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 jlscoob5@gmail.com
Blog rules
Stay on topic.
No profanity, threatening language, pornography.
NO NAME CALLING.
No political debate.
Posts and comments are posted several times a day.
Sunday, March 7, 2010
Managers! How do you feel about LLNS?
Anonymously contributed:
What do managers really think? For managers only, tell this blog how you really feel about LLNS.
Scooby's note: Mention your PAD.
21 comments:
Anonymous
said...
I was a manager under UC LLNL. I am still a manager and am convinced that LLNS management have no spine.
They are in it to get their fee. Their objective is to meet the contract requirements. UC's objective coincided with DOE's objective. Just awaiting retirement in a couple of years... .. and my PAD is S&T.
I agree with the above post. The worst thing that could of happened to the lab was for LLNS to appear. Corporate attitude and being more worried about their Management Fee than doing the science and technology to help the country.
When I started at the Lab some 25+ years ago, I was thrilled. Having worked on projects with LLNL scientists previously, I was so excited about being part of a group that I thought was the best and brightest I had ever seen.
That has all changed. Take a look at where we are hiring. Instead of the top Ivy League and science/ engineering schools, we now recruit at Cal Poly, Harvey Mudd, etc.
Why do you think S&T is so interested in foreign nationals and the open campus? We can't get the best and brightest of US citizens anymore.
The Lab has been good to me. As a manager in S&T, I am financially well off. After a more few years of putting in my time, I will retire comfortably. I feel sorry for the current generation who will remember today as the good old days.
That has all changed. Take a look at where we are hiring. Instead of the top Ivy League and science/ engineering schools, we now recruit at Cal Poly, Harvey Mudd, etc.
March 9, 2010 7:45 PM
I got a good laugh at this comment. It turns out that Bret Knapp who is the Associate Director for Weapons at LANS is a Cal Poly graduate. Question is, how in the world did this guy get into the Labs, let alone alone one of the highest ranking individuals in the U.S. nuclear weapon? Someone please answer this question.
LLNS management is a failure in most respects. There have been pitifully few improvements since the transition, and all around is seen degradation in the quality of resources and infrastructure. It is difficult to hire qualified workers despite the slow economy. Low level managers are frustrated and powerless. I am a group leader in S&T.
I think you just proved the point regarding the comment above yours. Cal Poly is clearly not in the top 10 science/engineering schools, and as I recall, doesn't even have a PhD program. If we settle for "respected" in stead of the best, we will not get the best.
Regarding the following comment on BK now at LANL, I do not claim that a few jewels cannot come from schools like Cal Poly. It just means that overall the best scientists/engineers come from the best schools.
People flapping their jaws about Harvey Mudd and Cal Poly SLO are just showing their ignorance. It is true those schools do not have PhD programs, but they are very strong undergraduate engineering programs. Far from a perfect metric, but if you care to look, Mudd is tied for #1 and Poly #6 on the vaunted U.S. News and World Report list
What, you think highly qualified doctoral level scientists would want to come and work at these dismal and dysfunctional NNSA "for-profit" run labs?
Good science is just a side-line business at the new and improved NNSA research labs. The real job involves making money, and lots of it, for the corporate LLC partners.
PBIs, baby! That should be pretty clear to all lab employees by now.
Please do some research before you working your jaw next time.
"According to U.S. News & World Report's 2010 America's Best Colleges report, Cal Poly is ranked #1 in the Western United States for public schools whose highest degree is a Master's for the 17th straight year.The College of Engineering was tied for the #6 ranking for undergraduate engineering schools in the US whose highest degree is a Master's."
Cheap labor and they really aren't working on anything that criticall to national security.
March 15, 2010 6:27 PM
So true. And, the lab "prostitutes" who continue to try to sell themselves to DHS and the like as uniquely capable to do something, despite the fact that there are universities all over the country who are better, are embarrassing. If you can't sell nuclear weapon design expertise to work uniquely on nuclear terrorism forensics (and you can't), then just forget it. Universities are better equiped than you will ever be.
NNSA and DHS are probably the two most dysfunctional agencies in all of Washington DC. The sweet heart link-up between the two is a match made in heaven! No wonder NNSA and the lab upper management are pushing hard for "special deals" to bring in more DHS work.
No wonder NNSA and the lab upper management are pushing hard for "special deals" to bring in more DHS work.
March 16, 2010 10:42 AM
No kidding. If you doubt the "sweetheart deal," consider that DOE has a "Work for Others" order with a lot of detailed and burdensome requirements for work at DOE/NNSA labs for other US government agencies. Then, there is a separate DOE order solely applicable to work for DHS, where the requirements are much easier. The fact that many universities are much more capable and cheaper than DOE labs for the purposes of DHS programmatic requirements seems to have largely escaped DHS's notice.
"The fact that many universities are much more capable and cheaper than DOE labs for the purposes of DHS programmatic requirements seems to have largely escaped DHS's notice."
March 17, 2010 7:23 PM
Shhh, be quiet! Most of the program managers out at DHS are way too clueless to figure that one out.
Don't spoil the windfall that these WFO projects produce! My high upper management salary is dependent on the high overhead taxes I can steal from these lucrative WFO accounts.
21 comments:
I was a manager under UC LLNL. I am still a manager and am convinced that LLNS management have no spine.
They are in it to get their fee. Their objective is to meet the contract requirements. UC's objective coincided with DOE's objective.
Just awaiting retirement in a couple of years...
.. and my PAD is S&T.
I agree with the above post. The worst thing that could of happened to the lab was for LLNS to appear. Corporate attitude and being more worried about their Management Fee than doing the science and technology to help the country.
March 8, 2010 10:15 AM,
If your not management your post doesnt belong here. If you are, then state your PAD.
