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.
"The Los Alamos National Laboratory received a final score of 89 percent on its annual performance evaluation from the National Nuclear Security Administration, according to documents released Friday.
But in a memo to employees, lab Director Charlie McMillan said LANL did not receive an additional year on a possible contract extension.
“Under the Prime Contract, if the lab meets certain performance standards the government may choose to award an additional year to the LANS contract. As of last year, we had earned five consecutive award terms,” McMillan wrote.
“This year, we did not meet NNSA’s criteria for award term. Under the new Performance Evaluation Plan adopted for sites across the NNSA for FY 2013, sites were required to score “Very Good” or higher on each of five performance objectives (in previous years, 4 out of 5 were required).”
The lab’s contract currently runs through FY 18."
"Last year, the lab received an 80 percent score but also received a contract extension thanks to a one-time waiver by then NNSA principal administrator Neile Miller."
Hopefully LANS won't last that long. They've been a disaster in almost every way. One might say they are better than the reign of Nanos, but that is setting the bar very low.
Now now, calm down everyone. This is like grade school, and everyone is graded on a curve. So settle down. LANL will get a pass since it's only competition is itself.
NNSA is a poor organization to judge organizational effectiveness. A 50% score and a 100% score are the same. Neither has judgement nor merit.
But...you do care because...
When the LANL operations contract is rebid in 2018, there will be tremendous pressure on the liars, cheats, incompetents and fools populating Forrestal to make themselves look good by reducing the LANL compensation package rules under the new contract. This is just what happened in 2007 when contract -48 was replaced with a rebid contact -44 the severely reduced employee total compensation.
So, -you will lose medical insurance contributions and retiree medical insurance. -The quisling in human resouces will be forced to use low comparable organizations for compensation comparisons. - 401k and retirement contributions will be reduced or eliminated. -etc all the stuff they did in 2007 to screw up the labs while making themselves look good.
So what do you need to do?
Have a well written, tough, functioning UNION CONTRACT in place with all of the appropriate T&Cs so you are protected in writing from NNSA liars like Tom D'Agostino, Tyler Pryzbylek, Bodman, who will be jonesing you with happy talk and a big smile while they screw you and your family (as in 2007).
Remember 2007! Have the contact in place and functioning well by 2018. Name it the "Bodman, Pryzbylek, D'Agostino and other NNSA a*****s" memorial contract - never again.
Merry Christmas and best wishes, especially to our NSA observers.
"The lab received scores of 95 percent in Science, Technology and Engineering, 91 percent in broader national security mission, 90 percent in contract leadership, 87 percent in nuclear weapons mission and 49 percent in operations and management.
Only 49 % for the "management" rating? Does that mean that LANS managers won't be getting any raises or bonuses this year? Nah, I doubt it.
""The lab received scores of 95 percent in Science, Technology and Engineering, 91 percent in broader national security mission, 90 percent in contract leadership, 87 percent in nuclear weapons mission and 49 percent in operations and management.
Only 49 % for the "management" rating? Does that mean that LANS managers won't be getting any raises or bonuses this year? Nah, I doubt it.
December 22, 2013 at 9:28 PM"
A manager once told me that if half of the science vanished at the labs that they would get the same score for the science section.
How in the hell does LANS get a 49% on Management and Operations. It's a "take home exam" guys! All you had to do was answer the questions that were given to you a year ago!
1. Keep LANL from having bad news. 3. Keep Congress happy. 4. Suck up to NNSA 5. Act lucky to be in the presence of NNSA. 6. Say you follow environmental rules. 7. Pay lip service to affirmative action. 8. Say you retain talent, while reducing compensation. 9. Participate in lie that LANL employees and NNSA equally contribute to the 403b plan, 10. Ask for permission for everything, the answer is "no". 11. Implement expensive new unfunded mandates without compensating increases in budget authority. 12. Provide local hookers to NNSA visitors. 13. Accept blame for losing stuff that doesn't exist. 14. Do not tell the truth
To the person bemoaning lack of contributions to the "403b plan" - we haven't had one of those since the contract turned over from UC to LANS. Do you mean the defined benefit retirement plan?
Perhaps it is time to fire all senior managers at LANL and merge with LLNL, all under UC control.
December 23, 2013 at 2:52 PM Anonymous Anonymous said...
How in the hell does LANS get a 49% on Management and Operations. It's a "take home exam" guys! All you had to do was answer the questions that were given to you a year ago!
December 23, 2013 at 6:55 PM
Jeeze guys, it is an 'M&O contract'! For crying out loud, you would think that someone would be paying attention to the basics!! The pathetic failing score this year, on top of the failing score last year (given a hall-pass by Neile Miller), is a terrible report card for Charlie and his team. He's been at the helm for two years, and it may already be time for a change.
If you've ever had to live with a C-student NNSA watcher, you know how easy it is for them to find unimportant things that they can report to convince their C-student NNSA bosses that they're doing something worthwhile.
