BLOG purpose

This BLOG is for LLNL present and past employees, friends of LLNL and anyone impacted by the privatization of the Lab to express their opinions and expose the waste, wrongdoing and any kind of injustice against employees and taxpayers by LLNS/DOE/NNSA. The opinions stated are personal opinions. Therefore, The BLOG author may or may not agree with them before making the decision to post them. Comments not conforming to BLOG rules are deleted. Blog author serves as a moderator. For new topics or suggestions, email


  • Stay on topic.
  • No foul, vulgar, or inflammatory language.
  • No name calling.
  • No personal attacks or put-downs of other blog users.
  • Be patient. Moderator checks and approves new posts several times a day.

Suggest new topics here


Submit candidates for new topics here only. Stay on topic with National Labs' related issues. All submissions are screened first for ...

Thursday, January 31, 2008

Bogus RIF Reasoning

So displacing the first 500, the second 730 and then finally the last 300 people from LLNL in FY-08 has absolutely nothing to do with reducing the cost of each employee to the project or program at all. It looks as if the entire process has to do with making up a $130M shortfall. I guess that explains why the 2008 Lab Pricer shows each employee as being more expensive than in 2007. So if the FY-08 RIF only solves the $130M shortfall what plan do they have to reduce the cost of each employee. It should be evident by now to LLNS that Riffing the entire workforce isn't going to resolve anything. What's your next move LLNS?

PT14. Can someone please explain how "the cost of managing the Lab" has increased since the fee to manage the Lab was a fixed amount in the bid? What changed to make that cost increase to a point where we are now talking about voluntary and involuntary separations?

As of March 2007 the estimate of the additional costs in FY08 over FY07 for a private organization, LLNS, in managing the laboratory was approximately $80M, split between management fee, estimated taxes, and estimated 401K matching. The new contract does not provide any additional funds for these costs. LLNL must take them out of operating funds. This level of additional cost had been planned for by allowing attrition to take our staffing level down 500 in the last two years.

However, as we moved into this fiscal year under the new contract, several issues arose that increased the additional contract costs $50M more to approximately $130M. These include a higher than anticipated 401K match, higher management fee than originally estimated from the Request for Proposal (RFP), and increases in the cost of health care with a smaller pool of participants.

This, combined with inflation and a lower federal budget, create a financial challenge that requires the laboratory to assess the size of its workforce.

Tuesday, January 29, 2008

Have you seen this notice?

Many people got this notice by e-mail. Does anyone know why it was sent out and why it only went to a selected few. Are those who got this being told, "you've been selected for departure at a given date and we need to know where you are at all times so we can give you the final word or escort you out the gate"?

This is very important!

There is going to be a Laboratory wide announcement this week. This means, I need know your schedules for the next three days, including:

* Will you be here, I need to know where you are. Other than short runs to other buildings, I will need to get in touch with each of you at a moments notice. Stay in touch with me if you plan on being away from your phone. Pager is the next best. Please wear them.

* If you are taking vacation, I need a phone number where I can reach you at a moments notice.

* If you go on sick leave or think you may go on sick leave, I need a phone number where I can reach you at a moments notice.

* If you are on travel or planning to be on travel, I need a phone number where I can reach you at a moments notice.

I apologize for not being able to give more information at this time. Other than the obvious question, please call me if you have any others.

Keep in touch.

VSSOP Coming Soon

Please post anon:

Rumor control central hits a soft spot today at LLNL for a few with their ears open.

It looks as if LLNS in a most creative way has found an ingenious means of informing everyone of who ( is ) or ( is not ) eligible for the VSSOP and also who (is) or ( is not ) eligible for the involuntary separation. Your notification will be done through LAPIS and internal web page whereby they can hide their dirty deeds from the public and from their employees. In other words you'll never know what classification or quantity of any particular classification they want to thin out. Yes they are treating their employees like mushrooms whereby they keep them in the dark and feed them bullhockey dopes with arsenic.

