The word on the street is the LLNS is desperate to build morale. I don't think this is just a rumor either. Many departments have created "blogs" to find out what employees are thinking and now, there is the employee blog. Sorry, no need to provide a link, because you have to be on-site to get to it! No sense posting to it, because my guess is it's overly censored (you do have to sign in with your OUN to reply to any of the posts). I do see that the administrator of the LLNS blog is actually a poster on this blog - see, management is indeed reading this blog!
I heard that several departments had some type of a morale committee, but that they were disbanded when the committee members had no morale themselves. I do like the posting here where someone said that working at LLNL gave them a sense of pride. Our current management has deflated almost all of the pride any of us ever had. Me, I'm just plain emotionally drained. The article in the news where it says that the local labs are hiring 500 New Employees is just too funny. note that most are at LBL and the rest are Post Docs. Post Docs are among the hardest working and make about half of what their peers make doing the same job.I'm not quite to the point that I say they win, but I'm close.
7 comments:
So LLNS cares about my morale? Well that's a surprise. I very rarely see management types beyond by immediate supervisor so I don't know if they know I exist, other than a name they have to shuffle into the stack during the yearly evaluation cycle.
Did we miss some milestone? That would explain the sudden interest by LLNS. If they believe that unhappy employees will cause an incentive to be missed, I can see where the sudden concern would be raised.
If I only had a year or so left I might entertain logging into an official blog with my official name and my official password. But the cynic in me says that would probably be buying a ticket in future RIF raffles, so I'll keep my anonymous status, if you please.
LLNS can be glad about one thing - the sorry economy. If the economy were in good or great shape you would be seeing people improve their morale on their own, with their feet.
Is LLNS desperate - hope so. I really hope that NNSA were desperate and that they in turn would be able to convince congress that their directives have devastated the national labs.
But while I wait for the NNSA/DOE/Congress to wake up and try to mitigate the train wreck they created, I'm going to take some web classes. That will cheer me up. Guaranteed.
To improve moral DOE should fire LLNS and all of ulm
Trust is an essential element of morale. How can you improve morale with the threat of being laid off hangs over your head? GM needs to cut costs, what percent of the total cost is payroll? I think the majority of new hires at LBNL will come from LLNL.
All of us expected LLNS to better manage LLNL than UC did because of their experience in project management. The added no value. They raised cost, lowered morale and if the economy was in better shape, there would none left at LLNL, except for those who are within a short term from retirement!
I would like to see ULM fire some managers. Not move them down so they can fire the hard working people under them. They are overpaid and underworked. Make work is not needed work. ULM show us you care about the future of the lab, cut 25% of management now (especially those you pushed into lower positions but still maintain outrageous salaries). Without this cost burden, the lab would be able to compete better for projects and prosper. Quit sinking all of us so your cronies can bleed us dry. Then we have a shot at growing, believe me morale will improve.
Several departments st LBNL is in the middle of a RIF due to reduced funding!
November 20, 2009 7:04 PM
You are correct.
UC used the exact same management model for LLNS that was created for LANS. However, LLNL and LANL are two completely different sites and cultures. LANS made sense for LANL - they have production facilities and high nuclear hazard operations.
To my grave I will always wonder what would have happened if LANS had lost the LANL competition to the Lockheed Martin/Univ of Texas team. This team had expressed zero interest in the LLNL contract. And if they had bid on LLNL, the idea of UT operating in Calif would have had UC pulling out every stop to win the LLNL contract. Also if UC had not won the LANL contract with Bechtel, there would have been no incentive in using a losing model to bid on LLNL.
Would UC have teamed up with Lockheed Martin instead?
But two years late that's all history... btw, isn't the contract up for renewal in "2012"...
Post a Comment