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.
Thursday, August 7, 2014
SHRM at LLNL
Is LLNS SHRM increasingly irrelevant for LLNS "worker bee" employees?
18 comments:
Anonymous
said...
No way! They're an organization to be carefully watched and never crossed. Much of what they do is useless boilerplate, but they often sneak little "gifts" into PPPM updates without any hoopla.
I think it's always important to look at the changes as they're announced. And discussion of the impact of those changes in this blog is occasionally helpful; blog readers have an exceptional talent for figuring out the worst-case reasons for the changes!
LLNS SHRM is not a checks and balance organization and has an ever diminishing positive or protective value to LLNS employees. By that standard, SHRM is becoming or has become irrelevant to "worker bee" employees. In contrast, SHRM is a very relevant tool and buffer for the LLC.
long term and careful management of human resources
An observed LLNS SHRM role is:
an organization pushing new policies and ignoring existing ones in a subservient capacity for LLNS corporate at the expense of the "worker bee" employee population
SHRM does not serve employees. It does not value them. It is above that. It is a henchman for LLNS overseers "strategic" initiatives.
It should be abolished.
The former UC employees now in human resources should return to a reformed LLNS personnel office under an experienced manager who worked under UC policies. Employees who were hired afterward, under LLNS, especially Lynn Soderstrom, should be shown the door.
LLNS personel policy implementation are a strong source of current employee dissatisfaction. Bill can fix this with a stroke of the pen.
SHRM has been slipping away from an employee resource to an instrument of the LLC since 2007. Do you think Bill will override the control of the SHRM puppet masters when the previous directors have not? Any evidence of such a change so far?
SHRM is there to protect the management and their poor management decision making. They are there to cover up any abuses illegal or otherwise that management engage in. They only take the side of management over employees.
"...SHRM is there to protect the management and their poor management decision making. They are there to cover up any abuses illegal or otherwise that management engage in. They only take the side of management over employees..."
LLNS SHRM and Staff Relations have hand in hand complicity in the areas mentioned. The question is what will the Director do to address this? Will he show leadership, or will he just be another "its my turn" Director?
It is unlikely the Director will make any material changes to SHRM or Staff Relations, low morale or not. LLNS corporate would have fought hard to prevent a political "Trojan Horse" from entering the scene and upsetting their favorable current arrangement.
It's interesting that SHRM does the salary reviews to look at "market value", yet they always give themselves a nice fat salary increase.
Does anybody else find this a conflict of interest? They hire a 3rd party to do these reviews, but doesn't it make sense that the 3rd party would want to make SHRM happy so they can get the contract again next year?
Ultimately, it is LLNS's job to pay it workers as little as possible (not because they're mean, it's just business). Every LLNS employee who works on establishing the salary package does well by making the package smaller. The ONLY feedback on this is the resulting actual size and quality of the staff, which is affected by salaries, market conditions, and quality-of-life issues. That's why it is so important for people who are acutely unhappy to leave LLNS; it provides the feedback to help keep the system "reasonable" for those who remain (for whatever reason).
And, by the way, complaining doesn't help very much, because the decision makers have to back up what they do with actual demonstrable facts. Saying "our attrition rate is up and we have to do something about it" carries a lot more weight than "our employee survey indicates that our staff is less happy than they used to" (to which they could respond: "tough, we're sill meeting all our requirements").
"...That's why it is so important for people who are acutely unhappy to leave LLNS; it provides the feedback to help keep the system "reasonable" for those who remain..."
Hmm. Encourage others to leave LLNS to cultivate a "reasonable" compensation package for the rest of us. What a strategic plan this is.
And if employees don't leave in adequate numbers then what? You offer them a gift card for "Hooters" if they change their mind before the next compensation package is finalized?
18 comments:
No way! They're an organization to be carefully watched and never crossed. Much of what they do is useless boilerplate, but they often sneak little "gifts" into PPPM updates without any hoopla.
I think it's always important to look at the changes as they're announced. And discussion of the impact of those changes in this blog is occasionally helpful; blog readers have an exceptional talent for figuring out the worst-case reasons for the changes!
