But after an hour of listening to them Monday, Republican representatives on the House Retirement Committee signed off on a controversial bill phasing out the unused sick-leave program with virtually no discussion.

Committee members voted 6-3 along party lines to send the bill to the full House.

After the disgusted gasp of the crowd and as dozens of workers filed out of the meeting, one said, "Well, there's always the election" - a not-so-veiled threat of retribution for legislators' brisk decision to dramatically change one of state employees' most prized benefits.

House Bill 213 would change the way state workers can use accumulated sick leave when they retire. Right now, state workers are allowed to exchange eight hours of leftover sick leave for one month of medical insurance benefits.

Under Santa Clara Rep. David Clark's plan, employees would have to deposit 25 percent of the value of their sick leave accumulated after Jan. 1, 2006, into 401(k) accounts and the rest would be transferred into medical benefits, but at a lesser rate.

Wayne Bulkley, a deputy warden, said he was told by state bosses to consider the sick leave a retirement benefit and he told his subordinates the same thing, calculating post-retirement medical benefits on a dry-erase board.

"It was a verbal contract reinforced by the highest levels of management in state government. No one ever told us this would change," he said. "How many people would have continued to work for the state had they known that this was just a carrot?"

But Clark argues new accounting rules that would force the state to list $220 million in workers' ''banked'' sick leave as a liability endangers Utah's credit rating. "We have to do something," he said.