BATON ROUGE — House Speaker Chuck Kleckley said todat that the governor's proposals to revamp pensions for thousands of rank-and-file state workers are on track for debate next week.



The bills are among Gov. Bobby Jindal's priorities for the legislative session, and they're set for a quicker hearing then such controversial measures usually get in session.



Kleckley said the House Retirement Committee is planning to give the proposals a hearing next week, similar to a plan for the companion Senate committee.



The House speaker said the House wants to make a decision on the retirement proposals before crafting its version of next year's budget, because Jindal's spending plans assume savings from the retirement changes. If those changes don't pass, or if they are scaled back, that would create a hole in the budget.



Jindal wants to increase the contribution rate charged to state workers for their retirement from 8 percent to 11 percent, to push the retirement age back to 67 for a person to receive full benefits, to calculate the monthly retirement payment on an employee's last five years of salary instead of three years and to create a new, cheaper type of pension plan for new employees.



The proposals wouldn't apply to public school teachers and law enforcement workers.



Supporters of the changes say they would help cut the costs of retirement programs to protect critical services and ensure the state can provide pensions to its workers. Opponents call the proposals illegal, by breaking contracts made with employees when they were hired.



"I haven't seen anything that supports the claim that it is a contract between the state and employee," said Kleckley, R-Lake Charles.



A procedural question about how to handle one of the bills remained undecided Tuesday.



When Jindal unsuccessfully proposed last year to increase the retirement cost to employees, then-House Speaker Jim Tucker declared the proposal was a payroll tax hike — and, therefore, would require a two-thirds vote on the House floor to pass. Jindal disagreed then and has said this year that none of his proposals would require the supermajority vote.



Kleckley, a strong Jindal ally, said he hasn't decided his position.



"We're still researching it and will make a determination soon," Kleckley said.



___



Online:



House Bills 53, 54, 55 and 56 can be found at www.legis.state.la.us