Skip to main content

what is wrong with Hewitt?

Anonymously contributed:

I'm a retiree- took the buyout, such as it was, because I figured that even tho LANS people got twice as much, that was the best we could expect, and I didn't want to "go down with the ship" that used to be called LLNL.

I received a letter dated 11/6/09 from LLNS signed by Art Wong that states the letter sent by Hewitt "incorrectly stated that .. enrollment ends on Nov 6, 2009." He states it is open until 11/20/09.

Q. The letter does not give costs, does anyone know how to get those?

There was an article in the local paper that said the same thing, and the reporter asked Hewitt about the error.
Hewitt's response sounded like: Well, it was correct for other programs we handle, and NO they were not going to correct their error.

Maybe LLNS should contract with someone to manage our health care who cares about doing a good job? Or restore the good in-house HR dept. that once did this?

Comments

Anonymous said…
I've been receiving emails saying that open enrollment ends on November 13.
Anonymous said…
The costs were listed in the other packet of information you should received the week before open enrollment started. They are also posted on the http://benefits.llnl.gov web site, under the retiree section.

Popular posts from this blog

Plutonium Shots on NIF.

Tri-Valley Cares needs to be on this if they aren't already. We need to make sure that NNSA and LLNL does not make good on promises to pursue such stupid ideas as doing Plutonium experiments on NIF. The stupidity arises from the fact that a huge population is placed at risk in the short and long term. Why do this kind of experiment in a heavily populated area? Only a moron would push that kind of imbecile area. Do it somewhere else in the god forsaken hills of Los Alamos. Why should the communities in the Bay Area be subjected to such increased risk just because the lab's NIF has failed twice and is trying the Hail Mary pass of doing an SNM experiment just to justify their existence? Those Laser EoS techniques and the people analyzing the raw data are all just BAD anyways. You know what comes next after they do the experiment. They'll figure out that they need larger samples. More risk for the local population. Stop this imbecilic pursuit. They wan...

Trump is to gut the labs.

The budget has a 20% decrease to DOE office of science, 20% cut to NIH. NASA also gets a cut. This will  have a huge negative effect on the lab. Crazy, juts crazy. He also wants to cut NEA and PBS, this may not seem like  a big deal but they get very little money and do great things.

Why Workplace Jargon Is A Big Problem

From the Huffington Post Why Workplace Jargon Is A Big Problem http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/04/25/work-words_n_5159868.html?utm_hp_ref=business&ir=Business When we replace a specific task with a vague expression, we grant the task more magnitude than it deserves. If we don't describe an activity plainly, it seems less like an easily achievable goal and more like a cloudy state of existence that fills unknowable amounts of time. A fog of fast and empty language has seeped into the workplace. I say it's time we air it out, making room for simple, concrete words, and, therefore, more deliberate actions. By striking the following 26 words from your speech, I think you'll find that you're not quite as overwhelmed as you thought you were. Count the number that LLNLs mangers use.  touch base circle back bandwidth - impactful - utilize - table the discussion deep dive - engagement - viral value-add - one-sheet deliverable - work product - incentivise - take it to the ...