Each employee will be required to log onto LAPIS and check their "status" of eligibility. When you log on there will be a simple status of something like ( yes or no ). I have not been informed of the exact chosen words, but here's the jest. If your status says ( YES ), not only are you eligible for the VSSOP but you're automatically eligible for the ( involuntary separation programs ) what ever acronym they chose for that event. If your status is ( no ) or some other chosen words you are ineligible for either ( RIF program ) and you're safe for the _next nine months_ or until the next budget crunch FY-09.

But here's the twist that no one counted on. If you're in NIF you're exempt for both the ( voluntary and involuntary separation ) until further notice. Then from another good source I heard this wasn't entirely true. There are a few that will be asked to leave. On what boat they'll be able to depart with honor and dignity I haven't a clue. Remember NIF, you have a nine month reprieve. There will be down sizing next year and ever year afterwards until they too have the selected few who'll remain gainfully employed.

That's all for now folks. Anyone else heard any rumors or facts they'd like to share?

Sunday, January 27, 2008

Stressful Transitional Times at LLNL

Symptoms & Warning Signs of Job Stress

While the causes can be something other than job stress, here are the most common symptoms and early warning signs of job stress and burnout:

Low morale
Anger/irritability Physical problems (headaches, stomach problems) Absenteeism

Are you approaching Job Burnout?

Take our free assessment: Job Burnout Quiz: How Close Are You To Burning Out?

How are you dealing with stress at LLNL? Maybe Fido has the only answer.

Understated costs!

Contributed by anonymous:

LLNS significantly understated its costs to take over the new contract. Why should NNSA allow LLNS just scoop the difference from the FY08 budget? Make them eat the loss. Maybe it will bankrupt them and force them out of business.

Saturday, January 26, 2008

Outsourcing of America

Is there any doubt in anyone's mine why America is no longer an industrial nation and how big business through greed and manipulation has ruined this country.

As I read Dilbert this morning I immediately envisioned the pointy haired dude as our new LLNS HR representative interviewing the next generation of LLNL employee. It seems their attitude is the same as every business in this country today. You are a replaceable commodity and will be replaced with a cheaper workforce where we'll get quality work and a complacent low paid employees that will eventually result in higher profits, bonus checks for management and many satisfied investors.

Each time I read the cartoon I envisioned an LLNS HR representative saying to the cone head icon that could in fact represent any nationality.

"You're the type of employee we need to make LLNL a success story. It's people like you that'll embrace change and are the future of this lab. However, we can only offer you a 401k that'll never be substantiality equivalent in the aggregate to the once lucrative UCRP retirement plan. The facts are this. With the wage we are offering and current IRS rules it's virtually impossible in todays recessionary environment to achieve your financial goals in order to secure a return substantial to sustain life within your employed life. Knowing these facts and understanding that you'll most likely have to work until you're 62- 65 years old when at that time you'll qualify for social security and medicare are you receptive to this offer? If so when would you like to start."

Tuesday, January 22, 2008

More from the Contra Costa Times!

Read the article and ask LLNS how they plan on achieving what is described in the paragraph before last:


Response from jwolford of SPSE! Thanks JW!

I encourage any member who's curious about the status of SPSE-UPTE to come to the general membership meeting next week. That way we can at least address your questions. In summary, SPSE is doing a miniature version of what LLNL is doing: reconfiguring itself to operate in the private sector.

We now operate under a completely different set of laws, and adjusting to this is not automatic. Despite collecting dues, SPSE is a member-run union, and there are a handful of members doing all the work. We're grateful to everyone who sends us good ideas, but what we really need now is a few interested members to get involved and act on them. In my opinion SPSE has succeeded best when a member with a passion for something gets involved, gets help, and gets it accomplished. As for status, you will see another Sentinel sometime soon. I know because I'm editing the thing. Sure, the web page needs updating. If this bothers you, then stop complaining and volunteer to help with it. JW

Sunday, January 20, 2008

LLNL in the news!

