ANOYMOUSLY CONTRIBUTED:
Employee benefit cuts at ORNL; no word yet on voluntary departures
As part of the announcement back in September that the lab was looking to cut up to 350 jobs to prepare for budget shortfalls and perceived tight budgets in the future, ORNL Director Thom Mason said management would also be evaluating changes in employee benefits as a way to reduce costs. At the time, he said the lab didn't want to proceed too quickly because there could be ramifications on recruiting, etc.
On Monday, however, Mason announced to staff that the Dept. of Energy had approved UT-Battelle's decision to suspend matching contributions to employee 401(k) savings plans for non-bargaining unit employees and also make changes in the paid leave policy to better position the lab for the future. The timing of the announcement apparently was to let that info be known for employees considering a voluntary departure program (deadline for applications is tomorrow, Nov. 16). The number of volunteers will determine, in part, the number of layoffs to come later.
"We continue to seek effective ways of streamlining the Laboratory's operations, reducing our overhead costs, and controlling the cost of benefits," Mason said in the memo to staff. "Additional changes to the benefits package are under consideration, and details will be announced as soon as possible. As always, your support and continued commitment to ORNL and its mission will be vital to our future success."
The amount of money saved on the 401(k) matches -- about $1M a month -- will be applied to the contractor's pension liability, Mason said.
"We regret having to take this action, but our analysis indicates that it is necessary to meet our funding obligations without further negative impacts on staff or programs. We will restore competitive matching contributions to the 401(k) savings plan when business conditions improve, although the percentage of employee contributions that we elect to match may change," he said. "We will assess the Laboratory's financial situation before December 31, 2012, and make a decision on reinstatement and structure of our matching contributions going forward."
Mason also said at the beginning of 2012 there would be a new work shift for exempt staff to give more flexibility in workload demands and personal responsibilities.
"Also beginning Jan. 2, 2012, we will replace our current policies on sick leave and personal leave with a paid leave policy, providing exempt (monthly) employees with 3 days per year and non-exempt (weekly) employees, who are not eligible for the Business Quarter shift, with 6 days per year for occasional absences associated with illness, injury, or personal business," the lab director wrote.
He said these changes, which won't affect vacation, jury duty, funeral leave, or short-term disability policies, are expected to bring savings of about $3.4 million annually
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts you viewed tbe most last 30 days
-
LGBT intolerance problem at Sandia? I was just checking glassdoor.com and noticed several comments suggesting intolerance to LGBT at Sandia...
-
So did you SSVSP and why? Give details.
-
“Raise a concern, get blackballed then lose your job and benefits…” “…instead of raising your concerns just leverage on your skills and go t...
17 comments:
The technical staff at ORNL will be treated to huge benefit cuts -- no 401k match and only 3 days of sick leave per year! Meanwhile, the unionized workers will feel none of this pain. You can also assume that the upper management team will not be taking any hits to their inflated salaries or perks.
Once again, it becomes clear that the professional staff at the DOE labs should have long ago unionized to protect themselves from management. They are about to be squeezed out of most of their benefits and lots of their salaries over the next few years. The sheeple will be sheared.
But as everyone on this blog knows:
Unions are bad.
So let's keep our heads in the sand
and say:
Unions are bad.
So let's keep our heads in the sand
and say:
Unions are bad.
November 19, 2011 4:25 PM
Yes. Unions are bad. Private sector unions are really bad and as a result are less than 12% of the private sector workforce. Public sector unions are worse, and are unfortunately 20+ % of the public workforce. This needs to be fixed so that for public workers, including the revered (but not for any real reason) public school teachers with their summers off and Fridays off and Wednesday afternoons off, get to compete like everyone else for their jobs. Why are teachers so coddled? Double their pay and double their performance criteria. Fire the bad ones.
This needs to be fixed so that for public workers....
How do you propose to fix it? Declare them illegal?
And what deos this have to do with teachers? Summer off? They are not paid in summer. And have you looked at their salary lately?
But I have to agree with you, the teachers and the postal workers and all the federal employees and contractors are the origin of all our woes. Once these people started to deal in mortgage securities and speculated on the bond market it was clear that our financial system was going to crash.
And then the huge million dollar pensions they get and the stock options. Truly amazing.
Yes, we really need to help companies like Bechtel more, they are hurting and need more of our foodstamps.
