LLNS just got a big chunk of money from UC for TCP1. These layoffs eliminate or reduce the amount that the RIFees get. Is there something actionable here in that the remaining TCP1 people just improved their financial position at the expense of those laid off?
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...
Comments
I guess, now that I think about it, having a 110% vs. 85% funded plan may mean the difference between substantial employee contributions or none. If enough decision makers eliminated people in TCP-1 from getting benefits to improve their own financial situation this might be malfeasance.
But I doubt it, No doubt the senior decision makers get a bonus in part based on how much they control costs through layoffs. So it is unfortunaltely a reality that managers are by design supposed to take advantage of their employees. Another reason LLNS was a bad idea for the taxpayer.
10 BEAM