Friday, April 15, 2005

Contract ends in September?

From: "" <>
Subject: [ COALITION for LANL EXCELLENCE ] End of Benefits??
Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 13:38:08 -0000

I just heard this morning that the benefit folks are telling
people with appointments looking into retirement (I have one
coming on April 26) ....
the benefits are saying that the contract ends in September
and so do the benefits .... there is no guarantee that the
benefits will be extended as we've heard the contract has
been extended to March '06.

Has anyone else heard this????

Legally, that is correct. No extension of the contract has been offered to UC by DOE as of yet, so Sept. 30 is presently it!!!!!!!
The benefits people are right. Since no contract extension has been signed and made publically available, we have to act as if the contract ends on Sept. 30. Unless a written extension has been made public, the wise employee will have to retire to maintain any UC retirement benefits. I suppose an extension could happen, but until it is in writing, it doesn't exist.
So much for Bodman's statement when he was here.

Do none of these people understand the concept of credibility?
What would Wise Management do?

The wise employee *OVER 50* will have to retire to maintain any UC retirement benefits.

The wise employee *UNDER 50* will have to *quit* to maintain (a guarantee of?) her vestment in UCRP.

What will Wise Management do to maintain their workforce? Threaten not to hire back anyone wise enough to retire or quit? Or promise to hire back anyone wise enough to retire or quit?

And what can a TL or GL or even DL promise that an AD or Director (or the new HR) refuse to act on for retaliatory, bureaucratic or ??? reasons.
And how can "We the People" get a message to those who might be able to make this a non-issue?

Who could make it a non-issue?

What would that look like?

This seems like something that would provide a win-win for everyone, including DOE and the new contractor (or UC should they win).

Instead of a petition to dump Pete, how about a "show of hands" for how many vested UCRP folks will retire/quit

A) Whether UC loses the contract or not.
B) Whether someone makes a credible promise/commitment to preserve our status with UCRP under a new contractor.
C) If someone makes a credible threat to not hire anyone back, or to be extremely selective, etc...

With the simultaneous threat of a RIF, it would be hard for many to make the choice of guaranteeing their UCRP while forfieting their job...

But with say 50% of the workforce ready to quit/retire w/o a promise of rehire... what is DOE/NNSA/NewContractor going to do?

Make that promise?

Cut the work in half?

Hire/clear thousands?

Looks like it might be ??? = $$$
I heard that the contract extension must be approved by Congress, not DOE. Maybe this goes back to the bill that Congress passed requiring the bid in the first place? Can anybody confirm?

I'm in the *well under 50* crowd, and am seriously considering terminating to preserve UC benefits. If they want to hire me back, they will. If they don't, I'm sure that my skills are useful elsewhere.
For all of you who are thinking of quiting, but not retiring, please remember that if you retire later on from UC, you will NOT have any medical benefits. So you better work for a company that guarantees that you will have medical benefits from them when you retire.

I speak from experience.
To 6:31
No health care is correct. Transfer employees are supposed to get a better retirement deal from the new contract than newly hired employees will. If you quit you will give up all accumulated sick leave and your current vacation schedule - but then again you know what you are going to get from UC now....

Cruel choice, and you don't have enough info to go on. Plus you need to know what the next few years of inflation will be. I think you are going to need a crystal ball or tea leaves.
I suspect many people will begin retiring at 65, when Medicare kicks in.

I believe the current pension plan at Sandia covers medical insurance from 62-65 for retrirees. Need to verify.
UC/Nanos have already tipped their hand with the edict against hiring back LANL retires as consultants. Once you're retired, you're gone (unless, of course, you retired from the DOD).

Yes, we'll see a huge brain drain as people with unique skills and "tribal knowledge" walk out the door, but from a corporate perspective, getting ridd of those senior people who cost too much is a plus - and no nasty age discrimination lawsuits because they left "volutarily."
Post a Comment

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?