BLOG purpose

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. Opinions not conforming to BLOG rules are deleted. Blog author serves as a moderator. For new topics or suggestions, email jlscoob5@gmail.com

Thursday, December 5, 2013

Double standard for lab upper management?

Double standard for lab upper management? LANL Employees File Complaint Against Former Supervisor - Los Alamos Daily Post, Dec 4th 2013 ..."This was a horrifying situation, Erika was assaulted by her high ranking employer who demanded sex ... she complained to high level Laboratory officials who did nothing to help her, instead they rewarded the perpetrator by allowing him to retire with full benefits," Day told the Los Alamos Daily Post today. "Mr. Stanford supervised both Erika and her husband William and he knew William was aware of what he was doing and he didn't care. His behavior was that of a pig and the Lab took no action to step in and stop it."... http://www.ladailypost.com/content/lanl-employees-file-complaint-against-former-supervisor Why did the executive management at LANS continue to protect this "pig" (sexual harasser?) Why do the regular staff get bombarded with online training, etc. regarding sexual harassment but when it actually happens, it is usually the managers who are found to be the culprits? And does the name of Rick Marquez ring a bell for anyone? The stories about his "hot pursuits" at LANL are legendary and long running!

32 comments:

Anonymous said...

When you are a member of upper level management at the lab, "No!" must really mean "Yes, YES, YEEEEES !!!!". At leasts that is what some of them seem to believe. It's sad to see these abusers protected.

Get ready for more mandatory training because of these horrid stories of sexual abuse.

Anonymous said...

It really is a double standard. According to HR, AD and higher are not subject to the LANL policies about sexual harassment and all the other things we peons have to take training.
So no wonder they follow their own rules.

Anonymous said...

According to HR, AD and higher are not subject to the LANL policies about sexual harassment and all the other things we peons have to take training.

December 6, 2013 at 5:26 AM

Sorry that is BS. Care to provide a citation?

Anonymous said...

I say bring back the "Mad Men" era when it was OK to drink up at work and chasing office tail was just a perk of the job!

LANL is already half-way there! Just add booze! (Some already have added booze, from what I hear.)

I loved the 60's. Maybe we can bring back Key Parties again. (Why did they ever stop?)

Anonymous said...

If you have an established diversity role at LLNS, your management escapades will be ignored out of fear, and you will instead be rewarded with subsequent promotions. It only becomes problematic when your coworkers within the "diversity space" flush you out for what you have done.

Anonymous said...

One or two DOE IG phone call confirmations to LLNS engineering management could address this "skeleton in closet" and remedy the situation pronto.

Anonymous said...

When I saw the title about double standards, I was certain this thread was talking about Sandia. Wow, so the other labs are that bad too huh.

Anonymous said...

alpha male unethical behavior + an anchored diversity role = unimpeded upward management mobility at LLNS

Anonymous said...

Sorry that is BS. Care to provide a citation?


Read the HR manuals, and then call HR if you cant find it. This is your homework. By just caling it BS, you clearly show that you have no clue.


Anonymous said...

I have seen management abuse first hand. Brought problems forward about a manager to upper management. What a huge mistake. The result was years of retribution and promotions for those abusing managers. At LLNL you bring management abuse forward at your own risk. They will not do anything to help and the retribution is harsh. My advice is to not do it. If you are lucky what they do will be a sueable offence, then you can get some justice. Short of that your options are to grin a bear it or leave the lab. If the manager does not break the law, they are pretty much going to get away with it and you are going to have to live with it.

Anonymous said...

Sorry that is BS. Care to provide a citation?


Read the HR manuals, and then call HR if you cant find it. This is your homework. By just caling it BS, you clearly show that you have no clue.


December 7, 2013 at 1:27 PM

Didn't think so. A reference to "HR manuals" shows you are the one without a clue.

Anonymous said...

Unfortunately LLNS retribution is true.

As a reply to the above diversity point, I would only add you first have to be in management prior to the "escapades" to attain impunity. Having escapades or being a vocal proponent of diversity as a non-management employee, will leave you wide open for chronic retaliation, and you will never ever get a "ticket to the show" within engineering management ranks. Do not become a political martyr so others can climb the ranks at your expense.

Anonymous said...

"...If the manager does not break the law, they are pretty much going to get away with it and you are going to have to live with it..."

If the manager in question uses his authority to threaten his subordinates to keep his behavior confidential, it is unlawful via CA DFEH and DOE security clearance workplace criteria.

Anonymous said...

If management were to knowingly harbor or shield such a person, that would be a serious Q clearance infraction.

Anonymous said...

that would be a serious Q clearance infraction.

December 7, 2013 at 5:32 PM

You have no idea what you're talking about. There is no such thing as a "Q clearance infraction."

Anonymous said...

Activity leading to susceptibility to blackmail or coercion is a clearance issue. Don't get side tracked with the word "infraction". Really now.

Anonymous said...

Didn't think so. A reference to "HR manuals" shows you are the one without a clue.

