The good news is LLNS or ULM is looking at people SKA's and overall performance in conjunction with the needs of the company. This to me means those who are marginal or worse will be gone very shortly probally starting on Oct 1st, 2009. This may or may not be the case with all of those who got laid off, however I suspect those who were very good employees like the ones I know who did get laid off simply meant they were in jobs that LLNS has no intention of ever supporting or they were jobs LLNS has intentions of out-sourcing on an AS NEEDED contract basis. Yes, this means there will be more cleaning of the house which consequently means more people will lose their jobs over the next 18 months.
Take a look at yourself and ask yourself a question. Am I in a service oriented organization whose job could be done by a firm outside LLNL on a contact basis or via the Internet. If the answer is yes, I'd be real worried. People who are in business services, gardeners, custodians, procurement, plant engineering of any type, external security, or most any job that could be out-sourced need to be worried.
LLNS is just another General Motors who as of today just shut down an assembly plant and sent all the work to Mexico. Yes, that cost all those people their jobs, but did GM worry about that or even care? No. They are in the business of making money and they take their business where it's the cheapest to get the job done, and where they have no long term obligation of pension, 401k , health care, etc, etc , etc.
None of us have secure "jobs" anymore. We have all been screwed out of what we were to get and the screwing isn't going to stop no matter how many calming speeches we get from ULM. The flood gates are open and people of all types are going to start being sent through those gates at warp speed until we are no better than any mediocre company on the outside of this one square mile fence.
How many of you understand this concept and are willing to work within this parameter? If you're not, you are in a world of crap, because that's the way it's going to be. You'll come to work every day with full intention of doing a good job but at any time within that day you could be gone. All any of us can do is prepare ourselves for termination and have an alternate plan in place so "when" you get axed, you simply hand them your badge, keys, pagers, sign the forms and exit without any remorse, as one of my friends did.
That's how it went down for one supervisor Thursday. They walked into his office,to him his job was no longer needed, asked for his keys, badge and pager and then said sign here. There was no warning, and he was gone in 45 minutes without hitting the processing trailers. He was a supervisor who started at LLNL in 1976 and needed six more years to reach social security benefits age in order to have a good livable income without having to become a K-Mart greeter.
His job came to an end with no warning. He now has barely enough to live on, will have to gather his 401K, 403b, UC-DCP plan into a single fund and start his SEPP to subsidize his "minuscule" UCRP pension check until he's 59.5 years old, where at that time he can select to continue to draw the IRS fixed allocation or start drawing any amount he wished from his defered savings account. Is he mad? Yes, but just maybe over time he'll be glad he no longer has to worry about being fired each and every day.
By the way he was "never" on the EBA list, "never" had any run in with management and "never" was on their radar for any misdoings. He was a hard working dedicated lab employee who went beyond the call of duty everyday to assure LLNL's mission was met.
Did that make any difference? No.
In the end he was deemed "worthless" to the organization and was tossed out the gate like a piece of trash, humiliated and left wondering. IMHO, it's LLNS loss, not his. He will overcome his tramma simply because of his demeanor and self confidence. He, is a man of honor and a patriot, and will be remembered by many for these attributes. LLNS on the otherhand "in this case" will be remembered for their abusiveness, stupidity and tyranny.
The question that remains is this. When it's your turn, will you prevail the agony or vanish into oblivion without a trace. What each and everyone of us must remember is this simply fact. You will be treated no differently, so be prepared.
22 comments:
I'm sorry, but any one with 30 years in will not be getting a miniscule check from UC, but a pretty decent one. While it is terrible he lost his job, I don't think he will be hurting. I wish I was as lucky to get that much time in.
