Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Labor Contracts topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commissioners approve AFSCME contract for Job and Family Services to bolster recruitment and retention
Summary
Clark County commissioners approved a three-year contract with AFSCME Local 1939 for Department of Job and Family Services employees, which JFS Director Tom McGrath said includes a generous first-year increase aimed at recruiting and retaining staff amid persistent vacancies.
Commissioner Sasha L. Rittenhouse and Commissioner Richard L. Lohnes voted unanimously Feb. 4 to approve a contract between Clark County and the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) Local 1939 covering bargaining-unit employees in the Department of Job and Family Services for Jan. 1, 2026 through Dec. 31, 2028.
The agreement was added to the agenda as an add-on resolution and authorized the County Administrator to execute contract-related documents upon receipt of originals. County Administrator Jennifer Hutchinson presented the item as an add-on and the commissioners approved the motion without recorded dissent.
Tom McGrath, director of the Department of Job and Family Services, said the contract seeks to address high vacancy and turnover rates at JFS. "JFS concentrated on trying to recruit and retain employees through this contract. There is a generous increase for the first year," McGrath said, adding that training new staff takes more than a year and the county hopes the pay changes will keep employees for five to six years.
Stephen Lanham, the AFSCME Local 1939 representative, thanked the commissioners and staff for their work negotiating the agreement.
The contract is intended to make JFS more competitive in hiring and reduce churn in positions that McGrath said are critical yet difficult to fill. The board recorded unanimous yes votes for the motion and authorized the County Administrator to execute the agreement and related documents.
No dollar amounts for the contract's total cost or specific pay increases beyond the "generous increase for the first year" were specified in the meeting record. The board did not indicate additional budget adjustments tied specifically to this contract during the meeting; supplemental appropriations were considered elsewhere on the agenda.
