[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 26 (Thursday, February 9, 1995)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E309]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


                NATIONAL LABORATORY EMPLOYEES INCENTIVE

                                 ______


                          HON. BILL RICHARDSON

                             of new mexico

                    in the house of representatives

                       Thursday, February 9, 1995
  Mr. RICHARDSON. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to introduce legislation to 
provide a retirement incentive to national laboratory employees who are 
members of the public employees retirement system [PERS] of California.
  These 450 men and women have each given over 30 years of service to 
the Department of Energy [DOE] and yet they were not offered a 
retirement incentive when DOE began downsizing staff at national 
laboratories administrated by the University of California.
  The DOE funds three national laboratories through the University of 
California. From 1940 until October 1, 1961, national laboratory 
employees enrolled in the PERS of California. In 1961, the University 
of California established its own retirement system. As a result, 
employees hired at the national laboratories after October 1, 1961, 
were enrolled in the University of California Retirement Program 
[UCRP]. When the University of California established the new 
retirement system, national laboratory employees were given the option 
to transfer to the UCRP or remain with the PERS. Most chose to stay 
with the PERS because they had already accrued benefits in that system.
  In 1993 when DOE began downsizing, national laboratory employees with 
UCRP were offered a retirement incentive package that added 3 years to 
retirement age, 3 years service credit, and 3 months pay. National 
laboratory employees with the PERS were not offered any incentive. The 
result of the University of California's decision to offer retirement 
incentives only to employees with UCRP was discriminatory against the 
most senior employees at the labs who were with the PERS of California.
  As with any retirement incentive, this bill would have initial costs, 
but would generate millions of dollars in salary savings each year 
thereafter. For an initial investment of $14 million we could achieve 
$32 million in national laboratory salaries savings in the first year 
alone.
  I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this legislation which 
brings equality to the scientists and employees of our national 
laboratories and achieves significant downsizing at the DOE.


                          ____________________