If you knew what you were taking about I might have some respect for you but you do not. If you are not at least 57.5 or 59.5 and now days 62 you don't get crap. People need 100% of their income to live on NOT 55% or for that matter even 75%. The check is chump change. Now if you are some admin ULM puke that makes $425 K a year than I buy your BS story. I know many of a person at LLNL that has 30 + years and is still to young to retire with a good pension, most know they have to do at least 6 -8 more years and then maybe they'll be able to stay afloat as inflation continues to rise more than 2% year. If you think that's the inflation rate, you are sadly mistaken. Heck gas alone has gone up more than that, not counting everything that goes up because of a gas increase. I got news for all you less than ULM over paid types. 100% of your wage is only going to keep you afloat for about ten years and then you'll be slowly but surely edging your way to poverty.
For May 31 11:05 -
Take another gander at the retirement tables. They are HEAVILY weighted for age. This is understandable, the older you retire the more they pay out with the actuarial tables predicting you won't last as long:
30 years at age 50 = 33%
30 years at age 55 = 54%
30 years at age 60 = 75%
So if you got laid off at 50, it does become a miniscule pay check. And if you think you can just freeze and find another job for 10 years and retire at 60, you'll lose the retirement medical. You must retire within 120 days from being separated from the lab to obtain retirement medical. I confirmed that with HR and with UC.
And of course, if you retire at 50 with the paltry paycheck in order to get retirement medical and then have LLNS cancel retirement medical, you've lost twice.
Are we having fun yet?
May 31, 2008 11:05 AM
I hope you're one of those who never get a pension and if you do I hope you eat every word you have written. Lets see how you fare when you're 57 and they cut you off at the knees by changing contracts. If you at note one of those who was a UCRP I hope you have between $1.5M and $2M in your 401K becasue if you don't you are going to be SOL. Welcome to the real world. I wish you the worse. They way it looks you're one of thos silver spoon children and have no worries.
The most helpful and realistic post I have read so far. For those who are safe, it really is just a matter of time, and those of you who were RIF'd that were poorly ranked and EBA'd for a ridiculously long time had to have seen it coming; if you did nothing to prepare yourself for this day you have nobody to blame but yourself.
May 31, 2008 11:54 AM
You need to have 30 years in and be 57.5 or more, preferable you need to be 62 so you can draw SS too in order to keep your head afloat. Anything less and you're done. I'm not referring to ULM. Those people are well overpaid and can go at 50% and still live like kings and queens. These are the people they should have trash canned a long time ago and for sure by tomorrow. These are the people that are costing the LLNS the most and yet they are a protected species who take care for their own kind. Go figure. maybe if we're real lucky they won't live to see retirement or will die shortly afterwards.
The bottom line is this. LLNS has proven to be no better than the terrorist who attacked the twin towers. Their contract needs to be terminated immediately. It is time to terminate their contract and along with that each and every LLNS employee's need to be fire with no retirement, no medical and no severance pay. No, old UC employees do not consider themselves LLNS employees and never will. There is YOU and then there is US. LLNS is just a nasty four letter word.
"I'm sorry, but any one with 30 years in will not be getting a miniscule check from UC..."
Not true. Check the facts.
At 55 years old, the age factor is about 1.7%. 1.7 * 30 = 51% of the HAPC which is about 5% lower than current salary. With the required 50% spousal contiunance (another 6% lower) and the new Lower LLNS contingent annuity payout factors (another 4% lower than UCs). A 55 year old with 30 years would take home only about 40% of current salary.
Who among you can live on 1/2 of your current salary? (George, you and Soderstrom don't count.
There ain't no sinecure here folks.
30 years at age 50 = 33%
30 years at age 55 = 54%
30 years at age 60 = 75%
These are for single people. The required 50% spousal continuance drops this another 5%.
The factor is of the three-year average which is 4-7% lower than what you make now.
Also the LLNS annuity factors for the same conditons are unexplanably 3-5% lower than UCs for the same input.
Pay attention. The folks in strategic human capital think of you as just that, not people, and they try to take advantage any way that they can.
The only thing of any value at LLNL is YOU. The equipment, facilities and practices only work because YOU use them. Codes don't write and validate themselves, data doesn't explain itself, degraded weapons components don't come with deficiency reports, NIF and $4.5B didn't just stand itself up.
The people of LLNL are its only resource.
YOU certify the stockpile.
