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. Comments not conforming to BLOG rules are deleted. Blog authors serve as moderators. For new topics or suggestions, email jlscoob5@gmail.com

Friday, June 9, 2017

LANS cares?

 After 9 years and on their way out, LANS wants our input in their first survey.

To: LANL-ALL
From: Charles F. McMillan, DIR
Date: June 7, 2017
Subject: Employee Engagement Initiative Begins Soon

Creating a positive, inclusive, and supportive work culture is essential to a vibrant workplace. In support of this, we will soon release an Employee Engagement Survey that will enable you to give us your direct feedback about working at the Laboratory. The information gathered through this survey will help shape the organizational culture at the Laboratory. This effort is one of several initiatives that supports the Laboratory’s Strategic Plan Goal 3 that aims to position the Laboratory as one of the best places to work.

20 comments:

Anonymous said...

This survey is ridiculous and vapid, and it provides no insights whatsoever into cultural problems or how to fix them. You will get to vote on meaningful, thoughtful questions like "I have a best friend at work", and then develop action plans to boost your scores if they are too low in your work group. The dumbest survey you will ever have to fill out, but upper management gets to claim they are "doing something" to improve the work culture for the next PER.

Anonymous said...

After 11 years, LANS is still striving to make LANL one of the best places to work in the world.

Anonymous said...

LANS has the plan for making LANL grand.

Anonymous said...

"LANS has the plan for making LANL grand."

By leaving, however LANS has been grand to a number of people who have made millions and millions and a rich amount of profit for certain companies. LANS was only about the profit nothing more and nothing less. They thought it was best to take as much as they could has fast as they could. In the end I think LANS will be seen as success. Bechtel has often seen their projects as 10 years of profit and than move on to the next. Tell me what has been the value added to LANL or LLNL by going over to the for profit model?

Anonymous said...

LANS had no "profit." There was award fee that was severely curtailed for shortfalls in performance points. You people who continue to think that LANS is producing widgets for a profit margin are just stupid. It was never the case, and LANS never expected "profit."

Anonymous said...

It's beyond comprehension why Charle wants feedback from LANL employees, particularly now with a few months left. Fact is, LANS has never demonstrated compassion to it's employees or promoted, inclusive, or supportive institutional principles. LANS has never "walked the talk", it's only promoted "follow the money". All Charlie had to do walk over to TA-55, or Area G, or WETF, or WCCRF, or CMR, or DAHRT, or RANT, or TA-16 and talk to people rather than paying the Gallup pollsters a few million dollars to conduct a "rigged" poll. Let's see how the questions will be asked (i.e. rigged) to ensure LANS gets "high marks" to demonstrate once and for all that the LANS legacy was "GREAT"! That's what is poll is about!

Anonymous said...

"LANS had no "profit." There was award fee that was severely curtailed for shortfalls in performance points. You people who continue to think that LANS is producing widgets for a profit margin are just stupid. It was never the case, and LANS never expected "profit."

June 9, 2017 at 8:59 PM"

We have gone over this a billion times, of course it is profit. That said corporations are experts in leverage profit, this is done by ensuring their own subsidiaries contractors being hired, moving through as many people as possible, moving people through the system in 3 year cycles and transferring their pensions. Charging nation wide travel trips to LANL even when it was one of only 10 steps and so on. LANS only goal was money any way they could get that. It is not profit for widgets, it is not even profit in the traditional sense that there are companies
competing against each other or large marketplace of different companies. It is what is called rent seeking, or crony capitalism.

In any case the bottom line is can your provide me one example of value added to LANL or LLNL by going to the LLC model?

Anonymous said...


1-4 Immensely agree, Totally Agree, Completely Agree, Strongly Agree

(a) I greatly admire my managers

(b) The government should be ashamed of itself for throwing out LANLS

(c) All the PADS are good locking and powerful

(d) PBIs baby!

(e) Follow the money!

