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. Comments not conforming to BLOG rules are deleted. Blog author serves as a moderator. For new topics or suggestions, email jlscoob5@gmail.com

Thursday, October 7, 2010

Newsline announcement of TCP1 changes

LLNL NewsLine
Changes to Defined Benefits contributions
October 7, 2010


Employees who selected the Defined Benefits retirement plan (TCP1) could begin making contributions to that plan some time during calendar year 2011.

Director George Miller made the announcement during his quarterly all hands meeting Wednesday. Miller announced the Defined Benefits (DB) Plan remains healthy, with a funding ratio of 122 percent assets to liabilities – the result of prudent stewardship under both UC and LLNS management.

However, since 2008 the plan’s asset performance has been almost flat, due to a weak economy, a volatile stock market and declining interest rates. At the same time, liabilities, as expected, continue to increase, due to an aging workforce with increasing years of service.

“As a result, liabilities will likely exceed assets,” Miller said.

In order to maintain the funded status of the DB plan, for the long term, the Lab is requesting DOE approval to begin TCP1 contributions in 2011.

While details still need to be worked out, Miller said the contribution strategy will be based on both Laboratory and employee contributions. Contributions will start in a way that avoids the challenges now being faced by UC, sister laboratories and others across government, Miller added.

Only those employees who selected TCP1 at contract transition will be affected; all other employees are enrolled in TCP2, the Defined Contributions Plan.

Contributions to the DB Plan will not affect participants in TCP2 plans.

25 comments:

Anonymous said...

So will the $75 Million that was "held back" by UC from the original transfer of funds be paid back BEFORE contributions begin?

Anonymous said...

Paragraph 3 from the Executive Summary of the UC Regents meeting held on January 17, 2008...

"The proposed agreement between the University and the DOE/NNSA governing the transfer of assets and liabilities from UCRP to the LLNS Plan substantially replicates the transfer agreement for the Los Alamos National Laboratory transaction with one exception. For the LLNS transaction, UCRP will retain $75,000,000 in excess of the amount of assets required to be retained under the Contract, which will represent the initial credit to a pre-funded reserve referred to as the “Contribution Reserve Amount.” The Contribution Reserve Amount, adjusted as provided in the agreements with DOE/NNSA, will provide the DOE/NNSA with an identified funding source to apply against any future funding obligations to the LLNL Segment."

Something smells like "creative financing"...

Anonymous said...

I invite all of the TCP1 folks to read the posts from the April 30th 2010 thread in the blog archive re: contributions. For those smug posters on that thread, how you are preparing your crow? Now you can see why so many of us took TCP2. My advice for TCP1 participants would be to assume everything out of George's mouth is a lie until proven otherwise.

Anonymous said...

You guys really need to read this and see your future.

http://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/news/article/23973

Anonymous said...

Looks like the guy or gal that said LLNS was going to follow UC model was right on the money just as they have been for the last 3 years or so.

http://llnlthetruestory.blogspot.com/2010/04/ready-for-contributions.html

Anonymous said...

You guys really need to read this and see your future.

October 8, 2010 7:43 AM

Well, it just means that UC will still have one of the most generous pension plans on earth, instead of the absolute fantasy plan UC employees have enjoyed for many decades. A small step towards the real world. All in all, it could be much, much worse.

Anonymous said...

To Oct. 8th, 7:07, you have to realize those who took TCP1 knew from the start contributions would be coming. Hoped it would be further down the road of course, but if you ask anyone who chose TCP1 if they have any regrets they'll probably tell you no, because TCP2 folks have been contributing towards their 401K and have watched it dwindle; at least these contributions, in theory, should pay off in the long haul. Seems to me you love to jump at the chance to pat yourself on the back for your TCP2 decision, when in reality you really have no idea if you made the right choice; just wishful thinking on your part.

Anonymous said...

October 8, 2010 6:50 PM

TCP-1 justice has finally been served. May the original 3% to 16%contributions that was talked about three years ago come true very fast.

Anonymous said...

The TCP1 pension at both LLNS and LANL will not last much longer in its present form. Sometime in the next few years, the liabilities will begin to grow to the point that both LLNS and LANS will "freeze-out" the pensions to preserve what they can of these pensions to service current and future liabilities.

Once the "freeze-out" occurs, you will no longer receive TCP1 service credit for your additional years of service. This will come down particularly hard on those staff members who have not yet entered their golden years of 50 and above.

Sorry to have to say this, but given the ultra-low fixed yields and the poor equity markets, it is only a matter of time until "freeze-out" occurs. The economic depression we are currently experiencing is likely to last for a decade and maybe even longer.

Be forewarned -- both LLNS and LANS will give you no hints about a "freeze-out" until right before it happens. Until that point, they will lie like crazy about their ultimate plans to resolve the pension problems.

Anonymous said...

