tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28220200.post4234482528870000414..comments2023-08-27T06:53:36.768-06:00Comments on LANL: The Rest of the Story: Benefits Question from LivermoreFrank Younghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02134775226991383924noreply@blogger.comBlogger39125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28220200.post-47920152612970670632007-06-25T23:59:00.000-06:002007-06-25T23:59:00.000-06:00Hi,Have you guys seen the Segal report detailing t...Hi,<BR/>Have you guys seen the Segal report detailing the demographics of LANS employees? I don't have it on this computer, but will post the link tomorrow.<BR/>You'll see that LANS employes went TCP1 2 to 1. And the average age of TCP1 employees was 44 years old. <BR/>Clearly most are betting on LANS to guarantee pension payments, even the young employees.<BR/><BR/>I'm using a couple of spreadsheets that originated a LANL. Thanks to the authors. There is clearly way more money in TCP1, provided it pays off. TPC2 leaves me with a nontrivial shortfall, just considering 403(b), pension from UCRP and 401(k). <BR/><BR/>Tough choices.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28220200.post-42167804701005406192007-06-21T21:14:00.000-06:002007-06-21T21:14:00.000-06:00P&TBThe LLNS website now (as of June 21) includes ...P&TB<BR/><BR/>The LLNS website now (as of June 21) includes their proposed benefit package.<BR/><BR/>(http://www.llnsllc.com/file/Employeebriefing062007.pdf)<BR/><BR/>Under TCP2, for service-based contributions, the 401(k) company contribution for LLNL employees is significantly less than for LANL employees:<BR/><BR/>0-9 years is 1% vs. 3.5%<BR/><BR/>10-19 years is 1.75% vs. 4.5%<BR/><BR/>20+ years is 2.75% vs. 5.5%<BR/><BR/>No doubt this is a result of a BenVal study, which caps benefits at 105% of benefits at comparable companies. I'd tend to believe this reduction will be reflected in the LANS benefits as well, maybe LANS TCP2 employees will see this reduction for their CY2007 company contributions to be distributed at the end of February 2008.<BR/><BR/>Because the original post is buried pretty far down, and because it may be the next thing to hit LANL employees, can you please bring this to the top? It could be important to many employees at both labs.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28220200.post-74173073563875437342007-06-12T21:19:00.000-06:002007-06-12T21:19:00.000-06:00from 12:32 - I am a veteran and I spent my share o...from 12:32 - I am a veteran and I spent my share of time in harms way (life before LANL). I also have a sense of humor that you seem to have missed, but at the same time, Eric's willingness to share his wisdom with us is a little tiresome. Chill dude.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28220200.post-21048655425303065932007-06-11T22:20:00.000-06:002007-06-11T22:20:00.000-06:00Tyler Przybylek of NNSA promised everyone during t...Tyler Przybylek of NNSA promised everyone during the RFP Townhall meetings that DOE/NNSA would always be around to protect our pension benefits. We have nothing to worry about. In fact, I'm sure Tyler's pension promise is every bit as good as Mike's incessant promises of "no RIF, no plans for a RIF" Right?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28220200.post-89084453806441884412007-06-11T21:44:00.000-06:002007-06-11T21:44:00.000-06:006/10 12:00 pm:"Going TCP1 (the new LLC pension) wi...6/10 12:00 pm:<BR/><BR/>"Going TCP1 (the new LLC pension) will lock you into your current workplace so you'll never be able to leave, no matter how badly your new LLC decides to treat you. Choose wisely."<BR/><BR/>Not exactly. TCP1 will lock you into the current LANL (or in the case of the left coast), LLNL contractor, whoever that may be either now or in the future. In evey contract change to come, TCP1 will mean that you'll be waiting to see what DOE requires the "new" contractor to do with those "leftover" employees who used to be, long ago, UC employees entitled to a UC retirement. I'd hate to be the last employee in that fund - maybe $1.50 left for my retirement?? If you took TCP1 at LANL and think you made a solid, defensible choice, look and think again. Do you trust LANS to be around and to do the right thing? If not, do you trust DOE to continue strict requirements to take care of all those "left over" UC employees?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28220200.post-5178288292695778882007-06-11T20:02:00.000-06:002007-06-11T20:02:00.000-06:00The LLNS contract was posted on the NNSA contract ...The LLNS contract was posted on the NNSA contract competition website last week. The same provisions for Inactive Vested Transferring Employees as in the LANS contract remain:<BR/><BR/>- UC service credit counts for vacation and sick leave accrual, retiree medical premium contributions, and 401(k) employer contributions and matches.