Skip to main content

Voluntary separation?

Anonymously contributed:

Heard that Lab Benefits office is hinting that voluntary separations may be happening this spring.

Anyone else hear this?

Comments

Anonymous said…
I too had heard a rumor about this - perhaps from the same source as the original poster.
Anonymous said…
A VSIP would be an anathema to the Bechtel model of running the labs. Take off the paisley jacket and the rose colored lenses, this is LLNL, run by LLNS, a Bechtel money making machine. You're living in the past with UC's kinder, gentler guidance. The layoff polices have been re-written, with NNSA's blessing, to make it cheap and easy to get you out the door. VSIP, rhymes with DODO.
Anonymous said…
At his all-hands today, Parney was asked what appeared to be a question about retirement incentive. He said no such thing is under discussion. His tone seemed to be one more of 'we are trying to get more people, not lose them.'
Anonymous said…
It's amazing how many old timers around the NNSA labs still believe rumors of a possible VSIP early retirement offer when times get tough.

Never going to happen again. I've heard several PADs say as much. You'll be lucky to get severance when they kick you out the front gate.

You now work for a for-profit Frankenstein corporate creation called an LLC. You are a disposable commodity in their eyes, especially if your "sell by" date indicates you are 50+.
Anonymous said…
This discussion has definitely taken place behind closed doors at LANS so it should be no surprise. One of the reasons our new LANS/LLNS management is paid significantly more is to keep their mouths shut. LANS has been aware of a $200M shortfall for months and is keeping all options "on the table". One thing for sure, MacMillan is turning out to be the most secretive and least communicative Director since Anastasio, both tried and true LANS boys.
Anonymous said…
For sure, MacMillian is no Anastasio. But he did buy a house on the Hill for near a million dollars.
Anonymous said…
I heard something about this but was also told it will a rather small incentive.
Anonymous said…
See what the low bid gets you? Sometimes better to pay a bit more and get real quality.
Anonymous said…
His tone seemed to be one more of 'we are trying to get more people, not lose them.'

LANL has started to lose them...get rid of them actually. At least two divisions yesterday dumped most of their affiliates effective close-of-business today. Hiring is nearly frozen, purchases over $100K are nearly frozen. Lots of people are unfunded or facing de-funding.

And they're still trying to sell the fantasy that they can attract the best and brightest in science and engineering.

Thanks Congress! Great job! Thanks LANS!
Anonymous said…
The decline of LANL started well before LANS. Anastasio should get some credit for turning it around. Now looks like the trend is back down. This is sad, and could have been avoided. LLNL has a new Director with a much better chance in the current environment. Remember, selections have consequences.
Anonymous said…
The problem with a voluntary separation is that they will lose the wrong people. What we really need is a separation that gets rid of the dead wood and extr managers.
Anonymous said…
"Never going to happen again..."

Even Art would not make such a definitive assertion. The future is not certain.

Never is a long time....The policy for incentiving separations is still in the current policies and procedures manual. A VSP with incentives can be a useful tool if the situation demands.

PADs are as ephemeral morning fog. Tomorrow brings another day, another PAD, and another opinion; some fragrant, some foul.
Anonymous said…
I haven't heard anything on this. The WFO sounds like it is funded although barely. I would guess next year will be extremely difficult. That said, given the average age of lab employees there will be a fair amount of natural retirement which may compensate for reduced funding.
Anonymous said…
That said, given the average age of lab employees there will be a fair amount of natural retirement which may compensate for reduced funding. - 2:57 pm

Maybe, but maybe not. Some of the staff who are reaching retirement age bring in funds and projects to the lab. Their loss with retirement will result in a loss of funding for the labs.
Anonymous said…
The WFO sounds like it is funded although barely.