YOU follow the rules.
YOU make this place what it is.
It's about time, Bodner, DAgostino and Miller start acting like it, cause almost everybody I know is looking outside.
Publish the List
Yesterday I had the awkward moment of seeing a colleague with her child at a local store. Though I thought she had been laid off, I wasn't sure. I danced awkwardly around the subject, hoping for the clue that never came. I still don't know. I was put in an awkward position of appearing to be uncaring; when I really wanted to pass on my sincere condolence, strong support.
I am angry the misguided lab management keeps the list under wraps. I don't know how to handle this deliberate confusion.
Its as if LLNS management has forsaken judgement and humanity
Check your TCP-1 retirement calculator. Is it correct?
As I compared the UC retirement calculator and the new LLNS/Hewitt retirement calculator for the same conditions, it appears that the values in the LLNS/Hewitt table are 3-4% lower for the spousal continuance options.
Does anybody understand why? I thought they were supposed to be 2.4% higher because the 25% continuance of the UC BRI could not be duplicated for TCP-1.
Please don't tell me Strategic Human Capital gets a 7% cut.
What gives?
To 11:05 a.m.
You don't know what you are talking about. Years have nothing to do with the amount of your pension (although it helps) - It all has to do with how salary was managed. If you received crappy raises over time then the last 3 yr takes more than 30 yrs of work to get maybe 80% of your income. You obviously are a newcomer.
Just for your information we had the very same thing happen to a 30+ chem tech that started in 1976 or 77 in 235. She had the same track record and was canned like a dog. I hope she sues for millions and I do mean millions
While the workers get screwed the COE's like aka Frank Russo and George Miller reap the vine.
CEOs get a pile of perks; you can protest several ways
Kathy Kristof Personal Finance
May 30, 2008
When new compensation disclosure rules were first implemented last year, they shone a much brighter light on the perks bestowed upon chief executive officers, such as country club memberships, rides on the corporate jet, home security systems and rich pensions unavailable to the rank and file.
An outcry ensued. After all, some shareholders asked, why does a company need to pay country club dues for someone who already makes $10 million a year? Ditto for car allowances and health care deductibles. And if you make that much money, can't you manage to put aside something for retirement?
Facing such bad publicity, many companies have been cutting back on executive benefits grouped under the heading of ''other'' pay, experts say.
''This is one of the areas that shareholders get most upset about,'' said Derrick Neuhauser, an executive compensation consultant with BDO Seidman. ''There is a definite reduction in perks.''
But in some cases, the loss of perks is being offset by an increase in regular cash pay. Nonetheless, the change in perk practices is notable.
Many corporate directors view perks as a remnant of an earlier era and are happy when they have the opportunity to get rid of them, said Jack Marsteller, head of the compensation practice at Towers Perrin in Los Angeles.
''They simply don't believe in them in today's world,'' Marsteller said. ''That's why you see many of these falling by the wayside.''
But some boards apparently didn't get the memo. Consider Ryland Group Inc. The Calabasas, Calif., home builder, hit hard by the housing downturn, had a miserable 2007, losing $334 million -- a far cry from the $360 million in profit it made in 2006. As a result, Chairman and Chief Executive R. Chad Dreier's cash and stock-based pay was slashed to $5.1 million last year from $20.9 million in 2006.
But Dreier didn't have to settle for a mere seven-figure package because his other pay, which increased last year, totaled $9.1 million. That included a $4.7 million boost to his retirement plans, an $80,000 allowance for ''personal health and services,'' $47,000 in life insurance premiums paid, $15,600 in personal flights on the company plane and $9,136 in medical reimbursements.
His ''other'' pay also included more than $4 million in cash to offset income tax Dreier owed on his perks.
''Leave it to boards to make a liar out of Ben Franklin, who said that the only constants are death and taxes,'' said Patrick McGurn, executive vice president at Institutional Shareholder Services, which advises big shareholders on corporate governance issues. ''Of the perquisites that are out there, this is arguably the most egregious of all.''
