Latest news with #NSEA
Yahoo
23-04-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Lawmakers unlikely to lower minimum retirement age for Nebraska school employees
Tim Royers, president of the Nebraska State Education Association, center, talks about 2025 priorities for the teachers union. Jan. 28, 2025. (Zach Wendling/Nebraska Examiner) LINCOLN — Senators and school administrators expressed hesitation Wednesday in lowering, back to age 55, the minimum retirement age at which Nebraska school employees can step down with full benefits. Currently, eligible school employees face what is known as the 'Rule of 85,' whereby if someone's age plus years of service exceeds 85, that person can retire without any reductions in benefits. Employees who started before July 2018 can retire as young as 55, but employees hired after have to wait until at least age 60. Tim Royers, president of the NSEA, said an amendment to reverse that 'poor decision' would have little financial or staffing impact and could incentivize young educators to look ahead to retirement. 'Our young educators deserve the same flexibility that I and other veteran teachers enjoy when it comes to deciding when we turn off the classroom lights for the last time,' Royers said at a Wednesday hearing on the proposed amendment, which he supported. The Nebraska Council of School Administrators and the Nebraska Association of School Boards opposed the change. Lawmakers advance changes to Nebraska school retirement plan to help close budget hole Royers said it would be in the best interest of a teacher who, at age 55, already has 30 years of service, to step back if they're exhausted rather than being forced to work five more years. State Sen. Beau Ballard of Lincoln, chair of the Legislature's Nebraska Retirement Systems Committee, proposed the change as a deal with the NSEA. In return, the State of Nebraska would agree to withhold annual contributions to the school retirement plan for the next two years before going to a stair-stepped contribution system based on the plan's funding level. The amendment comes to Legislative Bill 645, which was introduced by Ballard on behalf of Gov. Jim Pillen and seeks to change the annual contribution levels for the state, employees and school districts. The school retirement plan for employees statewide outside of Omaha Public Schools (who have a separate pension plan) is currently 99.91% funded. If passed, the current version of LB 645 is expected to save the state about $80 million. With the new amendment, the state would save approximately $20 million more. State Sen. Danielle Conrad of Lincoln, who has consistently opposed a shaky negotiations process behind LB 645, has repeatedly asked why the school plan had to be changed now. Royers said the original LB 645, which would have offered no reduced contributions to school employees or employers, was a 'poor bill' that he said was brought for the wrong reasons, mainly to help plug the state's nearly half-a-billion-dollar projected budget deficit. However, Royers said it presented a rare chance to 'force' a conversation on the plan, leading to an amended bill that could give the average school teacher more than $1,000 in annual take-home pay because of reduced contributions. Now, he views the amended bill as a way to give hard-working employees a benefit and put them on a more 'equal playing field.' Royers said he has to look for any wins for educators in a political environment where he said the 'political will' makes such victories 'candidly, limited.' Conrad asked Royers what happens if he is wrong about the feasibility of the amended bill, to which Royers responded that he hopes he's not. He pointed to an actuarial study showing that the amended LB 645 and a lower Rule of 85 could be financially feasible. Tim Hruza, appearing on behalf of the school administrators association, said the organization wanted a new actuarial study to fully understand the impact of a modified Rule of 85. But if the changes have to wait another year, Royers said he's OK with that. 'If the end result of this is we've had this conversation, it's on the radar but it's not going to be something we get to until next year,' Royers said, 'I'm perfectly fine with that.' LB 645 will return for the second of three stages of debate on Thursday. Ballard said he is likely to withdraw the amendment that was considered Wednesday. The full state budget will need to advance from the Appropriations Committee by next Tuesday, with debate beginning May 6. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Yahoo
28-03-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Per-pupil funding going up $2 next year unless something changes in Nevada budget