(f) SUPERVUCA was a great idea

(g) LANS brought many great efficiencies that saved huge amounts of money and reduced paper work and allowed us to avoid any voluntary separations programs.

(h) LANS can build non-functioning fences for under 5000 million dollars

(i) Unlike before, under LANS things are totally safe and not single person ever got hurt.

(j) LANS sped up efficiencies by cutting out the middle man scientists when asking about cat litter for radioactive waste thus saving the nation billions!

(k) If 20 divisions are good 120 and an explosion of managers is better.

(l) High level managers interact, listen and engage with the workforce.

(m) As a lowly worker scum I should not be allowed to ever interact, be heard, or
have any engagement with managers.

(n) We are corporate now so loyalty should be to LANS not the US

(o) We are all in it for the money so why else would you be at LANL

(p) Rick Peery is cute

(q) You're in a desert, walking along in the sand, when all of a sudden you look down and see a tortoise...

(r) You should be allowed to have your husband/wife be paid 10k by LANS to go to operas.

(s) Ethics training should only be for non-managers.

(t) but Rich Marquez is an honorable man.

(u) Substantially equivalent

(v) WTF

(w) High level managers need better parking places.

(x) After spending millions of dollars to outside agency we now know for the first time after 65 years what our purpose is.

(z) What me worry?

Anonymous said...

Just one more waste of money to make Charlie and the PADS feel good about themselves and their bloated salaries.

Anonymous said...

In any case the bottom line is can your provide me one example of value added to LANL or LLNL by going to the LLC model?

June 10, 2017 at 8:17 AM

No one outside the labs cares a whit about "value added to LANL or LLNL." You're just not that special.

Anonymous said...

No one outside the labs cares a whit about "value added to LANL or LLNL." You're just not that special.

June 11, 2017 at 7:10 AM

I am not sure what your point is? What on earth does special have to do with any of this? The value added is suppose to benefit the nation. Lets rephrase this. What has been the value added to the United States by having LLNL or LANL going to an LLC? Ok we cool now?

Anonymous said...

Obviously, it completely depends on what you consider valuable. Not a very useful discussion.

Anonymous said...

"Obviously, it completely depends on what you consider valuable."

Oh, no valuable has very clear meaning to most people. Some examples which is one that everyone who is sane would agree is is increased efficiency without loss quality, saving money without comprising quality, increased productivity or increased quality. Not too hard to understand and pretty easy to follow. The question is than very simple what value has been added turning the labs over to LLC? Simple question. Next question is what problems or inefficiencies have occurred since the labs have been turned over to an LLC.

Now of course it is possible to deliberately try to confuse the issue and deny
the commonly held definitions of what valuable is just as one can redefine the meaning of crime, honor, racism, society and so on, but come on no one really buys this.


Anonymous said...

What if I don't consider the nuclear weapons complex valuable in any way and so to me, there is no value associated with it at all, no matter who runs the asylum?

Anonymous said...

"What if I don't consider the nuclear weapons complex valuable in any way and so to me, there is no value associated with it at all, no matter who runs the asylum?

June 12, 2017 at 1:02 PM

Your response is rather bizarre. The police force has now value to me either however if they are going to get money. I would rather have it go do police doing its jobs more efficiency than having it being wasted. Why you ask, because if they can waste all the money in frivolous ways than why not argue that other organizations that I think do have value can also waste money in inefficient ways.

I think what may be going on is that you simply hate LLNL or LANL so if it hurts than that is personally valuable to you, however this is not the actual definition
most people use when they say something is of value or has value.

Anonymous said...

Project much?

Anonymous said...

Project much?

June 13, 2017 at 9:23 AM


Deflect much?

Anonymous said...

Only as much as absolutely necessary.

Anonymous said...



Only as much as absolutely necessary.

June 14, 2017 at 6:40 PM

And your case a whole lot of deflection in necessary.

Anonymous said...

Deflection is a rhetorical trick. Projection is a psychological malady.

Blog Archive