<BR/><BR/>- Sick leave can be retained with UC for determining UCRP service credit if the Inactive Vested Transferring Employee retires within 120 days of separating from service.<BR/><BR/>- Except for Key Personnel, LLNS is required to offer current workers in good standing (including Flex Term employees) jobs at their current salaries - this also includes Inactive Vested Transferring Employees. <BR/><BR/>Per the LLNL transition website, LLNS has already submitted their proposed benefits package to NNSA/LSO (Livermore Site Office). The proposed benefits package will be published for public comment before it is finalized.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28220200.post-846601854595973282007-06-11T12:41:00.000-06:002007-06-11T12:41:00.000-06:00Contributions to UCRS will come from UC employees....Contributions to UCRS will come from UC employees. Now, since June 1st, 2006, how many of us at LANL have been UC employees? Almost none.<BR/>TCP1 participants are LANS employees with a brand new LANS pension plan (whose interests in UCRS were transferred to LANS in the one-time distribution, underfunded or not). TCP2 participants are LANS employees and inactive vested participants in the UCRS who UC says will not be contributing to the plan as long as they remain inactive.<BR/>I personally opted for TCP2 for several reasons but one primary reason was maintaining the lump sum distribution option offered by UCRS and not available with TCP1 - too many uncertainties and in that light liquidity is your best position.<BR/><BR/>With regards to LLNS, LLC one should first make absolutely sure the contract and benefit plan will be identical to LANS, LLC before taking advice from one or the other - they are not going to be the same contract, nor same corporation, and will not necessarily contain the same benefit package.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28220200.post-47580874937562898022007-06-11T08:23:00.000-06:002007-06-11T08:23:00.000-06:00Eric's idea of a productive blog is the Lab's Read...Eric's idea of a productive blog is the Lab's Reader's Forum.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28220200.post-48471122168325560752007-06-10T23:30:00.000-06:002007-06-10T23:30:00.000-06:00Have to agree with you, poster 2:38pm. The DFA EM...Have to agree with you, poster 2:38pm. The DFA EMERG MKTS fund rocks! Most small investors never get a chance to invest in funds like this one. Thanks to the UC connection, those with 403b funds can put part of their investment in funds like this one. With the dollar dropping like a rock and the BRIC (go look it up) countries on a roll, this fund has been doing fantastic over the last few years!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28220200.post-70605681114310772922007-06-10T23:24:00.000-06:002007-06-10T23:24:00.000-06:00Eric may have a mental problem. No joke, I'm seri...Eric may have a mental problem. No joke, I'm serious. I highly doubt he has 150 paying customers from the Los Alamos community. He's making it up as he goes along. Unfortunately, he doesn't even realize it's all a great big fantasy created within his own mind. If you don't believe me, take a look at his own blog. He seems to think people are listening to him, when, in fact, he's only talking to himself. He's probably delusional. Of course, many could say the same thing about most of the people now working at LANL.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28220200.post-39633922689609023342007-06-10T22:51:00.000-06:002007-06-10T22:51:00.000-06:00I bet Eric is Pinky or the brain.I bet Eric is Pinky or the brain.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28220200.post-45795307297295322402007-06-10T21:02:00.000-06:002007-06-10T21:02:00.000-06:00LANS pension under TCP1 is not controlled by UC, i...LANS pension under TCP1 is not controlled by UC, it is controlled by LANS (at least that was my understanding, but I went with the 401k so I what do I know about it). They are seperate entities. If mandatory contributions are to be implemented it would be at the direction of LANS, not UC.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28220200.post-32795014679963746622007-06-10T19:40:00.000-06:002007-06-10T19:40:00.000-06:00Okay... I want to know more about this Anonymous s...Okay... I want to know more about this Anonymous said... <BR/>Opps forgot to give URL for the latest on UC pension plan findings or should I say need for contributions.<BR/><BR/>http://atyourservice.ucop.edu/news/retirement/0705-ucrp_update.html <BR/><BR/>6/10/07 3:10 PM <BR/><BR/>I want to know if the people in TCP-1 at both labs are now going to have to start contributing 5% of my pay check per month. Can anyone find out where it says the people at both labs that went TCP-1 are exempt from this donation. My feeling is that once they get their claws into you they will just keep taking more as the years go on.