Looking at the latest annual funding notice it appears that funding is down to 84% this year. There are approximately 2 retirees for every worker left on the program… not surprising since it has been closed since the transition.
The rate of return last year was 0.23%
However the number of participants has increased by 3 this year.
22 comments:
Seriously, when are you boomers going to stop bankrupting America? Social security, Medicare, even endless wars in Iraq. All ways the boomers, aka generation "me", have destroyed this country. Then their parting shot was pulling up the pension ladder on their way out the door. And all you can think about is whether your golden nest egg is 18k or 21k this year.
Baby boomers earned their retirement. If you are not happy with the way things turned out for you, blame corporate and billionaire greed
I hope you realize that it’s not just Boomers in this pension. Right before the ladder was pulled up there were people that joined the lab/ pension who were not even old enough to drink yet… just saying all on the promise of a so well funded pension and were told about how much money it had that the previous years the employees received money back in CAP funds. Those folks at the bottom have another 22 years to pay into the system that probably will not pay them back. They have to pay into a system to pay for people who instead of paying into it received CAP payments out of it.
Baby boomers earned their retirement. If you are not happy with the way things turned out for you, blame corporate and billionaire greed
4/26/2025 7:28 AM
Gen X are slackers, and the millennials are even worse. The Boomers earned every penny and worked hard. Instead of listening to Nirvana, or trying to be on Tick Tock, you should have worked hard. The first step is stop blaming boomers.
Maybe it will be a race to see if TCP1 or UCRP (via a bankrupt California) fails first.
Ironically, every year in April since 2009, LANS/TRIAD has published a perfunctory status of the Defined Benefit Pension. Given the hit on the market I do no expect good news. As a reminder, April 2018 TRIAD published a 104% funding attainment. Prior to 2018, there has a been a 5% per year decline in value from 134%, in spite of bull markets. When the attainment is 80% or below TRIAD will "punt" the pension to the federal government (Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation) and pay a portion of benefits would we have received from the plan. It should be noted that this is huge difference between the UC pension and the private LANS/TRIAD pension. My understanding is that UC pension will stay with UC through "thick and thin". I will never forget Tyler conveying "substantially equivalent in the aggregate", we will soon see what "aggregate" means. Buckle up everyone; we've been living on borrowed time.
I should also mention that LANS/TRIAD is very secretive about how (and who) they manage this private pension. I've tried without success to determine the qualifications and credentials of the personnel that manage the pension, let alone specifically where the investments.
Given we at 84% with decline of 5% every year I guess in one year and it goes to the Federal government. I am not sure how many people this effects but If you got to LANL 1998 or latter you better hope you had 401K.
The problem isn’t the plan, or the economy, or boomers or gen x. The problem is that TRIAD and LANS allowed a management class with a very heavy load of dead wood and highly inflated salaries to sign onto a pension they never paid into. It is a racket and is probably illegal.
There were payouts from the pension plan because it was over funded. It was required.
You can thank tariffs for the decline in the markets. Also thank the Republicans for Iraq.
4/26/25 1:53PM
“Baby Boomers earned their retirement”
Let’s look the LLNS TCP-1 facts. The folks that came over from UC experienced a “funding holiday” starting in 1987 as they put it in the 2008 LLNS TCp1 2009 annual report. Then again instead or paying into it it became super funded at 165% and in the years 1990, 1992, 1994, 2002, and 2004 payments were actually sent out to its members…. So yea typical of that generation. Many of those Boomers who came after 1987 retired from LLNS and started collecting their pension once 7% was required. Hardly paying for your retirement… sorry.
The millennials on the other hand were in school when these payments were made and were 18 - 27 when TCP-1 was created and will spend the next 35 - 40 years paying into a system that will only pay them back what the the PBGC will allow. It’s already in trouble today each one of them is carrying the load of 2 retirees Simple put you have that quite backwards.
As blaming Gen X. Last time I checked many of them entered the job market when both labs were on a hiring freeze post the end of down hole testing etc. They had to play the contractor game of the 90’s and early 2000’s once again were able to get into UC and the pension right before the transition so they could get burdened by people that enjoyed a funding holiday and actually made extra money from the system. Slackers… yea your kids are left with a mess and your bill any you act this way!!! Once again Thanks for the bill.
Those who joined the Labs didn't join with a fixed map of the future. They had certain benefits such as pension without contribution.
Things have changed and the younger generation feels cheated for no reason. If you don't like contributing to tcp1, don't blame the retirees. They worked hard. You are just beginning and you will have to work hard too . You have a choice
None of us paid into UCRP, including the University, because the lady that ran it did very well with the investments. No contributions were needed.
Wall Street did not like the defined benefit UCRP because they were not making any money off it. So they got a Wall Street type on the regents. With the change of contracts the plans were taken to non defined, you had to contribute, and you managed your accounts through Wall Street firms. They are happy now.
I think looking at retirement Assets to Liabilities other than what one MAY think impacts them, is valuable be it LLNS TCP1, Social Security, or CalPERS. The hope is they are using comparable measuring sticks :). CalPERS for example, doesn’t just rely on investment returns. A CalPERS
pension is “guaranteed by state law”. CalPERS can’t therefore become insolvent to the extent CA can use revenues or raise taxes. For this reason, having a look see at CalPERS practices, salaries, benefits, cost projections, etc., because it can impact every Californian short and long term.
