Skip to main content

Most Top Managers Will Be Gone

Image
By
No matter who wins LANL, because the team will be divided 2, 3 or even 4 ways into different bid teams, it means at most 1/2, 1/3 or 1/4 could survive into next contract. Some teams could have few or no current LANL managers.

The if you factor in the retirements that will be timed for the contract change another fraction of top managers will be gone.

No matter what the outcome, most LANL AD and PAD will be gone.

Comments

Anonymous said…
I disagree. If UC wins, how and why would they change their managers? UC has 80-90% of the AD and PAD positions now with very few at retirement age or temperament.
9/23/2017 9:39 AM
Anonymous said…
I'd be surprised if UC joined a new bid for LANL, but in any case the top management levels will certainly be changed around. People might not always disappear, but their titles and responsibilities do. Look at SNL for guidance as to what will probably happen when a new LLC comes in to run LANL, with or without UC onboard.
9/23/2017 11:21 AM
Anonymous said…
I disagree. If UC wins, how and why would they change their managers? UC has 80-90% of the AD and PAD positions now with very few at retirement age or temperament.

September 23, 2017 at 9:39 AM

This is a good point and from some of the manes that I hear it is the same people with a few moving up from AD to PAD to replace PADs that will retire. My guess is the structure will be exactly the same with the same people, hell they may make a few new layers to top it off, like SPADS Supreme PADS or some crazy thing like that.
9/23/2017 12:08 PM
Anonymous said…
If UC wins, they all stay If UC loses they all are gone. NNSA does not want change. Safe bet UC wins and most stay.
9/25/2017 4:57 AM
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

Rumor corner

By scooby
LLNS may have excluded the wrong people in last VSSOP? The exclusions were based on outdated job categories and related skills. ULM are now thinking that in the future, job categories and functional areas will have to be re-defined. The next VSSOP/ISP will be based on the new categories and functional areas. The questions I have are: 1) Why didnt they think of that before the transition. It seems like their style is “change things as you go”. Planning is out the window! 2) Who will give input on the new changes? The next RIF apparently is going to be more lucrative than the VSSOP. Depending on the length of employment, a RIFed person, not only gets their 1 week pay per year of service but also from 30 to 120 days notice, essentially 30 to 120 days pay. Please feel free to comment on the rumors or add new ones you actually heard.
92 comments
Read more