Local CBS news

Invitation to SPSE to post a status!

In December, I emailed SPSE inviting them to post some update on what they are doing these days. I have not heard back. So, I would like to renew that invitation!SPSE: please let us know even if nothing is going on. Apparently, you still have quite a few members and you owe them an update!

Thursday, January 17, 2008

The answer is clear

I hope this article from the Contra Costa Times answers the question
about the 10%. It is 10% more!

Read the article

LLNL 2-1/2 Year Reduction In Force Plan

Having watched George H. Miller's presentation today, I, as many are left with a few unanswered questions. The first question is, why would anyone want to come to work for LLNL or even apply for a position for at least the next 2-1/2 years, knowing that job security is a thing of the past at any NNSA / DOE facility. Times have clearly changed and with that so will the caliber of employee these facilities acquire. Yes, "the transition is over, but change has just begun". That's a scary thought, and for many it'll bring a lifetime of uncertainties to come.

The talk itself was informative, however it left room for a lot of interpretation which I am sure will result in mounds of misinformation and many rumors to say the least.

Directly after the talk I immediately heard in the hallways a very good question that did not get answered. "There will be a 10% reduction in force at LLNL by Oct 1st, 2008". The people's question is this. Does the 10% reduction for FY-08 includes all of those who have just been given the boot in the last two months, or does it require an additional 10% reduction equal to ~ 730 more "FTE's" to be disposed of by the end of the fiscal year?

In conclusion the employees are left with one guarantee and a conclusive understanding.

Over the next 2 1/2 years we can expect to see a 10% reduction in force each year from now on until the work force is reduced to a manageable number of grateful employees and stabilization of the lab occurs. With that guarantee comes a promise that LLNL will forever have the wrath of a sudden reduction in force, at will, and for any reason that may arise such as the every changing national needs and budgetary fluctuation.

Did anyone notice how the career bar is extremely short and is to take the biggest hit in comparison to other classifications of LLNL employees? I guess FTE are now considered an extreme burden to the new establishment i.e LLNS.

I guess with that we can go back to work, stress free and sleep well. Good night and God bless. Your pay raises will be coming in three months.

All We Ask is 10% a Year

Redirection of Pension Funds?

Contributed by anonymous:

The following except was taken from the following link:

“The proposed agreement between the University and the DOE/NNSA governing the transfer of assets and liabilities from UCRP to the LLNS Plan substantially replicates the transfer agreement for the Los Alamos National Laboratory transaction with one exception. For the LLNS transaction, UCRP will retain $75,000,000 in excess of the amount of assets required to be retained under the Contract, which will represent the initial credit to a pre-funded reserve referred to as the “Contribution Reserve Amount.” The Contribution Reserve Amount, adjusted as provided in the agreements with DOE/NNSA, will provide the DOE/NNSA with an identified funding source to apply against any future funding obligations to the LLNL Segment."

Say what? DOE/NNSA has agreed to misdirect $75M of LLNS pension funds into a reserve account to be used by the Livermore segment within UCRP? (Hmmm, and there's that word again... “substantially”.) Any thoughts regarding whether this passes the legal smell test? Or how about when employee contributions kick-in again for the LLNS pension fund; is the money going to be reimbursed by DOE/NNSA? This sure comes across like DOE/NNSA believe they “own” the assets within the UCRP/LLNS pension plans and can redirect as they please. I believe "we" the employees deserve (and should demand) full disclosure from DOE/NNSA regarding the ramifications associated with this agreement BEFORE the transfer of assets transpires. Or we can simply sit back passively and let DOE/NNSA railroad us once again.

Wednesday, January 16, 2008

We'll take care of you

Do you think your pension and 401k's in good hands? Looks as if big business can do anything it darn well pleases leaving "you" with nothing. There is however a solution and "the people" have the answer. The question is, when will they get together and abolish the corruption.

Over Taxed,Used and Abused

Sunday, January 13, 2008

No more RIFs?