LAS VEGAS (KLAS) — Nevada lawmakers continue to work through questions in the state budget for K-12 education. But a lot of unknowns remain as they parse through the details. Republican Gov. Joe Lombardo's proposed state budget sets per-pupil funding in 2026 at $9,416, just $2 higher than the current funding level. Going higher than that is 'impracticable.' That prompted a spokesman for the Nevada State Education Association (NSEA) to call Lombardo '$2 Joe.' 'Two dollars will not keep up with increasing costs, especially with the 3.5% PERS increase that's coming in July,' the NSEA's Alexander Marks said. The Clark County Education Association, which represents teachers in Southern Nevada, has not commented. Extra pay for 'hard-to-fill' teaching jobs provided in legislation announced Tuesday in Carson City A formula in state law dictates that per-pupil funding adjusts depending on economic growth, inflation and enrollment growth. But even with stagnant enrollments, Lombardo's budget sets out spending levels that are less than the formula prescribes, according to officials with the Legislative Counsel Bureau's Fiscal Analysis Division. Marks calls that 'very unfortunate,' and the union wants to know more. 'The NRS does prescribe it should be going up to $9,942. So, the self-proclaimed education governor can't follow Senate Bill 543 from 2019. We're not sure what the practicality is in this context. We would love some more details on why they found that it wasn't practicable,' Marks said. Budget decisions don't take place until May, Lombardo said. He has prioritized making teacher raises permanent, removing the guesswork over one-shot funding that teachers can't count on. Opportunity scholarship tax credits are another priority if funds are available, Lombardo said. Economic growth figures released in December indicate a 3.4% increase in revenue for the state, and new figures are due out in May. But the three-year average for inflation is at 5.61%, according to officials. Enrollment has actually gone down slightly, but the governor has it as flat in the budget. A total of 465,927 pupils were in Nevada's public and charter schools in 2024. Lilliana Camacho-Polkow, a program analyst in the Legislative Counsel Bureau's Fiscal Analysis Division, laid out the budget figures for lawmakers at Thursday's joint committee meeting in Carson City. 'Adjusting the per-pupil amount by the combined rate of inflation and the growth of enrollment over the biennium as practicable required under NRS would result in a statewide base per-pupil amount of $9,942 which is $456 more than the governor's recommended — as amended — statewide base per-pupil amount of $9,486 in fiscal year 2027,' Camacho-Polkow said. 'The governor determined it is not practicable to adjust the statewide base per-pupil amount from the immediately preceding biennium by the combined rate of inflation and the growth of enrollment,' she said. Analysts calculate that the state would need another $240 million to meet the $9,942 per-pupil funding level. Law states that if the governor says it's impracticable, legislation must be proposed to come up with the additional funds. That legislation hasn't been introduced yet, 53 days into the 120-day legislative session. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
17-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Lincoln senators clash over Nebraska school retirement bill, as school leaders weigh in
State Sens. Danielle Conrad and Beau Ballard, both of Lincoln, clashed at a Nebraska Retirement Systems Committee hearing regarding a proposal to change annual contribution levels to the state's school retirement plan, depending on actuarial funding levels. The Lincoln senators vied for the committee chair position in January. (Zach Wendling/Nebraska Examiner) LINCOLN — Two Lincoln state senators clashed Friday at a hearing over a governor-backed priority to reconsider what to do with Nebraska retirement plans once they are fully funded, starting with schools. The proposal in question, Legislative Bill 645 by State Sen. Beau Ballard of Lincoln, seeks to lower annual contribution rates to the statewide school retirement plan for eligible teachers and school employees, excluding those in the Omaha Public Schools, who have a separate retirement plan. The initial bill, introduced at Gov. Jim Pillen's request, had received broad condemnation from the Nebraska State Education Association and teachers statewide, prior to a latest amendment that shifted the NSEA to neutral because it would lower the payroll deductions for employees, increasing take-home pay. State Sen. Danielle Conrad of Lincoln, the current Legislature's longest-serving lawmaker in her 11th year, repeatedly asked Ballard if lawmakers should pause given 'great risk and significant economic volatility.' She also pinned Ballard over whether he would have proceeded differently knowing the 'heartache' that teachers had over the version of LB 645 that he introduced on the last day of bill introductions without much heads up. Part of that opposition came because NSEA leaders described the bill as a 'raid' on the retirement fund, which Ballard and the governor's staff adamantly denied and said was never an option. 