So if they were in a defined contribution plan (as in the "other plan" mentioned in the article), they'd be able to draw on the money in that plan by this point

So if they were in a defined contribution plan (as in the "other plan" mentioned in the article), they'd be able to draw on the money in that plan by this point in their lives yet still work. I'm not sure this is even morally questionable. Sure, the state of Washington may have underfunded their retirement plan, but that's poor planning, not necessarily these guys' problem. Couple this with the fact their defined contribution plan didn't exist for most of these people when hired, I really don't see that this is a moral problem. Sure, the state may wish to change the law to make it harder to do, but that's just changing the law to make it easier to fund the pension, it's not a morality issue.