You'd think LANL (and LLNL) folks would be smart enough to get ahead of those bozos, but it is really hard. If they decide they're going to give you a 49%, they will.
LANL got a raw deal on their M&O score. The fact that they were punished for a firearm that went missing after it fell though a tear in the space-time fabric... Is not the fault of LANL. All these other M&O problems are also the fault of Obama, Obamacare, Snowden, Justin Bieber and Sandia. In my book, they deserve a perfect score, and I know I'm right because I'm a legend in my own mind.
Make all the snarky comments you want about the contract extension process, but that won't change the result that the lab leadership wasn't able to deliver. Successful leaders are able to deliver passing annual scores to their boards, and that hasn't happened at LANL since Mike retired.
Why is Macmillan still there? The take-home-radiation-day fiasco should have ended his career, particularly his response to the post-fiasco scrutiny. Why can't you guys get a director that understands nuclear materials related operations?
Why is Macmillan still there? The take-home-radiation-day fiasco should have ended his career, particularly his response to the post-fiasco scrutiny. Why can't you guys get a director that understands nuclear materials related operations?
January 1, 2014 at 2:52 AM
That is only one of several events in the past two years that would have been career ending in other locations.
Macmillan was good for LANL, because he cock blocks you read and beloved Bret... That is unless Bret gets directorship of LLNL. If that happens, which Livermoron can you count on with taking the helm if the USS LANL? Goodwin? Verdon? Or better yet, Moses?
28 comments:
Hello poster!
Thank you for your contribution. Please send entire article as link is only or subscribers. Scooby
Knapp's plan is all playing out. He jumped ship as soon as it "went under". Under that baffoon exterior is a shear corporate genius.
"The Los Alamos National Laboratory received a final score of 89 percent on its annual performance evaluation from the National Nuclear Security Administration, according to documents released Friday.
But in a memo to employees, lab Director Charlie McMillan said LANL did not receive an additional year on a possible contract extension.
“Under the Prime Contract, if the lab meets certain performance standards the government may choose to award an additional year to the LANS contract. As of last year, we had earned five consecutive award terms,” McMillan wrote.
“This year, we did not meet NNSA’s criteria for award term. Under the new Performance Evaluation Plan adopted for sites across the NNSA for FY 2013, sites were required to score “Very Good” or higher on each of five performance objectives (in previous years, 4 out of 5 were required).”
The lab’s contract currently runs through FY 18."
"Last year, the lab received an 80 percent score but also received a contract extension thanks to a one-time waiver by then NNSA principal administrator Neile Miller."
Hopefully LANS won't last that long. They've been a disaster in almost every way. One might say they are better than the reign of Nanos, but that is setting the bar very low.
A 49% in LANL Management and Operations! What a disgrace. Let the beatings continue at TA-55, WETF, CMR, and Area G.
Now now, calm down everyone. This is like grade school, and everyone is graded on a curve. So settle down. LANL will get a pass since it's only competition is itself.
NNSA is a poor organization to judge organizational effectiveness. A 50% score and a 100% score are the same. Neither has judgement nor merit.
But...you do care because...
When the LANL operations contract is rebid in 2018, there will be tremendous pressure on the liars, cheats, incompetents and fools populating Forrestal to make themselves look good by reducing the LANL compensation package rules under the new contract. This is just what happened in 2007 when contract -48 was replaced with a rebid contact -44 the severely reduced employee total compensation.
So,
-you will lose medical insurance contributions and retiree medical insurance.
-The quisling in human resouces will be forced to use low comparable organizations for compensation comparisons.
- 401k and retirement contributions will be reduced or eliminated.
-etc all the stuff they did in 2007 to screw up the labs while making themselves look good.
So what do you need to do?
Have a well written, tough, functioning UNION CONTRACT in place with all of the appropriate T&Cs so you are protected in writing from NNSA liars like Tom D'Agostino, Tyler Pryzbylek, Bodman, who will be jonesing you with happy talk and a big smile while they screw you and your family (as in 2007).
Remember 2007! Have the contact in place and functioning well by 2018. Name it the "Bodman, Pryzbylek, D'Agostino and other NNSA a*****s" memorial contract - never again.
Merry Christmas and best wishes, especially to our NSA observers.
And NNSA is not contributing to your 403b plans even though you are contributing 7% of your salary.
They lied publically that they would pay their part of the agreement and you believed them.
Let those who can hear the drums be warned.
"The lab received scores of 95 percent in Science, Technology and Engineering, 91 percent in broader national security mission, 90 percent in contract leadership, 87 percent in nuclear weapons mission and 49 percent in operations and management.
Only 49 % for the "management" rating? Does that mean that LANS managers won't be getting any raises or bonuses this year? Nah, I doubt it.