'If you had to do it over again would you proceed forward in such a haphazard and careless manner, or would you have clearer communication and more stakeholder buy-in?' Conrad asked. 'I disagree with your framing,' Ballard, chair of the Retirement Committee, responded. 'I was confident in my ability to bring stakeholders to the table and talk about a reduction for teachers, and I think that this is going to be a huge win.' The Lincoln senators faced the closest committee chair election on the first day of the 2025 legislative session for the Retirement Committee. After a 24-24 vote, Ballard prevailed over Conrad by one vote, 25-24. This is Ballard's first year on the committee, while it is Conrad's fifth. During Conrad's first stint in the Legislature, 2007 to 2015, she was part of a major 2013 compromise partly led by three key school organizations to keep the retirement plan afloat after rough economic downturns. Those compromises have since brought the school retirement plan from around 77.1% actuarially funded to 99.9% as of last summer, which led to LB 645. The retirement plan for judges is also fully funded, which Ballard told Conrad he is open to modifying. The school retirement plan is annually funded via contributions from: Teachers and other employees: 9.78% of payroll. Employers (school districts): 9.88% of employees' payroll. State of Nebraska: 2% of statewide school employee payroll. Statewide school employee payroll for this fiscal year was estimated to be about $2.5 billion. 'Not quite there yet': Nebraska teachers union now 'neutral' on proposed retirement tweaks When the plan requires more funding than legally required, the obligation falls on the state, which was the case in 2013. The compromise that year was championed in part by the NSEA, Nebraska Association of School Boards and Nebraska Council of School Administrators to provide long-term stability to the plan and lower the shortfall that the state needed to cover. The NSEA shifted its stance on LB 645 after a Feb. 13 amendment from Ballard was introduced to streamline stepped-down contributions for the state and employees to three tiers, based on whether the plan is less than 96% actuarially funded, 96% to less than 100% actuarially funded or fully funded. At 96% funding, the contributions drop to 0.7% of statewide school employee payroll for the state and 7.28% of payroll for employees. Once the plan is fully funded, the state would fully pull out of annual contributions, while teachers would remain at the 7.28% level. If the plan is less than 96% funded, contribution levels would return to the current levels. School districts are currently set at 101% of what employees contribute, equating to 9.88% of employee payroll. Ballard's amendment would lock that 9.88% contribution into law, foregoing a benefit to the school districts funded by property taxes or state tax dollars. Jeremy Knajdl, business manager for Minden Public Schools in central Nebraska, said employers would effectively pay the same portion of payroll taxes if LB 645 is adopted. However, he said employers would end up paying about 136% of what employees contribute under lowered contribution rates. The state would receive its modified contribution rate after the start of each fiscal year on July 1, but employees would get a new contribution rate after Jan. 1 of each year. Knajdl, representing the Nebraska Council of School Administrators, told the committee that this timing could be hard for some employees who go into winter break with one paycheck and then come back facing a 2.5% increase in required contributions, lowering their take-home pay. Colby Coash, a former Lincoln state senator representing the Nebraska Association of School Boards, said leaving the plan alone makes sense. 'It's always when things are good, pull money out, it changes, and then you're not able to be responsive to that,' Coash said. However, Coash said, if state and employee contributions are lowered, employers should receive an adjustment, too, which he noted would help lower property taxes. His legislative tenure between 2009 and 2017 crossed paths with Conrad and included the 2013 retirement compromise that both supported. 'The proposal that got us to where we are was three boats all rising,' Coash said. 'Now we're in a situation where that's a little off balance.' Ballard said employers were left out 'to maintain a certain level of funding.' 