Skip to main content

VSIP in the news

http://www.contracostatimes.com/contra-costa-times/ci_23201898/lawrence-livermore-lab-looking-voluntary-layoffs Lawrence Livermore lab looking for voluntary layoffs LIVERMORE -- To prepare for projected budget challenges in 2014, Lawrence Livermore Laboratory is offering buyouts to as many as 600 workers willing to take a voluntary layoff. The Self-Select Voluntary Separation Program plan was announced by lab Director Parney Albright at an "all-hands" meeting with employees Wednesday. In that scenario, the lab would pay qualified employees a severance package of one week of salary per year of service for up to 26 weeks. The program began Wednesday and is being offered to all career full-time employees until May 23. "This is a Fiscal Year 2014 pre-emptive strike if you will," said lab spokeswoman Lynda Seaver. "We received the budget proposal, and even with the way it stands, we're going to have some challenges with our workforce." According to Seaver, as currently drawn up, President Barack Obama's budget request for Fiscal Year 2014 allocates $1.48 billion to the lab. Factoring in sequestration, Seaver said the figure represents about a 10 percent cut from the lab's 2013 budget. The next fiscal year begins Oct. 1. Albright said that by implementing the voluntary program now, the lab would get a jump on what is expected to be an "uphill battle in Congress this summer, with continuing debates about reducing federal spending, a possible FY14 sequester and the debt ceiling," according to a news release. After the application deadline and an eight-day review process, exits from the lab are scheduled for June 13. Employees who apply and are approved can collect the payouts in a lump sum or through bi-weekly payments. Employees who have been approved and change their minds have seven days to rescind. Seaver said the lab has "no target" for how many jobs must be eliminated or dollars saved through voluntary layoffs. "This is a voluntary separation," Seaver reiterated. "We're hoping enough people apply." Although not in play now, involuntary layoffs are not off the table, Seaver said. After the voluntary separations are done, the lab will review its staffing situation, she said. The voluntary separation program was approved by the National Nuclear Security Administration.

Comments

Anonymous said…
Move 'em out.
Anonymous said…
BYE!!!!!!
Anonymous said…
Just saw that LLNL lost the first wrongful termination lawsuit over the 2009 layoffs. Five folks won, 140 to go:

http://www.contracostatimes.com/tri-valley-times/ci_23219268/lawrence-livermore-lab-must-pay-five-former-employees
Anonymous said…
When the involuntary layoffs come, hopefully they will have learned from their last layoff, and illegal actions; oh wait, they rewrote the policy. What is it now? I don't like the way you look, you are gone.
Anonymous said…
What's the new layoff policy?

The wording was loosened such that anything can be a reason for a RIF.

What is MUCH worse, is that they inserted a requirement that you must sign a "waiver" in order to receive any severance pay. They will not divulge the contents of the waiver until you are RIFd. But it's reasonable to assume that it says "I waive all rights to sue LLNS for any reason." I hope that somebody who takes the VSP will post the contents, so we'll know.
Anonymous said…
May 13, 2013 at 12:30 PM

If you take the SSVSP you should not be considering suing the lab anyway. The SSVSP should be looked at as a saving grace not a forced retirement. Be happy, you could be one of the fools who are sticking around waiting to be ISP'd in hopes LLNS screws up only so you can get your 24 months of unemployement and become a parasite to society.

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!