Thursday, September 26, 2013
Privatizing National Lab Management Misguided
Thanks very much for your continued upkeep of the blog.
I'm not one to post there myself but I thought our OpEd "Privatizing National Lab Management Misguided" might be of interest.
http://www.sfgate.com/opinion/openforum/article/Privatizing-national-lab-management-misguided-4843513.php
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts you viewed tbe most last 30 days
-
LGBT intolerance problem at Sandia? I was just checking glassdoor.com and noticed several comments suggesting intolerance to LGBT at Sandia...
-
So did you SSVSP and why? Give details.
-
“Raise a concern, get blackballed then lose your job and benefits…” “…instead of raising your concerns just leverage on your skills and go t...
9 comments:
Absolutely correct.
They got the headline right: "Privatizing National Lab Management Misguided"
But then failed to support it with any of the relevant points/analysis.
The fee is a small issue, compared with everything else that has happened...
The U.S. debt is pushing $17 trillion. Can LLNS employees make a compelling performance and or cost benefit argument to NNSA for a return to UC management of LLNL or UC plus other non-profit Universities (Texas Tech, etc.)?
Nice subliminal message using the word "tenured".
The real cost argument would be "opportunity cost" of mission work foregone due to increased management fee. Would anyone of consequence find this compelling?
Perhaps the DOE IG might find "opportunity cost" and or performance arguments compelling. The IG has made cost savings recommendations on the labs before.
http://www.nti.org/gsn/article/energy-department-ig-pushes-cost-savng-moves-national-labs/
The LLNS annual fee to run LLNL, plus its "for profit" tax status is a ~10% budget burden. A non-profit (UC, other) institution running the lab would produce a savings comparable to a lab wide furlough event that nobody wants to see occur.
Anonymous said...
The LLNS annual fee to run LLNL, plus its "for profit" tax status is a ~10% budget burden. A non-profit (UC, other) institution running the lab would produce a savings comparable to a lab wide furlough event that nobody wants to see occur.
September 29, 2013 at 11:44 AM
It's all about making money for the big corporations just like Obamacare. The people aren't going to benefit, well at least not the working ones, but big business medicine, supplies and hospitals are all while the working cannot afford the monthly premium and then get taxed at the end of the year for not having medical insurance.
At least one LLNL scientist has the guts to tell it as it is. Why do so many of us huddle in the corner waiting for the ax to fall. Speak up! Act up! I know you have a mortgage to pay, two kids in college, but how can you allow this to happen to you and your colleagues. If we really are working in the national interest then how can we allow ourselves to be part of an organization that is most certainly not working in the national interest?
Post a Comment