'I believe that this is a recruitment and retention piece for employers,' Ballard testified. State Sen. Rob Clements of Elmwood, chair of the Legislature's Appropriations Committee, asked whether the 2% state contribution increase passed in 2013 was meant to be for 'forever,' or 'until we fix the problem.' Coash responded that it was intended 'to get us out of the hole.' Clements' committee is leading efforts to fill a $457 million projected budget shortfall over the next two years. The committee preliminarily identified about $171 million in cuts and could use another $100 million in more revenue than initially anticipated in the next few months. State Sen. Margo Juarez of Omaha, a former paraeducator and former school board member for OPS, suggested cutting back on sending the Nebraska National Guard to the southern border could save money. She asked why 100% funded should be the threshold and not a 'greater cushion,' such as when the plan is 105% or 110% actuarially funded. 'Just because we're at 100%, to me, I just don't think that that should be the reason why we're doing this,' Juarez said. While the lower state contributions could be used toward the projected budget shortfall, Kenny Zoeller, director of the governor's Policy Research Office, reiterated the governor's stance that the freed-up dollars should remain separate and be used for state investments in education. Zoeller said the governor identified the dedicated education investments as a 'North Star' for the committee's continued work. Zoeller said it is an opportunity to be forward-thinking. Two other 'North Stars' for the governor, Zoeller said, are ensuring the financial longevity, growth and health of the school retirement plan while finding a proper balance in increasing teacher take-home pay and providing tax relief in state dollars. 'This bill is truly an exciting opportunity for the state to deliver wins for teachers and the taxpayer,' Zoeller said. Another contentious moment Friday came when Conrad pressed Ballard on whether the bill was 'retribution' for the efforts of the teachers union and other advocates the past few years to stop state 'voucher schemes.' About 57% of Nebraskans in November rejected using state dollars to help offset the cost of attending private K-12 schools. Ballard said 'that was never a consideration,' and Zoeller shook his head 'no' during the questioning. Conrad, an attorney, pushed further and asked if public records would confirm Ballard's position. He said any records involving his office would. Ballard said he, like other committee members, had received feedback from thousands of teachers statewide and interacted with more in person and over the phone. Conrad asked Ballard if he would personally publish his communications with the governor's office online. Ballard declined, describing them as 'private' communications. 'I have nothing to hide in this,' he added. Lawmakers' communications are shielded from records requests, but the executive branch does not have that same privilege. Tim Royers, president of the NSEA representing 26,000 public K-12 school teachers statewide, repeated that the LB 645 amendment was a 'step in the right direction,' but expressed openness to bringing employers to the table. Royers cautioned that the committee needs more information before acting and shouldn't 'rush.' 'My fear is in your quest to reduce an appropriation, I fear you're setting yourself up for a much larger gap in the future,' Royers said. Such changes to state retirement plans require an actuarial study before they can be enacted, to ensure the proposals are feasible. One such study was completed one week ago, but Royers said Friday it was a 'coin flip' to whether the state could afford the increased risk and volatility or if employees or the state could be harmed in the long run. 'I would love to live in a world where we could do a two-and-a-half percent increase in pay to our teachers, but I can't in good conscience advocate for that if the data tells me that 10, 15, 20 years from now we're going to actually see us go in the opposite direction,' Royers said. He continued: 'Absent additional information that tells us for sure this is a viable plan, no, we can't be comfortable moving forward with this.' Ballard committed to working with districts, administrators, the governor's team, teachers and his committee members to figure out how to move forward. On Friday, he identified LB 645 as a 2025 committee priority bill, increasing the chances it could be debated on the floor this year. The committee took no immediate action on the legislation. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Yahoo
13-03-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
‘Not quite there yet': Nebraska teachers union now ‘neutral' on proposed retirement tweaks