Contributed by anonymous:

Word on the street is that DOE/NNSA has told LANS and LLNS no involuntary separations for now! It appears someone alerted someone in DC about a lot of carryover/unspent monies both labs have squirreled away and asked the obvious question “How can you terminate career personnel for fiscal necessity when there is this pool of money at the labs”. This could be a truer explanation of why the numbers of 570 leaving LANL is close enough to the 750 target, than was provided by Mike at his all hands meeting.

I was not at the group meeting where this information was disseminated, so what I have heard is second hand. Can anyone add more details to this?

Maybe George will be crying tears of joy at his all hands meeting on the 17th

Complex Transformation Summary

I'd suggest you read this document. To make it easy do a search for LLNL and step through it. You'll find some interesting dates and events that are to take place.

Complex Transformation Summary

If you see anything notable please copy your findings and comment on it.

Saturday, January 12, 2008

Workplace Substance Abuse Programs Equals VSIP Candidates

10 CFR 707
Workplace Substance Abuse Programs at DOE Sites
Public Forums via Videoconferencing

The public forums on the new drug testing and security clearance requirements for DOE contractors are scheduled for January 16, 17, 22, and 23, 2008, from 1:30 to 4:30 p.m. (Eastern Standard Time). The purpose of the forums is to give each contractor affected by the new requirements the opportunity to voice their views and assist the Department in identifying any issues requiring resolutions. The forums will be conducted via videoconferencing at DOE sites. Attached is a list of the videoconference sites with a call-in number for telephone participation. Please note videoconferencing will be linked on a first-come first-serve basis for each day. If you have any questions regarding the videoconference, please contact Bill McArthur or Jacqueline Rogers. Specific questions regarding video links and setups should be directed to HSS User Support at (301) 903-8358.

Additional information regarding drug testing requirements is located at:

Can't Do The Time, Don't Do The Crime

And the VSIP list just got a lot bigger than expected. It's either go now and take the severance pay or we'll catch you later and get you'll get the boot. It's your choice.

The take over by Lawrence Livermore National Security

Meet Mr. Doesburg

John Doesburg is the principal associate director for Global Security.

The newly created Global Security organization encompasses the Nonproliferation, Homeland and International Security directorate, and portions of the Energy and Environment directorate.

It features six divisions — Nonproliferation; Radiological and Nuclear Countermeasures; Chemical and Biological Countermeasures; Infrastructure and Force Protection; Energy and Environmental Security; and International Assessments. It also includes the National Atmospheric Release Advisory Center and the Security Awareness for Employees (SAFE) program.

Before coming to the Laboratory, Doesburg worked for two-and-a-half years as the University of Tennessee-Battelle’s director of Homeland Security and a program director in the national security directorate at Oak Ridge National Laboratory.

Previously, he served in the U.S. Army for 35 years, retiring as a major general.

In his last Army position, he was the commanding general of the U.S. Army Research, Development and Engineering Command. This organization provides basic research, development, engineering and analysis of warfighter systems, from concept to capability.

Doesburg has a bachelor’s degree in chemistry from the University of Oklahoma and a master’s degree equivalent in national security from the U.S. Army Command and General Staff College.

Now what's his salary?

Thursday, January 10, 2008

George Miller to hold all hands meeting

Director George Miller will hold an all-hands meeting Jan. 17 to discuss the workforce restructuring process, his vision of the future, the strategies that will help accomplish that vision and Millers perspective on the opportunities and challenges facing the Laboratory in the coming year.

In addition, he will discuss the allocation of the federal budget, future workforce restructuring and the compensation increase package.The meeting will be at 10:30 a.m. in the Bldg. 123 auditorium. It also will air on LabTV, channel 2, and is available on streaming video at CNN Live Online or Fox Live Online found on My Page on MyLLNL.

Wednesday, January 9, 2008

LLNS to change custodians working hours

Please post anon

Well LLNS just can't seem to shake what they're known for. Making changes and doing it all for the wrong reasons. Looks like they have their heads up their rectums again. How many times has this happened since the take over on Oct 1, 2007? Someone please keep count. It may someday make it to the Guinness world book of records.

