Plans to significantly change the pay and classifications for thousands of Nevada state employees is likely on hold because of the uncertain budget situation.

State officials had eyed rolling out a new pay and classification system in fiscal year 2027 based on recommendations from a study that concluded last year. The plan would have seen a significant increase in the number of employees being considered “unclassified” — a designation typically reserved for leadership and political appointees — consolidation of job titles and an overhaul of salary bands and steps, likely resulting in pay raises for many workers.

But rollout of the system would have required between $35 million to $40 million that would need to be approved by the Legislature to cover the expected pay increases, said Jack Robb, the state’s chief innovation officer. Not all state positions that could be affected by the plan are funded through the general fund.

With legislators largely focusing on maintaining existing programs because of the state’s economic uncertainty, there’s little chance that they would approve this funding, kicking the project down the road, Robb said.

“It’s on the back burner because we don’t think it’s gonna get funded,” he said in an interview.

The expected delay also means that the study — which focused on market averages for state positions — would need to be updated before any changes could be made. The state previously agreed to a $450,000 contract with the Las Vegas-based Simmons Group to conduct the study.

“We’ll have to dust it off in two years,” Robb said.

Because the recommendations do not call for newly funded positions — only the reclassification of roles and changes to employee pay structure — they do not need approval from the Legislature, Robb said. Instead, they must be approved by the Human Resources Commission, a five-member body appointed by the governor.

The topic has been largely absent from this year’s legislative session, aside from a 15-minute discussion in a January Interim Finance Committee (IFC) meeting, leaving state workers and lawmakers largely in the dark about its status.

Assembly Speaker Steve Yeager (D-Las Vegas) told The Indy that he did not recall the study being completed and had not heard anything about the rollout.

“We probably wouldn’t be able to afford it anyway,” Yeager said.

Details on the plan

The study originated from 2023’s AB451 and concluded last year, with recommendations presented during an IFC meeting in January. The Indy also obtained the study’s findings report, which is marked “confidential” and was sent to agency leadership earlier this year.

It proposed a new state pay system with 21 salary bands, each with 12 steps. A step increase would represent a 5 percent salary jump.

Under the new system, positions would be assigned to salary bands based on the market data for similar roles, with the midpoint of each band corresponding to the median salary for corresponding roles in the market.

Click here to view the proposed salary table, by annual and hourly pay.

To gather the market averages for state positions, the Simmons Group collected pay data from various sources including the Department of Labor and data from other state governments. The group then determined the 10th to 90th salary percentiles for state positions with a market equivalent.

These recommendations were meant to bring more consistency to the state’s pay structure.

For example, there are several salary band/step combinations with the same pay, as well as inconsistent salary increases between steps and differing pay ranges across a single step. Under the new system, the highest salary in a single band would be about 70 percent higher than the lowest salary in that band, while the current system has ranges spreading anywhere from 37 percent to 53 percent, according to the confidential findings.

Additionally, the recommendations called for consolidating more than 2,000 job titles to fewer than 700 designations, which officials hope would streamline hiring processes. The study also recommended that classified employees who were managers be moved to the unclassified designation, an “at-will” employment designation that is typically reserved for appointed positions and comes with fewer job guarantees.

“This new classification structure is created so each job classification is distinctly different from each other, with clear criteria between the level of work performed and responsibilities within the same job series,” the recommendations said.

Click here to see the market ranges for equivalent state positions, and which positions would be considered unclassified.

In a statement, Nalani Page, a state employee and member of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees Local 4041 (AFSCME), said the union is “heartened to see this study seriously taking a look at our compensation as state workers.”

“We look forward to working with the state in the future to put these findings into practice and collaborate on recruitment and retention of quality employees for the State of Nevada,” the statement said.