Tim Royers, president of the Nebraska State Education Association, leads a news conference highlighting 2025 priorities for teachers statewide. Jan. 28, 2025. (Zach Wendling/Nebraska Examiner) LINCOLN — Nebraska's teachers union will no longer oppose a governor-backed bill to tweak the state's school retirement plan, partly due to an amendment that could also benefit teachers. The Nebraska State Education Association formally shifted its stance this week, two months after urging caution and encouraging teachers statewide to speak out against Legislative Bill 645, which was introduced by State Sen. Beau Ballard of Lincoln at Gov. Jim Pillen's request. The bill would create stepped-down contribution levels from the state to the school retirement plan, depending on its actuarial funding level. As of July 1, the plan was 99.9% funded. If passed, LB 645 would drop the state's annual contributions toward the retirement plan based on statewide school employee payroll. Once the plan reaches 100% funding, the state would no longer automatically contribute year over year. A Feb. 13 amendment from Ballard proposes similar changes to teacher and other employee contributions depending on actuarial funding, which could save teachers money each month, helping lead to the changed NSEA position. 'I think this is a win-win,' Ballard said of the amendment. 'In my opinion, this is the teachers' money. It's a real-world take-home pay increase for teachers.' The amendment would also limit the modified state contribution levels to three tiers, instead of six as in the original LB 645. The teachers union had originally said the bill would 'raid' teacher pensions, which director Kenny Zoeller of the governor's Policy Research Office said was a 'flat-out lie' because LB 645 wouldn't touch 'hard-working dollars.' NSEA President Tim Royers, in a Feb. 20 emailed video to NSEA members addressing the Ballard amendment, credited his members for the change. 'We would not be here delivering this good news without you using your voice the way that you did, to help those lawmakers see that we need to build a better version of this bill that puts the educators of the state at the forefront of what it intends to do,' Royers said at the time. He described the amendment as 'version 2.0 of the bill.' The state currently contributes 2% of school employee payroll statewide to the pension plan, while employees contribute 9.77% of their salaries and school districts contribute 9.88% of their employees' salaries. This means that for the current fiscal year, with an estimated $2.5 billion payroll for school employees statewide, the required contributions would be: State of Nebraska (2%): $50.1 million. School employees (9.77%): $244.8 million. School districts (9.88%): $247.6 million. Zoeller said that the changes for the state would free up funds for education investments and are not designed to help plug a projected budget shortfall of $457 million prior to any legislative action. Royers has said it was OK for the state to reduce its contributions but that school employees and the teachers he represents should also be part of the conversation. Under Ballard's amendment, the plan would require different contributions at three levels of funding: less than 96% actuarially funded, between 96% and once the plan is 100% actuarially funded. When the plan is 96% or more funded, but not 100%, school employee contributions would fall to 7.28% of their salaries, and the state would contribute 0.7% of school employees' payroll. Once the plan reaches 100% funded, the state would pull out of funding. Lawmakers would continue to need to add funding in volatile years in which legally set contribution levels aren't enough to keep the plan afloat. Contribution levels would revert to current levels if the plan drops below 96% funded. Laura Strimple, a spokesperson for Pillen, repeated Pillen's firm stance that efficiencies can be found 'in all aspects of state government,' which she said includes the school retirement plan. 'With a nearly fully funded plan, the Legislature should decide how we can save taxpayer money and directly increase teacher pay,' Strimple said. Such changes to state retirement plans require an actuarial study on possible impacts. The study for LB 645 and its amendment was completed late last week, with actuaries writing that the changes would create more volatility and risk. The study does not specify a 'yes' or 'no' to whether the state could afford the changes. The full actuarial study on Legislative Bill 645 and its amendment is available here. Actuaries predicted the school retirement plan, if Ballard's amended bill became law, would be fully funded about 68% of the time, and at least 96% funded nearly three-fourths of the time. However, the actuaries also gave a 43% chance that the retirement plan could drop below 96% funding before 2035, and a 52% chance before 2045. This would return the 2.5% payroll fee to teachers in a given year, which the actuaries wrote could catch some employees off guard. 'Given the probability of such an event, it might be prudent to ensure members are fully aware of the likelihood of such an adjustment occurring to avoid a surprise on the members' behalf,' the study states. Royers said the study didn't provide all the information his union wanted about the proposal's viability and that a new review methodology left him and his team 'not quite sure, candidly, how to parse the data.' 