Anonymously contributed:
The Lame Ducks spill the beans.
It is interesting to read these two articles:
http://www.independentnews.com/news/article_7a30ea08-72bd-11e0-bd4d-001cc4c002e0.html
http://www.santafenewmexican.com/local%20news/Cost-crunch-takes-toll-on-science-at-LANL
Both are write ups of Miller's and Anastasio's testimony before the National
Academy of Science meetings. It seems that now that they have nothing to lose,they can begin to tell it like it is.
Miller points out that other entities of the government would like to do
business with LLNL but are thwarted by NNSA policy.
Anastasio indicates that the extra cost of running LANL by Bechtel inc. has "taken lot of flexibility taken out of the institution." Miller makes it a little more blunt by saying the change has caused a loss of morale and
stability.
When Miller was asked whether something should be read into the fact that the leaders of LANL, Sandia and LLNL were all departing, he smiled.
And once I leave this once great institution that is now circling the drain, I too will smile.
The Lame Ducks spill the beans.
It is interesting to read these two articles:
http://www.independentnews.com/news/article_7a30ea08-72bd-11e0-bd4d-001cc4c002e0.html
http://www.santafenewmexican.com/local%20news/Cost-crunch-takes-toll-on-science-at-LANL
Both are write ups of Miller's and Anastasio's testimony before the National
Academy of Science meetings. It seems that now that they have nothing to lose,they can begin to tell it like it is.
Miller points out that other entities of the government would like to do
business with LLNL but are thwarted by NNSA policy.
Anastasio indicates that the extra cost of running LANL by Bechtel inc. has "taken lot of flexibility taken out of the institution." Miller makes it a little more blunt by saying the change has caused a loss of morale and
stability.
When Miller was asked whether something should be read into the fact that the leaders of LANL, Sandia and LLNL were all departing, he smiled.
And once I leave this once great institution that is now circling the drain, I too will smile.
Comments
May 3, 2011 2:43 PM
Isn't that what you as an employee are planning??
Some highlights
http://www.independentnews.com/news/article_7a30ea08-72bd-11e0-bd4d-001cc4c002e0.html
"In the meantime, he acknowledged that the contract change had brought additional costs that sap the Laboratory's scientific resources by adding overhead expenses of about $130-$150 million each year. These have led to personnel reductions and significant losses of morale and sense of stability. Stability concerned him particularly, he said, because some key scientific positions demand unusually long periods of training and experience before high levels of competence can be reached."
"No one had a simple answer. Miller's view was that the essential problem is that the system is a bureaucracy governed by short term interests. "
"He said that innovation has always been an American strength. We seem to be allowing it to slip away."
"both the new for-profit contractor, Lawrence Livermore National Security, and the Lab's federal sponsor, the National Nuclear Security Administration, had "lost the trust" of employees and retirees by allowing them to be "swindled out of their job security by making them at-will employees."
"we're adopting the bureaucratic characteristics of our opponent, the Soviet Union."
"The quality of science and technology (at the Lab) is as good as ever. But it's not as broad as five years ago, and it's not as resilient. It's more easily disrupted than five years ago.""
Nothing was ever done about it. Nothing will be done now. Learn from history. The NNSA "science" labs are slowly dieing thanks to the for-profit LLCs like Bechtel (a CONSTRUCTION company, for G-d's sake!) and the DOE/NNSA. RIP.
May 3, 2011 10:39 PM
Sig Hecker tried this at LANL. It was a complete disaster. One Director and 26 Division Leaders reporting to him. At the time it was called "flat-land." A perfect recipe for 26 non-accountable fiefdoms, which is exactly what happened. No upper manager (or any manager) can deal with 26 direct reports. I hope there are enough people still around who remember that fiasco that it won't be tried again.
I guess it's all perspective. Lots of us thought flatland was great. The Divison leaders were so busy trying to keep Sig happy, they didn't have time to harass the rest of us as we got some great science done. Check out lab scientific productivity (referred publications/employee)as a function of year, and you'll see that Sig's flatland years were some of the best.
May 5, 2011 8:21 PM
Some of the worst, as far as DOE was concerned. Many of the egregious security concerns had their genesis then, as well as disregard for environmental responsibilities and worker safety among the fiefdoms. There was no one in control and no one to hold accountable except Sig, a situation neither Sig nor DOE could allow to continue. Even Division Leaders need oversight. Productivity is NOT everything. Accountability and responsibility were lost - not a good thing in the long run for a taxpayer-funded institution.
Your failure to proofread before posting completely screwed up your point (whatever it was).
Your failure to proofread before posting completely screwed up your point (whatever it was).
May 6, 2011 11:29 AM
This practice, aside from being unfair, reflects poorly on the credentials of these employees.
Can't you read or are you from Bechtel?
Can't you read or are you from Bechtel?
May 6, 2011 12:05 PM
Yes, I can read. Unlike you, I read the first two sentences of the May 6, 2011 8:08 AM post. Do they make sense to you?
May 6, 2011 7:32 PM
It seems his definition of "off topic" has become "posts I don't like." Too bad.
The proper comments should have been.
"LLNL and LANL are better than ever, doing great. We should have Bechtel run more things for the government."
"LLNL and LANL are better than ever, doing great. We should have Bechtel run more things for the government."
May 8, 2011 9:47 AM
You forget that for the (soon to be) former LANL and LLNL Directors, the "golden parachutes" are coming from UC, not Bechtel. Those deals were struck before they agreed to become Director.
Why do they lie to their own workers? The lies they tell them to their faces show they have no respect for their own staff!
Tell us the truth. We can't stand the constant lies from our management.
To keep the peasants from revolting, that's why the lies occur. There is a small smidgen of bonus that may still be based on scientific output and as such, as any good company president, the bottom line rules. So tell us things are ok and we will continue to produce.
Remember all the years that UC would either buck inane orders from DOE or put a higher value on science rather that toeing the line caused the creation of NNSA. The NNSA in turn needed a whipping boy and Bechtel is more than willing to be that, just as long as the profit comes in. UC's hands aren't clean in this, they too have benefited from the higher fees and I am not sure that they have plowed the money back into research as they routinely did before the contract change.
At the end of their careers the two directors mildly let loose on a commission that is probably toothless, so nothing will change. They in turn get to leave with a slightly cleaner conscious knowing they have voiced (whispered) the truth.
I would like to think that Anastasio and Miller did push back on NNSA and that things might have been worse had they not done so. Is that true, beats me, I'm down in the trenches. But it will be interesting to see who takes their place and what type of change occurs, either positive or negative. And remember, a positive change in NNSA's eyes is sure to be a negative one in our eyes.
George's "conflict of interest" only applies if he still considers himself president of LLNS. Obviously he doesn't, but considers himself a free agent able to say what he thinks (at last). Have you never heard of a very highly-paid employee who must do what his employer wants or lose everything? I'm not excusing any bad behavior, but speaking the truth at the end is better than never speaking it. None of us will ever know what pressures were put on either Mike or George that made them do what they did. It is easy to say they should have "done the right thing" but from some small personal experience, I can say the issues and solutions are really never that clear from that level.
May 16, 2011 12:21 PM
You forgot to mention who "those in control" are, according to your paranoid delusional fantasies. Please elaborate.