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, May 18, 2017

What will happen to LANL TCP1?

Does anyone have a sense as to the future of the LANL TCP-1 (Pension) under a new M&O contractor. Will they have to continue it for transferring employees or freeze it and force employees into a 401K plan?

The current contract (Clause H-36) says this - "If the Contract expires, or is terminated and an award is made to a follow-on management and operating contractor, as a part of the transition to another entity and in accordance with Contracting Officer direction and applicable law the Contractor shall transfer sponsorship of site-specific pension and other benefit plans covering employees at the Laboratory to the follow-on management and operating contractor."

But does this mean transferring employees will continue to accrue benefits under TCP-1?

24 comments:

Anonymous said...

Put it up for auction and let the pension aggregators bid for a chance to operate it.

Anonymous said...

I assume the answer to this question is inherent in "shall transfer sponsorship of site-specific pension". It does not specifically say this so, it appears the new M&O contractor could re-examine, including increasing the current contribution rate, which would force me to leave immediately. The other more important question is the new operator going to transfer all their upper manager team into the pension to raid it? Bechtel did this! Incidentally, there are $3.7 B in assets in the pension, a significant "chunk of change".

Anonymous said...

LANS TCP-1 folks had better keep a very close eye on their monies in the plan when the new operator takes over. There is a lot of money here, with NO ONE in this plan looking out for your best interests.

Anonymous said...

"...other more important question is the new operator going to transfer all their upper manager team into the pension to raid it? Bechtel did this! Incidentally, there are $3.7 B in assets in the pension, a significant "chunk of change".

An alarming comment, but can you detail how, when, and where (LANS and LLNS) Bechtel "did this"? I would like hard facts/proof.

Anonymous said...

I would like hard facts/proof.

May 19, 2017 at 9:48 AM

Not going to happen. No such facts/proof exist. Repeat a lie often enough....

Anonymous said...

Bechtelians heard from.

Anonymous said...

You don't have to be a "Bechtelian" to value truth and facts. Got any? Nah. didn't think so.

Anonymous said...

"You don't have to be a "Bechtelian" to value truth and facts. Got any? Nah. didn't think so.

May 19, 2017 at 7:07 PM"

I thought a couple of years ago someone provided some numbers of people on TCP1 and found it was going up after the contract change which seemed very odd since people would be dying so one conclusion was that new people where being added and it was managers from Bechtel. If I remember the claim was these numbers where public however I only saw this on the blog and also even it was true it may be due to completely different reasons. I have heard many rumors from HR people about huge moving expenses and subsidized housing for these managers and that many seem to just float around without doing anything for 3 years and move to the next job. Again unless there is audit of some form it is all just speculation but I have no reason not to believe the HR people. I would also add that it is very common place for companies like this to leverage every dime they can every single way they can. There are several books on Bechtel that talk about how they do this.

Finley even if none of this can be proven I have yet to see anyone on this blog or elswhere provide evidence for a single
improvement at LANL or LLNL brought in by Bechtel which is damming enough as it is without having to add the possible sleazy tactics to leverage profit.

Anonymous said...

Well, to state the obvious, which is contradictory to the oblivious among us, LANL was not and is not run by Bechtel. LANS President is Mcmillan (a UC person). Chairman Pattiz (UC), Vice Chair Rusinko (Bechtel). Only 2 of the 7 other governors are Bechtel. Bechtel has been purposely reducing it's LANL presence for about two years now. Try to get some facts before you post.

Anonymous said...

"Bechtel has been purposely reducing it's LANL presence for about two years now."

What Bechtel's presence has been in the last two years says nothing about an alleged front end TCP1 pension "pile in" a decade ago or more recently. A LANS TCP1 pension participation audit from inception would clear this up.

Anonymous said...

"...other more important question is the new operator going to transfer all their upper manager team into the pension to raid it? Bechtel did this! Incidentally, there are $3.7 B in assets in the pension, a significant "chunk of change".

An alarming comment, but can you detail how, when, and where (LANS and LLNS) Bechtel "did this"? I would like hard facts/proof.

May 19, 2017 at 9:48 AM

Really? The pensions that many Becthelian's had was considered "portable" and landed "in the LANL TCP-1 plan. My former ES Division Leader, Dan Steinberg, only worked at LANL for ~4 years and left took ~44 years of TCP-1 pension money with him. There have been may other Bechtilian's that landed into TCP-1. Also, the other beauty of Sternberg is that he placed many of his workers on the "excluded list" on the 2012 VSP and then quickly exited on this VSP, thank you very much. The problem with placing folks from Becthel in TCP-1, is that this was never foreseen or planned (i.e. actuarilized) for when UC money was moved into the LANS TCP-1. That's one reason, those are TCP-1 are paying into the plan. Hello!

Anonymous said...

LANL TCP-1 employees paying for Bechtel retirees? Shocking ! But, typical of Riley.

Anonymous said...

