Skip to main content

Brain drain!

Image
By scooby
Anonymously contributed:


Read this first

Why in the world did LLNL terminate technical experts? There are so many useless doofusses roaming the lab to this day, not to mention most of the spineless technically incompetent managers, how in the world did they decide to lay off people like the guy interviewed in this article? The super-secret layoff-decisions crew ought to lose their security clearances and be forced to testify in Congress about their methodology for determining who to lay off. Then, technical experts that were laid off should be brought back and put in charge of a new round of layoffs targeting managers only. The least technically competent managers will go first. Then the LLNS idiots. We will target a manager to scientist ratio of 1/50. We will be financially solvent immediately, no one will miss the useless managers and we can recover our mission of science in the national interest.

Comments

Anonymous said…
check out todays modesto bee there is a article in there about the layoffs and how congress is worried that some of unemployed weapons physicists might sell there knowledge to the highest bidder; congressman McNerney in the article is wondering what did NNSA and DOE do to the labs.
Modesto bee page A7 06-04-08

10-beam
6/04/2008 12:09 PM
Anonymous said…
When the Soviet Union went under, didn't we start a program to keep their unemployed weapons scientists busy, to keep "brain drain" under control? Maybe we can ask the Russians to start a program for LANL and LLNL! Hey, what goes around, comes around. Aren't they awash in petro-dollars (or petro-rubles) these days? And aren't they concerned about US weapons scientist brain-drain?
6/04/2008 6:13 PM
Anonymous said…
When it comes to government, never attribute to stupidity when it could be malice.

The powers that be don't care about nuclear weapons, or science research, or energy independance. Why? Because that's what people voted for.

In their mind, LLNL is about as useful as a buggy-whip factory. So why should they do anything but get rid of the thing?

Before anyone thinks I don't care about the people or the projects - I do. I'm just stating what I think is going on.

This country does things like this every once in a while. Especially after a big war ( the Cold War in this case ). Disarm and get rid of everything in the inventory. That's why the US was so ill-prepared when Pearl Harbor happened. And it'll happen again, history is cyclical after all.
6/04/2008 6:32 PM
Anonymous said…
Conclusion:
They don't care about these people/families losing their livelihood, but they care who are you going to work for?
WHAT???
6/08/2008 2:26 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Plutonium Shots on NIF.

By scooby
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...
155 comments
Read more

Trump is to gut the labs.

By scooby
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.
124 comments
Read more

tcp1 looking good

By scooby
I just received my annual TCP-1 letter from LLNS and a summary of the LLNS Pension Plan. Looked in pretty good shape in 2013. About 35% overfunded (funding target attainment percentage = 134.92%). This was a decrease from 2012 where it was 51% overfunded (funding target attainment percentage = 151.59%). They did note that the 2012 change in the law on how liabilities are calculated using interest rates improved the plan's position. Without the change the funding target attainment percentages would have been 118% (2012) and 105% (2013). 2013 assets = $2,057,866,902 2013 liabilities = $1,525,162,784 vs 2012 assets = $1,844,924,947 2012 liabilities = $1,217,043,150 It was also noted that a slightly different calculation method ("fair market value") designed to show a clearer picture of the plan' status as December 31, 2013 had; Assets = $2,403,098,433 Liabilities = $2,068,984,256 Funding ratio = 116.15% Its a closed plan with 3,781 participants. Of that number, 3,151 wer...
105 comments
Read more