In its regulatory filing on executive pay, Ryland said that if it didn't pay the tax on Dreier's benefits, it would have to give him more in cash. The company declined to elaborate.
How investors
can be influential
The reversal last year of the long trend of rising executive pay came about in part because of growing activism by institutional investors, experts say.
But even if you're a small-time investor, you can make your voice heard regarding how the companies you own shares in are run. And with the help of others like you, your portfolio can benefit, corporate governance activists say.
''If you stand on the sidelines, thinking you are just one investor, you have to realize that there are hundreds of thousands of people who are like you,'' said Daniel Pedrotty, director of investment at the AFL-CIO. ''If the majority of people are like you, you leave the governance of the company in the hands of people who want to preserve the status quo.''
In fact, if you own stock through index funds, you may not have the option to do the ''Wall Street walk'' -- sell your shares in a company -- if you don't like its management or directors, said Michael Garland, director of value strategies at CtW Investment Group, which advocates for better corporate governance on behalf of the labor federation Change to Win.
''For us, demanding better governance is the only way to protect and create value,'' Garland said.
Here are answers to questions about taking a role in the companies in your portfolio:
How do I know whether a company is well-governed? You can buy a report from Corporate Library (www.thecorporatelibrary.com), a research firm that grades companies on an A-F scale. But with each report going for $495, individual investors may need to take a cheaper approach.
The do-it-yourself research method requires a copy of the company's proxy statement -- the document sent to investors before the annual shareholder meeting. You can get a copy of the proxy statement from the company or the Securities and Exchange Commission's database of filings at http://www.sec.gov/edgar.shtml . (Click on ''Search for Company Filings'' and then on ''Historical EDGAR Archives.'' When you get to the search bar, type in the company's name and ''14a,'' which is the SEC's term for the proxy statement.)
What do I look for in the proxy statement? The proxy includes a list of board members, a biography of each director, charts indicating how much stock company managers and directors own and charts showing the pay of the company's five most highly compensated officers.
Look for signs of bad governance, such as:
The CEO is also the chairman. This suggests the company's boss is his own boss and answers directly to no one.
A lack of independent board members. If the bulk of the board is made up of people who work for the company or have close financial or personal ties to managers, the directors aren't likely to feel independent enough to challenge management decisions. The proxy will make clear when a director is an employee. To learn of other relationships between a director and the company, look in the proxy under the heading Certain Relationships and Transactions.
Multiple shareholder resolutions. When shareholders petition a company to officially change its practices and the company puts the resolution up for a shareholder vote at the firm's annual meeting, the proposal is printed in the proxy statement. Although a well-governed company may occasionally draw such resolutions, they are relatively rare at companies rated A on the Corporate Library's governance scale.
If the proxy contains a number of resolutions -- especially those involving pay, the election of directors and corporate provisions perceived as discouraging takeovers -- that could signal bad governance.
Excessive executive pay. ''Excessive,'' of course, is a relative term. The median annual cash-and-stock pay of a chief executive at a Fortune 500 company is about $10 million. It might be a warning sign if a CEO earns significantly more than that. (CEOs of smaller companies generally earn less.)
Massive perks. The executive compensation table will include how much other pay top executives make and will spell out what ''other'' consists of. Most often, that category includes the cost of letting the CEO use the company jet to take his family on vacation, what the company pays to provide top executives with security systems, company cars or chauffeurs, country club memberships and financial planning services.
This information will give you an idea of how regally top officers are treated.
What can I do to change a company's policies?
Vote. Every year shareholders have the right to vote on the election of directors and several other matters of importance to the company.
If you don't like how directors are paying company executives, you can ''withhold'' your vote against the members of the compensation committee. Some companies recently have adopted rules that require the resignation of a director who does not receive yes votes from a majority of shareholders.
If other shareholders have presented resolutions to reform company practices, consider voting for them as well.
Write. If a corporate policy offends you, write to the chairman of the board, expressing your dissatisfaction and suggesting a better course. A letter from a typical individual investor won't have the same effect as one from an investor with a much bigger stake, said Paul Hodgson, research associate at the Corporate Library.
