Anonymously contributed:
http://arstechnica.com/science/news/2010/07/scientists-informally-intervene-in-cases-of-sloppy-research.ars
Tuesday, July 27, 2010
WARN Act notices!
Anonymously contributed:
For IAP and Johnson Controls:
See:
http://www.edd.ca.gov/jobs_and_training/warn/eddwarnlwia10.pdf
For IAP and Johnson Controls:
See:
http://www.edd.ca.gov/jobs_and_training/warn/eddwarnlwia10.pdf
Friday, July 23, 2010
20 Workers Fired at LANS
Anonymously contributed:
I was one of at least 20 workers fired this week (June 19) from the LANS Waste Disposition Project (WDP). This program supports the disposition and transfer of nuclear waste from Area G to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP). Apparently there is at least a $5M shortfall of money, however we were not informed of any details or reasons for our terminations. There was no warning, just to get our personal belongings and leave the premises, immediately. I have been a contractor for 35-years and while I have been terminated for various reasons I have never been treated so inhumanely and unprofessionally by an "organization". We literally worked weekends and 24-hour shifts to move waste to WIPP and handled extremely dangerous and hazardous materials. We were the workers doing the "dirty jobs" behind the elegant science and technology that never gets any recognition.
There were no management meetings or information leading up to our terminations to give some indication that there were any budget issues. My general impression is that LANS (and DOE/NNSA) is trying to keep our terminations a secret. Good luck to you workers that remain at LANS.
I was one of at least 20 workers fired this week (June 19) from the LANS Waste Disposition Project (WDP). This program supports the disposition and transfer of nuclear waste from Area G to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP). Apparently there is at least a $5M shortfall of money, however we were not informed of any details or reasons for our terminations. There was no warning, just to get our personal belongings and leave the premises, immediately. I have been a contractor for 35-years and while I have been terminated for various reasons I have never been treated so inhumanely and unprofessionally by an "organization". We literally worked weekends and 24-hour shifts to move waste to WIPP and handled extremely dangerous and hazardous materials. We were the workers doing the "dirty jobs" behind the elegant science and technology that never gets any recognition.
There were no management meetings or information leading up to our terminations to give some indication that there were any budget issues. My general impression is that LANS (and DOE/NNSA) is trying to keep our terminations a secret. Good luck to you workers that remain at LANS.
Thursday, July 22, 2010
Do all people report safety concerns?
The BP story is an interesting one. "A confidential survey of workers on the Deepwater Horizon in the weeks before the oil rig exploded showed that many of them were concerned about safety practices and feared reprisals if they reported mistakes or other problems." from:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/22/us/22transocean.html?ref=us
We don't have a profit motive, but do people hesitate to report their own mistakes or insignificant injuries for fear of reprisal? Like whatever happened to those dudes in the electrocution interview video? That obligatory confession in the face of a firing squad sure scared me!
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/22/us/22transocean.html?ref=us
We don't have a profit motive, but do people hesitate to report their own mistakes or insignificant injuries for fear of reprisal? Like whatever happened to those dudes in the electrocution interview video? That obligatory confession in the face of a firing squad sure scared me!
Tuesday, July 20, 2010
George before congress
Anonymously contributed:
In testimony before congress George Miller made this statement:
"The Workforce. The Stockpile Stewardship Program's most valuable and
irreplaceable assets are the unique individuals who sustain it. Confidence in the stockpile ultimately depends on confidence in the stockpile stewards at the NNSA laboratories and production facilities. We must attract top talent to the program and sustain over time specialized technical skills and expertise, which provide the basis for judgments about the stockpile and stewardship actions taken, through mentoring and hands-on experience."
Given that we now have a two tier retirement system and any new employee will be in tier 2 and the lab has a penchant for term employees, will the expertise be lost because there will be no disciples to pass on the secrets?
In testimony before congress George Miller made this statement:
"The Workforce. The Stockpile Stewardship Program's most valuable and
irreplaceable assets are the unique individuals who sustain it. Confidence in the stockpile ultimately depends on confidence in the stockpile stewards at the NNSA laboratories and production facilities. We must attract top talent to the program and sustain over time specialized technical skills and expertise, which provide the basis for judgments about the stockpile and stewardship actions taken, through mentoring and hands-on experience."