LLNS in their infamous wisdom is going to force all custodian to start work at 4:00AM disregarding the fact that some may be on rapid transit that doesn't run at those hours but who cares how much the cost of gasoline is, lets just put these poor people in a more financial hurt.

Hell, they make the big bucks, lets just screw the blue collar worker once more.

There can be only one motive LLNS has in mind. Let make them do something that'll get the FTE's custodians to quit their job so we can ( out source the task and get these people off the retirement system. ) I hope they all endure and no one leaves.

I wonder what classification LLNS will attack next. Maybe they'll do away with AWS and screw everyone at once.

Stand by, the title wave has just gotten started.

I have a better idea, letsmake the17 pages of ULM start time at 4:00AM and see how long that BS last. ----Idiots.---

No layoffs at LANL!

Contributed by anonymous:

Los Alamos Monitor

By ROGER SNODGRASS, Monitor Editor

The director of Los Alamos National Laboratory told employees today that there would be no need for involuntary staff layoffs.

With 430 eligible voluntary departures, along with 140 employees who have departed since Sept. 17 through natural attrition, the total of 570 is above the minimum goal of 500 and below the higher target of 750, Director Michael Anastasio said at an all-employee meeting Tuesday,

“However, given the 570 we have achieved, coupled with an assessment of the skill-mix consequences and the budget picture, I have decided that it is best for the Laboratory not to proceed with an Involuntary Separation Plan at this time,” Anastasio wrote in a follow-up memo that summarized his discussion.

There will be a 10 percent reduction, or about 50 positions, from the so-called flexible workforce. The flexible workforce includes staff augmentation, generally short-term subcontractors and limited term staff, some of whom would not be renewed when their contracts expire.

Anastasio was upbeat about LANL’s budget prospects for this year under the recently signed consolidated appropriation bill.

“Overall this is very good news for the laboratory, providing us with a relatively flat budget compared with last year,” he wrote. “However, future budget uncertainty mandates that we successfully take advantage of opportunities for program growth and that we carefully manage hiring.”

Tuesday, January 8, 2008

Your congress man needs to know!

Below is a website that allows you to send 1 email message to all your senators and rep in 1 shot.

There are many reasons to do so. Some of the reasons are more important to you than others; so pick and choose which topic you want to address with him/her; readers are welcome to add more:

Reason number 1:

DOE/NNSA knew about the costs associated with privatization and misled so many people into taking Total Compensation plan 1. So many people were cheated! I want congress to give them a chance to reverse their decision. This should be on your agenda.

Reason number 2: (contributed by anonymous):

There was an incentive at LANL. That is a major reason why so many folks left. LANL's incentive was roughly 50% more lucrative than the one allegedly proposed by LLNS and current under NNSA review--max of 39 weeks instead of 26. LLNS claims this is due to a difference in the contracts.

Once the VSSOP is approved, LLNS will probably try to pull the string as quickly as possible, at least for the voluntary departures. NNSA and the LLNL contract originally gave LLNL less in TCP2 than LANL, but a massive appeal to Congressman forced NNSA to reconsider and make them equal. (It also forced NNSA to allow comparisons with other companies than originally listed by NNSA.)

We need to be prepared to launch a similar appeal for the incentive. Giving someone a few months extra pay to save someone else from an involuntary layoff seems like a no brainer. Besides, it still irks me that this entire contract change was due to LANL, not us, but every time we turn around, they get a better deal and better budgets.

visit this site

500 face layofs at LLNL

Temporary workers, those hired through contractors most affected; 'core scientists' should continue their jobs

Article Launched: 01/08/2008 03:01:05 AM PST

As a first step to overcome a $300 million budget shortfall, the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory announced Monday it will lay off 500 workers this month.

In November, lab director George Miller told employees to expect the layoffs, which will affect temporary workers and those hired through contractors.