Agree with the other posts. No spine, no development of better management; its about fee and protecting their fee nothing more.
When I started at the Lab some 25+ years ago, I was thrilled. Having worked on projects with LLNL scientists previously, I was so excited about being part of a group that I thought was the best and brightest I had ever seen.
That has all changed. Take a look at where we are hiring. Instead of the top Ivy League and science/ engineering schools, we now recruit at Cal Poly, Harvey Mudd, etc.
Why do you think S&T is so interested in foreign nationals and the open campus? We can't get the best and brightest of US citizens anymore.
The Lab has been good to me. As a manager in S&T, I am financially well off. After a more few years of putting in my time, I will retire comfortably. I feel sorry for the current generation who will remember today as the good old days.
March 9, 2010 7:45 PM
Can't speak to Harvey Mudd but Cal Poly is a highly respected engineering school.
That has all changed. Take a look at where we are hiring. Instead of the top Ivy League and science/ engineering schools, we now recruit at Cal Poly, Harvey Mudd, etc.
March 9, 2010 7:45 PM
I got a good laugh at this comment. It turns out that Bret Knapp who is the Associate Director for Weapons at LANS is a Cal Poly graduate. Question is, how in the world did this guy get into the Labs, let alone alone one of the highest ranking individuals in the U.S. nuclear weapon? Someone please answer this question.
LLNS management is a failure in most respects. There have been pitifully few improvements since the transition, and all around is seen degradation in the quality of resources and infrastructure. It is difficult to hire qualified workers despite the slow economy. Low level managers are frustrated and powerless. I am a group leader in S&T.
March 10, 2010 6:49 AM
I think you just proved the point regarding the comment above yours. Cal Poly is clearly not in the top 10 science/engineering schools, and as I recall, doesn't even have a PhD program. If we settle for "respected" in stead of the best, we will not get the best.
Regarding the following comment on BK now at LANL, I do not claim that a few jewels cannot come from schools like Cal Poly. It just means that overall the best scientists/engineers come from the best schools.
People flapping their jaws about Harvey Mudd and Cal Poly SLO are just showing their ignorance. It is true those schools do not have PhD programs, but they are very strong undergraduate engineering programs. Far from a perfect metric, but if you care to look, Mudd is tied for #1 and Poly #6 on the vaunted U.S. News and World Report list
http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/spec-engineering
Yours truly,
A PhD engineer, who is not an alum of either school
There is the list of best undergraduate engineering programs at schools that don't offer PhD programs and that list has been appropriately provided.
Then there is the list of best undergraduate engineering programs at schools that do offer PhD programs and that list is here:
http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/spec-doct-engineering
March 11, 2010 9:06 PM
The list you referenced is for undergraduate schools.
Yours truly,
A PhD who went to one of those schools as an undergraduate, but learned what it was really like at at the best graduate school.
Why are we recruiting undergraduates?
Why are we recruiting undergraduates?
March 14, 2010 7:49 AM
What, you think highly qualified doctoral level scientists would want to come and work at these dismal and dysfunctional NNSA "for-profit" run labs?
Good science is just a side-line business at the new and improved NNSA research labs. The real job involves making money, and lots of it, for the corporate LLC partners.
PBIs, baby! That should be pretty clear to all lab employees by now.
March 11, 2010 8:03 PM
Please do some research before you working your jaw next time.
"According to U.S. News & World Report's 2010 America's Best Colleges report, Cal Poly is ranked #1 in the Western United States for public schools whose highest degree is a Master's for the 17th straight year.The College of Engineering was tied for the #6 ranking for undergraduate engineering schools in the US whose highest degree is a Master's."
Rankings for CalPoly
* Electrical Engineering: #1
(#4 overall)[22]
* Computer Engineering: #1 (Tied #3 overall)[23]
* Mechanical Engineering: #1 (tied #3 overall)[24]
* Industrial Engineering: #2 (#2 overall)[25]
* Aerospace Engineering: #3 (#5 overall)[26]
* Civil Engineering: #2 (Tied #5 overall)[27]
Cheap labor and they really aren't working on anything that criticall to national security.
Cheap labor and they really aren't working on anything that criticall to national security.
March 15, 2010 6:27 PM
So true. And, the lab "prostitutes" who continue to try to sell themselves to DHS and the like as uniquely capable to do something, despite the fact that there are universities all over the country who are better, are embarrassing. If you can't sell nuclear weapon design expertise to work uniquely on nuclear terrorism forensics (and you can't), then just forget it. Universities are better equiped than you will ever be.
NNSA and DHS are probably the two most dysfunctional agencies in all of Washington DC. The sweet heart link-up between the two is a match made in heaven! No wonder NNSA and the lab upper management are pushing hard for "special deals" to bring in more DHS work.
No wonder NNSA and the lab upper management are pushing hard for "special deals" to bring in more DHS work.
March 16, 2010 10:42 AM
No kidding. If you doubt the "sweetheart deal," consider that DOE has a "Work for Others" order with a lot of detailed and burdensome requirements for work at DOE/NNSA labs for other US government agencies. Then, there is a separate DOE order solely applicable to work for DHS, where the requirements are much easier. The fact that many universities are much more capable and cheaper than DOE labs for the purposes of DHS programmatic requirements seems to have largely escaped DHS's notice.
"The fact that many universities are much more capable and cheaper than DOE labs for the purposes of DHS programmatic requirements seems to have largely escaped DHS's notice."
March 17, 2010 7:23 PM
Shhh, be quiet! Most of the program managers out at DHS are way too clueless to figure that one out.
Don't spoil the windfall that these WFO projects produce! My high upper management salary is dependent on the high overhead taxes I can steal from these lucrative WFO accounts.
Post a Comment