Anonymously contributed:
I have not read any topics on de-inventory and how it will effect more layoffs. We (security) are losing at least 150+ personnel. We are being told that layoffs will be according to Lab rules. i.e. Lab seniority, etc.
I have not read any topics on de-inventory and how it will effect more layoffs. We (security) are losing at least 150+ personnel. We are being told that layoffs will be according to Lab rules. i.e. Lab seniority, etc.
Comments
And that is waste, fraud, and abuse.
The Lab wanted a proposal based on just reimbursing the security contractor (such as the Sheriff) for the cost of the "officers" protecting the lab - "time & material" contract. This type of contract would have been flexible and gone down if the number of offers went down.
DOE HQ (and other DOE security contractors interested in running lab pro forces) wanted the lab to issue the contract as a "fixed price" contract. This type of contract would have stayed the same over time, regardless of the number of officers employed by the contractor. The Lab said no and shelved the proposal to outsource protective forces.
Basically, the Alameda Sheriff was not interested in making money or a profit off of the Lab, so they were okay with a less expensive "time & material" type contract. Private security contractors need to make a profit, so a "fixed price" contract allows them to cut cost (lay off 150 officers for example) and keep the difference.
DOE HQ claimed a fixed price contract made budging easier, but I think they were fearful of losing control. They also listened to the DOE security contractor community that wanted an easy money making contract at the Lab (especially once the SNM is gone).
Too bad, its the ProForce officers that are losing. Clearly they would have had more job/work opportunities as part of the local Sheriffs Office than employed by some "for profit" security firm that will kick them to the curb as soon as possible when the Lab's security posture is downgraded.
It is waste if they maintain a capability that exceeds what is needed to protect greatly reduced amounts of material.
I can appreciate that people feel abused if they lose their jobs, but this is a slow-motion train wreck rather than a lightening bolt.
Not sure where any fraud comes in.
It is waste if they maintain a capability that exceeds what is needed to protect greatly reduced amounts of material.
I can appreciate that people feel abused if they lose their jobs, but this is a slow-motion train wreck rather than a lightening bolt.
Not sure where any fraud comes in."
I was referring to the general term applied when the I.G. gets interested. It is embodied in statues.
It is a waste from a taxpayer point of view when you will end up spending more money than necessary to achieve the job or task at hand.
It is a fraud to claim you will save money when in fact it will cost more money. ALCO is a non-profit serving the public interest (as was the UC contract before the debacle); there is no way a private security service comes close. That is the fraud. If you acknowledge the greater cost, then you move over to the "waste" side of the equation.
It is an abuse of an oversight authority to quash what would be a normal contract arrangement between the M&O contractor and another entity. That is the new tyranny....
This is just plain crazy!
You get the feeling that Anastasio is working to destroy what is left of nuclear weapons expertise at Los Alamos. How else do you explain it?
August 8, 2010 12:06 PM
You explain it by realizing that the loss of weapons expertise is nothing more than tolerable collateral damage in the process of ensuring the enormous salaries and bonuses for the LANS crew. I truly do not believe they are trying to destroy the labs; it is just that they don't particularly care if it happens, as long as they get theirs. This is pure criminal collusion between NNSA and LANS/LLNS. Someday the truth will come out.
It now costs x20 as much to manage these labs post-LLC and the cost of doing scientific research has risen by a factor of at least x2!
Maybe it's not about saving money. Perhaps the real reason the NNSA launched it's privatization campaign is so the employees of NNSA can retire at an early age and take very lucrative positions with the same companies they hired to do the lab's work.