Given that we now have a two tier retirement system and any new employee will be in tier 2 and the lab has a penchant for term employees, will the expertise be lost because there will be no disciples to pass on the secrets?
Thursday, July 15, 2010
Need advice
Dan asked:
Hi,
I want to know if its a good idea to consider getting a "Flexible Term" position on the business side. It's something I am very qualified for. But I am not quite sure what Flexible term implies versus the alternative.
Sandia does 9/80 and holiday shutdown. At least they use to as of 5years ago when I was working there. Does LLNL have 9/80 and holiday shutdown?
The posts make it seem like LLNL is not a good place to work because people are generally unhappy (morale is down, work atmosphere is not enjoyable). That was the sense I got.
I fear leaving my job and ending up in a worse situation. My current job is not that bad just that I'm hoping to have a much shorter commute and the above mentioned benefits.
I'm thinking smaller population (LLNL) not as much corporate big company type stuff to deal with as a 100K+ employee population/Retail. The LLNL medical benefits don't seem as good as what I have currently. I have the best PPO plan and my monthly prems are $240 to cover my family; and deductible is $1K, out of pocket max is $4K for fam and most coverage is 80% with things such as prostate screening, mammogram, pap smear, immunizations covered at 100%.
Sincerely,
Dan
Hi,
I want to know if its a good idea to consider getting a "Flexible Term" position on the business side. It's something I am very qualified for. But I am not quite sure what Flexible term implies versus the alternative.
Sandia does 9/80 and holiday shutdown. At least they use to as of 5years ago when I was working there. Does LLNL have 9/80 and holiday shutdown?
The posts make it seem like LLNL is not a good place to work because people are generally unhappy (morale is down, work atmosphere is not enjoyable). That was the sense I got.
I fear leaving my job and ending up in a worse situation. My current job is not that bad just that I'm hoping to have a much shorter commute and the above mentioned benefits.
I'm thinking smaller population (LLNL) not as much corporate big company type stuff to deal with as a 100K+ employee population/Retail. The LLNL medical benefits don't seem as good as what I have currently. I have the best PPO plan and my monthly prems are $240 to cover my family; and deductible is $1K, out of pocket max is $4K for fam and most coverage is 80% with things such as prostate screening, mammogram, pap smear, immunizations covered at 100%.
Sincerely,
Dan
Tuesday, July 13, 2010
New Sports Cars for the LANS Prenup Boys
Anonymously contributed:
New Sports Cars for the LANS Prenup Boys
While Mikey just went out an upgraded his black Audi TT coup, Bret Knapp (Associate Director for Weapons) is flaunting his brand new $100,000 2011 Cayenne Porsche at the taxpayers expense. Knapp behavior fits the following Shaw quote to a tee.
"Power does not corrupt men; fools, however, if they get into a position of power, corrupt power."
- George Bernard Shaw
New Sports Cars for the LANS Prenup Boys
While Mikey just went out an upgraded his black Audi TT coup, Bret Knapp (Associate Director for Weapons) is flaunting his brand new $100,000 2011 Cayenne Porsche at the taxpayers expense. Knapp behavior fits the following Shaw quote to a tee.
"Power does not corrupt men; fools, however, if they get into a position of power, corrupt power."
- George Bernard Shaw
Saturday, July 10, 2010
What is really happening with the MUSD Budget?
Anonymously contributed:
Note from Scooby: What is MUSD? Please explain acronyms as much as possible. TY
What is really happening with the MUSD Budget.
Word is coming out that MUSD spent ~$2M of its $25M budget on actual maintenance and will not account for the balance of the funds.
Since we do not have an accounting of the funds we can't evaluate the purpose and value gained by the remaining $23M.
If this is true, and it yet needs to be validated, why will continue to see PADs and Directorates decentralize and locally optimize the facility capabilit5ies.