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28220200.post-34808700533116756912007-06-10T19:02:00.000-06:002007-06-10T19:02:00.000-06:00"...if these commenters anonymously attack a perso..."...if these commenters anonymously attack a person they don't know with facts they don't have, they would expect anyone to listen to them."<BR/><BR/>Because that is what this, and all of the LANL blogs are about.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28220200.post-73893445499760433842007-06-10T19:00:00.000-06:002007-06-10T19:00:00.000-06:00"Now lets get back to having a productive blog as ..."Now lets get back to having a productive blog as Pinky and the Brain have been trying to do for months now."<BR/><BR/>A productive blog? Where is that one?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28220200.post-33806257355298124542007-06-10T18:25:00.000-06:002007-06-10T18:25:00.000-06:00How about equal time for Eric's competition? He is...How about equal time for Eric's competition? He is not the only finacial advisor out there. There are nationally reocognized head huters avaialable, too.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28220200.post-7688243413333525262007-06-10T18:22:00.000-06:002007-06-10T18:22:00.000-06:00Pinky and Brain, Why don't you start selling ad sp...Pinky and Brain, <BR/><BR/>Why don't you start selling ad space? Oh, I forgot, Eric currently gets unlimited ad space for free . . . <BR/><BR/>(Eric, attacking those that question the business ethics of using this blog commercially is probably counter-productive.)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28220200.post-26131545710518679342007-06-10T17:59:00.000-06:002007-06-10T17:59:00.000-06:00The comments above are fascinating.The attacks see...The comments above are fascinating.<BR/><BR/>The attacks seem to be against the person's self created avatar of who I might be. They say much more about the commenter than they do about me.<BR/><BR/>Maybe they should be called "Attacks without facts."<BR/><BR/>Here are a few facts:<BR/><BR/>More than 150 customers on transition counseling from age 25 to 75, from 1 year at the Lab to 33 years at the Lab, from income of $40,000 a year to income of more than $150,000 a year, techs, TSMs, SSMs, group leaders and more.<BR/><BR/>50 man years experience in financial counseling and 17 years experience in how the Lab works and doesn't. <BR/><BR/>As to working for a large company, we don't do it because brokers for such a company usually make money by taking it from you in commissions when you are not looking. And, they know little about how weapons labs work or about the world view of experienced weapons lab workers.<BR/><BR/>To us, working for a commission and not for the benefit of the client is a conflict of interest, so we don't do it.<BR/><BR/>My main question is why, if these commenters anonymously attack a person they don't know with facts they don't have, they would expect anyone to listen to them.<BR/><BR/>I will listen to anyone with the courage to become a real person with a real name, real substantive financial and Lab information, and real contact information who has the courage to contact me. I do not intend to listen to anonymous annoyances.<BR/><BR/>As before, I invite any attackers to meet me in person. The last time that I made this offer and even offered to buy them coffee no one had the courage to show up.<BR/><BR/>I am sorry that the commenters are so angry that hurting the lives of their friends and colleagues and the families of these friends and colleagues is the commenters best use of their time.<BR/><BR/>My growing guess is that these attackers do not work at a national lab and do not have a career and a lifetime's assets on the line. A friend suggested that the anonymous attackers are probably boys who will, with luck, be in eighth grade next year.<BR/><BR/>If they are actually suggesting that their own colleagues should lose their life savings and their careers and not do any learning in order to minimize the loss, then I do not understand why such a suggestion is responsible adult behavior on the part of the commenters. Such behavior might give the anonymous commenter an adrenaline rush for a minute or two, but it is not responsible, empathetic, nor caring.<BR/><BR/>Thanks for giving me a chance to say these things.<BR/><BR/>Now lets get back to having a productive blog as Pinky and the Brain have been trying to do for months now.Erichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04112131448599926289noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28220200.post-27506188418976482082007-06-10T15:10:00.000-06:002007-06-10T15:10:00.000-06:00Opps forgot to give URL for the lastest on UC pens...Opps forgot to give URL for the lastest on UC pension plan findings or should I say need for contributions.