"The positions are largely administrative," lab spokeswoman Lynda Seaver said Monday.

"It won't affect our core scientists."

She said that the temporary, or "flex-term" employees were notified Monday, while contracted workers will receive notice Jan. 16. They will receive 30 days' severance pay.

The shortfall is caused by a number of factors, a major one being the Department of Energy budget that Congress passed as part of a spending package in December.

It allocates $1.15 billion to the lab -- $100 million less than last year.

The lab's current bill for contracts is $130 million more than last year. That, plus inflation and a low attrition rate, created the bulk of the deficit.

Seaver said more layoffs may be required to get the lab budget out of the red, but that would be evaluated later.

"What's going to happen is after we go through this (series of layoffs), the lab director will reassess where we are," she said.

"We'll probably know more at the end of the month."

There was no figure immediately available regarding how much would be saved through this month's layoffs.

Lab director Miller praised and thanked the employees in a statement issued Monday.

"These changes, while particularly difficult, are part of the steps we are taking to position the laboratory for the future and ensure our continuing ability to contribute to the solution of the country's and the world's most challenging problems," read the statement, which added that he will hold a meeting with employees Jan. 17 to discuss his vision and possible future strategies.

Jim Wolford, who has worked as a computer scientist at the lab for 27 years, said that the transition of lab management from the University of California to a private partnership with the university is partially responsible for the shortfall.

"I think it's clear that conditions we're facing of layoffs comes in part as a result of restructuring decisions that management made," he said.

It was predicted that adding private industry to the management mix would initially make costs rise but that the lab would be more efficient in the long run.

But the predictions fell short of reality, leaving workers worried about what will come next, especially when they aren't offered the same job protections they enjoyed under UC management.

Wolford said it's hard to find work in specialized fields such as the ones practiced at the lab.

"A lot of jobs here are very unique," he said.

"People have accepted positions that are very esoteric ... They might have thought twice about taking the job if they thought they were vulnerable to layoffs.

" Eric Kurhi can be reached at 925-847-2184 or

LANL good to go. LLNL, who knows

Some preliminary notes...

The meeting seemed poorly attended. Lots of empty seats are seen in the auditorium.

Perhaps that's how Mike wanted it?Also, Mike seemed really nervous during this presentation.

He did mention that LANS wants to grow programs, but only in those areas that LANL has specialized expertise (which I assume to mean plutonium science).

I get the feeling we are being told not to expect to see us branch out in any way like SNL.

He also stated "The lab will evolve in those areas that we can make a difference."

Again, I take this to mean specialized pit work, etc.

He said the LANS profit fee for last year was $66 M ("LANS met 71% of the NNSA objectives"), but that none of this money would be coming back to the lab.

His words, "By doing things, we (LANS) have made the lab a better place. That's the benefit (to the lab and the work force).

" During this point in the talk about incentives he also said, "I'm here for the country. I don't need a lot of incentives to do this work."

Reclassification of jobs was put on hold for the RIF, but that will now restart. Jobs will be reclassified and our methods for measuring performance will change.

A cyber-security corrective plan is being done to satisfy NNSA and this plan will "make us more capable, not less".

No RIFs for this year sounds good, but it makes me wonder if we are simply delaying the inevitable for next year.

That all for now.

I'm sure others will have additional observations to make.

Monday, January 7, 2008

where are the comments on the 3161 plan?

Contributed by anonymous:

The comments were supposed to be posted at the URL below, but as you can see they are not. Could we please have 8000 people write Homer and find out why.

LLNL 3161 Comments

Where are they? It's been months and we were promised this before people were thrown out the gate. As you can see, we have been told another lie.

Just in case the URL goes dead in the next few days, here is Homer's info:

Draft Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Workforce Restructuring Plan and Press Release

The below draft plan is available for public comment through November 5, 2007. The draft plan will be finalized at the end of the stakeholder comment period.