Case in point, WCI and NIF did not join the centralization of facility management. Comp followed suit, now GS is pulling out. This would leave the Facility Department supporting support Departments and not directly linked to funding PADs.
One would think that NIF, with its Landscape craze as a high priority represents the a continuing trend.
Maintenace money not spent on maintenance, and not account for by the Washington Group morons who do not report to G. Miller.
PADs split up back to Directorates, facility staff managed again by the funding sponsors who will, and should, set their priorities.
I see this simply as this: those who bring the gold know what the gold givers want, proof of success is measured in delivery of budget.
Note from Scooby: What is MUSD? Please explain acronyms as much as possible. TY
What is really happening with the MUSD Budget.
Word is coming out that MUSD spent ~$2M of its $25M budget on actual maintenance and will not account for the balance of the funds.
Since we do not have an accounting of the funds we can't evaluate the purpose and value gained by the remaining $23M.
If this is true, and it yet needs to be validated, why will continue to see PADs and Directorates decentralize and locally optimize the facility capabilit5ies.
Case in point, WCI and NIF did not join the centralization of facility management. Comp followed suit, now GS is pulling out. This would leave the Facility Department supporting support Departments and not directly linked to funding PADs.
One would think that NIF, with its Landscape craze as a high priority represents the a continuing trend.
Maintenace money not spent on maintenance, and not account for by the Washington Group morons who do not report to G. Miller.
PADs split up back to Directorates, facility staff managed again by the funding sponsors who will, and should, set their priorities.
I see this simply as this: those who bring the gold know what the gold givers want, proof of success is measured in delivery of budget.
Interesting insight into the fee structure on the UC side of LANS/LLNS
Anonymously contributed:
Interesting insight into the fee structure on the UC side of LANS/LLNS
http://www.universityofcalifornia.
edu/regents/minutes/2010/joint52.pdf
Highlights....
The (UC) President recommended that he be authorized to expend, for the following purposes and in the following amounts, from the University’s net share of Los Alamos National Security (LANS) and Lawrence Livermore National Security (LLNS) LLC income earned between September 30, 2009 and December 31, 2010:
1. Supplemental compensation and other payments (including accruals) approved by the Regents for certain LANS LLC and LLNS LLC employees, from July 1, 2010 through June 30, 2011 – $2.0 million ($2.2 million in 2009-2010).
2. An appropriation to the Office of the President budget for federally unreimbursed costs of University oversight of its interest in LANS LLC and LLNS LLC, paid or accrued July 1, 2010 through June 30, 2011, including but not limited to an allocable share of the costs of the Regents, the President, the Provost, Research Security Office, Human Resources, Policy and Analysis, Financial Management, Compliance and Audit, Laboratory Management Office, External Relations, Office of Research, the General Counsel, and the University appointed Governors on the Boards of the LLCs – $4.0 million ($3.85 million in 2009-2010). The increase reflects more accurate cost allocation for UC Office of the President (UCOP) LLC efforts.
3. An appropriation in 2010-11 to a post-contract contingency fund – $1.3 million (no change from 2009-2010).
4. An appropriation for research funding in accordance with the Laboratory Fees Research Program process for 2010-2011 – $19.9 million ($18.7 million in 2009-2010). A Reserve will be allocated for research in the amount of $1.0 million ($1.15 million in 2009-2010). The Reserve will be available to potentially fund new projects, supplement projects that may exceed their allocation, or in the event there is a reduction in fees in future years, the reserve will allow projects approved for a three-year period to be fully funded. The Spend Plan for research is subject to annual approval.
5. An appropriation of $0.3 million for 2010-2011 for administration of ongoing awards and the upcoming competition review and award process.
