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

Thursday, October 16, 2014

LLNL retiree medical benefits

I just talked to a retired LLNS individual that their medical was now fully on them, no more allowance from LLNS. Can anyone provide more information?

23 comments:

Anonymous said...

Total bs with rates the same as last year, which is a surprise! Some Medicare RX plans are even cheaper than last year such as Citra. HRA remains the same at $2400

Anonymous said...

Did this person just reach Medicare age?

According to the packet sent out there aren't any changes for Kaiser and there are changes for out of pocket maximums for pharmacy costs in the Anthem Blue Cross plans. All of those plans are for not eligible in Medicare.

Anonymous said...

At LANL if retired and medicare eligible, you have a choice of three plans, all of which will be secondary to medicare. A supplement plan that also covers drugs at the same rate as the employee plan. A plan that replicates the employee plan in all respects but is secondary to medicare, and a plan that is a medicare advantage plan. No complaints from anyone that I've heard.

Anonymous said...

My LLNS Non-Medicare retiree medical for Northern CA Kaiser HMO for a family of three goes up 28.6% starting 1-1-15.

Anonymous said...

did all monthly non-Medicare retiree premiums go up ~28%?

Anonymous said...

Anthem Blue Cross didn't

Anonymous said...

My LLNS non-medicare N CA kaiser self plus spouse went up 12%

Anonymous said...

My Kaiser Family Plan increased ~28% but Kaiser Medicare Advantage stayed same at $200 as did $2400 HRA.

Anonymous said...

It's only going to get worse due to Obamacare. Even those plans that stayed the same this year will eventually cost a lot more. Those who work in jobs that have medical insurance will pay for those who don't. It's only fair to do so.

Anonymous said...

October 20, 2014 at 10:23 PM,

You really have no idea what you are talking about.

Do some homework at http://www.factcheck.org/issue/obamacare/

Anonymous said...

Those who work in jobs that have medical insurance will pay for those who don't. It's only fair to do so.

October 20, 2014 at 10:23 PM

The most likely item of tax reform to pass Congress will be to count as taxable income the value of your employer-provided health insurance. See if you feel the same way then.

Anonymous said...

If the LLNS contract ends, will our retiree medical premiums go up, down, or stay the same with the next contractor? Any thoughts? How do our medical premiums compare to that of non-Medicare and Medicare UC retirees?

Anonymous said...

"...The most likely item of tax reform to pass Congress will be to count as taxable income the value of your employer-provided health insurance..."

You raise a valid concern. I would hope, the retiree medical benefit would be grandfathered in because for
many of us it was a benefit of vested employment at UC/LLNL, at a time when other more lucrative career options outside of UC/LLNL were readily available.

Anonymous said...

NOTHING is "grandfathered in" since the invention of "substantially equivalent."

Anonymous said...

"...NOTHING is "grandfathered in" since the invention of "substantially equivalent."..."

What has been the collective employee response to the erosion of "substantially equivalent"? Listen for it...baa, baa, and baa.

Anonymous said...

It's long past the time when these retirement medical plans should be done away with so that the NNSA labs are more in tune with the rest of the business world.

Let the older staff and retirees scream about it but the younger staff and those who come to work for five years or so and then leave could care less about retirement medical. It's a drain on these labs and hurts the NNSA lab budgets. Get rid of it and make the retirees under the age of 65 pay for their own Obamacare plans if they want coverage.

Anonymous said...

"...It's long past the time when these retirement medical plans should be done away with so that the NNSA labs are more in tune with the rest of the business world.

Let the older staff and retirees scream about it but the younger staff and those who come to work for five years or so and then leave could care less about retirement medical. It's a drain on these labs and hurts the NNSA lab budgets. Get rid of it and make the retirees under the age of 65 pay for their own Obamacare plans if they want coverage..."

A colossal "bait and switch" proposal. I'm sure Lay, Skilling, and Madoff would be proud of it.

Anonymous said...

The key resource remaining at the weapons labs are its people and its data. The people are necesssary to access and interpret the data and apply it to arsenal issues. The nuclear arsenal cannot survive long-term without renewal and maintenance, and the science at the labs leads that renewal.

Keeping key personnel focussed on the mission, relatively free from distractions from finding and accessing medical help for themselves and family is the reason that employers provide a part of compensation as medical/dental/vision/insurance. Providing this, along with long-term financial security through defered compensation in the form of pension or contributions into defined contriubtion programs allows key employees to focus more onto the issues in the workplace and less on life/family distractions. It has been shown through long experience to best retain and deploy the critical human resources.

If a safe and effective arsenal is in the national interest and weapons experts are critical to that mission, then providing part of compensation in these forms is simply good practice.

Anonymous said...

It is imperative that the "experts" have some personal experience in their field. So it is likely both new warhead designs and underground testing will be renewed again soon. Otherwise the experts are more like librarians.

Anonymous said...

Keeping key personnel focussed on the mission, relatively free from distractions from finding and accessing medical help for themselves and family is the reason that employers provide a part of compensation as medical/dental/vision/insurance.

You don't really know anything about the history of employer-provided benefits, do you? Hint: your Pollyanna scenario has nothing to do with history. Employer-sponsored health and other benefits were the only way to provide extra incentives to prospective employees during the wage-controlled environment of WWII.

Anonymous said...

"...It is imperative that the "experts" have some personal experience in their field. So it is likely both new warhead designs and underground testing will be renewed again soon. Otherwise the experts are more like librarians..."

I don't know what will be worse, losing our experienced "stewards" due to a perpetual state of flux in funding, job stability, work environment, and eroding benefits, OR
having a job shop staff with a rotating set of newbies, looking to ratchet up their salaries every few years with their 401k retirement in tow.

Anonymous said...

October 27, 2014 at 8:01 PM

Whenever I hear the talk about comparing with industry, my first question is:
Which industry?
Maybe Renaissance Technology, where a huge portion of the workforce are physicists and the medical benefit paid by the employer is 2000$ a month?
Or maybe Goldman Sachs, where Ted Cruz gets his health insurance from through his wife?
So what industry standard are you referring to? Or are you seriously suggesting, that working at the labs is like working for Walmart? Is that your industry standard?

Anonymous said...

I just received a bill for $400 for my medical insurance. I thought we were supposed to get about $2400 for our HRA account. Where is that and why can’t they take the $400 from that instead of me paying for it out of my bank account?

Blog Archive