'That's honestly one of the main reasons why we're coming in neutral,' Royers said Wednesday. 'We want to make sure that what we're doing is going to keep the plan sound for the next 10, 20 years, and we just don't feel that what that study said tells us one way or another.' Royers described the study as asking 'how much oil is in the car,' yet the response was about 'how the brakes are doing.' Ballard's bill and amendment would not decrease contribution levels for school districts, but Royers said there is some 'wiggle room' to bring districts to the table while benefiting the state and teachers. Doing so could lead to property tax relief, repurposing those payroll obligations toward teacher salaries or both, Royers said, and could be a win for communities on tax relief or educators on pay increases. Asked whether the bill could pair with a separate NSEA priority, LB 440, to cover 6 weeks of paid family and medical leave for all teachers during or after significant life events, Royers said it's possible. LB 440, the 2025 priority bill of State Sen. Ashlei Spivey of Omaha, would impose a 0.35% payroll fee on teachers, which school districts would also match, to cover the group benefit. The current estimated payroll this fiscal year for all school employees (not just teachers as under LB 440) would mean the state's 245 school districts, mostly funded through property taxes or state dollars, would need to cover about $8.8 million. This would be less if limited to teachers. 'Synergy is great when you have multiple bills, but we also recognize a bill could fail,' Royers said of the Spivey and Ballard bills. 'We don't want to build our plan around both bills passing.' Royers said he's confident that the NSEA, Ballard and Pillen can find a path forward on school retirement. 'We think ultimately we'll land on a good bill,' Royers said. 'We're just not quite there yet.' SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Yahoo
11-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Teachers praise bill for 6 weeks paid family, medical leave for all Nebraska educators
Tim Royers, president of the Nebraska State Education Association, center, talks about 2025 priorities for the teacher's union. Jan. 28, 2025. (Zach Wendling/Nebraska Examiner) LINCOLN — Sydney Jensen had scarcely taken a single day off of teaching in eight years before having her first child in 2020, often coming in sick to teach Nebraska students. She had saved eight weeks of paid leave, but as she faced postpartum depression, she felt returning would be devastating for her mental health, and the eight weeks weren't enough. 'In truth, I felt like I would not survive it,' Jensen said Monday. The federal Family and Medical Leave Act allowed Jensen to extend her leave to a maximum of 12 allowable weeks for significant life events, but the final four weeks came without pay, leading to financial strain, worsening her postpartum depression and creating hardships for her growing family. 'I thought I had done everything right,' Jensen said. 'But it still wasn't enough.'Jensen, a ninth grade English teacher, in Lincoln was one of many supporters to speak in favor of Legislative Bill 440 on Monday, seeking to establish an additional 0.35% payroll fee on Nebraska teachers, matched by local school districts, to cover long-term substitute costs for the first 6 weeks of teachers' leave under the federal Family and Medical Leave Act. For a teacher making $60,000, that's a monthly fee of about $17.50, according to the Nebraska State Education Association, advocating on behalf of more than 26,000 public school teachers. Federal law protects workers for up to 12 work weeks of unpaid leave in a year, such as for birth and bonding, adoption or foster care placement and serious personal or family health conditions. Teachers' salaries and benefits are already budgeted for each year, so LB 440 would protect 6 weeks of that federal leave before other accrued paid leave would need to be used. 'For less than $20 a month, we're gonna give teachers the peace of mind that if they need to take this leave, they won't have to worry about the financial hardship that accompanies it,' NSEA President Tim Royers told the Education Committee. No one testified against the bill. State Sen. Ashlei Spivey of Omaha, LB 440's sponsor, said she suffered severe postpartum depression but was lucky to have an employer who covered paid leave for three months. But she and many teachers said that isn't the same for frontline teachers who are helping to shape the next generation of students. An amendment Spivey offered to the committee would clarify that school districts would still need to pay teachers their full salary and benefits during the covered 6-week leave. Payroll contributions would also be used to cover the operating and administrative costs of the program. Thirteen states and Washington, D.C., have mandatory paid family medical leave laws, Spivey said. She modeled her bill off of similar teacher payroll contributions toward state insurance and retirement funds. Spivey noted that the union for most state employees also has negotiated 6 weeks of paid maternity leave, which takes effect July 1. She said her bill would promote long-term savings by reducing turnover costs through a sustainable, teacher-led funding model, with no state appropriations needed for the program. 