October 8, 2010 6:50 PM
With the employer match and vigilant investment I have been turning a very nice profit. You, on the other hand, seem to be upset that you will now have to contribute to a pension plan which allows you no options whatsoever. Enjoy your sour grapes.

Anonymous said...

Hope your nice profit is still around when you're in your golden years. No sour grapes here!

Anonymous said...

When you make over a million per year plus bonus (like the NNSA "for-profit" lab Directors), you don't have to sweat stuff like this pension problem.

Upper level management at the NNSA labs must be rolling in lots of cash by now. The TCP1 pension is just 'chump change' for these guys. They are being well compensated to whittle down the salary and benefits of their employees at the weapon labs.

Anonymous said...

If You Had Any Doubt....


... that the government knows it is completely and totally ****ed, this should disabuse you of it.

Democrats in the Senate on Thursday held a recess hearing covering a taxpayer bailout of union pensions and a plan to seize private 401(k) plans to more "fairly" distribute taxpayer-funded pensions to everyone.

I called this one a long time ago, and unfortunately, I am sad to report that they're actually trying to figure out how to do it.

If there's a pitchfork moment in this country it had better show up fairly soon, because if this report is accurate you can bet that these clowns are going to find a way to attach this in some obscure section of a 2,000+ page "must pass" bill - another one of those "you have to pass it so you can read it" deals.

I hate it when I'm right. I hate it even more when tens of millions of Americans are going to get reamed to pay for the crimes of the handful on Wall Street, and their crony enablers in Washington DC.

And by the way - you don't hold hearings on something you don't intend to do.

http://market-ticker.org/cgi-ticker/akcs-www?post=168743

Anonymous said...

It's really sad to see the TCP-1 and TCP-2 participants taking "pot shots" at each other. Fact is, we both got screwed. It's also unfortunate that instead at taking pot shots at each other that we act as a single group to ensure we don't continue to get screwed.

Anonymous said...

I agree, we are all in this together, and anyone who thinks they know for sure they have made the right choice is dillusional. All we can do is hope we made the right choices, given the facts at the time.

Anonymous said...

October 13, 2010 10:54 AM
The web address you posted is for a conservative media outlet, Human Events. Anytime somebody cites a conservative or liberal media outlet I ignore it. They are all simply too biased to be trusted.

Anonymous said...

I retired from UC in 2006 but stayed on with LANS until 2007. I took TCP2 because I saw that TCP1 was a closed program and the issue of the "last" TCP1 retiree was a real one. I have never regretted my choice. As soon as possible after quitting LANS I transferred my TCP2 401k to UCRP, and have not regretted that either. Whatever happens to the UC pension program, they have always managed their retirement funds in an exemplary fashion. As long as I have access to that expertise, I will take advantage of it.

Anonymous said...

Does anyone really trust either LLNS or LANS with their pension for the next 20 to 40 years?

Nah, I didn't think so.

Anonymous said...

Oct 14,
I wasn't aware that once I retired from LLNS or LANS for all that matters, I could transfer my 401k in to my 403b under UC? I thought it was closed to any further additions? Anymore info on this subject would be most helpful to many I'm sure! I agree, nobody manages their funds like UC!

Anonymous said...

Oct. 15, yet you trust UC?? Don't you think UC, knowing DOE has agreed to cover you, will take DOE up on that offer? And then it will be NNSA we all need to trust in the next 20 to 40 years. Just a thought.

Anonymous said...

October 16, 2010 3:41 PM:

Any retirement fund (401k, 403b, IRA, etc.) can be rolled over into any other retirement fund you have. Tax and fee-free if you do it right. Fidelity will happily do this for you, although I found the insistence on signed paperwork a little bothersome. I moved my LANS 401k money to my UC 403b with only minor hassle. Call Fidelity.

Anonymous said...

October 16, 2010 7:57 PM:

I think you are confused. NNSA never agreed to cover UC retirees who retired from UC prior to the transition to LANL/LANS, which is what I did. NNSA has no influence or power over my UC retirement funds. Yes, I have placed all my eggs (well, those in my retirement funds, not those in other investments) in the UC basket. Based on almost 70 years of managing LANL and LLNL retirements, they deserve my trust, IMO.

Anonymous said...

I didn't realize that the LLNS and LANS 401k could be rolled over to my existing UC 403b. I've never heard anything about this from LANS.

LANS promised much great selection of funds for their 401k over time, but of course never delivered on the promise.

The UC 403b offers far more choices for working around the investment dangers in these current markets. Thanks for the tip, 9:28 pm!

Anonymous said...

Oct 18th, you are correct, sorry. I was referring to those who have frozen with UC, not for those who have already retired.

Anonymous said...

Did any of you know that you can as a LLNS employee under TCP-2 take your 403b and buy and annunity with it right now and have additonal income for the rest of your life and your spouse life plus if you pass away any remains going to your remaining famility even if you are not retired from LLNS yet, but you can not touch your 401k until you do.

Blog Archive