October 22, 2007 Press Release
Draft Workforce Restructuring Plan - Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory - FY 2008
Comments on the draft plan should be directed to:
Homer Williamson,
Contracting Officer,
NNSA Livermore Site Office,
P.O. Box 808, L-293,
Livermore, CA 94550;
by e-mail:
Homer Williamson

or by fax to (925) 423-7668.

Results of the tcp2 and double dippers poll

80 people responded to the question: Have you been asked if you would consider voluntary separation? 23 or slightly more than 1 in 4 were.

George Says ?

Earlier today, Director George Miller issued a statement to employees regarding the workforce restructuring process.

The following is his message:

Today we will begin the next step in the workforce restructuring process that will result in the notification and release of flexible term and supplemental labor employees. Dedicated people who have contributed to this institution will be leaving. I want to personally thank them all for their contributions and wish them well in their future endeavors – we will truly miss them.

These changes, while particularly difficult, are part of the steps we are taking to position the Laboratory for the future and ensure our continuing ability to contribute to the solution of the country’s and the world’s most challenging problems. I will be holding an all-hands meeting on Jan. 17 to further discuss my vision of the future, the strategies that will help us accomplish that vision and my perspective on the opportunities and challenges facing the Laboratory in the coming year. In addition, I will discuss the allocation of the federal budget to the Department of Energy’s individual sites and my decisions on further workforce restructuring and the compensation increase program.

First layoff testimony!

From anonymous:

I was laid off today. Actually, according to my separation letter, my appointment end-date (which would have been in October, 2008) is being changed to Jan 7, 2008.

I will give more details later (I only received 30 days of pay in lieu of notice, so need to concentrate on finding new employment).

I had been in the NIF directorate, and thought that I was "safe."

Sunday, January 6, 2008

What will 2008 bring

Much greater NNSA oversight.

Congressional Budget Report

One of the most interesting parts of the above 2008 Congressional Budget Request for the NNSA is contained in the "Site Funding Summary" starting on page 569. While the design laboratories and the rest of the NNSA complex show essentially level funding between 2006 and 2012, Washington DC Headquarters funding is anticipated to go from $348M in 2006 to $1,267M in 2012. The 2012 funding level for DC is about equal to the projected funding for SNL and greater than that anticipated for LLNL. Note the 44% funding increase from 2007 to 2008.

Friday, January 4, 2008

Idaho National Lab benefits

Compare their Employee Investment Plan (our TCP2 "equivalent"). No Ben Val study required in Idaho, I guess.

INL Employee Investment Plan

The INL Employee Investment Plan offers the opportunity to participate in a 401(k) savings plan with several diverse funds. This plan is administered by The Vanguard Group. An eligible employee hired on or after Feb. 1, 2005, receives an INL profit-sharing contribution equal to 4.2% of his/her annual base pay. These contributions are 100% vested after three years of service and require no employee contribution. In addition, up to 6% of an employee's contributions to the plan are matched by INL. The Laboratory matches dollar-for-dollar on the first 3% of base pay contributed by the employee, then $0.60 for each dollar contributed on the next 3% of base pay, for a maximum match of 4.8% of base pay. Employees are 100% vested in their contributions and the INL matching amount on those contributions

Thursday, January 3, 2008

How Secretive can LLNS be ?


LAPIS View Paycheck will be unavailable from Sat., Dec. 29 through Mon., Jan. 21. Only LAPIS will be affected by the planned outage - statements of direct deposit will continue to be mailed out. Employees will be able to resume using LAPIS View Paycheck on Tue., Jan. 22. The purpose of the LAPIS outage is to ensure confidentiality is maintained for releasing flex-term employees early. Thank you for your understanding during this outage.

Why would LLNS want to hide this information from the employees?

Accounting Class

Anonymous said... time for an accounting class.

The "institution" only has one source of funding to pay severance, G&A, a overhead tax on direct funding. DOE did not allocate separate funding to pay the big severance checks, they authorized payments out of the G&A pot. So it costs overhead funds to pay everyone who won the SSP lottery.

