BLOG purpose

This BLOG is for LLNL present and past employees, friends of LLNL and anyone impacted by the privatization of the Lab to express their opinions and expose the waste, wrongdoing and any kind of injustice against employees and taxpayers by LLNS/DOE/NNSA. The opinions stated are personal opinions. Therefore, The BLOG author may or may not agree with them before making the decision to post them. Opinions not conforming to BLOG rules are deleted. Blog author serves as a moderator. For new topics or suggestions, email jlscoob5@gmail.com

Monday, March 22, 2010

LANL TCP1

Anonymously contributed:

So, any predictions on what Mikey is going to say about tcp1 Tues at LANL?
1 or 2 or 3% contributions?

24 comments:

Anonymous said...

2 percent of first $106,800 salary; 4 percent of salary in excess of $106,800 up to $245,000. Effective April 19, shows in May 6 paycheck. Pension contributions are post-tax.

Anonymous said...

I'm told that Mikey said if one makes less than about $106K they will contribute 2% of their gross, on an after-tax basis. Over than amount, 4%.

He claims we (LANL TCP-1 employees) won't have to pay taxes on our pension income. This sounds incredible. (ie: not credible...is it?)

The plan is funded at 101%. Why is it reported that LLNL's plan is funded much higher than that?

Mikey said UC is funded at <100%...and backed by the State of California.

--LANL TCP-1 employee who got a report from a colleague because I wasn't there.

Anonymous said...

With the 4% contributions being capped for all salary amounts over $245,000, guys like Mikey and his highly compensated PADs and ADs will end up making out very well, indeed, with this scheme.

Mike, at about $1 million in salary with his bonus, will only pay the pension contribution for the first $245,00 (or about 25% of his total compensation).

His PADs and ADs will only pay the contribution on around the first 40% to 60% of their compensation, based on the fact that they all make well over $245k.

LANS working staff will then make up for upper managements lack of contributions on their total salary with the 4% contributions they will have placed on their *whole* salary (as most TSMs make less than $245k per year).

As usual, the guys at the very top appear to be looking out for the people who really matter in the LANS hierarchy... themselves!

Anonymous said...

The new taxes to help pay for TCP1 shortfalls that are going to be applied to projects and programs at LANL should do wonders to help grow and diversify the project base. Sponsors just love paying higher and higher rates to get less and less work done at Los Alamos.

And, remember... the 4% TCP1 salary contribution and the new pension taxes on programs are just for starters, of course. Given the ultra-low rates being issued on fixed income investments that support the TCP1 pension, you can expect that salary contribution rates and pension program taxes will rapidly rise in the next few years.

Eventually, of course, the lab pensions will be frozen like the pensions of most of corporate America. That freezing process will likely happen when UC decides to do likewise with their current pension. Given the lousy financial state of both California and the UC system, that pension freeze-out date is probably coming within 3 to 5 years. When it finally happens, LANS, LLNS and NNSA will justify it as being "substantially equivalent" with what happens out at UC. Workers in this country are all in a race to the bottom of the barrel.

Anonymous said...

Did everyone notice the way Mike Anastasio announced this sudden meeting on Monday afternoon and then held the meeting at 8:30 am the very next day? Neat, huh?

Anonymous said...

Of coursew you will have to pay taxes on your retirement income (IRS 1040 line 16b). Anyone who says otherwise is an idiot. Or maybe an idiot misunderstood what he heard.

Anonymous said...

Being linked with the promise of "substantially equivalent" to what happens out at a broken UC and the bankrupt state of California is starting to take on some fairly ominous connotations.

Of course, from NNSA's viewpoint: "It's ALL good!" They want to further reduce general contractor salaries and benefits.

And the outrageous LLC management profit fees?... well, I would not expect much NNSA concern for those types of things. There will be lucrative positions awaiting most of the NNSA bureaucrats who retire early and jump on the ol' Bechtel Bandwagon. Right, Tom D'Agostino?

Anonymous said...

You don't need to worry about Mike's LANS pension. He got the special deal of 'executive pension insurance' from UC when he placed his big, fat ass on the LANS team. No matter what happens to the TCP1 pension in the future, he's covered for his full amount.

Perhaps Mike's HAPC for his TCP1 pension payout should be held to $245,000 - same as the new 4% salary contribution cap? Nah, that's crazy talk. It would never happen!

Anonymous said...

