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.
Wednesday, August 4, 2010
de-inventory and its impact
Anonymously contributed:
I have not read any topics on de-inventory and how it will effect more layoffs. We (security) are losing at least 150+ personnel. We are being told that layoffs will be according to Lab rules. i.e. Lab seniority, etc.
10 comments:
Anonymous
said...
The real crime is that Security proposed a glide path to protect SNM and the SPO's careers until deinventory was complete, and LSO and HQ would not support it.
DOE HQ force the Lab to kill the idea of having Alameda County Sheriff take over protective forces, similar to the way the County is now running the Lab fire department.
The Lab wanted a proposal based on just reimbursing the security contractor (such as the Sheriff) for the cost of the "officers" protecting the lab - "time & material" contract. This type of contract would have been flexible and gone down if the number of offers went down.
DOE HQ (and other DOE security contractors interested in running lab pro forces) wanted the lab to issue the contract as a "fixed price" contract. This type of contract would have stayed the same over time, regardless of the number of officers employed by the contractor. The Lab said no and shelved the proposal to outsource protective forces.
Basically, the Alameda Sheriff was not interested in making money or a profit off of the Lab, so they were okay with a less expensive "time & material" type contract. Private security contractors need to make a profit, so a "fixed price" contract allows them to cut cost (lay off 150 officers for example) and keep the difference.
DOE HQ claimed a fixed price contract made budging easier, but I think they were fearful of losing control. They also listened to the DOE security contractor community that wanted an easy money making contract at the Lab (especially once the SNM is gone).
Too bad, its the ProForce officers that are losing. Clearly they would have had more job/work opportunities as part of the local Sheriffs Office than employed by some "for profit" security firm that will kick them to the curb as soon as possible when the Lab's security posture is downgraded.
The Waste Disposition Project (WMP) is now entering the 2nd Phase of firing and furloughing workers at LANS. 30% increase in medical benefits. $70M shortfall in TCP1 in 2011 and $200M in 2012. The problems are mounting with no solutions. Could it be that Mikey was just lucky up to now?
The same security problem was easily solved by Bret Knapp at LANS. Following the firing of security workers last year, he just transferred (aka forced workers out their current jobs and forced them into jobs they are not qualified for) a bunch of his nuclear weapon engineers to the security posts to check badges. He's always happy to compromise the careers of others so that he can look good to Mikey and get PBI money doing it. He's also reducing the cost of doing business by cutting the salaries of these workers and demoting them. Mikey rewarded Bret by giving him a promotion and more bonus money for these actions and also gave him the entire nuclear weapon design groups (X-Division). Now Bret has the physicists at his "disposal" so to speak. There's no such thing as expertise let alone careers here at LANS, "workers" are nothing more warm bodies. It's the brave new world here at LANS.
It is waste if they maintain a capability that exceeds what is needed to protect greatly reduced amounts of material.
I can appreciate that people feel abused if they lose their jobs, but this is a slow-motion train wreck rather than a lightening bolt.
Not sure where any fraud comes in."
I was referring to the general term applied when the I.G. gets interested. It is embodied in statues.
It is a waste from a taxpayer point of view when you will end up spending more money than necessary to achieve the job or task at hand.
It is a fraud to claim you will save money when in fact it will cost more money. ALCO is a non-profit serving the public interest (as was the UC contract before the debacle); there is no way a private security service comes close. That is the fraud. If you acknowledge the greater cost, then you move over to the "waste" side of the equation.
It is an abuse of an oversight authority to quash what would be a normal contract arrangement between the M&O contractor and another entity. That is the new tyranny....
You get the feeling that Anastasio is working to destroy what is left of nuclear weapons expertise at Los Alamos. How else do you explain it?
August 8, 2010 12:06 PM
You explain it by realizing that the loss of weapons expertise is nothing more than tolerable collateral damage in the process of ensuring the enormous salaries and bonuses for the LANS crew. I truly do not believe they are trying to destroy the labs; it is just that they don't particularly care if it happens, as long as they get theirs. This is pure criminal collusion between NNSA and LANS/LLNS. Someday the truth will come out.
The NNSA says they are concerned about the operating costs of their labs. If so, then why did they put them out as "for-profit" management bids?
It now costs x20 as much to manage these labs post-LLC and the cost of doing scientific research has risen by a factor of at least x2!
Maybe it's not about saving money. Perhaps the real reason the NNSA launched it's privatization campaign is so the employees of NNSA can retire at an early age and take very lucrative positions with the same companies they hired to do the lab's work.
10 comments:
The real crime is that Security proposed a glide path to protect SNM and the SPO's careers until deinventory was complete, and LSO and HQ would not support it.
And that is waste, fraud, and abuse.
