Skip to main content

Who paid for this settlement?

Image
By
Who paid for this settlement?

Since LANL gets its funding from the federal government, maybe the taxpayers paid for the sexual harassment case settlement.

Anybody got a guess as to how much this cost?

http://www.abqjournal.com/462481/abqnewsseeker/lawsuit-over-sexual-harassment-at-los-alamos-lab-settled.html

Comments

Anonymous said…
In monetary terms it was cheaper than WIPP. In terms of loss reputation, well not much since LANL's reputation was very small to begin with. From the article it appears that police action (the restraining order) was the trigger to the forced retirement of Mr. Stanford. Since the Lab has settled we will not know how much or how little the Lab attempted to intervene in what appears to be repeated pattern over extended time.

And of course it is taxpayer money that funded the settlement. You don't see LANS or LLNS listed on the stock exchange and there is that limited liability clause which would prevent the bleeding from extending beyond the fence line.
9/22/2014 10:18 AM
Anonymous said…
I hope they all had a "happy ending",
9/22/2014 12:09 PM
Anonymous said…



Couple million is not out of the question.
9/24/2014 6:43 AM
Anonymous said…
"...And of course it is taxpayer money that funded the settlement..."

Did the settlement money come from DOE/NNSA or out of the contractors service fee/profit? Limited liability is not zero liability, it's just capped.
9/24/2014 7:01 AM
Anonymous said…
Whether or not DOE/NNSA or LANS paid the settlement, it is taxpayer money. The limited liability means that you can't go beyond LANS and go after UC or Bechtel etc. You can only go after the funds that LANS has. Not a zero liability but it is capped in the sense that it is firewalled from the parent companies.

Now as to which pocket, one would hope that it comes out of LANS' hide unless the action was somehow approved by NNSA or that NNSA knew of the problem and failed to stop it. Maybe LANS would be hit with a double whammy, the court judgement followed next year with NNSA cutting the bonus portion of the contract fee. Pain is the only motivator in this case.
9/24/2014 10:51 AM
Anonymous said…
"...How is causing pain to LANS going to stop the actions of an _____ like the one who committed the assault?..."

Unless LANSLLNS managers are fired or swiftly removed from management roles for unacceptable performance, dollar penalties are the only, and I mean only, action that materially motivates business practice change at these two labs.
9/25/2014 1:39 PM
Anonymous said…
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
10/12/2014 7:28 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Plutonium Shots on NIF.

By scooby
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...
155 comments
Read more

Trump is to gut the labs.

By scooby
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.
124 comments
Read more

LLNL un-diversity

By scooby
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!
79 comments
Read more