December 7, 2013 at 2:14 PM

You can call it what you want. The fact is that AD and above are exempt.

I don't really care if you accept that or not. Keep your head in the sand and everything will be fine.

Anonymous said...

You mean to say that ADs and above are exempt from corporate policy for even the parts that are law?

Anonymous said...

Didn't think so.

Anonymous said...

Corporate policy covers illegal harassment. No way that ADs and above are exempt from this. Maybe specific parts that don't cover "illegal acts" perhaps...

Anonymous said...

Yeah, December 7, 2013 at 1:27 PM is just trying to start a fire, with no fuel and no match.

“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it." - Joseph Goebbels

Anonymous said...

I would believe that HR would not go after an AD or above even if there were clearly illegal sexual harassment involved. I think the case for double standards is accurate. They will try to make the "problem" (e.g., the victim) go away, through bribe or blackmail. Only when the risk of the issue hitting the press as a whitewash or a whistleblower retaliation case might the lab actually do something.

It's not whether they are above the law, but rather, whether HR treats an AD differently than a low-level manager or employee engaged in illegal sexual harassment. I'm sure this falls under "unwritten" policies.

Anonymous said...

HR most definitely treats LANS managers with kid gloves.

Anonymous said...

Remember those good ole days in high school? The kids whose parents were wealthy enough to buy them nice cars were always near the top of the social pecking order. Well hey that's the way it is today! Got a Lamborghini or Ferrarri? Yeah? Then you get special treatment! I mean really, we are all equal under the eyes of justice. Just some of us are more equal than others.

Anonymous said...

I mean really, we are all equal under the eyes of justice. Just some of us are more equal than others.

December 10, 2013 at 7:14 AM

You work in a hierarchical organization, and live in a hierarchical society with a hierarchical economy. Your niche in the overall hierarchy is generally, but not always, determined by your level of education. Tell that to your kids when they want to drop out.

Anonymous said...

It's about who you know and who you slept with. And most importantly, who you have under your control by the balls.

Anonymous said...

"...It's about who you know and who you slept with. And most importantly, who you have under your control by the balls..."

"Who you slept with" is your private business, until it oozes into your public LLNS job function and unlawfully impacts your uninvolved and threatened subordinate employees.

You won't be able to scratch this "cat turd" under the marble floor Mr. Engineering Manager,....turn yourself in with the hope of leniency.

Anonymous said...

the "sleeping around" is more a metaphor for the sycophantic self-degradation that those with lesser abilities must resort to. though for sure the literal "sleeping around" does happen.

Anonymous said...

Well the p division at Los Alamos hasn't converted a female postdoc in 15 years. Plenty of these former female postdocs are still at the lab, although in other divisions (and most are doing really, really well). I find it hard to believe that with an average 3-4 female postdocs/group that not one of them was good enough to be converted. The conversion rate for men hovers at around 30%.

Of course, I've always assumed that p actually stood for physics. Maybe I've been wrong all this time.

Anonymous said...

If you want to report a concern please follow this advice:

(1) do not bring your concern to HR ever, they are there to protect the organization at all costs. Read the book HR is not your friend.

(2) report the concern to your direct supervisor only, and only if you fully trust them and report it in a way to help them fix the problem and not be blind sided or blamed.

(3) realize that employees who report concerns are seen as not trustworthy to the organization.

(4) The organization sets up a bcc to the legal department and to HR on the e-mail accounts of all who complain or are blacklisted. Every work e-mail you send is copied to legal and HR, and perhaps others.

(5) The DOE and NNSA inspector general office do not really police the labs. They are there to protect the lab and DOE/NNSA from bad press and law suits. They are not going to correct or punish wrongdoing at the lab. They try to encourage you to not pursue a legal complaint.

(6) The upper managers protect themselves via "plausible deniability"... ideally you want your complaint to go to them, and to be documented that they received the complaint -- instead of setting up a meeting with them to raise a concern, setup a meeting on a positive topic and then hand them the written concern (like delivering a summons) .

(7) Read the book Corporate Confidential.

(8) The corporation is never going to admit a wrong-doing, or apologize. They will protect their image at all costs.

Anonymous said...

"Well the p division at Los Alamos hasn't converted a female postdoc in 15 years. Plenty of these former female postdocs are still at the lab, although in other divisions (and most are doing really, really well). I find it hard to believe that with an average 3-4 female postdocs/group that not one of them was good enough to be converted. The conversion rate for men hovers at around 30%.

Of course, I've always assumed that p actually stood for physics. Maybe I've been wrong all this time.

December 10, 2013 at 6:39 PM"

You should see T-division at LANL. I think they are at 4% female or less. To be fair to T they have few female postdocs so there are few to recruit in the first place.

Anonymous said...

The ONLY reason this case didn't get swept under the carpet (or marble floor) is because the victim went outside the lab HR system and reported it to the police. The victim is now the bad guy in LANL's eyes. The manager in question was repeatedly moved, abruptly from org to org, over 20 years. He was well-known as a repeat sexual harasser.

Blog Archive