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


  • Stay on topic.
  • No foul, vulgar, or inflammatory language.
  • No name calling.
  • No personal attacks or put-downs of other blog users.
  • Be patient. Moderator checks and approves new posts several times a day.

Suggest new topics here


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

Friday, March 27, 2015

Need the real story behind UC and LLNS retiree health benefits and the merits of the lawsuit

The real story behind UC and LLNS retiree health benefits and the merits of the lawsuit. I'd like a true analysis. My understanding is that UC retiree health benefits today are worse than the LLNS benefits as of 2015. If you worked 20 years under UC/LLNS you would receive 100% vested benefit, while under UC alone at 20 years you would receive 80%. Depends on age and total years of service, but UC watered down their coverage in 2013 so that UC employees would have to work 30 years minimum and retire at 65. Am I wrong ?


Anonymous said...

This is not an issue of percentages. Most current retirees are fully vested. The real issue is the benefit itself. The UC system is much better when monthly cost, copays, etc. are compared.

Anonymous said...

There is another issue at play here as well. I would guess that a fair number of those folks involved in the suit do not qualify for Medicare. They spent their entire career at the lab and were not contributing to Social Security and Medicare since that was not a requirement prior to 1977. Should the lab decide not to support medical in retirement they would have nothing.

Anonymous said...

B. Hussein O sure acts like an ardent Muslim supporter.

lesson learned.

Anonymous said...

I would like the ability to opt out of the lawsuit since I retired in 2012 and prefer the LLNS benefits package. How do I do this now. I never received any notification on the lawsuit and paperwork to opt out ? If the 2007 and earlier retirees win the suit, how would this affect me ?

Anonymous said...

" Moniz is too busy hastening the development of the Shia Shoa."

Agreed ! Our DOE chief is giving Sect. Kerry a lot of high fives. Really, is that photo opt necessary. Maakes my stomach sick !

Posts you viewed tbe most last 30 days