Summary
Estimated Funds Available
Estimated Net FY 2010 LANS/LLNS LLC Management Fee = $29.50M
Estimated Carryover from 2009-2010 = $ .59M
Total = $30.09M
Recommended Allocation
Supplemental compensation = $ 2.0M
UCOP oversight = $ 4.0M
Post-contract contingency = $ 1.3M
2010-2011 Lab Fees Research Program = $19.9M
Competition Review & Award Process 2011 = $ 0.3M
Reserve for Research Awards 2010-2011 = $ 1.0M
($1.08M remains from 2009-2010)
Contingency for factors affecting the final fee $ 1.59M (to keep at $3.0M level)
Total Allocation for 2010-2011 = $30.09M
Interesting insight into the fee structure on the UC side of LANS/LLNS
http://www.universityofcalifornia.
edu/regents/minutes/2010/joint52.pdf
Highlights....
The (UC) President recommended that he be authorized to expend, for the following purposes and in the following amounts, from the University’s net share of Los Alamos National Security (LANS) and Lawrence Livermore National Security (LLNS) LLC income earned between September 30, 2009 and December 31, 2010:
1. Supplemental compensation and other payments (including accruals) approved by the Regents for certain LANS LLC and LLNS LLC employees, from July 1, 2010 through June 30, 2011 – $2.0 million ($2.2 million in 2009-2010).
2. An appropriation to the Office of the President budget for federally unreimbursed costs of University oversight of its interest in LANS LLC and LLNS LLC, paid or accrued July 1, 2010 through June 30, 2011, including but not limited to an allocable share of the costs of the Regents, the President, the Provost, Research Security Office, Human Resources, Policy and Analysis, Financial Management, Compliance and Audit, Laboratory Management Office, External Relations, Office of Research, the General Counsel, and the University appointed Governors on the Boards of the LLCs – $4.0 million ($3.85 million in 2009-2010). The increase reflects more accurate cost allocation for UC Office of the President (UCOP) LLC efforts.
3. An appropriation in 2010-11 to a post-contract contingency fund – $1.3 million (no change from 2009-2010).
4. An appropriation for research funding in accordance with the Laboratory Fees Research Program process for 2010-2011 – $19.9 million ($18.7 million in 2009-2010). A Reserve will be allocated for research in the amount of $1.0 million ($1.15 million in 2009-2010). The Reserve will be available to potentially fund new projects, supplement projects that may exceed their allocation, or in the event there is a reduction in fees in future years, the reserve will allow projects approved for a three-year period to be fully funded. The Spend Plan for research is subject to annual approval.
5. An appropriation of $0.3 million for 2010-2011 for administration of ongoing awards and the upcoming competition review and award process.
Summary
Estimated Funds Available
Estimated Net FY 2010 LANS/LLNS LLC Management Fee = $29.50M
Estimated Carryover from 2009-2010 = $ .59M
Total = $30.09M
Recommended Allocation
Supplemental compensation = $ 2.0M
UCOP oversight = $ 4.0M
Post-contract contingency = $ 1.3M
2010-2011 Lab Fees Research Program = $19.9M
Competition Review & Award Process 2011 = $ 0.3M
Reserve for Research Awards 2010-2011 = $ 1.0M
($1.08M remains from 2009-2010)
Contingency for factors affecting the final fee $ 1.59M (to keep at $3.0M level)
Total Allocation for 2010-2011 = $30.09M
Work Outage Project Manager??
Anonymously contributed:
LANS TA-55 Work Outage Project Manager.
LANS has decided that running the Plutonium Facility (TA-55) in "shutdown mode" is standard operating procedure (SOP). So they will be paying someone up to $191,200.00 to "run" the facility in that mode. I expect they will hire an entire staff to "run" the facility in this mode. You can't criticize LANS Management ingenuity. You can expect they will now receive PBI (aka money) for running in that mode! It all fits, zero work, zero safety incidents, maximum PBI money!
Job Number: 219953, Date Posted 7/7/2010
SMS-INP is seeking a Technical Project Manger 4 who will provide technical project management and coordination for all TA-55 outages. This individual will work closely with all programmatic organizations, construction projects and facility operations to optimize the overall effectiveness of planned facility outages. The Technical Project Manager will lead a diverse integrated project tem to plan, manage and execute facility outages as to reduce the overall impact and maximize the benefit to the facility. In addition to understanding all of the technical requirements associated with the outages, the Technical Project Manager is also responsible for scope, schedule, budget, quality, safety, security, and environmental compliance as related to the assigned scope of work. The Technical Project Manager will review and present as required status reports, develop forecasts and oversees appropriate corrective action(s) as necessary.
