Nevada Revised Statutes

Nev. Rev. Stat. § 288.150 (2026)

Negotiations by employer with recognized employee organization: Subjects of mandatory bargaining; matters reserved to employer without negotiation; reopening of collective bargaining agreement during period of fiscal emergency; termination or reassignment of employees of certain schools

✓ current as of July 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NRSleg.state.nv.us (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

NRS 288.150 Negotiations by employer with recognized employee organization: Subjects of mandatory bargaining; matters reserved to employer without negotiation; reopening of collective bargaining agreement during period of fiscal emergency; termination or reassignment of employees of certain schools.

1. Except as otherwise provided in subsection 6 and NRS 354.6241, every local government employer shall negotiate in good faith through one or more representatives of its own choosing concerning the mandatory subjects of bargaining set forth in subsection 2 with the designated representatives of the recognized employee organization, if any, for each appropriate bargaining unit among its employees. If either party so requests, agreements reached must be reduced to writing.

2. The scope of mandatory bargaining is limited to:

(a) Salary or wage rates or other forms of direct monetary compensation.

(b) Sick leave.

(d) Holidays.

(e) Other paid or nonpaid leaves of absence.

(f) Insurance benefits.

(g) Total hours of work required of an employee on each workday or workweek.

(h) Total number of days’ work required of an employee in a work year.

(i) Except as otherwise provided in subsections 8 and 11, discharge and disciplinary procedures.

(j) Recognition clause.

(k) The method used to classify employees in the bargaining unit.

(l) Deduction of dues for the recognized employee organization.

(m) Protection of employees in the bargaining unit from discrimination because of participation in recognized employee organizations consistent with the provisions of this chapter.

(n) No-strike provisions consistent with the provisions of this chapter.

(o) Grievance and arbitration procedures for resolution of disputes relating to interpretation or application of collective bargaining agreements.

(p) General savings clauses.

(q) Duration of collective bargaining agreements.

(r) Safety of the employee.

(s) Teacher preparation time.

(t) Materials and supplies for classrooms.

(u) Except as otherwise provided in subsections 9 and 11, the policies for the transfer and reassignment of teachers.

(v) The salary incentive program for differential pay for professional growth that must be made available to licensed educational personnel pursuant to NRS 391A.475.

(w) Procedures for reduction in workforce consistent with the provisions of this chapter.

(x) Procedures consistent with the provisions of subsection 6 for the reopening of collective bargaining agreements for additional, further, new or supplementary negotiations during periods of fiscal emergency.

3. Those subject matters which are not within the scope of mandatory bargaining and which are reserved to the local government employer without negotiation include:

(a) Except as otherwise provided in paragraph (u) of subsection 2, the right to hire, direct, assign or transfer an employee, but excluding the right to assign or transfer an employee as a form of discipline.

(b) The right to reduce in force or lay off any employee because of lack of work or lack of money, subject to paragraph (w) of subsection 2.

(1) Appropriate staffing levels and work performance standards, except for safety considerations;

(2) The content of the workday, including, without limitation, workload factors, except for safety considerations;

(3) The quality and quantity of services to be offered to the public; and

(4) The means and methods of offering those services.

(d) Safety of the public.

4. The provisions of NRS 245.063, 268.4069 and 391.1605 are not subject to negotiations with an employee organization. Any provision of a collective bargaining agreement negotiated pursuant to this chapter which differs from or conflicts in any way with the provisions of NRS 245.063, 268.4069 or 391.1605 is unenforceable and void.

5. If the local government employer is a school district, any money appropriated by the State to carry out increases in salaries or benefits for the employees of the school district is subject to negotiations with an employee organization.

6. Notwithstanding the provisions of any collective bargaining agreement negotiated pursuant to this chapter, a local government employer is entitled to:

(a) Reopen a collective bargaining agreement for additional, further, new or supplementary negotiations relating to compensation or monetary benefits during a period of fiscal emergency. Negotiations must begin not later than 21 days after the local government employer notifies the employee organization that a fiscal emergency exists. For the purposes of this section, a fiscal emergency shall be deemed to exist:

(1) If the amount of revenue received by the general fund of the local government employer during the last preceding fiscal year from all sources, except any nonrecurring source, declined by 5 percent or more from the amount of revenue received by the general fund from all sources, except any nonrecurring source, during the next preceding fiscal year, as reflected in the reports of the annual audits conducted for those fiscal years for the local government employer pursuant to NRS 354.624; or

(2) If the local government employer has budgeted an unreserved ending fund balance in its general fund for the current fiscal year in an amount equal to 4 percent or less of the actual expenditures from the general fund for the last preceding fiscal year, and the local government employer has provided a written explanation of the budgeted ending fund balance to the Department of Taxation that includes the reason for the ending fund balance and the manner in which the local government employer plans to increase the ending fund balance.

