Sunday, March 26, 2006

Response from Senator Bingaman

Submitted by Anonymous:

Response from Senator Bingaman regarding the unresolved issue of the proposed UCRP clone, our forced decision regarding LANS pension plans, and "substantially equivalency" follows. Do not give up: keep writing DOE/NNSA, LANS, UC and your elected representatives; take legal action.

Thank you for contacting me regarding the proposed pension plan for Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) employees and retirees. I appreciate your taking the time to share your concerns with me.

I understand your concerns with the proposed pension plan for LANL employees and retirees. As you know, Senator Domenici and I wrote a letter to Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman urging him to reject the request made by the University of California Board of Regents to segregate and spin off liabilities and assets. As of this time, I have not received a response from the UC Board of Regents regarding my concerns. I am aware that many employees and retirees still have serious questions about their retirement benefits, and from my perspective, the generic statement from the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) that the LANS package is "substantially equivalent" is insufficient to address those questions or provide them with confidence. For this reason, I have consistently urged NNSA and LANS to address these concerns before finalizing the package. Please be assured that I will continue my advocacy for LANL employees and retirees as I monitor any new developments in this transition process.

Well, I for one am sure glad that the University of California retained a place at the LANL feeding trough. They continue to perform in that awe-inspiring style which they honed to perfection during the Nanos regime.
"Clueless and powerless" is the only way to describe our Congressional delegation. They supported the spinoff NNSA over which neither the DOE secretary nor Congress has any control. They supported privatization of our national laboratories over which they now have no control. Writing them results only in placating responses that come weeks after initial letters are sent. Requests that they spend a day in Los Alamos hosting a town hall meeting where they actually discuss what they are doing to support the community in its request for a bypass around the SPP, what they are doing to ensure that retirees' pensions are not raided, what they are doing to ensure that those who transfer to TCP1 do not have their benefits cut after one year, etc. are ignored because they know that not only do they have no answers but they have no power to effect change.
This post has been removed by a blog administrator.
So what does this tell you Tarvis. I'd say that the UC Regents is going to do what ever the "law" allows them to do. If they find a loophole that will enable them to spin off everyone that has retired or that is going to retire, they will in fact dump you as quick as possible. I will assure you that they are consulting with their hot shot lawyers this very minute. I have had coworkers call a few lawyers and ask if what they intend to do is legal, and over the phone they say "no"; but that's as far as it gets. Eventually this will go to court and some liberal pinhead San Francisco lawyer will rule that you can not hold a firm liable for a promised pension plan if the pay outs will cause bankruptcy or discomfort to the firm that made the promise. In reality what this tells me is that even if you had a sign contract when you got hired, when the time comes the big firms can wiggle their way out of upholding their end of the bargain.

My bet is that we will be spun off and that within five years you will not get a check nor will you have medical coverage. If you do it will be for1/3 of what you were supposed to get and your medical will come from a state facility such as those used by the people on welfare or the state prisons.

We are just now catching up with all of those who have already been burned by corporate America, and there is nothing we are going to do about it simply because they have a large of foreign nationals and illegal aliens who will work for 1/3 what they are now paying you, even if they have no allegiance to the United States of America or its Constitution. That trait is irrelevant to the corporation. Their objective is to make the rich richer and the poor, poorer where there will eventually be two classes of people. The haves and the have nots. As a lab employee I have that gut feeling that we are going to join the have nots very soon.

If we get lucky we will get to retain our primary UC retirement of which I will be very gratful for no matter how little the check is, since I will know that I will be the last of this generation to ever see a pension of any sort.
For the record b-ohica, your "pinhead" conservative judges are the ones caving in to every corporate whim these days, not your "pinhead" liberal types. It's your conservative buds that are sticking it to you this time boys!
Oh well, think what you want but I am afraid that I will always be conservative, even in 2008. I am not about going to vote for Hillary or anyone that shares her beliefs. Have a good day.
The NM congressional club has been a total failure... lip service and politics and form letters and not a care in the world.... Not one of them has lifted a finger to do anything to stop this travesty in Los Alamos...
What I want to know is, what does he plan on doing about the Epstein-Barr virus
Post a Comment

<< Home

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