Sent by SPSE:
SPSE-UPTE has compiled a complete list of employees that were involuntarily separated last week, and has circulated it among members to check its accuracy. After preliminary analysis of this data we believe every laid-off employee should file a grievance or pursue a discrimination case against LLNS, LLC for failing to follow Laboratory policy and the law in determining who would be separated. In order to help with this, SPSE-UPTE needs demographic information for all the people who were sent home, along with contact information. This will allow us to communicate our progress in building a case. If you have the means to contact your laid-off friends and colleagues, please do so and ask them to call our office at (925) 449-4846 or e-mail us at spse@spse.org
20 comments:
I am curious as to why only those laid off last week are seen as entitled to a lawsuit. What about the FX employees who were let go in January (an since then)? Or quit rather than be laid off? I think some of us have a better case for being unlawfully designated as FX than some of the FTEs who got laid off last week have for being unlawfully selected? I still don't understand how I could have been classified FX (temporary) when I was part of my Directorates AD Office annual budget. I was not funded as part of a project, I was funded as part of overhead. By definition that sounds like FTE to me.
SPSE I am proud to be a member! The suggestion for RIF'd personnel to file grievances is excellent. Additionally, remaining staff who lost key personnel should file grievances. We will need guidance-how about posting an electronic template here? Who can help?
It seems that both FX and FTE's should have a case, if the FX's were told that FX didn't really mean what the designation implies then that is a problem. Throwing FTE's under the bus to compensate for their own incompetence is an even bigger betrayal and hopefully there will be some consequences for LLNS for their arrogant and arbitrary actions.
Thank you SPSE-UPTE for your efforts to help protect the dedicated workforce and the over 400 career employees that were involuntarily separated on May 22 and May 23.
I have over 30 years of excellent service to Plant Engineering and I will challenge my lay-off.
LLNS management has said for months that all non-200 series employee lay-offs would be based on seniority but that policy was clearly not followed in Plant Engineering.
May 30, 2008 8:08 AM
I wish each and everyone of you good luck. Please take LLNS to court and do not settle for anything less that $1M to $1.5M a piece (after taxes) putting the funds into a 401K whereby you can invest it as you wish. Let them pay the taxes. If they insist on making you pay the tax make sure you still have that $1M to $1.5M after taxes no matter which way they want to play the game. This should hit them in their profit funds if not deplete it entire for next year. God Speed.
Lawyer's on on the sidebar
It's seniority within layoff units. I know of not a single instance where seniority was violated within layoff units. I very much doubt anyone will win based on assertions that the rules were not followed in this area. You might be able to question how those layoff units were composed but it is my impression that the HR rules were vague enough to give the lab a lot of latitude in defining them.
Rule number one in regards to the law, it isn't about what is fair, it is about what is legal.
Just to be clear, I am not a Lawyer. By all means, consult with somebody who is. preferably you'll want to talk to a Lawyer that specializes in labor related issues.
May 30, 2008 9:50 AM
This is why the only good laywer is one that not breathing anymore. Same goes for CEO's
"You might be able to question how those layoff units were composed but it is my impression that the HR rules were vague enough to give the lab a lot of latitude in defining them."
To some of us, it seems like this was the place the lab opened themselves up to a potential lawsuit the most. If the "business units" that had been defined for the VSSOP had been left alone and simply became the "layoff units" for the ISP, the lab might have appeared more above board. But because the lab went in and changed the composition of a number of those units between the VSSOP and ISP, it could be argued that fairness didn't prevail and that they only changed them to game the system and target certain individuals for layoff.
I was thinking about filing a grievance, but then I started thinking..do I really want to work for LLNS?
Worst case, I would win my grievance and get my job back. Then I would have to suffer under poor management again. Not a fun life to look forward to.
How long does an employee have to bring a claim for age discrimination?
The employee must file his claim with the EEOC within 180 days of the alleged discriminatory practice. In some states the employee may have as many as 300 days to file the complaint with the EEOC.