DOE HQ force the Lab to kill the idea of having Alameda County Sheriff take over protective forces, similar to the way the County is now running the Lab fire department.
The Lab wanted a proposal based on just reimbursing the security contractor (such as the Sheriff) for the cost of the "officers" protecting the lab - "time & material" contract. This type of contract would have been flexible and gone down if the number of offers went down.
DOE HQ (and other DOE security contractors interested in running lab pro forces) wanted the lab to issue the contract as a "fixed price" contract. This type of contract would have stayed the same over time, regardless of the number of officers employed by the contractor. The Lab said no and shelved the proposal to outsource protective forces.
Basically, the Alameda Sheriff was not interested in making money or a profit off of the Lab, so they were okay with a less expensive "time & material" type contract. Private security contractors need to make a profit, so a "fixed price" contract allows them to cut cost (lay off 150 officers for example) and keep the difference.
DOE HQ claimed a fixed price contract made budging easier, but I think they were fearful of losing control. They also listened to the DOE security contractor community that wanted an easy money making contract at the Lab (especially once the SNM is gone).
Too bad, its the ProForce officers that are losing. Clearly they would have had more job/work opportunities as part of the local Sheriffs Office than employed by some "for profit" security firm that will kick them to the curb as soon as possible when the Lab's security posture is downgraded.
The Waste Disposition Project (WMP) is now entering the 2nd Phase of firing and furloughing workers at LANS. 30% increase in medical benefits. $70M shortfall in TCP1 in 2011 and $200M in 2012. The problems are mounting with no solutions. Could it be that Mikey was just lucky up to now?
Hopefully they will follow the rules this time.
And that is waste, fraud, and abuse.
It is waste if they maintain a capability that exceeds what is needed to protect greatly reduced amounts of material.
I can appreciate that people feel abused if they lose their jobs, but this is a slow-motion train wreck rather than a lightening bolt.
Not sure where any fraud comes in.
The same security problem was easily solved by Bret Knapp at LANS. Following the firing of security workers last year, he just transferred (aka forced workers out their current jobs and forced them into jobs they are not qualified for) a bunch of his nuclear weapon engineers to the security posts to check badges. He's always happy to compromise the careers of others so that he can look good to Mikey and get PBI money doing it. He's also reducing the cost of doing business by cutting the salaries of these workers and demoting them. Mikey rewarded Bret by giving him a promotion and more bonus money for these actions and also gave him the entire nuclear weapon design groups (X-Division). Now Bret has the physicists at his "disposal" so to speak. There's no such thing as expertise let alone careers here at LANS, "workers" are nothing more warm bodies. It's the brave new world here at LANS.
"And that is waste, fraud, and abuse.
It is waste if they maintain a capability that exceeds what is needed to protect greatly reduced amounts of material.
I can appreciate that people feel abused if they lose their jobs, but this is a slow-motion train wreck rather than a lightening bolt.
Not sure where any fraud comes in."
I was referring to the general term applied when the I.G. gets interested. It is embodied in statues.
It is a waste from a taxpayer point of view when you will end up spending more money than necessary to achieve the job or task at hand.
It is a fraud to claim you will save money when in fact it will cost more money. ALCO is a non-profit serving the public interest (as was the UC contract before the debacle); there is no way a private security service comes close. That is the fraud. If you acknowledge the greater cost, then you move over to the "waste" side of the equation.
It is an abuse of an oversight authority to quash what would be a normal contract arrangement between the M&O contractor and another entity. That is the new tyranny....
Why would someone with Bret Knapp's poor education and background be put in total charge of the former X Division staff?
This is just plain crazy!
You get the feeling that Anastasio is working to destroy what is left of nuclear weapons expertise at Los Alamos. How else do you explain it?
You get the feeling that Anastasio is working to destroy what is left of nuclear weapons expertise at Los Alamos. How else do you explain it?
August 8, 2010 12:06 PM
You explain it by realizing that the loss of weapons expertise is nothing more than tolerable collateral damage in the process of ensuring the enormous salaries and bonuses for the LANS crew. I truly do not believe they are trying to destroy the labs; it is just that they don't particularly care if it happens, as long as they get theirs. This is pure criminal collusion between NNSA and LANS/LLNS. Someday the truth will come out.
The NNSA says they are concerned about the operating costs of their labs. If so, then why did they put them out as "for-profit" management bids?
It now costs x20 as much to manage these labs post-LLC and the cost of doing scientific research has risen by a factor of at least x2!
Maybe it's not about saving money. Perhaps the real reason the NNSA launched it's privatization campaign is so the employees of NNSA can retire at an early age and take very lucrative positions with the same companies they hired to do the lab's work.
Post a Comment