The pressure is now on Gov. Dannel P. Malloy to persuade state labor unions to agree to concessions and demonstrate that getting a handle on the state’s pension problems truly involves shared sacrifice.

In a partisan vote, the legislature on Wednesday narrowly approved a deal that essentially refinances the cost of meeting Connecticut’s pension obligations. It spreads the burden over a longer period, eliminating budget-consuming balloon payments tied to the earlier and most lavish employee pension plans that are passing into history.

As noted in prior editorials, the deal reached between the governor and the leaders of the state employee unions makes fiscal sense. If nothing had changed, Connecticut would have faced in the early 2030s annual pension contributions approaching $6.6 billion. Given the total budget is currently around $20 billion, paying that obligation would have required massive cuts in programming and higher taxes.

Under the new arrangement, payments peak in the next few years at $2.2 billion, then drop to around $2 billion and stay there into the 2040s, before starting to shrink.

The deal provides a sense of fiscal sustainability, eliminating the uncertainty the state faced over how it would handle the massive payment obligations that had loomed in the future. For that reason it had the backing of the Connecticut Business and Industry Association and of the two credit rating agencies that assessed it.

But if taxpayers are asked to do their part by assuming this obligation over a very long period, state employees should be asked to do their part by negotiating reasonable concessions. After all, the vast majority of private-sector taxpayers supporting those pensions do not enjoy retirement plans nearly as generous. Many have no pensions at all.

Republicans voted against the deal, saying they wanted to see labor concessions before the refinancing plan was approved. In the Senate, where the parties split control 17-17, Lt. Gov. Nancy Wyman had to cast the tie-breaking vote to pass the measure 18-17.

In the House, the Democratic majority held together and approved the bill 76 to 72 (one Democrat voted against the deal and one Republican in favor).

First off, it was good to see a vote. Inaction for 30 days would have resulted in automatic approval. This matter was too important not to have a vote.

Secondly, the Republican position was understandable and could actually help lead to the desired outcome of shared sacrifice.

Yet, the state is probably better off that the GOP did not prevail in killing the refinancing plan. Rejecting the agreement was too risky. If the pension refinancing had been rolled into a concession package, it would have been subject to a vote by state employees. A “no” vote and collapse of the refinancing plan could well have led to a downgrading of Connecticut’s credit ratings, resulting in a higher cost of borrowing, and making businesses yet more jittery about the state’s fiscal health and its ability to meet its obligations without big tax hikes.

It was not worth the gamble.

Yet Republicans make a good point. With the financing of their pensions now better secured, will the state unions be motivated to offer significant sacrifices? In separating the refinancing from the wage and benefit discussions, Malloy expressed confidence he can find savings through concessions. More importantly, the governor has said he is prepared to propose alternatives to cut costs if state employee unions don’t agree to reasonable concessions. He may need that stick.

Some changes seem obvious, such as boosting to 4 percent of pay the contribution state workers make toward funding their pensions. According to the Connecticut Mirror, about one-quarter of state employees contribute nothing toward their pensions, most others pay only 2 percent.

The state also needs to end or significantly modify the practice of using overtime payments to pump up earnings, then basing pension calculations on those highest-earning, overtime inflated years. The state should calculate pensions on base pay.

With their votes, Republicans have placed the Democrats and the labor unions that often break political bread with them in a tough spot. If the administration fails to reach a deal, and cannot achieve the savings in another manner, Republicans, having rejected a refinancing plan without concessions, will have a ready-made issue for the next campaign.

Maybe that potential political outcome is the incentive needed to accomplish a deal.