Contributed anonymously,
Who's Zoomin' Who?
This is another example that shows the ineptitude of LLNS management and the degree to which they will kowtow to NNSA. Just as they screwed up the transition by trying to make it worse than what transpired at LANL, they are trying again to scare you into accepting less. The best thing that could happen would be that the LLNL population will see through the deception (just as many did for TCP-1) and minimally participate in this VSSOP.
What's wrong?
First and foremost, they are asking you to resign instead of laying you off! Along with this, they are specifically making you give up any notice or pay in lieu of notice. There's a reason that clause is specifically in the agreement that you sign (electronically) when you check the box on LAPIS.
And this is bad because?
They keep telling you that it's the same whether you participate in the VSSOP (resign) or must leave later via the ISP (get laid off). But if you are laid off, they must give you notice or pay in lieu of notice. It's in their Policies and Procedures. In Wong's answer to the 26 vs 39 weeks question, he said LLNL only got 26 weeks because it's in the LLNL policies. They can't selectively enforce their policies and choose which to obey and which to ignore, and just like severance, notice is in there.
Observe also how they skirted the unemployment question, basically saying it's up to you to figure it out. I'm no expert in this, but since when has unemployment ever been given to someone who resigned from a job. It usually comes down to who was the initiator that caused separation, and, if you resign, that'd be you.
This whole thing is an effort at hiding part of the horrible truth of the privatization of the Labs. They want to be able to say, "Hey! we didn't lay those people off - they left of their own accord. They resigned!"
My only hope is that the word gets spread far and wide: DON'T DO IT! Don't give up your rights! Don't participate in the VSSOP. Make them pay you all that you are entitled to. Make them own up to what they've done and allowed to be done to LLNL.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts you viewed tbe most last 30 days
-
LGBT intolerance problem at Sandia? I was just checking glassdoor.com and noticed several comments suggesting intolerance to LGBT at Sandia...
-
So did you SSVSP and why? Give details.
-
“Raise a concern, get blackballed then lose your job and benefits…” “…instead of raising your concerns just leverage on your skills and go t...
10 comments:
If you are going to do as you say and stick it out until LLNS fires you or lays you off then I would make good use of that time to find yourself a new job simply because no matter what's right or wrong there are those who are going to participate in the lay off. Maybe ULM will go for more than 750 this time like about 1050. The door was opened by DOE / NNSA and this is LLNS one time opportunity to get rid of everyone that gives them the slightest reason or has been on their radar for a while. Maybe you'll get lucky and there'll be no lay off at all but I'll assure you they didn't go through all that 3161 paperwork for nothing. Something is going to give, continuously. The choice is yours.
I do agree however with the unemployment issue. That needs to be in stone especially in today poor job market. I also don't buy their BS reasoning about the 26 weeks verses the 39 weeks. Both issues need to be investigated. A good place to start is with Besty Mason of the ContracostaTimes
It seems to be that B.M of the Contra Costa times just reports Lab news as they are. No analysis or opinion of any kind.Dont expect that change. Unless B.M proves me wrong!
"I also don't buy their BS reasoning about the 26 weeks verses the 39 weeks." What is there to buy or not buy? It is in the separate contracts that run LANL and LLNL. It was in the previous contracts held with UC. LANL has traditionally received extra perks. Up until sometime in the 90's you started with 5 weeks of vacation versus the three at LLNL. DOE funds were directed to support the local school district. I would guess that the extra perks were used to entice people to go work in the wilderness. Or they had a set of Senators and Congressmen that pushed harder for their lab.
Anyone who survived the 1973 layoffs have any insight on what the procedure was back then?
Part of the issue to consider is that LLNS is an awful place to work. The Bechtel management is clearly missing, and the old UC management only knew how to manage when money wasn't an issue. I was told by one ULM that they are treating this like a physics experiment, and that they have a end goal, but they don't have a path to get the company there. So they may make a bad decision which has bad implications on other parts of the lab, and then they will tackle those other bad implications later. The ULM has never been in this situation and has no idea how to move the employees through it. I was also told by the ULM that the sorry state of LLNS will remain like this for at least two years, with no estimated time frame for a recovery. That is to say, it sill take some time to hit rock bottom, and once we get there, we will stay at rock bottom.
The VSSOP reflects this. The package sucks, the time frame sucks, and there is no incentive for people to take advantage of it. The only reason to leave now is that if you think you do good work, then you can find a new job without the dark cloud hanging over the formally great LLNL campus.
What part of working for a "for-profit" corporation do you people not understand? The old days are over.
Better get use to it because there is a lot more sh*t coming your way through the LLNS sewer line over the next few years. The VSSOP and this year's layoffs are just the beginning of a trend.
84 people out of 7,300 stated their status so far with this VSSOP poll. There sure is a lot of unity at LLNL. Keep up the good work. These people don't even have the time to talk to one another.
As I understand it there are now Three classes of FTEs:
a) Those eligible for the VSSOP,
b) those ineligible,,
and those groups with a Cap of 0.
I show that I'm eligible in LAPIS - but my cap is 0. When I asked management they said that I actually could not take the buyout; if I applied it would be accepted by LAPIS but later denied by management.
So I am stuck in the middle - can't take the VSSOP, but not excluded from future 2008 reductions!!
If they had listed me as ineligible at least I could breathe a sign of relief that I "probably" would not be laid off in 2008. Now I have to continue to lay low and keep my nose clean.
And why do people keep complaining of our 26 weeks vs LANL's 39? Get over it. You didn't want to move there to work! We get the benefit of living in the Bay Area, they get a one time extra for a good bye kiss.
Just go to the HR policy and look up severance pay. It is 27 weeks, where LANL's is 39. I agree LLNL used to be a great place to work with some flaws under UC, and more economical for DOE. We are witnessing the revenge of the C- students, that were given their marching orders. Time to clear out while the getting is good. Take it before the job market further weakens.
I heard today, if you are not eligible to take the VSSOP you are only ineligible to be laid off for ONE YEAR! Did anyone hear that little proviso? I'd say take the money and run.
If LLNS does not get its quota in the VSSOP, or at least something close to it, they are in a real bind. The personnel policies will protect those with the most seniority so LLNS will be forced to eat its young, which it knows is a disaster.
Don't help LLNS. Just say no to the VSSOP.
Post a Comment