Permits an eligible retirement system member to receive, in lieu of an ordinary death benefit, a death benefit such member would otherwise be entitled to…

◆ The sponsor's argument

Why Luis R. Sepúlveda says this is needed

The Death Gamble is a draconian flaw within the retirement system for our state-paid judges. It dictates that the beneficiaries of a judge who, either dies in office, or before his or her retirement becomes effective receive a death benefit equal to three times the judge's aver- age salary during his or her final three years in office. However, once a judge reaches 60 years of age, his or her death benefit is reduced by 4% per annum up to a maximum of 40%.3 In other words, the death benefit of a judge who dies in office at the age of 70 is reduced to only 60% of three times the judge's average salary during their final three years in office. Neither the full, nor the reduced death benefits are as generous as the more substantial pension benefits the judge's beneficiaries would have received had the judge passed away while retired. As such, judges are forced to gamble that they can live long enough.to retire so that when they die, their families will be entitled to receive an adequate pension. Unfortunately, if a judge loses the Death Gamble and dies in office, it is the judge's family which suffers by receiving the necessarily smaller lump sum death benefit instead of a pension. By keeping this practice in place, we are effectively disincentivizing good judges from continuing to deliver justice and opting fcr minimal cost- saving at the expense of individuals who protect our democracy and the integrity of the law.' Legislation enacted in 2000 removed Death Gamble for thousands of police officers, fire fighters, and teachers, but specifically excluded members of the judiciary. Many judges enter service later in life and are therefore more prone to the Death Gamble. New York State judges, who are the cornerstone of our state's justice system, should not be excluded from the benefit options available to most other state employees. It is counterintuitive that such a workforce should not be able to die with dignity and justice. This bill permits an eligible retirement system member to receive, in lieu of an ordinary death benefit, a lump sum equal to the pension reserve that would have been established had the judge retired on the date of his or her death. This reform is supported by the entire justice system of New York, including bar associations and non-profit legal service providers. Nobody should have to gamble whether to continue to work and risk an untimely death at the expense of their beneficiaries' financial wellbeing, especially not workers who uphold our democracy.

This is the sponsor's own case for the bill, quoted from their memorandum. It is not Agora's description of what the bill does.