But if institutions and individuals are complaining about the same practices, he said, the board may take notice.
Propose. To sponsor your own shareholder resolution, you must have owned $2,000 of the company's stock for at least a year. Be careful to follow the rules for submitting shareholder proposals, which the company must make available. You can request a copy from the company's investor relations department. For help drafting a resolution, you can look at shareholders' proposals in other companies' proxy statements for inspiration or sample wording.
How much difference does corporate governance make? Maybe a lot. Companies with the best governance practices are more profitable, pay shareholder dividends that are more than four times as high (as a percentage of share price) and have stock prices as much as 50 percent higher relative to earnings than companies with poor governance practices, according to a study conducted by Institutional Shareholder Services, which advises big investors on ways to maximize value.
The study doesn't prove that better governance actually brings about those desirable financial outcomes, but it's a possibility to consider.
Kathy M. Kristof is a reporter for the Los Angeles Times, a Tribune Publishing newspaper. She welcomes your comments and suggestions but regrets that she cannot respond individually to letters or phone calls.
Write to Personal Finance, Business Section, Los Angeles Times, 202 W. First St. 90012, or e-mail kathy.kristof@latimes.com.
You can daydream all you want about LLNS people geting fired with no pension, George getting hung by his heels and flayed alive, etc..
It ain't gonna happen ... LLNS rules the roost now and if you don't like the way they play, look for another job. Soon all the good people at LLNL will be gone and they will close the doors. George et al will collect their $5M bonuses for doing the goverment's dirty work and be on their way ...
Flayed alive. I like that.
I got a call from a recruiter from Sloan Partners (very reputeable firm, i think) looking for people layed off from the Energy & Environment division or with similar experience that might be interested in a sales rep job for an environmental firm. If anyone is interested, call Dorothy at 866-870-7434.
People at the lab are worth a lot. The career fair is over-subscribed. Companies need you. If you got layed off, keep your head up and go for it - you'll be fine. If you didn't, I suggest you find another job and leave - LLNS doesn't deserve the work-force that it has.
If he is 60 y/o, then he'll be fine. But let say he's 50 y/o and this was his only job and will try to get another job that will be tough I think. At first I though "man, I wish I'm one of those retirable with lots of years in", but then again I'd rather be 41 years old. Either way, if you're not leaving on your own terms I don't consider that lucky.
It doesn't matter whether LLNS deserves us. What matters is, does the country?
Maybe the answer is no, but it is more than a little disappointing that so many people lose sight of that bigger picture question.
Moved from "how to file a grievance". Commenter: please do not comment under the wrong topic:
The ultimate result of the LLNL to LLNS transition goes well beyond the fact that NIF is LLNL's only chance of survival and, after NIF's commissioning, it will become a footnote in history that LLNL wasn't afforded an opportunity to delve into the realm of alternative and renewable energy for transportation and/or household consumption. Some employees have yet to come to terms with how this transition has adversely impacted their future goals and aspirations; I, on the other hand, am already beginning to notice that my future retirement plans have been severely impacted. When the management of LANL and LLNL by LANS and LLNS became a reality my life's uncertainties and misfortunes were no longer issues that I could control or mitigate. The future looks bleak and all to predictable - I am now no better off than those who have chosen to avoid higher education and who are depending on their insecure 401K's to provide them with a retirement standard of living that will allow them to obtain food stamps just to survive each month. Also note that any hoped for home equity is now lost on a real estate environment that is the worst since the Great Depression. Left with just a portion of my UCRP I expect to live a pauper's life and the light at the end of the tunnel is, in fact, a train. So much for hard work and honest living resulting in the American Dream . . .
"I am now no better off than those who have chosen to avoid higher education and who are depending on their insecure 401K's to provide them with a retirement standard of living that will allow them to obtain food stamps just to survive each month."
You chose your area of higher education and career suboptimally. Last I heard, tenured profs, MBAs from top schools, lawyers, and doctors were doing OK.
Post a Comment