Governor of Nevada
State Capitol Building
101 N. Carson Street
Carson City, NV 89701
RE: Nevada Senate Bill 196
Dear Governor Sandoval,
The ERISA Industry Committee (“ERIC”) urges you to veto Nevada Senate Bill 196 (“SB 196”). SB 196 mandates paid sick leave for private-sector employees, but in doing so, infringes on large employers’ ability provide leave under existing policies that already provide the requisite amount of paid sick leave that the bill mandates.
ERIC is the only national association that advocates exclusively for large employers on health, retirement, and compensation public policies at the federal, state, and local levels. While we recognize the importance of paid sick leave, we believe it should be accomplished in a manner that does not hinder employers who already provide quality paid sick leave policies.
SB 196 works against large employers because it mandates the carryover of accrued, unused leave between years of employment. Mandating carryover has an adverse effect on the totality of benefits offered by employers. Most large employers dovetail paid sick leave with short and long-term disability programs. By forcing large employers to allow for carryover, you force their hand in altering and potentially decreasing benefits across the board in order to compensate accordingly.
In our testimony and letters to both the Nevada Senate and Assembly, ERIC made the reasonable request that carryover be a discretionary choice by employers; or, at the very least, not be mandated when employers front-load all available paid sick. These requests went unanswered. When employers front-load leave, it: (i) institutes a “use it or lose it” system; (ii) puts control in hands of the employee; and (iii) relieves any undue administrative burden on the employer. Front-loading benefits employees greatly, allowing them to take leave as needed rather than waiting for it to accrue. Mandating carryover on top of front-loading creates undue burdens on employers with no added benefit being conferred on the employee.
SB 196 would be adding to the patchwork of state paid sick leave laws, increasing the administrative and compliance burdens on large employers. Most large, multistate employers already offer some of the highest-quality paid leave plans to their employees, and should therefore not be subject to this bill. We welcome the opportunity to work with your office in crafting legislation that benefits all Nevadans without increasing the compliance burden on employers already satisfying the underlying intent and purpose of the bill.
Associate, Retirement & Compensation Policy
The ERISA Industry Committee