Pension headache

Dems bid to undo Cuo cost savings

State lawmakers are looking to fatten pensions of the most recently hired government workers by undoing reforms that were approved to control runaway costs.

The rollback would cost New Yorkers $149 million in retroactive costs dating back to 2012 — when a law pushed by Gov. Cuomo went into effect. And it would cost state and local governments a combined $19 million a year.

The legislation would repeal portions of the Tier 6 pensions agreement covering the class of public employees hired after 2012.

Workers with higher salaries under Tier 6 would be required to kick in more toward their pensions — from 4.5 percent for those making over $55,000 to 6 percent for those making over $100,000.

Under current law, the basic pension is 35 percent of final average salary plus a 1.75 longevity multiplier for the first 20 years of service and 2 percent for years after that.

The governor had boasted at the time that the changes would save New York City, other municipalities and state government $80 billion over a 30-year period.

Based on that formula, Tier 6 workers would still earn a pension worth 55 percent of their final average salary if they worked for 30 years, which Cuomo said was fair. That’s down from 60 percent of the final average salary for workers.

But the boost in the basic final average salary — excluding longevity — would increase from 35 percent to 40 percent under the changes proposed by two Brooklyn Democrats, Assemblyman Peter Abbate and state Sen. Andrew Gounardes.

Workers would also be eligible for 2 percent longevity pay after 25 years of service.

That would bump up the pensions for 205,020 eligible retirees —a third of the state and local government workforce.

“I voted against it,” Abbate said, recalling the 2012 budget vote on pensions. “I thought it was horrible . . . trying to balance a budget on the backs of the working men and women of our state and city . . . Calculate if someone is making $50,000 a year, or $45,000 a year, you go back, [see] how much their pension will be in 30 years. They’ll be on food stamps if you keep it at that rate.”

In their bill memo, Abbate and Gounardes claim it’s “harder than ever” to recruit workers for direct care like home health aides and those in the medical field.

But David Friedfel of the fiscal watchdog group Citizens Budget Commission argued the bill should be rejected.

“Not only is it a sweetener, it’s retroactive . . . $149 million in retroactive costs and $20 million per year in ongoing costs,” Friedfel said. “Plus, it’s disingenuous to talk about pension reform and then go back and change it when the economy looks good.”

He also said Albany pols shouldn’t pile up additional costs amid “economic headwinds, potential trade wars and only $3 billion in the state’s rainy-day fund.”