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?
12 comments:
These hires are required to replace the people leaving voluntarily from funded positions.
No. It's absolute BS that LLNS should be hiring people back. They should be looking at reducing the workforce further. If LLNS continues to hire replacements then we'll know the layoffs were only to target certain people they didn't want. My suggestion to LLNS is leave things alone and let as many people who wish to leave do so on their own. There's still a lot of dead weight at LLNL on overhead accounts to displace. What happen to the "no project - no employment" concept LLNS said would be enforced. What happened to the "no one on the EBA list for more than 30 days" and then you're gone?
"What happened to the "no one on the EBA list for more than 30 days" and then you're gone?"
Like everything else, if your favored these rules don't apply. I know people who have been 30 days and you're gone and others that were never questioned regarding their EBA status.
Problem is that it is funded people that are leaving and generally it is not the dead-wood since you'd expect the better people to be more able to find jobs elsewhere.
The idea is to get rid of highly paid staff and replace them with lower paid staff who get reduced benefits and pay.
Seen in this regards, laying off lots of staff and then immediately replacing them with new hires makes a lot of sense to LLNS.
They want employees, just not the ones they have right now. In a poor economy, they should be able to pick up lots of cut-rate staffing.
Of course, at the very top of the food chain, nothing but the very best will do in terms of salary, benefits, and job security. Right, Mr. Miller?
Buyout - then hire new labor at half-cost. I believe that's the current GM model. "What's good for General Motors is good for America."
What's good for Bechtel is good for America and really, really good for the GOP.
If you really want to understand the push for LLC's at the NNSA research labs, then get a hold of Thomas Frank's latest book:
"The Wrecking Crew: How Conservatives Rule" (Amazon.com)
Read it an you'll fully grasp the privatization efforts that have taken over all parts of the US Government. What happened at LLNL and LANL is part of a much bigger process that is corrupting the whole Federal government.
Buyouts????
That reminds me of Jim Mora's rant on the Saints getting to the playoffs.
There is absolutely no incentive for LLNS to have a buyout. That costs money. A layoff is far less expensive than a buyout would be. LLNS would still be able to hire that cheaper labor force after a layoff. The issue here would be lawsuits. If you take a buyout and are replaced by a cheaper laborer, well you chose to go. Get laid off and see someone come in at 1/2 the price, you hit the yellow pages under Lawyers.
GM resorts to a buyout because they are dealing with unions that have teeth. LLNS does not have that worry.
Buyouts????
"What's good for General Motors is good for America."
That's a crock of crap. What I'd like to see if for people across the nation to wake up and stop buying new cars every time one comes out. Hold onto your present car for at least ten years. That would mean that GM would not make a sale for ten years. When the next car that comes out and it priced over $20K leave the SOB on the lot until the price comes down to $20K out the door. Do the same to the house. Do not purchase any home over $80K. If they want more let the SOB sit there until the termite eat it to the ground. This nation has to learn how to take control of the corporations not visa versa. The only thing they understand is NO SALES. As long as the people of this nation continue to give GM and GMAC Mortgage what they are asking the more you will be in debt and the richer you'll make the rich. When will you ever learn.
"What's good for General Motors is good for America."
5:30, perhaps you you missed the irony of the frequent misquote.
From wiki:
"At one point GM had become the largest corporation registered in the United States, in terms of its revenues as a percent of GDP. In 1953, Charles Erwin Wilson, then GM president, was named by Eisenhower as Secretary of Defense. When he was asked during the hearings before the Senate Armed Services Committee if as secretary of defense he could make a decision adverse to the interests of General Motors, Wilson answered affirmatively but added that he could not conceive of such a situation "because for years I thought what was good for the country was good for General Motors and vice versa". Later this statement was often misquoted, suggesting that Wilson had said simply, "What's good for General Motors is good for the country." At the time, GM was one of the largest employers in the world – only Soviet state industries employed more people. In 1955, General Motors became the first American corporation to pay taxes of over $1,000 million."
Indeed - and now GM's market cap is 1/20th of that of Toyota and they're 2 years away from insolvency.
Quite a good analogy really!
September 4, 2008 4:28 PM
Good and I hope GM,Ford and Chrysler go under and the government is smart enough to not bail them out. They need to fold and understand there should be no car more than $20K out the door and on the road. America needs an affordable vehicle that everyone can afford and it needs to get 50 miles to the gallon. Don't bother telling me it can't be done. I own two VW's Bugs both diesels. One is automatic and the other is a stick shift. The automatic get 45 MPG and the stick get 50 MPG all day long. That's better than my motorcycle. The VOLT an electric car GM has plans to roll out starts at $40K and the battery is $10K. Do these clowns really think this is going to sell to the masses. What fools they are, or maybe, it's what fools we are for buying them. Someone better write GM and tell them to start making a car equal to a VW that gets 50 MPG and maybe they'll survive the recession / depression.
Post a Comment