My biggest issue is the flat rate for salaries above $106,800 up to $245,000. Just like the corporate "fat cats" that we bailed out, Mikey obviously protected his Upper Level Management and Becthel boys here, particularly for the plus $200,000 club. In addition, Mikey (and his Board) indicated that he went forward on this without any allocation commitment from NNSA. I would have thought the contribution rates would be based on any NNSA contribution funding shortfall which is an unknown. He's forcing their hand, what if they don't deliver? Stay tuned, we haven't heard the last of this fiasco.

Anonymous said...

Of coursew you will have to pay taxes on your retirement income (IRS 1040 line 16b). Anyone who says otherwise is an idiot. Or maybe an idiot misunderstood what he heard.

Umm, the very reason there are distinct lines 16a and 16b is that not all of one's pension is necessarily taxable. Only an idiot would think that our post-tax contributions would be automatically taxed again.

Anonymous said...

Mikey and the top 18 all have their own pension and deals. The UC gang all have sweet deals based if they had stayed in UC ( See 2006 Regents meeting minutes around transition). The 2% applies to the first $106800 and then 4% on the amount above $106800.

Anonymous said...

My goodness, with 4% salary contributions to TCP1, my last 4 years of lab raises are completely wiped out!

I wonder what other types of salary "contributions" LANS is planning to help pay for lab health care and other benefits?

Anonymous said...

Let it be known that your LANS executive management team feels your pain!

In fact, we plan on offering free extra large weenies at this summer's LANS 'Love Fest' to help moderate the loss.

Anonymous said...

The contribution rate actually tops out at 3.12% of salary for someone making $245k. That would be 2% of first $106800 plus 4% of ($245000-$106800).

Anonymous said...

So when is LLNL director going to tell it's shelter little TCP-1 over stuffed pension holders their time to start contributions coming soon. hell, one more cut in pay won't hurt these people anyway.

Anonymous said...

At least not until UC requires contributions, and maybe not even then since the LLNS fund is in better shape. UC and the State of California aren't looking so good these days. Hope things pick up soon for all of us.

Anonymous said...

UC and the state of California are looking pretty bleak in economic terms.

Once UC decides to freeze the UCRP to solve their growing pension problems, DOE's "substantially equivalent" clause will kick in and TCP1 will also be frozen.

I give it only a couple of more years until this freeze-out of the UCRP and TCP1 pension happens.

Anonymous said...

I give it only a couple of more years until this freeze-out of the UCRP and TCP1 pension happens.

March 31, 2010 7:39 PM

I'd be more worried about the state raiding the UC pension funds to bail out the failing state budget. Any provisions in place currently to prevent this can and will be overturned if the crisis continues.

Anonymous said...

April 2, 2010 9:01 PM

There's nothing to raid, so there's not much to worry about but 150% funded TCP-1 now that's a great target.Letter's to the state talling them of this gold mine have been sent. There are poor people out there that need help and what better way to do your duty than yo give up your riches.

Anonymous said...

Wow, give it up already. It is obviously eating you up inside to see TCP1 so well funded, but who is to say how long that will last. It needs to stay well funded to support those who took a chance with LLNS and decided not to go with UCRP. If UCRP were well funded you would NOT see the TCP1 folks writing letters asking for that money to be used to bail out the state. Lets all work towards the same cause, that being we all have a decent pension to live on years from now.

Anonymous said...

Not to worry, UCRP was also well funded until Parsky was appointed to the UC Board of Regents. His term there is ended now and he has moved on to greener pastures.

Anonymous said...

Parsky was the guy who fired the excellent URCP financial manager UC previously had and then saw to it that his Wall Street cronies got appointed to the job.

What happened next? Well, the cronies put pension money into "investments" like Enron and the UCRP started on a long, downward spiral in returns.

Today, the TCP1 pension is being managed by LLNS LLC and the wise folks at Bechtel who serve on the LLC board. You can sleep well at night knowing they are carefully watching your pension assets, right?

Anonymous said...

You can sleep well at night knowing they are carefully watching your pension assets, right?

April 7, 2010 9:26 PM

Oh, yeah, they're watching them all right, like the fox watches the hen house.

Anonymous said...

April 7, 2010 9:26 PM

You forgot to mention that Parsky now sits on the Board of Governors for both LANS and LLNS where he can continue to protect the retirement investments of their respective employees.

Blog Archive