LLNL - The True Story -

More on Retiree Medical from an anonymous contributor: At the transition, LLNS said that retirees that took the Lump Sum Cashout from UCRP would be eligible for access only coverage, which meant that they would get the same rates as employees ( or other retirees), but would have to pay the full amount. Is this still true? Does anyone who reads this blog know of anyone who has tried this? Is this affected by the new retiree benefits plan? What are the rates? I know, lots of questions. Any info would be appreciated.

Percentages of people leaving: 19 9 > 6 17 > 1y 11 > 2y 20 > 5y 22 > 10y Assuming, this is anywhere near accurate, 45% of people will leave in 2 years or less. Can someone in LLNS tell us how they plan to replace them? or is that what the bureaucrats call "managed attrition"?

Bruzer said: Just Received in the mail a booklet informing us we are moving to a new and improved retirement 401b plan with VanGuard. Does anyone have any thoughts or concerns regarding this one My first impression is whats in it for them?

Contributed anonymously: Health Care Dates Extended, but not for all? Meds to cost at least 3 times as much! I'm hearing that the extension of the deadlines for health care is only for those who are Medicare qualified- which I think means 65 or older. Does anyone know if true? Also what will the various plans cost us? Looks like Kaiser has gone from a 90 day supply of meds to a 30 day supply, for the same price. Such a deal! Not what the 11/20/08 article in the Independent says: ----------------------------------- Period Extended for Lab Retirees to Sign Up for Health Care By Independent News Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory retirees are concerned that they may not be able to sign up for health care benefits by the deadline. Because of that concern, the Lab is extending the open enrollment period. Currently, the retirees are being asked to sign up for the benefits by Nov. 27. The problem is that many people cannot get through to Extend Health, the company hired to take on the...

Contributed anonymously from the president-elect website

Published by Frank Young in the LANL BLOG: By ROGER SNODGRASS, The Los Alamos Monitor In a lengthy report released Tuesday, the Government Accountability Office questioned the effectiveness of the Department of Energy’s nuclear safety program for 205 high-hazard facilities, including the 19 facilities at Los Alamos National Laboratory. In an unusual sign of contention, officials of the Department of Energy responded with 20 pages of formal comments on why they found GAO’s draft report to be “fundamentally flawed” and disagreed with many of its conclusions, prompting GAO to add several more pages of responses to DOE’s detailed comments. Reps. John D. Dingell (D-Mich.), chairman of the Committee on Energy and Commerce and Bart Stupak (D-Mich.), chairman of the Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee, who requested the report issued a joint statement saying, “the report confirmed their concerns about how safety has taken a backseat at DOE because the offices responsible for safety also...

Congressman Cardoza shares Valley frustration with Treasury Secretary Paulson WASHINGTON, DC – Congressman Dennis Cardoza delivered a frustrated and angry message to Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson Monday on behalf of the residents of the Central Valley. “In the most direct way possible I told Secretary Paulson that his efforts to date are completely unacceptable,” Cardoza said. “He keeps telling us they averted a financial crisis. I told him that in my district, we are in a recession. And to those who have lost their homes, we are in a depression. More needs to be done now. The country cannot wait for President Obama.” The congressman added that, “I wanted to deliver the message to him that I knew everyone in my district wanted to send -- act now.” The Congressman made the comments during tense closed-door talks he participated in when Paulson and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke met with the House speaker, majority leader and a handful other top Congressional leaders Monday. Co...

UPDATE: DOE Bodman: May Have Loans For Auto Cos By Year End November 19, 2008: 11:39 AM EST (Updates with Bodman comments) By Ian Talley DOW JONES NEWSWIRES WASHINGTON -(Dow Jones)- Auto companies have submitted to the Department of Energy five applications for $25 billion in loans to retool plants for fuel- efficient vehicles, and DOE could disburse funds by the end of the year, Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman said Wednesday. "We're in the process of evaluating them, and so depending on the quality of the applications ... it's possible we'll have money available by the end of the year," Bodman said on the sidelines of a conference here. Bodman did not say what companies had submitted the loan applications. Auto companies Ford Motor Co. (F), General Motors Co. (GM) and Chrysler LLC have come to Congress this week seeking additional government funding of $25 billion in loans to make sure they can remain financially solvent for the next six months. Republicans are bl...

Anonymous wants to know: What did you think of the G Miller presentation? He/She said: Looked like, with a few token exceptions, the only LLNL accomplishments he was aware of were NIF related or the WCI awards (oh yeah, the dragon boat team got 3 photos- science at its best). He made it clear that he is not interested in promoting WFO, by stating that even though overhead rates are still high we brought in more WFO in the last cycle. How about the weird statements from Arnold Sch., wildly supportive of NIF...? Are we now having our scientific reviews not by peers but by uneducated celebrities? Does anyone funding our work at LLNL think Arnold is a credible expert on fusion or lasers or nuclear energy? Really makes it look like NIF and LIFE are in big trouble technically if they are resorting to such shenanagins. Guess they figured out that the new administration is likely to accelerate the trend of cut backs on funding for fusion energy. They never mention NIF being used to study nucle...

By Mr Requa: It is certainly immoral and almost certainly illegal for UC to transfer liability for LLNL retiree medical benefits to LLNS. Those of us affected are having our benefits cut now and probably eliminated in the near future. UC's web site promises us that if we were receiving medical benefits immediately before retiring, we would continue to receive those benefits after retiring. In my case, they provided my medical coverage for 7 years, then suddenly declared they were no longer responsible for coverage and told me a Limited Liability Company would be providing my coverage. Being one of those retirees who is not eligible for Medicare, loosing my medical coverage would be catastrophic. Like most of these situations, it is complex enough that a short letter can't cover all the facts. I have set up a web site at: http://home.comcast.net/~jrequa/retiree.htm which explains the situation. I am seeking support from other retirees to help address the issue. Our most critical...

An anonymous contributors said: "Put your hip waders on. GM has rolled out the new and improved NIF. And I always thought it was a weapons research tool. Fooled again by the master nipple farmer." Another said: "I suggest a new thread on the next heroin program that Moses is on that is eating up SMS/LDRD and got the Governor to talk up." Let the comments pour in!

Anonymously contributed: A letter to the editor regarding LLNL retiree benefit changes has been published in the Nov. 6 issue of The Independent Newspaper, on page 5. Find it at http://independentnews.com/uploads/pdf/1_06112008_1225936863.pdf This policy change is such a blatant and obvious example of a LLNS management system that has lost it's moral and ethical compass , that further letters to newspapers or congress people could re-open the whole privatization issue at LLNL and LANL. Now is your chance to make a difference.

Anonymous said: Arnold Shwartznegger is visiting NIF on Monday; does anyone know what time?

Will congress do it? Oakland Tribune

Anonymously contributed: LLNL has announced that it will make a large corporate donation to this years HOME charity campaign. I am a strong supporter of the HOME campaign and have made personal contributions, along with thousands of other employees, yearly over my 30-year career. A corporate donation seems particularly inappropriate this year. This year the lab has downsized the workforce by about 2000 people including involuntary layoffs. Lab retirees have been notified that many older than 65 will loose the safety net of their group medical plan. After being told that ongoing staff and benefit reductions are necessary because of funding shortfalls, it seems totally irresponsible for management to make a donation up to $1 million of taxpayers money to outside agencies particularly when dedicated employees and retirees are suffering from these cuts. Selection of elderly retirees to be the first group to loose group medical coverage also seems particularly mean-spirited and disrespectfu...