Friday, August 3, 2012
LLNL loses 2 key leaders
Anonymously contributed:
From The Mercury News:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.mercurynews.com/breaking-news/ci_21222452/livermore-lab-loses-two-key-leaders
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
18 comments:
Seavers? Isn't this the one who answered 1000 + questions during the UC to LLNS turn over and since then all she said that wouldn't happen has happened and we're to believe her..
Seaver said she had no knowledge of any investigations taking place.
John Belluardo, public affairs director for the Livermore site office of the National Nuclear Security Administration, said the - "office does not comment as a matter of policy on potential or ongoing investigations conducted by law enforcement agencies or internal investigations involving laboratory contractors or federal personnel."_
WHO'S NEXT
This comments I believe still has substance no matter what type of cover-up the PAO wants to pull in the media.
Anonymous said...
The words consulting business on the side of which the nephew works for keep popping up in the rumor mill. I guess little bits of information will leak out slowly but surely until the truth is known. Either way it's a mess…
Folks are being way too hard on Tomas. He was just acting the same way that ULM has acted for decades. It is the UC way. If there were expectations that management would be better under the new LLC setup, then NNSA should have gone with a different team in the selection.
The transition from UC to LLNS and / or LANS had absolutely nothing to do with cost saving in operational funds but for sure had everything to do with cutting the employees throats by getting them off the UC pension plan and onto some funky worthless POS 401k and a TCP-1 pension plan that’s going down the tubes quickly. Can't wait until DOE tells LLNS and LANS to sick it and directs them to turn TCP_1 over to PBGC.
There’s been no cost savings what so ever since the contractors took over the labs except for manipulation of the workers off a very good defines pension program that actually was great and still is and extending their working years hoping they die on the job or shortly afterwards.
If you wnat to see some good earnings for presnt day times take a look at the 403b earning compared to the 401k or for that matter TCP-1 plan and you'll see what I’m talking about. Better yet take a look at the UC's DCP funds. Those are the plans everyone’s money should be in.
For those who think Tomas was out of the ordinary, who remembers Lowell "Brillant Pebbles" Wood? This guy was the most arrogant "A-hole" on the planet. These guys just breed themselves at the Labs.
August 4, 2012 8:02 PM
Aren't Lowell "Brillant Pebbles" Wood and Ed Moses brothers? They appear to be mirror images. “ I have a dream” – the problem is it’s wet.
4:42, how sad that you "can't wait" for the failure of TCP1. A little bitter, yes? The only folks that see it failing are the ones that aren't in it, and it's mostly wishful thinking on their part, which is again, sad.
August 5, 2012 9:47 AM
TCP-1's failure would only prove that LLNS ad LANS has been full of crap from day one. One more nail in their coffen is just fine with me.
TCP-1 at both LLNL and LANL probably won't go bankrupt but they will be frozen into "hybrid" plans and it's going to happen fairly soon. The lack of adequate returns in both stock markets and fixed income will make this inevitable.
For younger staff in these "closed" pensions, it means you'll be seeing much less money in your pension payouts during retirement. This is the NNSA's grand plan for the labs. It's already happened at SNL.
August 5, 2012 1:34 PM
Is the hybrid better than PBGC and how's it working at SNL. Please go into details so we know what to do and can make plans.
Please go into details so we know what to do and can make plans.
August 5, 2012 2:29 PM
Good luck with that approach!
The "hybrid" path would likely bring a freeze-out of any further service credit on the TCP-1 pension -- only age credit would accumulate. This would probably cut your final retirement payouts in half if you are not at least in your early 50s right now.
To compensate for this, LLNS and LANS would allow some employer matching contributions to 401-Ks. Maybe no a full 6% shared contribution match like those who are on TCP-2, but something around ~3% for those who are still a "frozen" TCP-1 pension. Current pension contributions from employee salaries and from program taxes would be reduced after the TCP-1 pension freeze-out process was implemented.
That's what I see as a "hybrid" path. It's been done by many corporations as they try to shed their pension promises. It's definitely not "substantial equivalent" with UC, but I doubt that would stop the DOE/NNSA from trying to weasel out of that promise.
Heck, LANS recent cut-backs to 30 days notice before a RIF begins wasn't "substantial equivalent" with UC policy. That didn't stop them from doing it and no one at LANL seems to be complaining. Strange, but true.
Then there was the wiping out of large amounts of accumulated severance for loyal, long-term staff. Like the above, little protest from employees was heard.
By now, LANS knows they can pretty much do as they please in terms of employee benefits and policies.
August 6, 2012 11:30 AM
They need to get this done quickly for the young people..
Thanks to the person who asked for an explanation of freezing/hybrid pension plan, and double thanks to the person who answered it so clearly.
I found that very useful, to help me think about potential future pathways things could take.
I appreciate it when the blog is about sharing information and ideas like this.
Thanks!
There are still a good number of smart, informed, level-headed and thoughtful people left at the labs.
Sometimes it's easy to forget that in all the blog shouting... And day-to-day at work -- more and more they're keeping their heads down and thoughts to themselves in the current environment.
Seems to me like Seaver's claims that she "didn't have further details about Diaz de la Rubia's departure" and "had no knowledge of any investigations taking place" must be just bald-faced lies. Unless the lab intentionally kept their deputy director of media and communications in the dark, just so she could say that.
At least Belluardo went with the usual "no comment" line, rather than implying nothing's going on.
August 8, 2012 12:10 AM
Again this is the same lady that lied on all 1000 questions posed to them during the transition from UC to LLNS where everything they said would never happen is happening before your very eyes. Any questions? Freeze and hyrid it is, now lets get with the plan.
Post a Comment