Plans were announced this week to file a federal class action lawsuit against the Department of Energy to recover retirement benefits lost for hundreds of Hanford employees who were moved to Lockheed Martin Services as part of a largely failed economic development plan in 1996. Fluor took over as the primary contractor at Hanford that year, winning the contract after proposing to develop enterprise companies that would initially be given some Hanford work as they developed business outside the facility to diversify the Tri-Cities, Wash., area economy.
Hanford workers were assigned to the enterprise companies, which workers called “outside the fence,” and told they would not be hired if they applied for other Hanford jobs rather than accepting enterprise company positions. Because enterprise companies were considered commercial enterprises, employees were told the number of years they had worked would be frozen as of 1996 when their Hanford pensions were calculated. They also lost retirement health insurance and life insurance benefits, say workers organizing the class action lawsuit.
Within a couple of years, Hanford workers assigned to enterprise companies began to be drawn back into prime Hanford contracts as the companies started to fold. But Lockheed Martin Services workers remained “outside the fence,” even though they said many continued to do the same information technology work for Hanford at the same desks as they had before they were assigned to the firm.
The proposed lawsuit is not a sure-fire case, said Richland attorney Doug McKinley, who agreed to take the case. One hurdle McKinley must overcome is the statute of limitations. He plans to argue that since decisions continue to be made regularly on the Hanford pension plan, the lawsuit remains timely.
Over the past 20 years Lockheed Martin Services workers have tried many ways to recoup lost benefits, said retired Lockheed Martin Services employee Peter Turping. They have filed appeals on their pension payments, met with state and federal elected officials, filed ethics complaints with the Department of Energy and Lockheed, and made their case in news media.
A DOE Inspector General’s Office report released in April gave Lockheed Martin Services employees new hope. It proves the case that employees cannot be denied Hanford pension benefits on the grounds that Lockheed Martin Services is a commercial rather than government enterprise, Turping said. The IG found that Mission Support Alliance had improperly awarded $63.5 million as profit to its information technology subcontractor Lockheed Martin Services, according to the report. Part of the government’s argument was that Lockheed Martin Services had a noncommercial and noncompeted subcontract, making it ineligible for a profit payment beyond what Mission Support Alliance received.
McKinley said he will post more information and signup sheets at www.mckinleylaw.com when he has filed the lawsuit. A group of 30 current and past Lockheed Martin Services workers have paid costs so far and there will be no up-front costs for the estimated 500 workers who may be eligible to join the lawsuit. If the claim is accepted, McKinley will receive a third of the award.
The Department of Energy on Friday affirmed its policy against commenting on pending litigation.