'I would always argue that teachers are some of our most important industry and frontline workers,' Spivey said. 'They need competitive benefits, they need this … in order to be able to stay in the workforce [and] keep educating our future leaders and workforce.' Any surplus in the new leave fund exceeding 20% of projected annual needs would be transferred to a separate fund to focus on teacher retention and professional development. State Sen. Dave Murman of Glenvil, a former central Nebraska school board member and committee chair, asked Spivey if the bill was still needed after voters approved a minimum level of annual paid sick leave for all employees: at least 40 hours of paid leave, or 56 hours for larger businesses. State Sen. Jana Hughes of Seward, a substitute teacher and committee vice chair, said she appreciated the program being separate from state dollars. She asked what would happen if contributions weren't enough to cover the required substitute costs in a given year. Hughes noted LB 440 would increase costs on districts, which Spivey described as an investment that would supplement, not replace, local 'sick banks' to pool leave time. Spivey said the bill was drafted with past leave requests in mind to create the 0.35% payroll but said she would confirm what would happen in the scenario Hughes had described. Royers, as he did in January, said the legislation is the result of a fall survey of nearly 10,000 Nebraska teachers. The issue encompassed all types of leave, he said, not just maternity or paternity. 'We have a crisis of faith right now for teachers in Nebraska,' Royers said of the survey. 'Just 8% of our educators feel that this body takes them into account when it crafts education policy.' Nora Lenz, a Lincoln teacher with more than 30 years experience, said her parents were placed in a nursing home in the summer of 2019, and Lenz was with her mother Friday through Sunday so she wouldn't be alone, 150 miles away from Lincoln. In January 2020, Lenz's father fell ill, and Lenz said it was clear he was losing his will to live, and his condition got even more fragile in the face of the 'looming threat' of COVID-19. Early retirement wasn't an option for Lenz, and she couldn't afford to go without a salary, needing to support her children in high school and college. Her father was hospitalized, and Lenz's heart ached to be by his side and by her mother's side. 'To this day, I regret not being there with them sooner, before he was hospitalized,' Lenz said. Lenz said she held her father's hand when he took his last breath and was with him in the final days of his life, but told the committee she believes that had she been with him sooner, he might have lived just a little longer. Lenz's mother died 17 days later. Sheila Janssen said that she had a stroke in her brainstem on June 6, 2022, at 43 years old, and was in the hospital for nine days. She spent about five weeks in the hospital but, without enough sick leave, returned to school on the first day, on Aug. 10, 2022. 'I probably had no business being there,' Janssen said. 'But I was because I couldn't do it financially.' Jake Bogus of Lincoln, an eighth grade U.S. history teacher, said some families are facing scenarios 'almost like a Margaret Atwood novel,' trying to time pregnancies to use as little paid time off as possible or asking for donated time to care for their newborn children. Other testifiers said they were stuck with a choice: family or financial stability as they or loved ones faced cancer, hip replacements, foster care obligations or loved ones in hospice care. Many current and retired teachers said they felt guilty over the choice they made. Now at 32 weeks pregnant with her second child, Jensen has about 30 days of leave saved up from the past few years. However, she noted that one in seven new mothers will face postpartum depression, and her experience increases her future risk. Jensen said LB 440 would help address a system that is forcing 'impossible choices' and disproportionately impacting younger teachers and women, contributing to burnout and turnover. 'Teachers shouldn't have to choose between their families or financial stability,' Jensen said. 'LB 440 aligns Nebraska's education system with modern workforce needs and demonstrates that we value the well being of those who shape our children's futures.' The committee took no immediate action on LB 440. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