LANS TA-55 Work Outage Project Manager.
LANS has decided that running the Plutonium Facility (TA-55) in "shutdown mode" is standard operating procedure (SOP). So they will be paying someone up to $191,200.00 to "run" the facility in that mode. I expect they will hire an entire staff to "run" the facility in this mode. You can't criticize LANS Management ingenuity. You can expect they will now receive PBI (aka money) for running in that mode! It all fits, zero work, zero safety incidents, maximum PBI money!
Job Number: 219953, Date Posted 7/7/2010
SMS-INP is seeking a Technical Project Manger 4 who will provide technical project management and coordination for all TA-55 outages. This individual will work closely with all programmatic organizations, construction projects and facility operations to optimize the overall effectiveness of planned facility outages. The Technical Project Manager will lead a diverse integrated project tem to plan, manage and execute facility outages as to reduce the overall impact and maximize the benefit to the facility. In addition to understanding all of the technical requirements associated with the outages, the Technical Project Manager is also responsible for scope, schedule, budget, quality, safety, security, and environmental compliance as related to the assigned scope of work. The Technical Project Manager will review and present as required status reports, develop forecasts and oversees appropriate corrective action(s) as necessary.
Friday, July 2, 2010
Almost 3 years later
What has improved?
- Safety
- Security
- Compliance
- Bureaucracy
- Landscaping
What has not improved, declined or even worsened?
- Productivity: declined, due to a higher % of resources spent on compliance.
- Morale: worsened; people, young and graying, walk around hunched over, knowing it wont getter any better. With sub 1% raises and bad job market, everyone is here waiting for a miracle.
- Good ol boy's culture: in 2007, the expectation that the Bechtel boys will come in and straighten out the UC guys and instill "private" industry culture of efficiency and productivity was a consolation. Guess what, the Bechtel boys joined the UC boys in their tradition of mediocrity. So, the good old boys culture is well and alive. The only difference is that taxpayers are paying and extra100 Million to manage LLNL and 2000 of our colleagues are no longer here!
- Cost of doing business: Rising! Why? I thought Bechtel was here for their business know-how and paid to run LLNL more efficiently. Oh no? Is their job to collect their fee and play watchdog for NNSA? Did we need a construction and project management company for that?
- Work for others: How are we doing? Global Security: can you answer that?
- Science in general: Anyone left who is qualified to answer this one? You have to admit that we were a real Science Lab under UC.
If people were open about how they feel and not afraid of reprisals from the Bechtel boys, we might be able to improve this Lab. Until then, it is moreof the same throughout many more no-bid contract extensions.
- Safety
- Security
- Compliance
- Bureaucracy
- Landscaping
What has not improved, declined or even worsened?
- Productivity: declined, due to a higher % of resources spent on compliance.
- Morale: worsened; people, young and graying, walk around hunched over, knowing it wont getter any better. With sub 1% raises and bad job market, everyone is here waiting for a miracle.
- Good ol boy's culture: in 2007, the expectation that the Bechtel boys will come in and straighten out the UC guys and instill "private" industry culture of efficiency and productivity was a consolation. Guess what, the Bechtel boys joined the UC boys in their tradition of mediocrity. So, the good old boys culture is well and alive. The only difference is that taxpayers are paying and extra100 Million to manage LLNL and 2000 of our colleagues are no longer here!
- Cost of doing business: Rising! Why? I thought Bechtel was here for their business know-how and paid to run LLNL more efficiently. Oh no? Is their job to collect their fee and play watchdog for NNSA? Did we need a construction and project management company for that?
- Work for others: How are we doing? Global Security: can you answer that?
- Science in general: Anyone left who is qualified to answer this one? You have to admit that we were a real Science Lab under UC.
If people were open about how they feel and not afraid of reprisals from the Bechtel boys, we might be able to improve this Lab. Until then, it is moreof the same throughout many more no-bid contract extensions.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)