<BR/><BR/>http://atyourservice.ucop.edu/news/retirement/0705-ucrp_update.htmlAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28220200.post-76369280806247064512007-06-10T14:53:00.001-06:002007-06-10T14:53:00.001-06:00Things are about to change I think very soon. I ju...Things are about to change I think very soon. I just read that the UC has conceded that they need 16 % contribution to the UCRP in order for the fund to stay at 80%. 11% will be paid for by UC and 5% will be taken out of the employees checks. I am assuming that this will include all LANS, LLC and all LANS,LLC starting July 15th or so. For me I can not take that type of cut in pay so I am going TCP-2, retiring on Oct 2nd and then going to make a go at trying to make my own 401k. I would almost bet that the 5% contribution will slowly but surly change in to 1% increases to the employees year by year until eventually UC's contributions is 0% and the employees is 16%. That's one hell of a pay cut per month people. If any knows for sure that the pension contributions do not apply to any of these LANS or LLNS please state so with factual information. I don't recall ever seeing anything that people who go TCP-1 will be exempt from this.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28220200.post-24637854682572548072007-06-10T14:53:00.000-06:002007-06-10T14:53:00.000-06:00http://www.irs.gov/taxtopics/tc424.html<A HREF="http://www.irs.gov/taxtopics/tc424.html" REL="nofollow">http://www.irs.gov/taxtopics/tc424.html</A>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28220200.post-53430797959946651852007-06-10T14:43:00.000-06:002007-06-10T14:43:00.000-06:00I'm not sure where Eric is getting his "yes" answe...I'm not sure where Eric is getting his "yes" answer to the OP's question #4, but I'd check with the powers that be prior to acting on that answer. <BR/><BR/>How an employer structures a 401k plan (or a 403b plan, for that matter) is largely a matter of the IRS code (section 401k, coincidentally!). So if you have questions about what an employer can do, see the link below, and also IRS publication #560. <BR/><BR/>In regard to investment choices, it's usual for a large employer to buy a turnkey 401k package from an investment house (Fidelity, Merrill Lynch, etc.) These vendors charge the employer to administer the plans, so, surprise! Most employers pick the low-cost bid. In other words there is a reason Fidelity is the custodian of many employers' 401k plans and it's that they are the low-cost solution. <BR/><BR/>Typically the custodian offers a menu of mutual funds and money-market funds in which you can invest your 401k dollars, and the choice is not infinite. They ordinarily offer you a choice among 6-10 funds that run the gamut from conservative to aggressive investment styles. I've not seen a 401k that lets you pick just any investment you like (such as individual stocks). There may be such a plan, but Fidelity won't offer it. <BR/><BR/>One thing y'all have going for you is that many corporate 401ks only invest the company match in the company stock. Your plan, presumably, will not have that restrication.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28220200.post-89628015819840508472007-06-10T14:39:00.000-06:002007-06-10T14:39:00.000-06:00I chose TCP2 because I don't trust LANS over the l...I chose TCP2 because I don't trust LANS over the long haul (20+ years). That's a lot of potential contract changes, a lot of unknowns. The payoff for TCP1 appears higher under most scenarios, but only if workers are never required to pay in as they go. <BR/><BR/>Baby boomers' mileage may vary.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28220200.post-76416486061145932402007-06-10T14:38:00.000-06:002007-06-10T14:38:00.000-06:00Please explain why LANS,LLC or LLNS,LLC did not gi...Please explain why LANS,LLC or LLNS,LLC did not give the people the option of putting their funds in the DFA EMERG MKTS INST listed on the fidelity site. Check out their performance and their rating then get back with me.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-28220200.post-58018296720524822972007-06-10T14:26:00.000-06:002007-06-10T14:26:00.000-06:00I can't think of a reason you'd need to "kick star...I can't think of a reason you'd need to "kick start" your LLNS 401k. <BR/><BR/>Unlike others, I am not particularly offended by the limited Fidelity 401k offerings. Most reputable financial publishers (e.g. the Wall Street Journal) are now recommending "lifecycle" funds (i.e. Fidelity's Freedom 20xx funds) for the vast majority of retirement investors. <BR/><BR/>Historically another reason to stay in your 403b was the significantly greater flexibility, e.g. you could take out a loan for just about any "hardship." I believe this is being tightened up under new legislation, but the edge may still go to the 403b. <BR/><BR/>I don't understand the "lower fees" claim for the 403b. Both types of accounts are held by Fidelity, and some of the fund offerings are exactly the same. I would like to see some evidence for the claim that the 403b has lower fees than the equivalent 401k investment.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com