December 4, 2011 2:57 PM

Depends. Some WFO projects at LANL are "overfunded" for next year, i.e., trouble getting all the work done unless they can hire, except there is now a hiring freeze. LANL has gotten itself in serious trouble in the recent past with such shenanigans, where a one-size-fits-all hiring freeze causes funded programs to under-perform, resulting in loss of projects that could have continued to bring in substantial funding. It's called lousy management. No thought involved. The idea that talented staff in underfunded programs could be moved to funded ones is too hard to figure out for LANL's crack management team. Better to move highly-experienced weapons people to environmental cleanup. Idiots!
Anonymous said…
"It's time for the lab to get rid of all this direct funded junk. It will be much easier to manage this lab once everyone is working off the overhead charge accounts."

-- Overheard coming from the mouth of Bret Knapp during a PAD executive retreat???
Anonymous said…
"It's time for the lab to get rid of all this direct funded junk. It will be much easier to manage this lab once everyone is working off the overhead charge accounts."

-- Overheard coming from the mouth of Bret Knapp during a PAD executive retreat???

December 5, 2011 12:23 PM

Yep, sounds just like UC in the 1960's: "Just drop off the money out back and we'll eventually get around to telling you how we spent it." Worked when all the Lab did was weapons development and testing. No need to itemize accounts or justify allocations. A manager's dream.
Anonymous said…
-- Overheard coming from the mouth of Bret Knapp during a PAD executive retreat???

December 5, 2011 12:23 PM

That does sounds like Knapp! Whatever he can't understand needs to be "junked". And that's alot of stuff for Knapp, who can't read or write.
Anonymous said…
"Yep, sounds just like UC in the 1960's: "Just drop off the money out back and we'll eventually get around to telling you how we spent it." Worked when all the Lab did was weapons development and testing. No need to itemize accounts or justify allocations. A manager's dream.

December 5, 2011 12:30 PM"

???
And the lab works great right now?
Give us break
Anonymous said…
Laying off lab staff during the middle of an economic depression while the "for-profit" executive team has raised their salaries and grown management by enormous amounts.... priceless!
Anonymous said…
LANS and LLNS 'voluntary separation' concept:

"You're free to head out the front door anytime you like. Don't let the door hit your butt on the way out, cowboy."
Anonymous said…
"You're free to head out the front door anytime you like. Don't let the door hit your butt on the way out, cowboy."

December 11, 2011 11:14 AM

Is that you Pete Nanos?
Anonymous said…
Nah, Pete and Melanie are in the closet together.

Popular posts from this blog

Plutonium Shots on NIF.

Tri-Valley Cares needs to be on this if they aren't already. We need to make sure that NNSA and LLNL does not make good on promises to pursue such stupid ideas as doing Plutonium experiments on NIF. The stupidity arises from the fact that a huge population is placed at risk in the short and long term. Why do this kind of experiment in a heavily populated area? Only a moron would push that kind of imbecile area. Do it somewhere else in the god forsaken hills of Los Alamos. Why should the communities in the Bay Area be subjected to such increased risk just because the lab's NIF has failed twice and is trying the Hail Mary pass of doing an SNM experiment just to justify their existence? Those Laser EoS techniques and the people analyzing the raw data are all just BAD anyways. You know what comes next after they do the experiment. They'll figure out that they need larger samples. More risk for the local population. Stop this imbecilic pursuit. They wan...

Trump is to gut the labs.

The budget has a 20% decrease to DOE office of science, 20% cut to NIH. NASA also gets a cut. This will  have a huge negative effect on the lab. Crazy, juts crazy. He also wants to cut NEA and PBS, this may not seem like  a big deal but they get very little money and do great things.

LLNL un-diversity

Actual post from Dec. 15 from one of the streams. This is a real topic. As far as promoting women and minorities even if their qualifications are not as good as the white male scientists, I am all for it. We need diversity at the lab and if that is what it takes, so be it.  Quit your whining. Look around the lab, what do you see? White male geezers. How many African Americans do you see at the lab? Virtually none. LLNL is one of the MOST undiverse places you will see. Face it folks, LLNL is an institution of white male privilege and they don't want to give up their privileged positions. California, a state of majority Hispanics has the "crown jewel" LLNL nestled in the middle of it with very FEW Hispanics at all!