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.
That plot included a category lumping admins with managers. Was there any clarification about the split within that category? Was it really more manager and not more admins?
Admins work too. But they are not managers. Also their salaries are often lower compared to managers. Unless "Admins" mean something other than what I thought, it does make a difference how you interpret the data.
My understanding (not 100% sure) is that the admin levels were flat or slightly decreasing. So that would provide the missing link for concluding that management population is increasing.
You can try to parse it any way you want to and the story is still the same. The trend for several years has been to add more managers to LANL at all levels. This drives the cost per scientist up to ever higher numbers due to the increased overheads. It was getting a tad better for a couple years, but in the past year it has gotten much worse. And for all this added overhead we get to be on the front page of the newspaper for radiation safety failures. And for cost over runs. And for missed project deadlines.
5 comments:
That plot included a category lumping admins with managers. Was there any clarification about the split within that category? Was it really more manager and not more admins?
Does it really matter ? You are saying there is more support than actual work being done.
Admins work too. But they are not managers. Also their salaries are often lower compared to managers. Unless "Admins" mean something other than what I thought, it does make a difference how you interpret the data.
My understanding (not 100% sure) is that the admin levels were flat or slightly decreasing. So that would provide the missing link for concluding that management population is increasing.
You can try to parse it any way you want to and the story is still the same. The trend for several years has been to add more managers to LANL at all levels. This drives the cost per scientist up to ever higher numbers due to the increased overheads. It was getting a tad better for a couple years, but in the past year it has gotten much worse.
And for all this added overhead we get to be on the front page of the newspaper for radiation safety failures. And for cost over runs. And for missed project deadlines.
Post a Comment