The pension at LLNL and LANL will not continue for much longer. SNL has already taken drastic actions to curtail their future pension benefits. The same pension reduction actions will soon be force on LLNL and LANL.
The pension at LLNL and LANL will not continue for much longer. SNL has already taken drastic actions to curtail their future pension benefits. The same pension reduction actions will soon be force on LLNL and LANL.
November 21, 2011 8:31 AM
This cannot happen without a change in the contract wording. That will not be possible to do without public knowledge and at least public comment. LANS/LLNS are bound to mirror UC under the current contracts. UC is not changing as of now. SNL has no such UC-umbrella protection.
Contracts can always be modified if both parties agree. I wouldn't be so sure about the pension being covered by the UC umbrella. It's becoming a financial burden which I suspect both LANS and DOE/NNSA would love to eliminate.
Per this article it is not TCP1 (pension) at LLNL that is at risk - remember that it is fully funded and closed. LLNS does not put any money into TCP1 at the moment. It is TCP2 (401k) matching (6%) that LLNS could end if they wanted to save money.
If LLNS followed what ORNL did - then in the future if the TCP1 pension plan needs money, they would stop (or reduce) TCP2 401k matching and put that money into the TCP1 pension.
LLNS has a legal duty to support the pension plan (TCP1), there is no requirement to do 401k matching (TCP2) - and a lot of companies has stopped.
November 22, 2011 6:03 AM: This sounds correct.
Enough of the false rumors!
i.e.,
The pension at LLNL and LANL will not continue for much longer. SNL has already taken drastic actions to curtail their future pension benefits. The same pension reduction actions will soon be force on LLNL and LANL.
ROTFLMAO.... and should that be FORCED?
What a state of sad affairs this country is going through and what it has become. I'll bet 99% of all the people in the work force don't understand you're being set up for a "work for life" society and therefore doomed from "cradle to grave." If you think you're going to retire you better do the math while in your senior year of high school do the disappointment sets in early and reality becomes that, realty. You are not going to make it if you allow these AH to take everything from you.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21563675/ns/business-personal_finance/t/retirement-calculator/
November 29, 2011 6:03 AM
Your barely-educated tone, spelling, and grammar indicate you are one of the envious who worked hard but never saw fit to actually save anything. Too bad for you. Teach your kids to live below their means. Saving 25% of what you earn is the goal. Most importantly, do not have kids you cannot afford after the 25% savings. Procreation by itself is not a virtue. Kids are the quickest way to bankruptcy.
November 30, 2011 7:28 PM
And how many people do you think are going to follow your advise. 1%? Sounds great, but it not the real world and therefore 99% of the nation if not the world are going to be the slave labor and in the end have nothing.
November 29, 2011 6:03 AM
Is right on the money and November 30, 2011 7:28 PM
That works if the entire would was gay or you were born with a silver spoon in your mouth or maybe someplace else. Do the math http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21563675/ns/business-personal_finance/t/retirement-calculator/
$1.5M in your 401k SAVINGS before 65 or admit defeat and work for life. It's as simple as that.
"Saving 25% of what you earn is the goal."
November 30, 2011 7:28 PM
Easy to save 100K and live on 300K per year if you are a big manager with a fat annual bonus. Not too bad to save 35K and live on 115K per year if you are a big science type. Try saving 12K and living on 38K if you are support staff.
Tax takes more than 25% already, so you must be in the big manager group to both pay tax and save 25%.
Tax takes more than 25% already, so you must be in the big manager group to both pay tax and save 25%.
December 1, 2011 6:20 PM
The answer lies in not buying more than you can pay for, including "buying" kids. Procreation is an activity for the rich. Poor people cannot afford it and shouldn't do it. There is no reason two married people cannot live very comfortably on $50k a year without kids. Unaffordable children are the doom of society. If that is your only imaginable source of life fulfillment, you were brought up by ignorant, and probably uneducated, people.
Try saving 12K and living on 38K if you are support staff.
That's the place you've made for yourself in this wonderful USA. Live it.
Great medical, great retirement. Great job security, great oppotunity for job growth with the study programs. Takes self-control.
I did it, saved $3k when I made $15k and 20% of everything ever since.
Learn from a first generation immigrant.
Act your wage!......and save
Post a Comment