“Defined Benefit Pension Plan through the California Public Employee Retirement System, known as CalPERS…Defined Benefit Pension Plans do not rely on investment returns to determine your benefit, like a 401(k) plan. Instead, calculations using the employment factors and formula can ensure a lifetime retiree income. Your accrued benefits are guaranteed by state law.”
https://esa.santaclaracounty.gov/career-seekers/benefits/about-countys-defined-benefit-pension-plan-retirement-income-life#:~:text=Defined%20Benefit%20Pension%20Plans%20do,are%20guaranteed%20by%20state%20law.
Yes pay 7% post tax for the next 25 years into a plan that is going broke for people that only payed in maybe 15 years max…minus the years that the plan payed you extra. We were sold the same free pension argument that you “earned” but somehow we are supposed to pay 35 - 38 years into a system that we will have to collect 0.30 from the Pension Guarantee system. So feels cheated for no reason.. let’s see pay into TCP1 for 35 - 38 years vs pay in to for what 10 and collect. The only choice is to leave the lab to get around this boomer tax as LLNS has sunk this great ship that UC has left them and left the remaining 1,000 workers to fit the bill.
The thing is getting back to the original post, this is TCP1 a closed pension with let’s call it 1000 people paying into it with little or no money coming in from LLNS the contractor and currently let’s round it to 2,000 people collecting a retirement.
Let’s try to stay on topic…Unlike UCRP, CalPERS, CalSTRS, or US SS those are open systems with people still paying into it and the backing of the State or Federal budget a very different situation. Unless Congress or DOE / NNSA forces the contractor to meet its legacy obligations some people are going to be paying into a system they will never collect from. American Airlines pension comes to mind here. There is no state law guaranteeing TCP1 a small pension of a Delaware LLC conglomerate running a Federal lab that just happens to be in California. The only guarantee is the federal PBGC fund that pays pennies on the dollar. Not sure why someone would post a link to CAL PERS here, LLNS TCP1 isn’t connected to this program, doesn’t mention it in the official LLNS TCP1 annual statement, apparently you don’t get this documentation… I get it if you worked at the lab in the 50’s and 60’s you had the option of CAL PERS apparently. But if you were at the lab in 2007 and didn’t have enough service years to freeze your UCRP you were put into TCP1, once again a very different retirement program than a State pension. I guess it’s the same “in the aggregate”
Apparently some of you are fine with this as you have your UCRP (a separate system BTW) and are not remotely affected by this or are collecting the LLNS TCP1 and won’t be your problem by the time this happens.
The math doesn’t look good the past few years the S&P has returned double digit growth while this relatively small pension assets have grown by less than 1% and had dropped significantly in funding. What’s going to happen next year and the coming recession?
Hey 5/02/2025 12:13 PM
Thank you for a well-articulated explanation. I agree that current TCP1 contributors may never be able to collect because of the lack of legal protection.
The person who said "that tcp1 was going to be the same as UCRP in the aggregate '" had no clue what he was talking about !
I recently received my annual LLNS TCP1 notice. In the April 2025 notice it stated "As of January 1, 2024, the Plan's funding target attainment percentage was 93%. Since under IRS rules the Plan's assets did not completely cover the Plan's liabilities, LLNS will make contributions to the trust by September 2025 for the 2024 plan year."
I remember all the debt back in 2007 as to which plan - TCP1 or TCP2 to take. It really came down to each individual's situation. I took TCP1 and while still working at LLNL I'm at 90% pension under it. However I've been blessed enough to have been contributing near the IRS max to a "supplemental" 403B/401K since the 1980s and it's now at $2.1 million. Add in SS, and I should do okay...
“The person who said "that tcp1 was going to be the same as UCRP in the aggregate”
As I recall, UCRP employees outside of LLNL, whose age and service did not add up to X by 7-1-13, were forced into a 2nd tier system that either impacted their pension age factor, or medical benefits in retirement. The point being, UCRP hasn’t been the gold standard for a long while.
“The thing is getting back to the original post, this is TCP1 a closed pension with let’s call it 1000 people paying into it with little or no money coming in from LLNS the contractor and currently let’s round it to 2,000 people collecting a retirement.”
When UC/LLNL employees selected TCP1, millions of dollars were transferred from the UC pension fund to the TCP1 pension fund based on the ~3,000 employees that selected TCP1 over TCP2 yes?
I assume new hires prior to October 1, 2007, in terms of UCRP funds moved to TCP1, were small compared to those UC/LLNL employees that had 10, 20, or 30 years of service within the UCRP system. Furthermore, those new hires (referenced here as part of the 1,000 still working), had the option of TCP2, a point worth remembering.
The 1974 Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) and its 2006, 2006, 2019, and 2022 updates, are designed to protect pensions. Let’s hope right.
When I read 1,000 TCP1 employees are paying in, and 2,000 employees are collecting a TCP1 pension, it comes across like TCP1 doesn’t resemble a self-sustaining pension that just needs annual tweaks, and more like slow motion Ponzi scheme? What argument can be made that TCP1 insolvency is inevitable largely due to the ratio of active to retirees on the TCP1 system?
Not sure where you are getting that funding is 93%? The April 25 2025 LLNS Defined Benefit Pension Plan funding on
December 31, 2024…84.06%, December 31 2023…87.70%
December 31 2022 85.52%
"Not sure where you are getting that funding is 93%?" It's on the first page of the April 2025 LLNS Plan notice. Bullet 2 - "The Plan's Funding Target Attainment Percentage." Also it's the "target" not the actual amount.
Post a Comment