LLNL - The True Story -

This guy should have been the director for all DOE Labs! Here are Q&As with him I took from LANL's Blog. Full text

I have spent most of the summer chatting every other day with the "representatives" of LLNS at Hewitt Management in a so-far futile attempt to get LLNS to adhere to the Kaiser health benefits as outlined in 20 years of "Evidence of Coverage" (EOC) documents, including the present one covering LLNS. My primary complaint (shared by many at LLNL?) is that UC threw us bona-fide UC retirees over the wall, linking us to the private contractor, LLNS, for whom we never worked (or wanted to work!!) a day in our lives. This was probably a prelude to the accelerating shrinkage of the UCOP staff (with what change in UCOP budget?) that is now requiring the campuses to take over many of the formerly system-wide functions operated by UCOP. I might understand booting campus UC retirees back to their respective campuses for benefit management (which are at least UC non-profit institutions), but why must I end up begging for UC benefits from a management company that is dedicated to...

Contributed anonymously (by a person with a sense of humor): We need some CHANGE WE CAN BELIEVE IN . Can we find a 47 year old technically strong leader who can restructure our lab to support the scientific and technical staff in redefining our mission? Your opinion?

Anonymously contributed: How does funding support look for next fiscal year around your part of the Lab ? Is there any place at the Lab that is doing well right now with regards to WFO funding ?

anonymous asked: Is there an unwritten rule in COMP that when there is an opening,preference is given either to COMP candidates or to outside non-LLNL candidates. Is there bias against candidates from other parts of the Lab? True/false?

Anonymous said: Do you agree the cuts went too deep? Have you seen the job postings? Twenty postings in the S&T area... Computer Scientists, Environmental Analyst, Program Leaders, Physicists. Heh! Weren't those positions targeted during the May layoff? What's the word on the street in your hallways?

Contributed by anonymous: I ran across this in the May 15, 2008 minutes (www.ucop.edu) of the UC Regent's Committee on Oversight of the DOE Labs... it's the last sentence that should give us all pause.... "Mr. Darling (UC Executive Vice President) reported that the Livermore laboratory is facing a $280 million funding shortfall this fiscal year resulting from a variety of components. These include a $50 million increase in inflationary costs, a $100 million reduction in federal funding due to the National Nuclear Security Administration’s budget reductions for Livermore, and items associated with the awarding of the new contract, the first of which is $86 million in increases mainly for retirement and health benefits compared to the costs the laboratory would have absorbed if it had remained part of the University. The second is $44 million in increased management fees and expenses that DOE agreed to provide to the winning contractor. To accommodate the shortfall, the labo...

This comment was brought from the post "Any suggestions for upper management" It calls a spade, a spade! First, management needs to understand how past WFO projects outside the weapons area have started -- a scientist or group of scientists had an idea and convinced their division leader to support it. They then developed it and found sponsors. A main motivator was that they would be rewarded by their division leader with higher pay, responsibility, and prestige in their division. The current situation is completely counter to the the process that has worked in the past. We now have middle managers whose primary responsibility is to bring new money in the door. This means that any efforts or initiative to do so by "lower-level" scientists/engineers are not rewarded. Indeed, the credit is usually stolen by the middle managers and they will take away control of any funding. The scientist's division no longer sees any of the money -- so they can care less. Scientis...

Anonymously asked: If every other facility at LLNL were to shut down except for NIF support personnel and the Super Computer how many people would LLNL need to operate?

Anonymously contributed: Despite the ULM talks, people are still talking in the halls about a layoff in October. What's your opinion?

suggested anonymously: what would you say to upper Lab management on how to turn the Lab around ?

Suggested anonymously.

Someone anonymously suggested that since there are so many negative opinions in this BLOG about LLNS, why can't ULM set them straight (rebutal) in this BLOG, anonymously? If they don't do that, then, all we hear must be true. ULM or the ones that read this BLOG for them, speak out!

Anonymous said about us: You livermites are the worse example of unity I've ever seen. Your blog or should I say lack of participation tells DOE, NNSA & LLNS all they need to know. They can do what they want, any time they wish, and all you'll do is bend over and take it. Even in a time when you're wages are 20% behind inflation you refuse to ask where's your 20%, while ULM get huge pay raises, bonus checks and build their nest eggs at your expense. It seems the Livermites' lack of action, involvement and complacency is a prime example of what has ruined this country and turned the mass majority into corporate America's lackey's. You get what you allow. Enjoy you dilemma.. Is he right?

Contrubyted anonymously: Immediately during and after all LLNS pep talks LLNL employees should be asking themselves the following question: Will I now or at any time in the future believe the rhetoric presented by anyone in LLNS management especially, when you are told once again that, "I don't foresee any future lay-offs . . ." If you take the time to review the LLNL to LLNS transition questions and answers (over 1000) it will become readily apparent that LLNS has reneged on almost every answer that was provided. The VSSOP and ISP processes were also fraught with numerous inconsistencies, potential inequities and half-truths. Did George's speech really give you a warm fuzzy . . . remember the "We are Family!" spiel - some of those faithful are now pounding the street and trying to find employment during extremely difficult economic times. Does anyone really believe that all is well in Lab-Land after today's carefully orchestrated speech, audio/visual ex...

Anonymously contributed: Miller talk. Crocodile tears about injury at Rochester, soon followed by the proclamation about NIF being free of safety incidents (but wasn't the ladder incident in NIF?). Odd comment that he had "broken" (I think that was the word he used) S. Houghton who is resigning. Funky music with images of "achievements" by LLNL. Would not confirm rumor that world wide web access is being cut off. Berated employees who have tossed their "we value" cards. Zero questions for him from the audience. Did I miss any high points from this inspiring presentation?

That is what they calls us at LANL! What our friends at LANL are saying

Contributed anonymously: There are opportunities at the Lab but the motivation on the part of management to fill them is not there! Things will change but in another couple of years. Certainly not 08 or 09. The indicators are: 1) How many posting are there in the jobs.llnl.gov site and what are they for? There should be more postings but many managers are too paralyzed to make a move and post. 2) I have looked for opportunities within the lab for 2 years now. First, before the transition, it looked like the hiring managers had an incredible preference for outside applicants(may be outside applicants tend to be younger?) Second, my own management was hell bent on not letting me get "matrixed". That is not likely to change without a culture change! 3)After the transition, all managers seem to be paralyzed, waiting for the next directive. No one wants to make a move. Will LLNS look at the lack of career development for its employees? It seems that that is not even on the list to...