Skip to main content

Changes to TCP1?

Image
By
I've heard this from a few people (who may have heard from the same source) that LLNS is making changes to TCP1. The rumored change is that your retirement salary will no longer be based on your highest 3 years of salary, but will instead be based on your last 3 years of salary. Has anyone else heard this and is there anything written as proof?

Comments

Anonymous said…
I heard it from someone in HR.
Does it really make a difference if it is the last 3 years or the highest 3 years. For most of us, all years will be substantially the same.
9/29/2009 8:15 PM
Anonymous said…
It would make a difference if you seperated, stayed out for a year and then came back and had to accept a lower salary. I know some people left LLNL for a campus job at a lower salary because they needed years of service and age. With UC it wouldn't matter as much because it is the three highest years, not the last three.
9/30/2009 5:29 AM
Anonymous said…
8:15

I agree with you, however I'm more concerned as to the motives in LLNS for the change. Are they probing to see how much they can change TCP1 from UCRP and still call it "Substantially Equivalent."

The last summary report on TCP1 from earlier this year had it well overfunded, and unlike UCRP in no need of additional contributions from either LLNS or employees.

TCP1 began 2009 with $1,305,923,996 in assets (fair market value estimate) compared to $882,891,334 in pension liabilities. About 47% overfunded.

So why make this change?
9/30/2009 6:23 AM
Anonymous said…
Well yes, it makes a difference, because it allows them to make adjustments as you get closer to retirement, lowering your pension to save them money. I'm not saying they would do that but it gives them the ability to. Most who are close to retirement would be fools to leave after putting in so many years, so basically they will have no choice but to take what they are given, which may be less than expected if this rumor is true.
9/30/2009 7:30 AM
Anonymous said…
LLNS are opening themselves to a lawsuit, in this case and will be in violation of the contract.
Since, they are an LLC, they can just dissolve and leave NNSA holding the bag!
That is what our smart congress people that voted to privatize did not think about!
9/30/2009 7:51 PM
Anonymous said…
I'm sure Lynn Soderstrom is staying up late figuring out ways how to screw each of us, personally.

crafting some scheme to take a benefit away from TCP-1 people would be a perfect way for her to get multiple screwjobs for the effort of one....
9/30/2009 11:37 PM
Anonymous said…
Many American corporations are currently cutting severance down to only two weeks right before they execute a big layoff. Working at some means of cutting back at your TCP1 pension benefits right before retirement would fit into the same mold. This is America, after all. We invented Bernie Madoff and big corporate crooks like AIG and Enron.
10/02/2009 8:37 PM
Anonymous said…
September 30, 2009 6:23 AM

The state needs help. What a great place to come get some funds to bail out the state. I say go for it.
10/03/2009 6:26 AM
Anonymous said…
What could make this significant is that the new job classification scheme will actually allow for salaries to be lowered: the days of pumping up your salary as a manager, then dropping back to being an individual contributor (with an inflated salary) are over. For most, though, this change isn't significant.
10/03/2009 11:42 AM
Anonymous said…
The other tactic that LANS here at Los Alamos has resorted to is to force (with no warning or process) engineers and scientists into absolutely crappy facility jobs. Many of these people have quit the Lab and moved-on thereby saving LANS money to direct into upper management's pockets. Brett Knapp (you guys know him) has fired or transfered over 200 people back here at Los Alamos. There has been no business reason for these transfers other than Brett exceeding his 5% PBI goal and stuffing more money in his and Mikey's pockets. Mikey also just promoted and recognized Brett for this achievement and appointed him to lead the design physics Division. Yeah appointed, no job advertisement.
10/04/2009 8:17 AM
Anonymous said…
Your manager: "You have two choices: retire now based on you current salary or be demoted and get a lower retirement later"
10/04/2009 2:07 PM
Anonymous said…
reduction in salary is coming our way it would seem.
10/05/2009 7:50 AM
Anonymous said…
You all didn't really believe that NNSA's "substantially equivalent" promise would be kept, did you?
10/05/2009 8:16 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