Curb the state's retire-rehire fiasco

In a year when Gov. Gary Locke makes speeches about the need to restore public trust in government, anecdotes support the most cynical stereotypes of state workers.

A law intended to help lure educators out of retirement to stem the teacher shortage has turned into a way for some state workers to get a raise at a time when the state can ill afford the extra expense.

Sen. Karen Fraser, D-Olympia, is right to push legislation quickly to stop the use of the program for those wanting to fatten their paychecks at taxpayer expense while foreclosing opportunities for other qualified candidates.

Two years ago, the Legislature made changes that increased the number of hours state employees could work while still receiving retirement benefits. The change was requested by the governor and state Superintendent of Public Instruction Terry Bergeson, who wanted to entice qualified retired teachers to take hard-to-fill jobs in math, science and special education and in smaller communities.

Because some state jobs were facing shortages, the program was expanded to other state jobs.

During the first year, more than 1,000 employees from the state's two oldest retirement systems retired and were rehired.

Unfortunately, the changes did not require proof the positions were hard to fill. Sunday, The Seattle Times reported that two top managers in the state Code Reviser's Office were able to boost their incomes simply by "retiring," taking a month off work and then resuming their old jobs. The positions were never advertised, and the employees didn't even have to clean out their desks. When they returned, they were able to pull their salary and a pension for nine months of the year.

The pensions can be as high as 60 percent of the average of the worker's two highest-paid years.

Fraser's bill would minimize abuse of the well-intentioned program. It would require a 90-day break between retirement and returning to work; that all positions be advertised; each agency develop a retire-rehire policy, and the agency's chief give official approval.

Meanwhile, the Washington School Personnel Association, the Washington School Directors Association and the Washington Association of School Administrators are drafting voluntary guidelines to protect this tool for school districts.

That effort should be commended, but a legal solution with accountability measures, such as that proposed by Fraser, is necessary. Some state employees have taken this well-intentioned program too far.