Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Rules Of Practice topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Employee‑Management Committee adopts rules requiring step‑four grievances go to hearing

State of Nevada Employee-Management Committee · October 17, 2024
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The committee adopted revised Rules of Practice that require grievances submitted to step four be automatically scheduled for hearing (minimum 21 working days) and allow agencies to file motions to dismiss; changes reflect statutory renaming from SB 431 and LCB file R171‑24.

The State of Nevada Employee‑Management Committee voted Oct. 17 to adopt revised Rules of Practice that change how step‑four grievances are handled by automatically scheduling them for hearing.

Nora Johnson, Human Resource Analyst for the Division of Human Resource Management, told the committee that under the new practice "grievances submitted to step four will now automatically be scheduled for hearing" to preserve scheduling timelines and ensure full committee disposition. The rule amendments were submitted in LCB file R171‑24 and conform certain nomenclature changes resulting from Senate Bill 431.

The revision replaces a prior triage step that had routinely placed some grievances on the agenda for preliminary discussion; under the new process, those matters will proceed to a formal hearing with at least 21 working days' notice and standard scheduling orders. Agencies retain the ability to ask the EMC to dismiss grievances they believe do not meet the definition of a grievance, but under the new procedure such requests must be filed as motions to dismiss and may be addressed at or before the hearing.

Deputy Attorney General Jordan Laub told members the written‑motion process will reduce repeated remands and requests for reconsideration that have led to petitions for judicial review in the past. "[W]e wouldn't have to go through the entirety of that hearing process" in cases where a summarily dismissible jurisdictional defect exists, DHRM staff said during the presentation.

The committee discussed scheduling constraints tied to member availability and quorum and approved the rules unanimously. The amendments also reflect DHRM's updated unit and staff titles and replace "personnel" language with "human resources" consistent with SB 431.