""The lab received scores of 95 percent in Science, Technology and Engineering, 91 percent in broader national security mission, 90 percent in contract leadership, 87 percent in nuclear weapons mission and 49 percent in operations and management.
Only 49 % for the "management" rating? Does that mean that LANS managers won't be getting any raises or bonuses this year? Nah, I doubt it.
December 22, 2013 at 9:28 PM"
A manager once told me that if half of the science vanished at the labs that they would get the same score for the science section.
Perhaps it is time to fire all senior managers at LANL and merge with LLNL, all under UC control.
How in the hell does LANS get a 49% on Management and Operations. It's a "take home exam" guys! All you had to do was answer the questions that were given to you a year ago!
Perhaps it is time to fire all senior managers at LANL and merge with LLNL, all under UC control.
December 23, 2013 at 2:52 PM
Right. How do you propose this be accomplished, and by whom?? Oh, wait, you were talking to Santa. How's the weather on your planet?
Yep. Actual merit factors from current contract.
1. Keep LANL from having bad news.
3. Keep Congress happy.
4. Suck up to NNSA
5. Act lucky to be in the presence of NNSA.
6. Say you follow environmental rules.
7. Pay lip service to affirmative action.
8. Say you retain talent, while reducing compensation.
9. Participate in lie that LANL employees and NNSA equally contribute to the 403b plan,
10. Ask for permission for everything, the answer is "no".
11. Implement expensive new unfunded mandates without compensating increases in budget authority.
12. Provide local hookers to NNSA visitors.
13. Accept blame for losing stuff that doesn't exist.
14. Do not tell the truth
Oh yeah. Now here's your $70M for your soul.
To the person bemoaning lack of contributions to the "403b plan" - we haven't had one of those since the contract turned over from UC to LANS. Do you mean the defined benefit retirement plan?
Perhaps it is time to fire all senior managers at LANL and merge with LLNL, all under UC control.
December 23, 2013 at 2:52 PM
Anonymous Anonymous said...
How in the hell does LANS get a 49% on Management and Operations. It's a "take home exam" guys! All you had to do was answer the questions that were given to you a year ago!
December 23, 2013 at 6:55 PM
Jeeze guys, it is an 'M&O contract'! For crying out loud, you would think that someone would be paying attention to the basics!! The pathetic failing score this year, on top of the failing score last year (given a hall-pass by Neile Miller), is a terrible report card for Charlie and his team. He's been at the helm for two years, and it may already be time for a change.
If you've ever had to live with a C-student NNSA watcher, you know how easy it is for them to find unimportant things that they can report to convince their C-student NNSA bosses that they're doing something worthwhile.
You'd think LANL (and LLNL) folks would be smart enough to get ahead of those bozos, but it is really hard. If they decide they're going to give you a 49%, they will.
LANL got a raw deal on their M&O score. The fact that they were punished for a firearm that went missing after it fell though a tear in the space-time fabric... Is not the fault of LANL. All these other M&O problems are also the fault of Obama, Obamacare, Snowden, Justin Bieber and Sandia. In my book, they deserve a perfect score, and I know I'm right because I'm a legend in my own mind.
You forgot to mention Lady Gaga's complicity in distracting those NNSA watchers, causing them to screw up their grading of our mindless tasks.
9:27 AM: " Yep. Actual merit factors from current contract.
1. Keep LANL from having bad news.
3. Keep Congress happy.
4. Suck up to NNSA... "
...and let's not forget item 11, the most important factor of all:
Don't trip... Wear shoes that GRIP!
The LANS executive team has an extreme obsession with those "slip & trip" metrics.
Make all the snarky comments you want about the contract extension process, but that won't change the result that the lab leadership wasn't able to deliver. Successful leaders are able to deliver passing annual scores to their boards, and that hasn't happened at LANL since Mike retired.
9:38. We haven't had credible management since Agnew retired.
Why is Macmillan still there? The take-home-radiation-day fiasco should have ended his career, particularly his response to the post-fiasco scrutiny. Why can't you guys get a director that understands nuclear materials related operations?
Why is Macmillan still there?
January 1, 2014 at 2:52 AM
As long as Glenn Mara, Bret Knapp, Charlie Macmillan, Mike Anastasio keep whispering (i.e. telling) Norm Pattiz what to do!
Why is Macmillan still there? The take-home-radiation-day fiasco should have ended his career, particularly his response to the post-fiasco scrutiny. Why can't you guys get a director that understands nuclear materials related operations?
January 1, 2014 at 2:52 AM
That is only one of several events in the past two years that would have been career ending in other locations.
Why is Macmillan still there?
Because his replacement, Bret, is busy in California for the time being. Nanos was nothing compared to whats coming.
Macmillan was good for LANL, because he cock blocks you read and beloved Bret... That is unless Bret gets directorship of LLNL. If that happens, which Livermoron can you count on with taking the helm if the USS LANL? Goodwin? Verdon? Or better yet, Moses?
Post a Comment