LLNS SHRM is not a checks and balance organization and has an ever diminishing positive or protective value to LLNS employees. By that standard, SHRM is becoming or has become irrelevant to "worker bee" employees. In contrast, SHRM is a very relevant tool and buffer for the LLC.
Anbody know why it's Strategic Human Resources Management?
I mean, what's wrong with Human Resources Management or just Human Resources? They have to lard up the title with "Strategic"?
What gives?
It raises the questions:
1. Are they managing resources for strategic humans, but not the rest of us?
2. Are they managing just the strategic human resources, and not the rest of us tactical human resources?
3. Are they strategically managing all human resources?
I'm so confused!!!!
A literal interpretation of SHRM is:
long term and careful management
of human resources
An observed LLNS SHRM role is:
an organization pushing new policies and
ignoring existing ones in a subservient capacity
for LLNS corporate at the expense of the
"worker bee" employee population
SHRM does not serve employees. It does not value them. It is above that. It is a henchman for LLNS overseers "strategic" initiatives.
It should be abolished.
The former UC employees now in human resources should return to a reformed LLNS personnel office under an experienced manager who worked under UC policies. Employees who were hired afterward, under LLNS, especially Lynn Soderstrom, should be shown the door.
LLNS personel policy implementation are a strong source of current employee dissatisfaction. Bill can fix this with a stroke of the pen.
SHRM has been slipping away from an employee resource to an instrument of the LLC since 2007. Do you think Bill will override the control of the SHRM puppet masters when the previous directors have not? Any evidence of such a change so far?
It's Strategic when plotting the course for layoffs and it's Tactical when it employs the boot.
"...Bill can fix this with a stroke of the pen..."
"...Any evidence of such a change so far?..."
Cricket, cricket...
SHRM is there to protect the management and their poor management decision making. They are there to cover up any abuses illegal or otherwise that management engage in. They only take the side of management over employees.
"...SHRM is there to protect the management and their poor management decision making. They are there to cover up any abuses illegal or otherwise that management engage in. They only take the side of management over employees..."
LLNS SHRM and Staff Relations have hand in hand complicity in the areas mentioned. The question is what will the Director do to address this? Will he show leadership, or will he just be another "its my turn" Director?
It is unlikely the Director will make any material changes to SHRM or Staff Relations, low morale or not. LLNS corporate would have fought hard to prevent a political "Trojan Horse" from entering the scene and upsetting their favorable current arrangement.
Bill has better things to do than ensure your emotional safety through a human resource security blanket.
It's time for your nap, Linus.
"Bill has better things to do..."
Like someday giving you a well deserved and long awaited pat on the head Peppermint Patty?
or was the football just pulled from in front of us?
"...or was the football just pulled from in front of us?..."
Yes. SHRM is the football and Lucy praises the value of SHRM until you actually attempt to use it, then it is pulled.
It's interesting that SHRM does the salary reviews to look at "market value", yet they always give themselves a nice fat salary increase.
Does anybody else find this a conflict of interest? They hire a 3rd party to do these reviews, but doesn't it make sense that the 3rd party would want to make SHRM happy so they can get the contract again next year?
DING DING DING DING
Correct!
Ultimately, it is LLNS's job to pay it workers as little as possible (not because they're mean, it's just business). Every LLNS employee who works on establishing the salary package does well by making the package smaller. The ONLY feedback on this is the resulting actual size and quality of the staff, which is affected by salaries, market conditions, and quality-of-life issues. That's why it is so important for people who are acutely unhappy to leave LLNS; it provides the feedback to help keep the system "reasonable" for those who remain (for whatever reason).
And, by the way, complaining doesn't help very much, because the decision makers have to back up what they do with actual demonstrable facts. Saying "our attrition rate is up and we have to do something about it" carries a lot more weight than "our employee survey indicates that our staff is less happy than they used to" (to which they could respond: "tough, we're sill meeting all our requirements").
"...That's why it is so important for people who are acutely unhappy to leave LLNS; it provides the feedback to help keep the system "reasonable" for those who remain..."
Hmm. Encourage others to leave LLNS to cultivate a "reasonable" compensation package for the rest of us.
What a strategic plan this is.
And if employees don't leave in adequate numbers then what? You offer them a gift card for "Hooters" if they change their mind before the next compensation package is finalized?
Post a Comment