-Gus
_______________________________________________________
To/MS: All Employees
From/MS: Michael R. Anastasio, A100
Phone/Fax: 7-5101/5-2679
Symbol: DIR-07-347
Date: December 4, 2007
SUBJECT: Workforce Restructuring Update Regarding New Mexico Unemployment
As the self-selection period draws to a close on Thursday, December 6, I wanted to update you and express my appreciation for your positive engagement in this process.
Since the announcement of the Self-Selection Program (SSP), we have received a number of questions about the eligibility of SSP participants for New Mexico Unemployment benefits. The State of New Mexico has confirmed that those who separate from the Lab voluntarily in Phase I will be eligible for up to 26 weeks of unemployment benefits. We’re all grateful to Governor Richardson, Speaker Lujan, Secretary Sparrow, and Secretary Mondragon for making that happen. You can read the press release regarding this issue at the following link, http://www.workinnewmexico.gov
As of this writing we have had more than 320 applications. This is the best and only SSP package the Lab is going to offer, and a lot of employees are taking a serious look at it.
We have witnessed an extraordinary level of engagement, reflected by the number and quality of questions about the SSP and a tremendous effort by Human Resources staff and senior managers throughout the Laboratory.
Should you have questions regarding the SSP, please contact your line manager, or the Human Resources division. The http://int.lanl.gov/orgs/hr
36 comments:
I am sorry that I can't share in the joy of this announcement. You volunteer to give up your job, then you want to live off of state welfare program handouts for six months? If you get caught up in the involuntary RIF then fine, but not if you volunteer.
"We’re all grateful to Governor Richardson, Speaker Lujan, Secretary Sparrow, and Secretary Mondragon"
--Mickey
And now, what Mickey said behind the scenes at the senior management meeting:
"Ok now, Richardson is doing us a big favor. So don't forget to make a big fat contribution to his campaign, or at least vote for him. Come on now, you can at least vote for him! Lujan on the other hand, well his family is being adequately rewarded these days through Lab employment opportunities we've set aside for the best qualified Lujans. I know, I know...you're getting a bunch of duds. But hey, look at the returns we're getting for the small investment. Not bad! A nice brushing of your collective noses up against Mr. Lujan's wrinkled behind doesn't hurt that much, does it? Be nice now. Oh, and before I forget kudos to our government relations office. Once again they came through for the Gipper."
Now imagine a Howard Dean type screech as Mickey shouts out: Man o man, am I gooooood or what!? ...yeeeeeaaa"
It is my understanding that if you are over 50, the NM unemployment office will require you to begin taking your LANL pension before they will allow you to receive any unemployment payments.
Unemployment is reserved for those people who have no other means of living after they have lost their jobs and all other sources of income.
NM unemployment deducts your other income when figuring how much you get. Almost everybody who retires will get nothing. Your severance may also be counted so you probably get nothing anyways.
Thanks LANS
I'm still having a good belly laugh over the geezer at the last All-Hands Q&A who asked if he would be able to continue receiving the LANS 401k match after he was terminated and on severance. Only at Los Alamos!
He's probably still glad "UC won the contract."
I'm pretty sure the ratio of "clued" to "clueless" staff at LANL is about to increase shortly.
Perhaps, 9:18PM, the "geezer" was trying to ask whether the mandatory contribution (eg 5.5% for old timers) to the 401K by LANS for TCP2ers on the two 2008 normal paychecks will still occur, albeit in early 2009? I understand the answer is yes.
9:18pm: You have got to be kidding.
LANS is eager to prove to NNSA that they are up to the task of herding the LANL workers into accepting increasingly low bid offers.
We've gone from requiring an expensive 3+3 voluntary inducement during the '95 layoff to only requiring entitled severance for this event. Thus, the SSP voluntary event cost NNSA nothing!
NNSA will logically conclude from this event that further cuts can be accomplished without much fear of negative worker reaction. We've proven to NNSA that we are successfully conditioned to accept less.
Next to be cut will probably be severance accumulations, followed shortly thereafter by sharp reductions in retirement medical. Each benefit reduction that succeeds will only embolden NNSA to continue down this path.
I'm skeptical, 10:18. I've yet to meet anyone who thinks they'll be involuntarily riffed.