The average direct-funded employee pays an overhead tax (G&A and all other overhead burdens, not including related payroll expense) which is a sizeable fraction of their salary. More than 50%. However, the average employee working on direct funding makes much more money than the average indirect-funded employee, so a similar number of indirect-funded employees must leave as direct-funded employees to be able to reduce overhead rates NEXT YEAR, not THIS YEAR.

THIS YEAR the picture is grim! There are what, 39 weeks left in this FY after January 10. Care to guess how they chose Jan. 10? Every indirect-funded SSP winner with 39 weeks of severance draws their entire salary for the rest of the FY on Jan 10. In one big check. Same for every direct-funded employee w/ 39 weeks - but the direct-funded employees also stop paying their overhead taxes on Jan. 10. Thus they stop contributing AND draw their remaining salary in one big check from the G&A pot. That's a bad thing. Very bad.

Now not all employees get 39 weeks but it doesn't matter, no matter what the average severance is, overhead rates must go up. One only needs to make the assumption that SSP lottery winners aren't predominately low service time, overhead-funded employees. If you believe they are, you qualify to be a LANS upper-level manager.

Maybe the overhead rates can drop next year, but this year they go up.

1/2/08 10:50 PM

Anyone at LLNL figured out how the RIF, VSEP and IVSEP will affect us with out 26 week severance package?

Wednesday, January 2, 2008

The Final Countdown

Happy New Year.

In 11 days LLNS will be handing out those pesky pink slips to the selected few. The major issue here is that many more FTE's are going to be gone before all of the term employees do. Once the slips are handed out I hear the selected few will be given a few days to depart and not escorted out the gate by armed guards. So yes, as of today it's the final countdown for many. May 2008 be better than 2007 for all.

When all is done I hope that everyone of you who got axed come back and leave your departing words. All comments will be reviewed, so please find a way to tell it like it is or should I say voice your opinion for the world to read and for the newspaper editors to print. It should be interesting.

How about a poll for RIF'd people ?

Lets not let LLNS get away with more lie and false promises. Lets try something new. Below are some questions. For anyone who wants to voice their opinions about being RIF'd please start your post with these questions, answer the questions and then, write on.

Simply copy and paste these questions and put them at the begining of your post. Answering all of them would be ideal but you only need to answer what you want.

- Directorate ?
- Age?
- Expertise?
- How long with lab?
- Gender?
- Employement Status? i.e
- Term, Contract, FTE

Tuesday, January 1, 2008

Hold Bodman and D'Agostino accountable

Having seen this post on the LANL blog does anyone know what LLNS total cost will be to LLNL and is there anyone who really cares? I wonder if POGO cares since they're so concerned about excessive government spending and misappropriation of tax payers funds, or have we given them all they need to complete their mission.


Criminal Malfeasance

A comment from the A recursive post on the future of WFO at LANL post suggests that Tom Udall go after Bodman and D'Agostino with charges of criminal malfeasance. I'd like to point out, however, that the GAO has proven itself to be LANS, LLC-friendly, given that the sum total of action taken by the GAO against LANS over the KSL $41 million 2007 slush fund expose has been a big, fat zero. Nil. Nada.

Not a bad suggestion from Udall's perspective though. It would provide an opportunity for him to grab some political sound bites. Sort of like he did when he told Anastaso to ignore NNSA's WFO guidance, and instead lead LANL in a new initiative to go after renewable energy WFO money.



4:59 is exactly correct with the clarification that the total cost of LANS to the LANL budget isn't $200M, it's greater than $1B over the 7 year LANS contract. LANS will cost taxpayers over ONE BILLION dollars in nonproductive costs over the UC's previous cost of running LANL.

Congress needs to hold Bodman and D'Agostino accountable for this astounding waste of Federal funding, so astounding that it perhaps rises to the level of criminal malfeasance. Are you listening, Rep. Udall? This is your chance to stand up for your district; ask the GAO to investigate!

Posts you viewed tbe most last 30 days