"Well, to state the obvious, which is contradictory to the oblivious among us, LANL was not and is not run by Bechtel. LANS President is Mcmillan (a UC person). Chairman Pattiz (UC), Vice Chair Rusinko (Bechtel). Only 2 of the 7 other governors are Bechtel. Bechtel has been purposely reducing it's LANL presence for about two years now. Try to get some facts before you post.

May 20, 2017 at 5:53 PM"

Well a couple of points. (1) UC does not keep the profit, it reinvests the money it gets back into lab-UC programs. (2) Bechtel has many of its sub-companies get contracts with the lab, one has to wonder how much these extra contracts where needed.(3) There seems to be plenty of examples of Bechtel putting their people on
TCP1 this coupled with the fact that Bechtel manages seem to be at the labs for 3-4 years before a fresh crop are rotated in to maximize this practice. Again there are several books on Bechtel "The Profiteers: Bechtel and the Men Who Built the World: Sally Denton" and "Friends in High Places: The Bechtel Story" These go into detail
about their utterly sleazy practices to maximize profit. There is not reason to believe that they do not do the exact same thing at the labs. (4) The Director is paid for by LANS and paid alot of money well into the millions and the reason he and other high level managers are paid that much is to ensure they know exactly who they are working for. It is a form of legal corporate bribery.

(5) You never reply to this point which I feel is the most important point. Can you
please give a single example of value added at LLNL or LANL by Bechtel? You always go on about how we are wrong about everything else but this is the real point. Unless you reply than we can assume Bechtel makes some good money but adds nothing of value whatsoever.

"Bechtel has been purposely reducing it's LANL presence for about two years now. "
I have heard that since the contract is changing soon that there is no point in replacing the Bechtel people that are leaving since there is not enough time (3-4 years) needed to transfer the pensions to the new people.

Anonymous said...

Shocking ! But, typical of Riley.

May 21, 2017 at 8:06 AM

Riley hasn't been in charge of Bechtel for a few years now. Find another whipping horse.

Anonymous said...

The key point is that our friend, Riley, was certainly in charge when the TCP scam was perpetrated.

Anonymous said...

The TCP "scam" was perpetrated by Tyler well before Riley was in charge of anything at the labs. Get your history right.

Anonymous said...

Why not audit LANS TCP1 participation from the get go instead of all the speculation?

Anonymous said...

Because the speculation is coming from the victims, the audit would have to come from the government, that's why.

Anonymous said...

This theory is the biggest load of crap I have heard. Does anyone here actually know the pension rules in the DOE as it relates to TOTAL DOE service time in the NWC. You should probably do some research. Remember, this pension is for DOE employees (contractors), funded by DOE dollars. Do you feel entitled to usurp the DOE rules? Remember who the real employer is.

Last, Bechtel rule? Really, how many Bechtel employees are at the Lab? 100, 200?

For Lab employees you sure fail to use the scientific method.

Anonymous said...

Last, Bechtel rule? Really, how many Bechtel employees are at the Lab? 100, 200?

It is about 380, however they never stay longer than three or four years, so that would give about 3500 over the years. The question is how many have been transferred to TCP1? As for rule, Charlie, and the PADS are paid enough to know who the masters are, which is the whole point of such salaries. The DOE pension rule does not apply since we an LLC.

Anonymous said...

Remember, this pension is for DOE employees (contractors), funded by DOE dollars.

May 24, 2017 at 8:58 PM

If you think DOE contractors are DOE employees you need to look at who signs your paycheck. LANS and LLNS employees are in no way government employees and are in no way subject to government pension rules. The rules are set by the NNSA contracts with the private contractor. Only those contract clauses control what happens. Get a clue who the "real employer is."

Anonymous said...

Ah education. It is a beautiful thing.... You can't have it both ways people. Either they swooped in and stole your pension plan money or they did not...

NA SD O 350.1 specifically states that time accrued for pension is not allowed but time accrued for medical retirement, severance, and service credit toward market based retirement plans (i.e 401k) is allowed.

https://nnsa.energy.gov/sites/default/files/nnsa/inlinefiles/SD_3511_FINAL_PDF_w_signature.pdf

Anonymous said...

NA SD O 350.1 specifically states that time accrued for pension is not allowed but time accrued for medical retirement, severance, and service credit toward market based retirement plans (i.e 401k) is allowed.

https://nnsa.energy.gov/sites/default/files/nnsa/inlinefiles/SD_3511_FINAL_PDF_w_signature.pdf

May 25, 2017 at 8:58 PM

And how many times did Anastasio and McMillan grant exceptions for upper management (e.g. from Becthel or other parent companies) to lure them in? Come on folks, the lawyers at LANL serve the Director and no one else. I also know for a fact that these lawyers frequently come into HR to confiscate computers to wipe out information that will incriminate the Director. The Labs have become corrupt institutions since we began "following the money". Get it!

Anonymous said...

Last, Bechtel rule? Really, how many Bechtel employees are at the Lab? 100, 200?

For Lab employees you sure fail to use the scientific method.

May 24, 2017 at 8:58 PM

And that was 200 too many! Hopefully, the new operator will run them off (e.g. Hugh McGovern).

Blog Archive