Saturday, April 15, 2006

Filing of a lawsuit

Submitted by Anonymous:
______________________________
I got this from a friend at LLNL.


Date: April 14, 2006

To: LLNL Employees
From: University Professional & Technical Employees (UPTE)/Society of
Professionals, Scientists, and Engineers (SPSE)

RE: Invitation to UPTE Press Conference on Tuesday, April 18 at 11:00 a.m.

UPTE System Wide will be holding a Press Conference to announce the filing
of a lawsuit challenging the legality of the plan by Los Alamos National
Security, LLC, the new management contractor for the Los Alamos National
Laboratory, to force all 10,000 Laboratory employees to forfeit further
accrual of their University of California pensions in order to be
guaranteed a job with the new contractor. The discussion will focus on the
transition of current laboratory employees out of the UC pension plan in to
the new contractor's private pension plan, employees' transition to "at
will" status, and how this transition adversely impacts employees and the
national security mission of the Laboratory.

The location of the Press Conference will be 4047 First Street, Suite 200,
Livermore. A Communications Workers of America (CWA) attorney will be
present to answer questions about the legal issues.

Please contact UPTE/SPSE at 925-449-4846 with any questions.


Directions to the SPSE Office, 4047 First St. (Suite 200), Livermore :
580E or 580W
Take the FIRST STREET/SPRINGTOWN BLVD exit
Take the FIRST ST ramp toward downtown
Turn onto First ST. (past the Mines Road intersection)
Make U turn at first left turn (Trevarno Road)
Make Right turn 4047 First Street (Gray Bldg & sign for Farmers Insurance
and Allied Insurance)
SPSE Office is upstairs Suite #200 (Left Side)

Comments:
"a lawsuit challenging the legality of the plan by Los Alamos National
Security, LLC, the new management contractor for the Los Alamos National
Laboratory, to force all 10,000 Laboratory employees to forfeit further accrual of their University of California pensions in order to be guaranteed a job with the new contractor."

Effective June 1st, 2006 when the rest of corporate America understands that all they have to do screw its employees out of a pension is to put the company up for bid and form a new corporation then at a later date buy it back; it won't take long before all of corporate America plays this legal game. Just look at what AT&T and SBC just did and you'll see what I mean. SBC bought out by AT&T just long enough to change the contract and benefits rules, then AT&T bought SBC out. What a way to clean house and get rid of the dead weight. Face it. Pensions in America are gone, "forever". Consider yourself lucky that you have what you have. It will be a lot worse for the younger generation or for this who can not retire because they are not age fifty.

If you want to do the world a favor, I'd say get rid of the lawyers who author this garbage and imprison the CEO/ Directors and politicians that screw over the workers.

I believe that in five years from now when all the dust settles UC will once again be the sole operator and owner of the labs once more, but by that time they will have done exactly what I said. Changed the rules, got rid of the pension plans and overpaid dead weight that would have retired very comfortable.

Mission accomplished without a glitch and the courts will back them.
 
Check out the "News" section from the latest UCRP web page:

http://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/news/ucrpfuture/articles.html

"The Future of the UC Retirement Plan"
-----------------------------------------------------------
................ In the News ........................
-----------------------------------------------------------

* GM cuts its annual dividend 50% - USA Today - Feb 7, 2006

* How Safe is Your Pension? - The Wall Street Journal Online - Jan 25,2006

* Pension Crisis Could Hit Balance Sheets - AP - Jan 7, 2006

* Pension Tension - US News and World Report ­ Jan 24, 2005

* The End of Pensions? - NEW YORK TIMES MAGAZINE - Oct. 30, 2005

------------------------------------------------------------

Hmmm.... can we take a hint? Are you getting the picture?

You might also want to take a quick gander at the graph on
the decline in UCRP funding from this UC web page:

http://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/news/ucrpfuture/welcome.html


Hint, hint? Now, tie this together with the UC HR Briefing
letter that we all just got in the mail this weekend. Carefully
read the article "Regents take action to reinstate contributions
to UCRP".

In particular, it restates what many of us have already heard,
namely:

------------------------------------------------------------------
"...(UCRP) contributions rates will increase gradually over time
to 16 percent of covered earnings"

"The ongoing cost to fund the UCRP is 16 percent of the covered
earnings of each Plan member... Regents are expected to hear how
costs will be shared between active UCRP members and the University"
------------------------------------------------------------------

Now, consider the fact that (1) we don't know how much of this
rapidly dwindling cash UCRP will share with the LANS TCP1
pension, but we can expect UC to be less than generous, and
(2) LANS will not be able to handle the TCP1 pension funding
fiasco with the same finesse as the UC system. If LANS passes
a significant chunk of this new cost on to our paychecks, we can
expect to see rather large reductions in take-home pay to cover
the TCP1 pension in the next few years. If we assume 20 percent
under-funding (given that UCRP is already at 16 percent), and
then assume LANS will be "generous" and split the difference,
we could expect to see around 10% of our LANL paychecks going
to pay for the upkeep of TCP1 for those who are members of
this new pension. Assuming static salaries for the future
and an average salary of $100 K for non-executive staff and
your looking at a significant $10 K reduction in life style.

It could get even worse, depending on how generous LANS decides
to be in covering for this growing shortfall. However, any
covering they may do will simply be passed on to LANL project
funds as an overhead cost, thus making employment at LANL
increasingly risky.

The LANL pension situation is clearly being acerbated by the
transition of Los Alamos to a "for-profit" management scheme.
It couldn't be happening at a worse time. If the TCP1 salary
contributions become too onerous, it may even drive out parts
of the current staff who are going to be on TCP1. Perhaps that
is part of the Grand Plan?
 
A detail worth noting; the man most responsible for the UC under funding is one Gerald Parsky. He forced out the UC Treasurer, who had done an outstanding job in managing the UC persion funds.

Does the name sound familiar? Its because "Gerry" is now the Chairman of the LANL LLC.

Let the good times roll!!
 
Parsky: http://www.corporateswine.net/parsky.html


b-ohica, get a clue, all those you rail against are big fat Republican corporate oinkers, screwing the working man.
 
The clue semifreddie is that you have issues that only a professional can help, maybe. I wish you luck on your journey.. maybe Hillary in 2008 will resolve the worlds issues, but somehow I doubt it, but then again she is the democrat's choice for President.
 
-Not this Democrat (former Republican).

I'll take "Moses" Gore (who was in the wilderness for 6 months, grew a beard, smoked some dope, and then came out like a prophet on fire against the people who stole the election from us in 2000).

Or else I'll take Russ Feingold.

Or Ron Paul, R-TX, Libertarian.

But NOT Lieberman, or McCain, or Hillary, or anyone else who voted for the PATRIOT Act or the Occupation of Iraq.

"Democrat" and "Republican" are labels so similar that neither is worth the fart I give in their general direction. (-Yes, yes...I acknowledge Monty Python and the "Holy Grail" for that one.)
 
Now, back to the original issue at hand on this post:
Where will all you "Republicans" (not to mention "Democrats") be when the Union holds its press conference at Ashley Pond on Tuesday 18 April at 11:30 am?
At your desks beavering away for NNSA?
 
I'm not sure that I identify with any political party - for the simple reason that Brad already gave.

As to "beavering" - yes, when I wasn't working on my dam project in my dam office, I was out frolicking with beavers.
 
Post a Comment

<< Home

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