Sandia lawsuit claiming research misconduct proceeds to federal court:
https://nationworldnews.com/sandia-national-labs-nuclear-scientist-sued-after-being-fired/
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...
8 comments:
4 Investigates: Scientist fired after raising questions about safety at nuclear waste plant
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=z8LAg3q3OqE
Hard to say whatis what, Sandia claims he had inappropriate interactions with other workers. He claims he was fried for raising concerns about WIPP. Maybe he is just after a payday, maybe he is legit. From the youtube you cannot really be ceratin.
your assessment is reasonable and fair, but of course we don’t know what editing occurred or what info was not available for the video.
If Sandia fired everybody who had "inappropriate interactions with other workers", they would have to fire almost everybody at the lab. I think their excuse right there tells you his claims are legit.
“If Sandia fired everybody who had "inappropriate interactions with other workers", they would have to fire almost everybody at the lab. I think their excuse right there tells you his claims are legit.”
Probably correct, but one must take into account NNSA lab contracts don’t have language to define or score contractor management to employee abuse, bullying, harassment, or working in good faith. So, when you stir up that alphabet soup, the only words that form are “employee insubordination” in one form or another. This would appear to run counter to a federal agency claiming to be a good steward of the environment and concern for employee treatment and safety.
WIPP looks obviously safe, as it is almost half a mile underground, and groundwater doesn't really flow through there, as there is a huge salt deposit around it older than the dinosaurs.
The geologic history of the WIPP salt deposit location being older than the dinosaurs is an interesting factoid, but totally irrelevant to the safety issues at hand. You see, the LANS 90% award fee haircut from the NNSA, did not occur because someone selected the wrong site to deposit radioactive waste. The LANS 90% award fee haircut occurred because the 2014 WIPP accident was preventable with appropriate LANS oversight. According to a 2016 LA Times article, the WIPP ~2 billion dollar accident, "ranks among the costliest in U.S. history". According to the DOE WIPP Release Report, there was a deteriorated safety culture and employees feared reprisals for reporting WIPP issues. Therefore, its a very high stakes situation all around if safety reporting reprisals are reoccurring or STILL occurring at the WIPP.
video on data integrity problems related to this case. Not the ABQ news video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mSmBNDnLt00
Post a Comment