Yes, I am also divided of mind about possibly participating in any class action because 1) I don't want my job back at LLNS (thanks for the golden handshake, though), and 2) if a class action was won, management would just take another 100-200 heads off below them to pay for the settlement. I would only want to participate in a class action that directly targeted named upper managers, hitting them in their substantially thicker wallets and purses since the transition. The thing that aggravates me most about this entire process is that the people that really ( F'd ) up by either lying to the general Lab population or just planning poorly for the coming financial storm essentially get off 100% clean with no consequences for what *I* would consider significant underperformance as managers.
May 30, 2008 5:01 AM
If you did not know that you were an FX, you no doubt deserve to be laid off.
It is very clear in some cases that matrix management selected people for layoff without knowing what they did or even whom they worked for.
Not only should that management be fired, the entire matrix system itself needs to be reviewed. At a minimum, the number of people managing these organizations needs be reduced.
"I was thinking about filing a grievance, but then I started thinking..do I really want to work for LLNS?"
That is what LLNS wants you to think. They do not want you back. They dont want you to fight.
May 31, 2008 8:37 AM
You don't want your job back, what you want is that $80M dollars that LLNS gets for managing LLNL to become yours. That would be, mission accomplished and justice served. Please let the good people sue and win for all of us.
May 30, 2008 5:01 AM
Not only are you so uniformed that you did not know you were an FX, you seem to be proud that you were funded by overhead.
Being funded by overhead has nothing to do with being an FX or IN, but it does put you in the category of parasites that live off funding of real programs. It's too bad more of you were not canned.
May 30, 2008 5:01 AM,
Aren't you sweet? I was not uninformed that I was FX. I knew I was FX. And what is wrong for being overhead? I believe you called me a parasite? I'm sorry I didn't slave away on some obscure scientific project, as I am sure you must. No, I busted my butt off working 50-60 hours a week on many different projects doing whatever was required to get the project done. I was not an Admin or a Manager, and I worked on very real programs. Do you work on NIF by any chance? It seemed to me that all the money for everyone else was being funneled into that waste of space. One reason I was overhead is that everyone wants you to work for them , but they don't want to pay for it (or don't have the money). I was farmed out all over the place and once in a while a project with $$ would throw some our way for my efforts. The rest of the time, my Directorate had to eat the cost (the price of being an Operations Directorate). If I was only assigned to one project (a "real" one by your definition) then I would understand the FX designation. I wasn't laid off by the way. I wouldn't have been. I left because I didn't like the holier-than-thou attitudes of people like you. And you know what? I'm making way more money than before with 100% less stress. No one at my new job thinks they are better than me or that they are entitled to their job more than me, because we are all the same classification.
I am one of the 440 career employees that was laid off. I got the boot on Thursday May 22 after 3 decades on dedicated service to the once great LLNL.
I am positive this lay off was not done properly and is not per policies and procedures as there are employees in my work group that do the same work but have much less seniority and they got to keep their jobs.
LLNS wants the laid off workers to just go away - never to be heard from again. I suggest that the career employees that were unfairly laid off FIGHT BACK. Don't lay down - FIGHT BACK.
At the very minimum, file the Complaint Resolution Form asap. Also, look around for a attorney that has years of experience dealing with labor law cases. FIGHT BACK - don't lay down.
I filed a grievance (now called complaint by LLNS) because I had been working out of my job class - managements choice, not mine - for years, and when I was finally able to wade through all the layoff rules and realized I was a prime target for the layoff I tried to get my classification changed. I was layed-off 5/22. Yesterday I got a formal response denying my complaint. Guess I'll have to get some legal advice.
Anyone looked into veterans preference? The government is supposed to extend preferences to veterans in both hiring and layoffs. It looks like this could also extend to government contractors. Looking at the age range of the victims here there could be a number of Vietnam Era Vets. I'm not enough of a law expert to know if this is actionable but maybe someone else is lurking out there.
Post a Comment