After hours of hand-wringing and contentious debate, House members this week passed legislation that will phase out a longtime policy allowing up to 25,000 state employees to turn sick leave hours into post-retirement medical benefits.

In all that time, no legislator has mentioned a law passed in 1998 that gives former lawmakers 62 years old or older discounted or free health insurance if they were in office more than four years.

State workers are irked by the apparent hypocrisy of part-time lawmakers cutting full-time employees' benefits without touching their own. The Utah Public Employees Association has decided not to make an issue of the legislative perk for fear of a backlash.

But not all of them are keeping quiet.

Corrections employee Becky Woodhave says lawmakers are applying their cost-cutting zeal inconsistently. "I find it interesting that they are willing to cut the benefits of the state employees but not their own," she said.

Upon election, each lawmaker is eligible to pay for the state's generous health benefits program as long as they are in office. Lawmakers typically work overtime during the 45-day session, but most are then required to attend just one official meeting a month for the rest of the year.

Seven years ago, lawmakers adopted legislation that extends state medical benefits for former legislators of retirement age. The state will pay 40 percent of insurance costs for legislators who served for four years, 80 percent for 8 years of service and lawmakers who were in office for 10 years or more can get the benefits for free. After age 65, the state will pay the lawmaker's Medicare supplemental insurance. Lawmakers who leave office before they turn 62 can pay a monthly Cobra payment of about $800 for a family until they are eligible for the taxpayer- subsidized insurance.

Right now, more than 20 former legislators are using the health insurance benefit and nearly 30 others are making Cobra extension payments so they can access state medical benefits when they retire.

"Remind the senior legislators that their health care benefits are far superior to those given to state employees," one worker wrote in an e-mail to Salt Lake City Democratic Rep. Roz McGee. "If legislators are so concerned over costs, maybe they should begin by cutting their own benefits!"

Santa Clara Republican Rep. David Clark, sponsor of House Bill 213, says state employees are comparing "apples and oranges" when they size up the accumulated sick leave policy against legislators' retirement benefits. He says few legislators are using the "very narrow" retirement medical benefits.

"If all the state employees would like to sign up for the [lawmaker retirement program], this would solve the problem," said Clark, who is willing to cut the lawmaker benefit as well.

House Bill 213 phases out a longtime state policy that allows employees to trade leftover sick leave for medical benefits at retirement. Under the legislation, 8 hours of sick leave accrued before Jan. 1, 2006 could be traded for one month of insurance after retirement. But sick leave collected after next year would have to be deposited in a 401(k) account or transferred into benefits at a lesser rate. Senators will consider HB213 before the end of the 2005 Legislature.