. While supporters emphasize worker protection, critics argue that the real-world evidence is proving Governor Lombardo’s concerns correct – that government mandates are driving business investment away from Nevada.

The situation presents a clear example of how policies intended to help workers can sometimes have unintended consequences for economic growth and job creation, potentially hurting the very people they aim to help.

This article was written with the assistance of AI. Please verify information and consult additional sources as needed.