(b) Take whatever actions may be necessary to carry out its responsibilities in situations of emergency such as a riot, military action, natural disaster or civil disorder. Those actions may include the suspension of any collective bargaining agreement for the duration of the emergency.

Ê Any action taken under the provisions of this subsection must not be construed as a failure to negotiate in good faith.

7. The provisions of this chapter, including, without limitation, the provisions of this section, recognize and declare the ultimate right and responsibility of the local government employer to manage its operation in the most efficient manner consistent with the best interests of all its citizens, its taxpayers and its employees.

8. If the sponsor of a charter school reconstitutes the governing body of a charter school pursuant to NRS 388A.330, the new governing body may terminate the employment of any teachers or other employees of the charter school, and any provision of any agreement negotiated pursuant to this chapter that provides otherwise is unenforceable and void.

9. The board of trustees of a school district in which a school is designated as a turnaround school pursuant to NRS 388G.400 or the principal of such a school, as applicable, may take any action authorized pursuant to NRS 388G.400, including, without limitation:

(a) Reassigning any member of the staff of such a school; or

(b) If the staff member of another public school consents, reassigning that member of the staff of the other public school to such a school.

10. Any provision of an agreement negotiated pursuant to this chapter which differs from or conflicts in any way with the provisions of subsection 9 or imposes consequences on the board of trustees of a school district or the principal of a school for taking any action authorized pursuant to subsection 9 is unenforceable and void.

11. The board of trustees of a school district or the governing body of a charter school or university school for profoundly gifted pupils may use a substantiated report of the abuse or neglect of a child or a violation of NRS 201.540, 201.553, 201.560, 392.4633 or 394.366 obtained from the Statewide Central Registry for the Collection of Information Concerning the Abuse or Neglect of a Child established by NRS 432.100 or an equivalent registry maintained by a governmental agency in another jurisdiction for the purposes authorized by NRS 388A.515, 388C.200, 391.033, 391.104 or 391.281, as applicable. Such purposes may include, without limitation, making a determination concerning the assignment, discipline or termination of an employee. Any provision of any agreement negotiated pursuant to this chapter which conflicts with the provisions of this subsection is unenforceable and void.

12. This section does not preclude, but this chapter does not require, the local government employer to negotiate subject matters enumerated in subsection 3 which are outside the scope of mandatory bargaining. The local government employer shall discuss subject matters outside the scope of mandatory bargaining but it is not required to negotiate those matters.

13. Contract provisions presently existing in signed and ratified agreements as of May 15, 1975, at 12 p.m. remain negotiable.

14. As used in this section, “abuse or neglect of a child” has the meaning ascribed to it in NRS 392.281.

(Added to NRS by 1969, 1377; A 1971, 1503; 1975, 919; 1983, 1622; 1987, 743, 1496, 1607; 1989, 1165; 2011, 2295, 2901; 2015, 1594, 2965, 3307, 3817, 3835; 2017, 2069, 3162; 2019, 2015, 2076, 2674, 3608; 2021, 1709; 2023, 2471; 2025, 3470)

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 26 cases (9 in the last 5 years), 1974–2025 · leading case: City of Reno v. Reno Police Prot. Ass'n, 59 P.3d 1212 (Nev. 2002).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

City of Reno v. Reno Police Prot. Ass'n, 59 P.3d 1212 (Nev. 2002). · cites it 12× “The contract was negotiated by the RPPA and the City and contained all subjects of mandatory bargaining required by NRS 288.150. On June 17, 1997, the RPPA filed an unfair labor practice complaint against the City with the EMRB.”

Clark Cnty. Sch. Dist. v. Local Gov't Emp.-Mgmt. Relations Bd., 530 P.2d 114 (Nev. 1974). · cites it 11× “: CLARK COUNTY CASE: In 1969 the Nevada Legislature enacted NRS 288.150 and in 1971 amended that act, the composite of which was designed to give bargaining rights to public employees.”

Clark Cty. Sch. Dist. v. Local Gov. Emp. Man. Rel. Bd., 530 P.2d 114 (Nev. 1974). · cites it 13× “*116 ZENOFF, Justice: CLARK COUNTY CASE: In 1969 the Nevada Legislature enacted NRS 288.150 and in 1971 amended that act, the composite of which was designed to give bargaining rights to public employees.”

