Skip to main content

LLNL security staff using favoritism to hire new SPO's ?

LLNL security staff using favoritism to hire new SPO's ?

SPO's that left for other DOE sites due to getting laid off because of de-inventory have applied for their old jobs and are not getting hired. Security managers are hiring their friends and putting them through all the required training at a high cost. Meanwhile current Q cleared certified SPO's are left in the wind. Another epic failure of money mismanagement.

Comments

Anonymous said…
This is against laboratory policy to use favoritism. But is widespread.
Anonymous said…
You know when the "nobody cares" hall monitor chimes in, LLNS is worried their questionable management practices are being exposed.
Anonymous said…
Did those who attempted to re-hire at the lab subject to any restrictions they may have signed before leaving the lab? Incentives were paid to a set of PSO's that were tied to the Superblock to stay on while it was being emptied. Did that incentive pay have any restrictions on rehire?

I know that on the VSIP of 2013 part of the agreement you signed was that you were in-eligible for any sort of re-employment for a year.
Anonymous said…
gotta keep jobs local. too many local young folks our kids and grandkids; men,women, of color, LGBT are out of work here.

getting them entry into local jobs is good. having the trained immigrants return home with a skill set learned during their visit to California is also good, technology transfer.
Anonymous said…
The only way to get a job is by knowing someone. Why would LLNL be any different ? @ 6:31 AM be careful what you ask for, sometimes it comes true.
Anonymous said…
If reemployment privileges were not waived upon their departure (severance package requirements) where does the AD for SHRM stand on this? Were the prerequisite steps (rehire priority, etc.) for these job postings skipped?
Shouldn't be difficult to determine.
Anonymous said…
Anonymous said...

Did those who attempted to re-hire at the lab subject to any restrictions they may have signed before leaving the lab?
No, they had 1 year recall under their CBA
Incentives were paid to a set of PSO's that were tied to the Superblock to stay on while it was being emptied. Did that incentive pay have any restrictions on rehire?
Everyone in the entire department that wore a uniform along with CAS operators were pain bonus money. No restrictions for rehire. Even those that new they would keep their jobs got paid.

I know that on the VSIP of 2013 part of the agreement you signed was that you were in-eligible for any sort of re-employment for a year.
No VSIP, SPO's had a CBA

August 6, 2014 at 11:27 AM
Anonymous said…
What official response are those that were laid off receiving from LLNS on this matter? Can this be partially corrected or is it too late?
Anonymous said…
Didn't the Director gives these laid off PSOs a "special thanks" for their collective service last year? Seems like a set of LLNS managers dropped the ball here, but does it amount to a policy violation or just another employee morale deflator?
Anonymous said…
Zero official response. Morale has always been low in PFD. When you have a supervisor volunteer to drop down to a SPO that says alot.
Anonymous said…
Overpaid guards (the highest in the complex for a Cat 3 facility)who have a very strong collective bargaining unit..NOT!! Chucky baby is gone DEAL with it!! Get a job on the outside of the Lab...right? Oh wait, most come back after they realize what the real world is like.
Anonymous said…
Only the sub-pars will return only to be heralded for having outside real world experience.
Anonymous said…
One former PSO is now the HEAF Facility Manager, a position formerly held successfully by graduates with Master Degrees.
Anonymous said…
Wait....not a PhD?!?!
Anonymous said…
No PhD, MS, or BS

A bold B-Division decision
Anonymous said…
AS degree? What? The previous FM had a Masters.

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!