BJC Pension Fund Management
Larry Long writes: Today, DOE announced that the planned increase in the cost of Pre-Age 65 Bechtel Jacobs Retiree medical benefits has been put on hold. Getting a reprieve is certainly welcome news, but we really need Bechtel Jacobs and DOE to step up and fix the total problem. There were 547 retirees that would have been severely impacted by the now deferred change. However, there are somewhere in the neighborhood of 2000 grandfathered employees, scattered across Oak Ridge, Paducah and Portsmouth, impacted by the segregation of retirement benefits from the other Oak Ridge facilities.
DOE has focused on contracting the work with the expertise. Bechtel Jacobs is a fine construction company. They know how to tear things down. Bechtel Jacobs and DOE have accomplished a great deal in recent years. Those of us that have worked there take a great deal of pride in the accomplishments.
However, Bechtel Jacobs has no expertise in managing a retirement package for retired nuclear workers. Even a quick review of the cost of our medical benefits demonstrates that the cost are excessive when compared to the other Oak Ridge DOE sites. They have no vested interest in our retirement plan and shouldn't be asked to commit their energies in this direction. They should focus on the things that they are good at.
Bechtel Jacobs contract has been extended until 2011. Assuming that DOE doesn't provide BJC with another extension, they will cease to exist. The management of our retirement plan will have to go somewhere when BJC goes away and as time goes on, our numbers will decrease and the cost of overhead will increase. BJC should proactively move out and work with DOE to move our retirement back in with Y-12 and ORNL. Why not reap the benefits of a larger base now?
As a BJC retiree, I feel the effects of discrimination. Maybe, we all need to feel this from time to time so that we scream when we see injustice. As I have previously stated, many of us worked for Y-12 and ORNL but fate put us at Bechtel Jacobs at the time of retirement. We worked under some extreme circumstances, but we accomplished much. We should not be treated differently.
Before proceeding any further, I urge Bechtel Jacobs and DOE to look closely at the cost of the current BJC retirement package, the plans for future management of this package, and the inequities that currently exist. It's time to make it right!
November 30th, 2007 at 1:40 pm
Larry Long makes some good comments but he has overlooked one thing: DOE/BJC is solving the problem, i.e., Protect the DOE budget against the rising cost of health care benefits by passing the responsibility on to the individual. Likewise for pension benefits albeit these cost are not rising as fast. Pension benefits can be controlled by freezing them on the reirement date, i.e. no improvements to compensate for inflation. Obviously , retiree morale is not a consideration. (You saved the world but what have you done for me lately?)
This has two fallacies: 1) The employees are to damn dumb to realize that they will soon be affected negatively, and 2) retirees won’t tell potential new hires the truth. Neither of these effects will make a positive contribution to staff quality.
The award fee contract is a good vehicle for doing this: DOE sets the goal and BJC reaches the goal or suffers in their award fee. This is clearly stated in the contract. When BJC sees its image being tarnished then they like Union Carbide will no longer bid on the contracts although it is clear that Roger Hibbs foresaw the problems and pre-empted tem.
As for switching contractors, they all have the same above motivation and the more things change the more they will stay the same.
Have faith! DOE is not GOD. They get their money from Congress who needs our votes (or perhaps the Devil).
Al Brooks