Nice gesture to the nation’s highest concentration of millionaires (per capita), but does this represent a new policy and, if so, perhaps then the Intel folks recently accepting a voluntary separation might want see if it applies to them as well? The State AG might also want to make certain this generous gesture by Mr. Bill doesn’t conflict with State law. So in making your decision, consider that this gesture might be challenged if not rescinded.
Thanks for reminding me 7:22, 8:56 and 9:07. I need to get off my ass and become a resident of a state with no income tax. No point in voluntarily paying NM state income tax on my pension and retirement accounts to support NM's "state welfare program handouts."
Although, that's not where the unemployment insurance funds come from:
http://www.answers.com/topic/federal-unemployment-tax-act?cat=biz-fin
Anonymous at 12/4/07 10:18 PM said
"I'm pretty sure the ratio of 'clued' to 'clueless' staff at LANL is about to increase shortly."
I think that s/he has this back-assward. The clued are leaving; the clueless are staying.
Or,
Not enough "clued" will leave, at which point some of the "clueless" will suddenly get a clue when they receive their RIF notice.
6:44, this doesn't answer your question, but Intel has its own Rapid Response Resource link on the NM Dept of Workforce Solns webpage.
http://www.dws.state.nm.us/
http://www.dws.state.nm.us/dws-Intel.html
So does PNM:
http://www.dws.state.nm.us/dws-PNM.html
This go round is a freebie for the pols. The younger people I know who are leaving voluntarily and cannot draw retirement already have jobs lined up. The older ones plan to pull retirement.
Well, 6:42AM, meet ME! And my coworkers at IRM.
I am NOT clueless, 8:56AM, just "specialized." It usually takes me 6+ months to locate a viable new job. I have over 34 yrs of on-the-job experience in what I do and I'm extremely good at it, for all that's worth to LANS.
Also, at age 57, with only 4.5 yrs of direct LANL employment, I have no option but to wait and make 'em fire my ass!
The "state welfare program," as 7:22PM put it, will only net someone like me about 1/3 to 1/2 of my current annual salary. I am NOT a scientist, I am one of Los Alamos' "poor." The average LANL salary of $107k is over $50k more than I gross. I will lose not only my job, but my home and my transportation as well in ANY RIF that comes my way. I'm the only bread-winner in my household.
Many of the posters here, both from LANL and from elsewhere, seem to forget that there are going to be a lot of us "little people" devastated by the coming RIFs. Whether they get us in Phase II or in later ones, it'll be just as hard to take.
And, yes, I'm job hunting. One would have to be a complete idiot not to at this juncture.
Maybe one of you young, smug, rich a-holes would like to pay my f-ing bills while I look!
12/5/07 11:02 AM
I hear you Ravenfriend. I would point out that there are people who make 30K less than you and might consider you to be a smug a-hole.
"I would point out that there are people who make 30K less than you and might consider you to be a smug a-hole.
12/5/07 11:07 AM"
I used to be one of them until my late 40s. I'll freely admit to being the latter; the former is something the fates have never allowed me.
Are you being defensive or justly reactive? Are you willing to publish your salary?
No no Ravenfriend, you have me all wrong. My point is that we should remember to be optimistic and that we might have more than we think. You say you are one of the LANL poor, but remember LANL is not the world.
Take a chill pill, Ravenfriend, and try to relax. Almost everyone at LANL is stressed to the max at this point and needs to decompress. Oh, wait a minute. That chill pill might show up on the random piss-tests! Better forget that suggestion.
"No no Ravenfriend, you have me all wrong. My point is that we should remember to be optimistic and that we might have more than we think. You say you are one of the LANL poor, but remember LANL is not the world."
Gee. MY turn to be defensive, eh?! When I read your post, I thought I read, "...might consider you to be a smug a-hole." Must be a typo on my version of the blog. Odd, that.
I AM optimistic! That I will either leave LANL, which (for 1:39PM, who rightly perceives I am stressed) or learn to loved being screwed here and having my civil liberties diminished.
Let me reiterate for those who didn't read the entirety of my post. "I have over 34 yrs of experience...4.5 yrs...at LANL." I do, in fact, know that "...LANL is not the world." Thank the f-ing gods!!!
