Skip to main content

Some Valuable Information

Moderator - I wanted this to be a new topic and not a comment.

At the following website: https://pppm-int.llnl.gov/k_separations.htm

The document contains:

  • Layoff (to be rewritten by April 2008)III.1 Layoff for 200-Series Employees III.1.4
  • Notice of Layoff to Employees
  • In the event of a layoff, Human Resources shall prepare written notification to be given to the employee.

The minimum notice period will be based on the employee's seniority as follows:

  • An employee with fewer than ten years of seniority shall receive thirty (30) calendar days' notice.

  • An employee with at least ten but fewer than fifteen years of seniority shall receive sixty (60) calendar days' notice.

  • An employee with at least fifteen but fewer than twenty years of seniority shall receive ninety (90) calendar days' notice.

  • An employee with twenty years or more of seniority shall receive one hundred and twenty (120) calendar days' notice.

  • The employee will receive pay in lieu of notice for each additional day he/she would have been on pay status if the required notice has been given.

NOTE: Apparently this policy pertains only to the 200 series worker ?

NOTE: Apparently policy is to be rewritten by April 2008 Does anyone know?

Is "pay in lieu of notice" independent of severance pay - could a 30 year employee collect 6 months + 4 months if layed off ?


Why only the 200 series? Is there an underlying legal requirement for this? Could the LLNS simply void this policy in April 2008 prior to layoffs?

The Livermoron

Please copy the ( URL / link) about, send it to work and review. As you can see it's an internal page and can not be view outside LLNL. He or she that finds something interesting or to everyones concern please send it to the blogmater and ask for it to be posted under this topic, or you can post it anon.

Comments

Anonymous said…
FYI
"NOTE: Apparently this policy pertains only to the 200 series worker ?"
Yes ... reading further down on PPPM, there's layoff policy for non-200 series.


"NOTE: Apparently policy is to be rewritten by April 2008 Does anyone know?"
being rewritten to change out UCRP to LLNS, UC to LLNS, etc.

"Is "pay in lieu of notice" independent of severance pay - could a 30 year employee collect 6 months + 4 months if layed off ?"
Yes ... They do have the option to have you stay around for 4 months and work (garbage can still needs to be empty ... )


"Why only the 200 series? Is there an underlying legal requirement for this?"
Management makes the policy, and
this change was done a few (10-12?)years ago.

"Could the LLNS simply void this policy in April 2008 prior to layoffs?" Yes they could, but highly unlikely (they need some time to put all the pieces together ... after all, they needed 6 months[Oct-Apr] to just update UC to LLNS,etc). Don't be surprise if they cut serverance (I'm guessing Oct 1, 2008) by half ... or worst yet, eliminate all serverance pay. May not like this, but this is really a big "cost-saving" move.
Anonymous said…
An interesting post from the LANL blog under another subject matter but confirms what I always suspected:

Garamendi called our local SPSE UPTE office and wanted to Know if about the massive layoffs at LLNL where true, are rep informed him that NNSA had given the green Light to dump 1200 people by the end of 08. so far 500 went out the gate january another 700 are to leave by june. are rep also stated that Garamendi is concerned about LLNL's future as a national lab. I am glade some one from the governers office is questioning why the directors are geting uc benifits when the rest of us where dumped out of the system.
UPTE local 11 LLNL Skill crafts
Anonymous said…
If the timing is right, this could be a sweet little incentive. Can we, unofficially, volunteer for it?

Popular posts from this blog

Plutonium Shots on NIF.

Tri-Valley Cares needs to be on this if they aren't already. We need to make sure that NNSA and LLNL does not make good on promises to pursue such stupid ideas as doing Plutonium experiments on NIF. The stupidity arises from the fact that a huge population is placed at risk in the short and long term. Why do this kind of experiment in a heavily populated area? Only a moron would push that kind of imbecile area. Do it somewhere else in the god forsaken hills of Los Alamos. Why should the communities in the Bay Area be subjected to such increased risk just because the lab's NIF has failed twice and is trying the Hail Mary pass of doing an SNM experiment just to justify their existence? Those Laser EoS techniques and the people analyzing the raw data are all just BAD anyways. You know what comes next after they do the experiment. They'll figure out that they need larger samples. More risk for the local population. Stop this imbecilic pursuit. They wan...

Trump is to gut the labs.

The budget has a 20% decrease to DOE office of science, 20% cut to NIH. NASA also gets a cut. This will  have a huge negative effect on the lab. Crazy, juts crazy. He also wants to cut NEA and PBS, this may not seem like  a big deal but they get very little money and do great things.

LLNL un-diversity

Actual post from Dec. 15 from one of the streams. This is a real topic. As far as promoting women and minorities even if their qualifications are not as good as the white male scientists, I am all for it. We need diversity at the lab and if that is what it takes, so be it.  Quit your whining. Look around the lab, what do you see? White male geezers. How many African Americans do you see at the lab? Virtually none. LLNL is one of the MOST undiverse places you will see. Face it folks, LLNL is an institution of white male privilege and they don't want to give up their privileged positions. California, a state of majority Hispanics has the "crown jewel" LLNL nestled in the middle of it with very FEW Hispanics at all!