LLNL will announce by May first a VSP targeting dead wood and EBAS. If your on the list look for a email strongly suggesting you apply for the VSP. All applicants will be released by June.
Anonymous Anonymous said...
April 25, 2013 at 8:21 PM
So you're telling all of us if we were a good employee who does a good job we can't get the he-ll out of here and have to stay to be tortured by unreasonable managers from the top down, but if were a *** no-load who hasn't done their part for years, we get a good deal, free and laugh all the way to the bank. Good move.
Comments
Reliable or speculation by CNN?
These people have a strong case for a lawsuit if they are terminated.
So lets assume no one who is EBA'd takes the VSP and LLNS still needs 300-500 people to go before the end of June, what's next? A RIF where EBA's will go first and then dart throwing to see who is to be next? I want to see how this is going to play out with year after year after year of reduced funding.
If you're laid off, you:
1) Get to hang on for a couple more months of salary.
2) Get unemployment.
3) Have a chance to sue.
4) Receive the same severance.
You'd have to be an idiot (or quitting anyway) to take the VSP.
They will need to do a VSIP to get the number of takers they need.
April 26, 2013 at 8:26 PM
Huh? A RIF doesn't need "takers."
If you are not in support or management (i.e., not one of the special positions living off overhead) and you run out of funds to support your research position, LANS put you on a "special path" to be fired. They laid this new policy in a quietly released memo from the Bechtel-managed CFO's office about 2 years ago and refer to it as "getting rid of staff who no longer have a 'business case' for being at the lab".
Of course, this layoff policy only relates to staff who are tasks to bring in funding to the lab, not to lab employees who live off those funds through the overhead accounts, and who will, thus, will never be "unfunded". When too little overhead tax money is available, LANS simply raises the overhead taxes a bit higher on the remaining (and shrinking) staff who bring in funding.
Using this policy, the LANS/Bechtel management team have found a way to avoid following the WARN act or announcing an official RIF. Staff not on the overhead accounts suddenly "disappear" and no one seems to ask hard questions about why they are gone.
This is the crux of the whole problem.
Invert this pyramid and we would have a healthy organization.
Namely: how much money we bring in determines how much management funding exists. Not the current up the internal tax dial model. Which is resulting in more and more management and less and less technical talent and money bringing in talent.
We get it. You hate management. Aside from informing everyone of that fact, is there another purpose for your endless, repetitive posts?
There's a certain rationale behind this post. Where LLNS acts as a high cost "property management" firm. No real work means very low risk. Slow the pace of science to a crawl and lower workplace incidents a similar rate.
It's a "win-win".
Well said. It would be foolish for EBA's or other individuals at risk of layoff to take a VSP. The financial and other personal incentives of a layoff are far superior to a VSP.
Yes its a loop hole, but it makes some sense. You could quit right now and not get the VSP severence pay. Take the VSP you are really agreeing to being fired - in exchange for the payout. To the government you are still being fired, and entitled to unemployment benefits.
If it was a VSIP it might be different. But a VSP is the same as a forced RIF (from unemployment standpoint), difference is employees self select instead of management.
These people have a strong case for a lawsuit if they are terminated.
April 26, 2013 at 3:53 PM
I second April 26's comment. I know of 2 such cases. Certain managers have too much power, which they abuse for personal advancement and to the detrement of the organization and some dedicated professionals.
In effect, funding gets harder to maintain for those who remain at the lab and their jobs become even more insecure. It's a familiar refrain, no?
And when this happens there will be more RIF's in 2014 to reduce the population until there's a balance between funds and people. It's just like a business, no money to buy, no need to make a product, not need to make a product no need for people. Lay-off's until there's a balance or all the jobs go to Mexico or India or maybe China. It's all good.
What is the source of the information please?
April 28, 2013 at 12:56 PM"
It's called a Death Spiral.
April 28, 2013 at 3:33 PM
Which information are you referring to? Try to be a little more specific in your questions. This is a blog, not a news source. The "source" of most "information" here is the fevered dreams of some very troubled folks' brains. Nothing more, nothing less. If you want something to base a life decision on, look somewhere else.
By your rationale the lab would simply be flush with cash if none of the 2008 layoffs or the below the radar layoffs occurred. The VSP in whatever form it takes is done to save money on pay and benefits.....the "tax" structure...well that's the labs problem.
VSP = no incentive
VSP just gives you the same as if you were laid off (ie 1 week severance pay per year worked, down from 2 weeks per year worked, and rounded down to the closest year naturally because that's how Bechtel rolls).
VSIP would give some sort of incentive (ie something more than just the normal severance pay you would get anyway). So, maybe they might give 1.5 weeks per year worked. Or back in the halcyon UC days you would get extra years of service and age plugged into the pension (that will never happen under Bechtel).
Bechtel lowered the severance payment from 2 weeks per year worked to 1 week per year worked (with at least tacit DOE approval I assume), I could see them lowering it further at a publicized date set in the near future. That would create an additional forcing function to take the VSP/VSIP.
They're all about forcing functions.
And I concur. ZERO chance of any sort of UC-like extra years/age in pension. Will not happen
The VSP should be two weeks for (every) year of service and 15 days to get out from open enrollment. That would work. For all of you sitting around saying I'm not taking the VSP, I'm going to force them to lay me off so I can get unemployment, well, I guess you'll be sticking around for the long hall paying your 7% then 9% then 12% contribution to the cause as many who are in TCP-1 will be leaving, equating to less contributors to the pot. Hum !!
May 1, 2013 at 8:01 PM
That's because there isn't going to be one, you putz! Get a clue.
Exactly why I left.
FUAH
May 3, 2013 at 10:18 AM
This discussion of VSP/VSIP just keeps getting stupider. You suspect?? Who gives a F what you suspect? Where is your evidence?
True, but try getting these dreamers to accept it.
May 6, 2013 at 9:46 PM
"Sponsor incompetence" = your lack of ability to convince your sponsor that you are worth continued funding. Victim mentality. Remember "the customer is always right"??
Is anyone still foolish enough to believe that the top people managing the NNSA labs on a "for profit" basis care about the morale at the labs or the well being of employees who slave under them?
Your new favorite word shows you posting on other threads too.
The sad thing is.... Thee guys are not going to take a vsp/vsip. Deep down they know that going to the private sector means that they will have to work and produce (real output, not theoretically). Others leaving means that their prospects for continued welfare improves. Come on baby let the good times roll!
Many are really good at pretending like they are interested, engaged, and willing to work too. There is a whole "language" and welfare "sub-culture" associated with these types. The kinds of adaptation you see out of PhDs.... really sickening.
Since there is a VSP, does this mean that Santa Claus, the Tooth Fairy, and the Easter Bunny are real too?