As for chilling. Well, I tend to get just the teeniest bit unhappy when something threatens to take away my life's work and my home. Too sorry; it's just the way I'm made.
Stress pills? Hah! Oc-Med has already informed me that I cannot take what my MD prescribed for me within 6 to 8 hrs of coming to work.
I'm sure I hear Mr. Murphy laughing up his sleeve somewhere nearby...
I heard it is now 375.
Wow, now they get to triple dip! Suprised they don't throw in a vacation package for the old timers.
So, how many people are out there who wanted to take the voluntary package as a retirement sweetener, and found themselves in an excluded category?
hey 12/5/07 6:15 PM -
Vacation too!! Wow I can't wait. It's great to be me, a double dipper. And it must totally suck to be you. I mean jealous and all. And all you have is your little pissy single income. By the time you are able to double dip there won't be anything left.
A lot of the "excluded" people seem to think they are somehow excluded from being RIFed. Not true. They are excluded from taking the SSP and changing positions at LANL, but protection from layoffs is only implied and not explicit nor legally defined for this category. Read the letter they sent out very carefully. There is no place in it that says "excluded" staff cannot be RIF'ed. Lab Legal constructed this letter with great care.
If the final LANL budget comes in very low (which looks increasingly likely) then almost everyone at LANL will suddenly be at risk to additional layoffs during Phase III. The Phase III layoffs could hit by early summer or even sometime during the next year or two.
The statement has been made in SSP briefings that "excluded" people are protected from involuntary RIF for nine months.
It seems that the "excluded" folks have to be excluded from the involuntary RIF as well, even though it's not in writing. For example, if you are ineligible for the voluntary, then get involuntarily RIFFED, couldn't you sue LANS because you had maybe stopped seeking job offers when you were told you could not voluntarily leave?
Everyon yes everyone is and will remain "At Will" employee's, and yes that means that they can scuttle your ass anytime they wish, with reason or not. (Why can't people understand this very simple concept?
I've only heard of one "ineligible" person, and he works at TA-55.
The protection of "excluded" staff from layoffs is implied, but not promised. This is an important point.
RIF protection of "excluded" staff is not even mentioned in the official letters we received. It was verbally mentioned during the SSP meetings, but I have yet to find any sign of it in writing. This is not by accident.
It's clear that LANS wishes to protect some areas at the lab, but if the FY08 or FY09 budgets come in below expectations, "exclusions" may offer minimal protection from layoffs.
It will be interesting to see what happens if an "excluded" worker gets laid off in the next few years after having been denied access to the SSP offer. I sense the very strong possibility of lawsuits if this occurs. However, Lab Legal will vigorously defend against lawsuits by saying (1) nowhere is there an official memo that claims that "excluded" staff can't be RIFed, and (2) LANS has a right to protect their workforce from unexpected loss of key personnel.
Watching this play out should be very interesting.
the same should be true for any eligible volunteers who, for what ever reason, end up not being approved - they should be exempt from involuntary RIF for some period of time.
You guys are boneheads, if your manager turns you down for the SSP, you are not getting Riffed in Phase II. If you are excluded, you can't take the SSP therefore you can't get Riffed in Phase II. I think the grace period is 9 months for both some reason. I read it in a LANL All email. Could you imagine the ineptatude that would be needed to exclude someone from the SSP, then Riff them or not let them take the SSP and then Riff them anyway. If they are that bent about being excluded they could always just quit, same if your manager won't let you take the SSP. Right now I would worry if your ORC score was anywhere near a 5, if you not excluded they will base the Riffs on performance scores (guess what they have in writing as back up, to avoid the lawsuits.) I would start to watch out now for alot more stuff starting to be "documented". Its a pointless task, talk to any labor lawyer in NM and mention that you were "at will" (also on paper with your LANS offer letter) and I'm sure he'll be happy to take your money but you won't be getting any. Good luck.
When will the Boo birds on this blog understand that LANS does not now and never has followed an at will policy for any employees other than limted terms. LANS policy on discipline and termination clearly espouses a for cause philosopy. The "atwill threat that is continually revived on this blog is totally baseless.
Post a Comment