LLNL - The True Story -

Anonymously contributed: Since Tyler the Liar uttered publicly his profane "...substantially equivalent in the aggregate..." and it echoed, un-denounced by those who knew better, the brazen public lie is emerging as an acceptable business practice at LLNL. Do you now think is an acceptable business practice to deceive to achieve your ends? Do you think that LLNL leaders deliberately deceive to achieve its ends? If the people being deceived know they are being deceived, is it acceptable? Do you believe either the proposed bonus program or the new 200-series classification step structure will be implemented without a direct reduction in compensation --- and --- that compensation and senior management know this and are lying about it? Do you trust reformed LLNL management?

Anonymously contributed: The link: http://llnlthetruth.blogspot.com/ Has a link to this article: http://www.globalsecuritynewswire.org/gsn/nw_20090824_8927.php The main thrust of the article is the study of whether the nuclear weapons complex should be removed from NNSA. But there are two interesting quotes in the article: "It is a testament to our weapon designs in the 1970s and '80s that the weapons are NNSA-proof," said Jeffrey Lewis, who directs the New America Foundation's Nuclear Strategy and Nonproliferation Initiative. "Given the failures that run from the management [of] NNSA down to the labs, it's remarkable that our bombs work at all." And Lewis said he does not expect the Nuclear Posture Review to significantly improve on what he sees as the commission's "anodyne" recommendation. Rather, he anticipates the nuclear agency and national laboratories would likely remain in "a death spiral of sorts," hampered by "inco...

ANonymously contributed: For those of you who chose TCP2, are you aware of a change in policy for 2009 in which 401k contributions under the over-50 "catch up" provision are no longer matched up to 6% of your income by LLNS? Depending on you income, this will cost you as much as $5500.

Anonymously contributed: It is time for Glenn Mara, now head of LLNS/LANS to begin cleaning house. An open letter to Glenn. Dear Glenn, During the transition, one of the silliest reprisals that jealous Congressional staff took at LANL and LLNL was to remove the option of Lump-sum cashout from TCP-1. There is no reason to continue this and we request that you get this changed. Having a lump-sum cash-out option is a no-cost benefit to TCP-1 members. It costs NNSA/LLNS nothing, since it is actuarially equivalent to an annuity payout. ERISAs assumptions are very consevative, so no losses would occur. The faster TCP-1 benefits are paid off, the faster the porcine Congress can waste the left-overs stoking their unsatiable egos. Why lump-sum? Because I would like complete separation from LLNS. While I trust Mara, I trust no one else running LLNS. I want my money outta there before some Bush-era MBA bu*********r figures out how to screw me, through adjusting factors, misinterpretting law or ...

Anonymously contributed: Has anyone else compared their current retirement estimate under LLNS with the retirement benefit calculator at the UC benefits website for exactly the same conditions? It seems the closer I get to retirement the more these two figures change, with the LLNS going down (for 50% spousal continuance). Can LLNS change this with time, for instance as ERISA factors change?

Anonymosuly contributed: "Inside Obama Administration, a Tug of War Over Nuclear Warheads," Tuesday, August 18, 2009, at http://www.globalsecuritynewswire.org/gsn/nw_20090818_1478.php

Anonymous wants to know: So what do you think about bonuses instead of compensation?

Anonymously contributed: All 192 beams were fired successfully yesterday.

Recognition is alive and well at the highest levels. http://www.nnsa.energy.gov/news/ourpeople.htm but how about recognition at the division and group levels? Does it exist where you are?

Anonymously asked: Given that the new task based work process with attendant documentation has slowed work to a crawl, has anybody else resorted to guerilla maintenance (working things in on Mondays and Fridays sans documentation when "safety" coverage is low) in order to get minor things done?

Good stuff is pouring in this weekend. Greg's comments have proven to be a lightning rod. This one is a Nut Rocker. --Doug Greg, this transition may be perfectly rational and beneficial to employees. The reactions here are symptomatic of the complete erosion of trust that's been accomplished by LANL management over the last several years. Remember Maslow's hierarchy of needs? Our management can't even seem to get the basics of modern human existince right anymore - e.g. safe drinking water and a non-porous roof over our heads. Our access to the basic tools to do our jobs is being eroded daily, and we are increasingly treated as babies in the safety and security arenas. Mike berated a room full of managers last week (at the Leadership Summit on Alignment, of all places) for holding different views and experiences of the Lab than his own. Why can't Alignment go bottom-up as well as top-down? It was supremely ironic that Alan Bishop presented a video about the Shacklet...

