Skip to main content

Duped into TCP1!

Image
By scooby
Contributed anonymously:

I went to EDD (employement developement department) to find out about unemployement should I get the axe. Well I am over 50 & choose TCP1 based in part on age factors @60 and the Q&A and being told over and over that there were no plans for layoff. Bad decision, if you get laid off from LLNS and then decide to take your retirement with LLNS you become inelegable for unemployement benefit or greatly reduced benefit. Had I taken TCP 2 and been laid off by LLNS and decided to retire under U.C. guess what, you are eligable for unemployment benefit. Hows that for the shaft!! I can tell you my measly pension is not enough to live on, but I want to preserve my medical benefit and do not wish to throw away 900+ hours of sick leave.

Comments

Anonymous said…
There were two good blogs of LLNL when all this started and you were told all the reason to not trust LLNS. You were warned to not trust what you read in the Newsline authorized by the blackwidow, but evidently you and 51% of LLNL did not listen.

Can I get you to take the time to read one of the best pieces of work that was published both on the LANL blog and the LLNL blog at the time people were making a choice between TCP-1 and TCP-2. It's on the side bar entitled " A Legacy destroyed".

I will also tell you this was sent into NNSA during the Q&A when they were asking for input. As you can see it never got published. Why? because it's the truth and they don't know how to tell the truth. It was also sent in for the Q&A for the 3161 and again it was not published.
4/24/2008 7:53 PM
Anonymous said…
"Had I taken TCP 2 and been laid off by LLNS and decided to retire under U.C. guess what, you are eligable for unemployment benefit."

In New Mexico, they include income from pensions, etc. in determining amount of unemployment you're entitled to. Unfortunately, many retirees with a lot of years of service, even with pensions reduced due to early retirement, would have pension income equal to or greater than the median family income in northern New Mexico. I don't believe they'd get very much in the way of unemployment from the State.
4/25/2008 6:40 AM
Anonymous said…
Unfortunately it hurts both, if you wait for the age factor you lose the medical benefit (if there is a medical benefit, which is doubtful, epecially under LLNS). That's why it probably would have made sense to take the lump sum. At least in my case I didn't take TCP 1. The whole situation is just sorry. I think every single person at the Lab was hurt, with the exception of ULM of course.
4/25/2008 7:01 AM
Anonymous said…
Moved from "GOT A NEW TOPIC"

"Had I taken TCP 2 and been laid off by LLNS and decided to retire under U.C. guess what, you are eligable for unemployment benefit."

In New Mexico, they include income from pensions, etc. in determining amount of unemployment you're entitled to. Unfortunately, many retirees with a lot of years of service, even with pensions reduced due to early retirement, would have pension income equal to or greater than the median family income in northern New Mexico. I don't believe they'd get very much in the way of unemployment from the State.
4/25/2008 4:12 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Plutonium Shots on NIF.

By scooby
Tri-Valley Cares needs to be on this if they aren't already. We need to make sure that NNSA and LLNL does not make good on promises to pursue such stupid ideas as doing Plutonium experiments on NIF. The stupidity arises from the fact that a huge population is placed at risk in the short and long term. Why do this kind of experiment in a heavily populated area? Only a moron would push that kind of imbecile area. Do it somewhere else in the god forsaken hills of Los Alamos. Why should the communities in the Bay Area be subjected to such increased risk just because the lab's NIF has failed twice and is trying the Hail Mary pass of doing an SNM experiment just to justify their existence? Those Laser EoS techniques and the people analyzing the raw data are all just BAD anyways. You know what comes next after they do the experiment. They'll figure out that they need larger samples. More risk for the local population. Stop this imbecilic pursuit. They wan...
155 comments
Read more

Trump is to gut the labs.

By scooby
The budget has a 20% decrease to DOE office of science, 20% cut to NIH. NASA also gets a cut. This will  have a huge negative effect on the lab. Crazy, juts crazy. He also wants to cut NEA and PBS, this may not seem like  a big deal but they get very little money and do great things.
124 comments
Read more

LLNL un-diversity

By scooby
Actual post from Dec. 15 from one of the streams. This is a real topic. As far as promoting women and minorities even if their qualifications are not as good as the white male scientists, I am all for it. We need diversity at the lab and if that is what it takes, so be it.  Quit your whining. Look around the lab, what do you see? White male geezers. How many African Americans do you see at the lab? Virtually none. LLNL is one of the MOST undiverse places you will see. Face it folks, LLNL is an institution of white male privilege and they don't want to give up their privileged positions. California, a state of majority Hispanics has the "crown jewel" LLNL nestled in the middle of it with very FEW Hispanics at all!
79 comments
Read more