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

Monday, January 3, 2011

Lawsuit by LLNL retirees.

Anonymously contributed:

New York Times Story covering the court case pertaining to LLNL Retiree's benefits:

A former scientist said of LLNS:

Lawrence Livermore National Security is “a business fiction with no real assets"


Anonymous said...

Good article. I've honestly had no doubt that LLNS would eventually roll up operations, leaving as many people out in the cold as they possibly could. Top management, of course, would be exempt.

Anonymous said...

He is a counter suggestion..

Current LLNL employees arrange that each PEP incentive this year is held in abeyance pending satisfactory resolution of the retiree medical benefits from the DOE shell corporation.

About $9M and almost all of LLNS senior management 2011 bonuses would then be on the table.

Anonymous said...

For the counter suggestion to work, everyone has to know about it. How are you planning on getting the word out? And please dont say this blog.

Anonymous said...

"...For the counter suggestion to work, everyone has to know about it. How are you planning on getting the word out? And please don't say this blog..."

Fishing by OPSec?

Anonymous said...


Anonymous said...

A 'must read' NY Times article. It's time for all lab retirees and current lab employees to fully grasp the corrupt shenanigans being executed by the so-called "partners" in the Frankenstein for-profit LLC creations that now run the NNSA labs. Do you really trust your future lab pension and medical benefits to Bechtel? Really?

From the NY Times article, I found this passage most interesting:

At Livermore, L.L.N.S. took a hard line with the retirees almost from the beginning. The health-plan “rules have been changed at the convenience of the organization every year,” Mr. Davis said. Assurance of coverage “substantially equivalent” to U.C. was downgraded to an “industry standard” in 2008. In 2009, L.L.N.S. claimed the right to discontinue benefits at any time.

“One wouldn’t want to be 85 and coping with this,” Mr. Davis said.

The retirees say they tried to discuss their concerns with the U.C. president, Mark Yudof, and university general counsel, but were rebuffed. Appeals to local elected officials and the Regents went nowhere, they say.

Lawrence Livermore National Security is “a business fiction with no real assets,” Mr. Davis said. Information on it is scant. Its spokeswoman did not respond to requests for comment. Its annual report noted 2009 “costs” of $1.5 billion but offered little other financial information. (It did, however, trumpet saving $1.8 million in pension and benefits costs last year.)

Given the corruption shown by both NNSA and their LLCs, is it any wonder that DOE would suddenly make up rules that claim they can now freeze contractor salaries for years into the future?

Anonymous said...

Not this BLOG?
what do you suggest Einstein?

Anonymous said...

I wonder how NNSA lab retirees will feel if their UCRP pension payments are cut back during their golden years?

Think it can't happen? Apparently some of the "bankrupt" states like CA and IL are already thinking about it in private! Promises and contractual rights seem to mean nothing in today's crazy and corrupt world.

Path Is Sought for States to Escape Debt Burdens

NY Times, Jan 20, 2011

Policy makers are working behind the scenes to come up with a way to let states declare bankruptcy and get out from under crushing debts, including the pensions they have promised to retired public workers....

Bankruptcy could permit a state to alter its contractual promises to retirees, which are often protected by state constitutions, and it could provide an alternative to a no-strings bailout. Along with retirees, however, investors in a state’s bonds could suffer, possibly ending up at the back of the line as unsecured creditors.



Submit candidates for new topics here only. Stay on topic with National Labs' related issues. All submissions are screened first for ...