I heard from one of our safety people that in the very near future, LLNS will be purchasing a bicycle helmet for anyone who wants to ride a lab owned bicycle on site. It looks like you'll have to take a class, then get fitted for a helmet. The bicycles will all be posted that helmets are required and the special lab law (CA DOT does not require anyone over 18 to wear a bicycle helmet) will be strictly enforced . . .

This website sure makes it look like the Lab is hiring deliberatly! http://www.indeed.com/jobs?q=Lawrence+Livermore+National+Laboratory&l=

Anonymouslty contributed as a comment on the Science key to nuclear labs future says Chu post and moved here because it is so interesting: To conduct business the labs need a cadre of talented and experienced technical staff including material scientists, chemists, weapons phyicists, engineers, technicians and intel types to keep our capability current. Since the timeframe to learn this arcane technology is a long one, incentives are needed for these folks to stick around. Since the cold war ended, weapons science alone can't attract enough adequate talent; so one needs attractive scientific thrusts (NIF, Fusion, lasers, ACI, HEAF) to interest them. So on examination it appears that the country needs some above average technical people paid at an above average rate to aid retention. Now the over-paid managers argument that you raise seemed to have merit. Until I realized that I only noticed management here - in 30 years - when it was bad. And there is plenty that was not so good, ...

Science key to nuclear labs future says Chu By Physics Today August 7, 2009 In the first public meeting of the President’s Council of Advisers in Science and Technology (PCAST), US Energy Secretary Steven Chu said the loss of basic science and technology funding at the nuclear-weapons labs Los Alamos and Lawrence Livermore have had an inverse effect in the labs ability to attract "the best and the brightest." During the 1990s the labs basic research funding was on an “10-year-glide-path” to be cut in half he said, which was only stopped in 1998. "To be blunt," said Chu, "the best and the brightest didn’t want to be weapons designers...they wanted to do good science." Chu pointed out that this model—of using basic science as the carrot which would eventually lead to an interest in more applied work—has been common at all the major innovation incubators such as the Bell Laboratories or in the weapons labs early history. How to attract high caliber staff to t...

Anonymous wants to know what you think: NNSA Press Release August 5, 2009 NNSA approves Livermore Valley Open Campus concept Scientific collaboration key goal of more interactive approach WASHINGTON, D.C. – The National Nuclear Security Administration today announced the first step toward the creation of the Livermore Valley Open Campus (LVOC), a joint venture between Sandia National Laboratories and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory that will promote greater collaboration between the world-class scientists at the nuclear security labs and their partners in industry and academia. The LVOC, which would create a shared space between the two adjacent labs, is in keeping with NNSA’s vision for increased scientific interaction and collaboration across the nuclear security enterprise. The proposal signed by NNSA Administrator Thomas D’Agostino and the Undersecretary for Science Steve Koonin, endorses the LVOC concept and moving forward on the conceptual development of design alternative...

The N ational almost IF An Engineer’s account of working on the NIF Livermore California, 2002-2003 https://lasers.llnl.gov/programs/nif/about.php Dear Reader, If you pursue a career in physics, chemistry or engineering and you are considering a professional position with the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory with the anticipation of career development, you should read this article. Do so before you accept an offer to work for this facility. Hiring From 2002-2003 I was employed as a flex-term employee at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in Livermore California. I was hired as a software engineer to develop algorithms for the Integrated Computer Control System (ICCS), a critical and integral part of the controversial National Ignition Facility (NIF). Termination I supported the NIF program for one year when I was aggressively fired and expelled from LLNL for asking too many embarrassing questions from NIF management about defining engineering requirements for my assig...

Anonymously contributed: Another sign that NNSA's national labs are fading away while DOE's national labs grow.... Bay Area national labs get new Recovery Act funding By Suzanne Bohan Contra Costa Times 08/04/2009 A $327 million initiative to bolster research and infrastructure programs at national laboratories is funneling more than $61 million to Bay Area facilities, the Department of Energy announced on Tuesday. Under the initiative, Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory will get $37.8 million in federal Recovery Act funding, with $11 million designated for fusion energy research, $13.1 million for new equipment at the Joint Genome Institute, and $4 million for new instrumentation at the Berkeley lab's Joint BioEnergy Institute. Another $8.8 million will go toward improvements at the lab's Advanced Light Source facility, which generates intense light for scientific research, and $875,000 will support development of "smart grid" technology, which uses computing and c...