Pennsylvania should offer early retirement, Wagner says
HARRISBURG -- Pennsylvania's cash-strapped government could save up to $381 million a year by offering retirement incentives to state employees, Auditor General Jack Wagner said Tuesday.
The figure is a projection based on $1.5 million Wagner saved in his department through voluntary retirements agreed to by 7.5 percent of his workforce, he said.
A spokesman for Gov. Ed Rendell said such a plan might work on a small scale in Wagner's office but, if implemented statewide, would force new hires to fill the positions of retirees.
The proposal "could potentially wind up costing the state more money, not less," said governor's spokesman Gary Tuma. "Our lack of control over who leaves produces significant risks."
Wagner, a Democrat, almost weekly offers suggestions on ways the state can save money to help close what he predicts will be a $4 billion to $5 billion deficit next year.
Because of that anticipated budget deficit, he said, "it's time to institute a voluntary retirement incentive program that would shrink the state payroll and reduce the cost of state government to taxpayers."
During two recent gubernatorial debates, Republican Attorney General Tom Corbett, the front-runner in polls, said he would consult Wagner's audits to help cut the cost of state government.
If Corbett wins, "we're going to dust off audits that Gov. Ed Rendell has had on the shelf," spokesman Kevin Harley said. Wagner's voluntary retirement incentive program "is certainly something we'll look at and review and discuss in further detail" with him, Harley said.
Democratic candidate Dan Onorato, the Allegheny County executive, has said little about Wagner's audits, which include Department of Public Welfare and grant programs, no-bid contracts and the state's vehicle fleet.
Onorato "intends to look at every serious proposal to save money as part of his plans to improve efficiency, streamline government and save taxpayers money," said his spokesman, Brian Herman. "As a former county controller, he has conducted audits himself and has experience implementing such reforms to ensure funds are spent wisely and effectively."
Wagner, a former state senator from Beechview, was a candidate for governor in the Democratic primary. He finished second to Onorato and ahead of two others. His term as auditor runs through January 2013.
Wagner offered his employees a one-time buyout in July. Those who chose to retire received $1,000 for each year of service, capped at $25,000. Fifty people in his 665-person workforce retired.
About 77,000 state employees serve under the governor's jurisdiction. Their average compensation in salary and benefits is $70,478.
After paying incentives, the state could save $37,200 per employee during the first year, Wagner said. That savings would almost double the second year if no one is rehired, he said.
He projected the state could save $201 million the first year, and up to $381 million the second year. Those are conservative numbers, he said, because they do not include thousands more state employees in the judiciary, Legislature and independent agencies.
Wagner said the governor could enact the voluntary retirement incentive, without legislative approval, if he obtains agreement with state employee unions as Wagner did with the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.