COLUMBIA - State employees, already burdened by job cuts, higher insurance premiums and a few years without raises, now are worried a relatively new retirement benefit could be cut.

The Teacher and Employee Retention Incentive program was created in 2000 to keep experienced educators in schools, but it covers all state employees.

Under the program, state employees can retire after 28 years and continue to work for up to five years while putting their retirement pay into a special savings account.

Critics say the program keeps mediocre employees along with the good ones. They also say it keeps older workers in their positions longer, preventing promotions for younger employees. And some lawmakers say it costs too much.

Sen. Greg Ryberg, R-Aiken, is one lawmaker who wants a change. Just one element - accrued annual leave - will cost the state $85 million extra over five years, he said. When an employee retires, he is paid for any annual leave he has built up - up to 45 days. When an employee enters the incentive program, he can accrue another 45 days of leave.

The annual leave issue is a problem, admits John Robinson, legislative consultant with the S.C. Association of School Administrators and executive director of the S.C. Association for Rural Education. Robinson has studied the TERI program. He recommends eliminating the second payout of the 45 days' annual leave and says most educators are OK with that modification.

Robinson says the program can slow younger employees trying to get ahead but that older employees are needed to add experience and knowledge. "It slows the process of promotion, but it also helps the agency in hard times," he said.

A common complaint among critics is how program participants are chosen. Gov. Mark Sanford said one of his biggest concerns was that employees decide whether they will participate, making budgeting virtually impossible.

Ryberg introduced legislation last year to end the incentive program. The bill is expected to be taken up when lawmakers return to Columbia in January.

Rep. Herb Kirsh, D-Clover, also has filed a bill to phase out the program and a backup bill that would eliminate the provision giving participants more annual leave.

"I really, truthfully, honestly think it needs to go," Kirsh said. "I think it's going to break the retirement system in a few more years."

A commission created by Sanford to study waste in government agreed. The Management, Accountability and Performance Commission recommended eliminating the program because of its costs.

Sanford said it's unlikely lawmakers will dismantle the program in an election year, but it could be modified.

"There is rightfully a lot of angst from state employees given the difficult times this year. Any alteration we would make would have state employees in mind," Sanford said. Still, he added, "An important part of looking out for state employees is having a government that runs well."