Nevada committee hears AB222 to require apprenticeship demographic reporting, spur recruitment of women and veterans

Assemblymember Jovan Jackson, sponsor of Assembly Bill 222, told the Assembly Committee on Government Affairs that the measure would require registered apprenticeship programs in Nevada to report applicant and acceptance demographic data — including counts of women, veterans and members of minority groups — to the state apprenticeship director and would authorize targeted support and grants to programs that meet utilization targets.

The change matters because sponsors and supporters said the state lacks a consistent, statewide accounting of who applies to apprenticeship programs and why some groups, particularly women, do not persist. "Apprenticeships balance skills‑based education and on‑the‑job training, making them critical pipelines for trades," Jackson said. "With AB222, I aim to implement certain accountability and support measures in our state apprenticeship programs with our goals of prioritizing the number of women and other specific populations in these programs."

Committee testimony and the bill's amendment

The amendment described to the committee would require registered apprenticeships to report specific demographic counts and acceptance rates to the state apprenticeship director, who would determine whether a program met the utilization rates outlined in that program’s standards and notify the program in writing. The apprenticeship director would also annually report the compiled data to the Legislature. The Department of Employment, Training and Rehabilitation (DETR) would be asked to make certain programs and resources available to apprenticeship programs that are not meeting utilization targets; the Governor’s Office of Economic Development (GoED) would be authorized to offer grants to apprenticeship programs that do meet utilization targets.

Greg Esposito of the Nevada State Pipe Trades said much of the data already exists and is reported federally, but "the apprenticeship director hasn't ever told you guys what the results are," making the amendment a mechanism to aggregate and publish findings to inform future policy. "You can't do anything until you know what the situation is," Esposito said.

Supporters urged the committee to approve the amended bill to create a data foundation before pursuing mandates. Evelyn Pacheco, president of Nevada Women in Trades, and several tradeswomen described outreach and national conferences focused on tradeswomen issues and urged the committee to adopt the measure. Apprentice Avery Moliner recounted personal barriers faced by women on construction sites, including accommodations for pregnancy and child care and an incident she described as an assault by a supervisor; she said data about why women leave apprenticeships would help the state and unions design supports. "This trade…does not call for women to start families or women who have families already," Moliner said, describing scheduling and facility gaps that affect retention.

Concerns, clarifications and fiscal questions

Several witnesses and members raised clarifying questions. Mac Bybee, president and CEO of Associated Builders and Contractors, noted that many apprenticeship programs report demographic and completion data through the federal RAPIDS system to the U.S. Department of Labor and urged the committee to avoid duplicative requirements. "This data exists," Bybee said, adding his organization wanted to review precise amendment language. Committee members asked whether the amendment would include private for‑profit trade schools; Jackson and presenters responded the version before the committee focused on registered apprenticeships but that broader reporting had been discussed conceptually.

Assemblymember Karas asked whether the fiscal note of about $1,700,000 applied to the amended bill; Jackson said he did not have an answer. Nevada Labor Commissioner Brett Harris, testifying neutral, said the fiscal note on file reflected the original version and that the note would likely be removed if the final amendment removed requirements that would trigger the state’s Apprenticeship Utilization Act regulatory workload.

Next steps

No committee vote occurred at the hearing. Sponsors said the amendment narrows the bill to data collection and voluntary supports, with future recruitment or enforcement changes to follow only after the state analyzes the results. Supporters urged the committee to move the measure forward so the state can identify barriers — including childcare, workplace accommodations and harassment — and consider policy remedies, training or grant supports.

Avery Moliner, an apprentice set to become a journeyworker in about three months, closed by urging the committee to acknowledge lived experience as part of the data gathering: "I just want us to have that conversation. I think that's what this would do, is to be able to give you guys that understanding so that there's no miscommunication," she said.

The committee closed the hearing on AB222 without a formal vote and moved to the next agenda item.