Int'l Ass'n of Firefighters, Local 1285 v. City of Las Vegas, 929 P.2d 954 (Nev. 1996). · cites it 7× “If a dispute involves an established past practice within the Fire Department that would be mandatorily negotiable under the provisions of NRS 288.150, that is not expressly provided for in the provisions of this agreement, such a dispute may be submitted for resolution as a…”

Truckee Meadows Fire Prot. Dist. v. Int'l Ass'n of Fire Fighters, Local 2487, 849 P.2d 343 (Nev. 1993). · cites it 10× “This court, however, has held that a subject not specifically enumerated in NRS 288.150 as a nonnegotiable subject is nevertheless a mandatory subject of bargaining if it bears a “significant relationship” to wages, hours, and working conditions.”

Kansas Bd. of Regents v. Pittsburg State Univ. Chapter, 667 P.2d 306 (Kan. 1983). · cites it 2× “The court concluded: "The appellant's interpretation of the act would render NRS 288.150 a nullity. The fact of the enactment of the legislation in itself evidences legislative intent that the statute serve a purpose and the stated purpose is to grant public employees a right…”

Int'l Ass'n of Firefighters, Local 1285 v. City of Las Vegas, 764 P.2d 478 (Nev. 1988). · cites it 3× “Article Ten provides that: If a dispute involves an established past practice within the Fire Department that would be mandatorily negotiable under the provisions of NRS 288.150 5 that is not expressly provided for in the provisions of this agreement, such a dispute may be…”

Pub. Employees' Benefits Prog. v. Las Vegas Metro. Police Dep't, 179 P.3d 542 (Nev. 2008). “023(1) (noting that employees may join the program upon retirement if either they or their dependents were covered by an NRS Chapter 287-described program and that the employees’ option to join PEBP is valid only to the extent that Medicare is not provided under the Health…”

Amalgamated Transit Union Int'l, Afl-Cio v. Raymond J. Donovan, Sec'y of Labor, 767 F.2d 939 (D.C. Cir. 1985). “1985); Nev.Rev. Stat. § 288.150(3) (1983); N.H.Rev.”

UMC Physicians' Bargaining Unit of Nevada Serv. Employees Union v. Nevada Serv. Employees Union/SEIU Local 1107, 178 P.3d 709 (Nev. 2008). “15, 1990) (holding that an employee organization could not charge an employer with failure to negotiate when those issues were nonnegotiable managerial rights, or when the allegedly improperly transferred “unit work” was not traditionally the work of the unit the organization…”

Pub. Employees' Ret. Sys. of Nev. v. Las Vegas Managers & Supervisors Ass'n, 140 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 80 (Nev. 2024). · cites it 8× “See NRS 288.150 and NRS 286.025. This is a SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 3 (0) l 4A ; question of statutory interpretation.”

City of Reno v. Reno Police Prot. Ass'n, 653 P.2d 156 (Nev. 1982). · cites it 5× “As a result, the RPPA filed a complaint against the City before the Local Government Employee-Management Relations Board (EMRB) on the ground that the City had failed to negotiate in good faith concerning mandatory subjects of bargaining pursuant to NRS 288.150(2). 1 The Reno…”

Show all 26 citing cases →

— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 288.150(1) — 6 cases

City of Reno v. Reno Police Prot. Ass'n, 59 P.3d 1212 (Nev. 2002). “The contract was negotiated by the RPPA and the City and contained all subjects of mandatory bargaining required by NRS 288.150. On June 17, 1997, the RPPA filed an unfair labor practice complaint against the City with the EMRB.”

Pub. Employees' Ret. Sys. of Nev. v. Las Vegas Managers & Supervisors Ass'n, 140 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 80 (Nev. 2024). “See NRS 288.150 and NRS 286.025. This is a SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 3 (0) l 4A ; question of statutory interpretation.”

Pub. Employees' Ret. Sys. of Nev. v. Las Vegas Managers & Supervisors Ass'n, 141 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 55 (Nev. 2025).

Goodsell v. Teachers Health Trust (D. Nev. 2024).

Pub. Employees' Ret. Sys. of Nev. v. Las Vegas Managers & Supervisors Ass'n, 141 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 55 (Nev. 2025).

— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 288.150(11) — 1 case

Clark Cty. Ass'n of Sch. Adm'rs v. CCSD (Nev. 2023).

— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 288.150(2) — 7 cases

Clark Cnty. Sch. Dist. v. Local Gov't Emp.-Mgmt. Relations Bd., 530 P.2d 114 (Nev. 1974). “: CLARK COUNTY CASE: In 1969 the Nevada Legislature enacted NRS 288.150 and in 1971 amended that act, the composite of which was designed to give bargaining rights to public employees.”

Int'l Ass'n of Firefighters, Local 1285 v. City of Las Vegas, 929 P.2d 954 (Nev. 1996). “If a dispute involves an established past practice within the Fire Department that would be mandatorily negotiable under the provisions of NRS 288.150, that is not expressly provided for in the provisions of this agreement, such a dispute may be submitted for resolution as a…”

Clark Cty. Sch. Dist. v. Local Gov. Emp. Man. Rel. Bd., 530 P.2d 114 (Nev. 1974). “*116 ZENOFF, Justice: CLARK COUNTY CASE: In 1969 the Nevada Legislature enacted NRS 288.150 and in 1971 amended that act, the composite of which was designed to give bargaining rights to public employees.”

Truckee Meadows Fire Prot. Dist. v. Int'l Ass'n of Fire Fighters, Local 2487, 849 P.2d 343 (Nev. 1993). “This court, however, has held that a subject not specifically enumerated in NRS 288.150 as a nonnegotiable subject is nevertheless a mandatory subject of bargaining if it bears a “significant relationship” to wages, hours, and working conditions.”

— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 288.150(2)(a) — 4 cases

Pub. Employees' Ret. Sys. of Nev. v. Las Vegas Managers & Supervisors Ass'n, 141 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 55 (Nev. 2025).

Corbett v. Pub. Employees' Ret. Sys., ex rel. State of Nevada (D. Nev. 2023).

— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 288.150(2)(b) — 1 case

— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 288.150(2)(d) — 4 cases

Pub. Employees' Ret. Sys. of Nev. v. Las Vegas Managers & Supervisors Ass'n, 141 Nev. Adv. Op. No. 55 (Nev. 2025).

— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 288.150(2)(f) — 2 cases

Goodsell v. Teachers Health Trust (D. Nev. 2024).

— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 288.150(2)(i) — 4 cases

City of Reno v. Reno Police Prot. Ass'n, 653 P.2d 156 (Nev. 1982). “As a result, the RPPA filed a complaint against the City before the Local Government Employee-Management Relations Board (EMRB) on the ground that the City had failed to negotiate in good faith concerning mandatory subjects of bargaining pursuant to NRS 288.150(2). 1 The Reno…”

LVPPA v. Eighth Jud. Dist. Ct., 2022 NV 59 (Nev. 2022).

Las Vegas Metro. Police Dep't. v. Jenkins (Nev. 2015).

— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 288.150(2)(o) — 2 cases

Goodsell v. Teachers Health Trust (D. Nev. 2024).

Pratt v. Clark Co. Dept. of Aviation (Nev. 2014).

— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 288.150(2)(r) — 1 case

City of Reno v. IAFF, Local 731, 2014 NV 100 (Nev. 2014).

— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 288.150(2)(u) — 1 case

Clark Cty. Ass'n of Sch. Adm'rs v. CCSD (Nev. 2023).

— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 288.150(2)(v) — 1 case

City of Reno v. IAFF, Local 731, 2014 NV 100 (Nev. 2014).

— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 288.150(3) — 4 cases

Amalgamated Transit Union Int'l, Afl-Cio v. Raymond J. Donovan, Sec'y of Labor, 767 F.2d 939 (D.C. Cir. 1985). “1985); Nev.Rev. Stat. § 288.150(3) (1983); N.H.Rev.”

City of Reno v. IAFF, Local 731, 2014 NV 100 (Nev. 2014).

Las Vegas Metro. Police Dep't. v. Jenkins (Nev. 2015).

— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 288.150(3)(a) — 1 case

Las Vegas Metro. Police Dep't. v. Jenkins (Nev. 2015).

— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 288.150(3)(b) — 2 cases

Bonner Vs. City Of N. Las Vegas (Nev. 2020).

City of Reno v. IAFF, Local 731, 2014 NV 100 (Nev. 2014).

— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 288.150(3)(c) — 1 case

— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 288.150(5) — 2 cases

Las Vegas Metro. Police Dep't. v. Jenkins (Nev. 2015).

— Nev. Rev. Stat. § 288.150(9) — 1 case

Clark Cty. Ass'n of Sch. Adm'rs v. CCSD (Nev. 2023).

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.