Skip to main content

who will it be?

The calendar is counting down until McMillan departs, and UC has not yet announced who they will put in as a caretaker until the contract expires next year. Names floated include each of the current PADS, bringing Anastasio back from retirement, Gibbs, and Budil. What are the current odds on each of these, and is an obvious pick emerging?

Comments

Anonymous said…
No one but one of the current PADS would be interested. Why would they be? It's a temporary job, unlikely to lead to long-term job, and anyone not already working for LANS would have to jump ship off their current ship. Budil is an interesting possibility, but she's got a cushy influential job and she's back on the UC pension plan too. Might be a candidate for being on a bid from a new UC-led LLC.
Anonymous said…
The moderators will never let this through but it will be Craig Lesure. Craig!!!! There are reasons people do want this to get out.
Anonymous said…
There is no one spelled "Lesure". That shows how much you know. Care to try a different spelling?
Anonymous said…
It would be logical for UC to use this chance to demonstrate credibility to DoE on the key contract issue of culture change. To do so would require the naming of an outsider to the interim position, however, that would be out of character for them.
Anonymous said…

There is no one spelled "Lesure". That shows how much you know. Care to try a different spelling?


Ok Craig Lesuire, no matter what it will be Craig, it has to be, there is simply no other choice.
Anonymous said…
Leisure would be a disaster.
Anonymous said…
Who is "Leisure" or "Lesuire" or "Lesure"?

I do know Craig Leasure.
Anonymous said…
Leisure would be a disaster.

November 3, 2017 at 3:18 AM

Indeed but if you have been at LANL long enough than you will realize that is precisely why it will Leisure.
Anonymous said…
Leisure is the LANL way, the one thing employees already have too much of.
Anonymous said…
The selection will be in-line with all the lousy decisions that LANS has made since 2006. Based on that, it will Leasure. He's LANS final nail, fitting.
Anonymous said…
The selection will be in-line with all the lousy decisions that LANS has made since 2006. Based on that, it will Leasure. He's LANS final nail, fitting.

November 3, 2017 at 6:19 PM

LANS has no other way to react so Leisure it shall be. Our only hope is for the next contractor to clear house. There is always lots of talk about "culture" and this is actually true but it is the management culture. Every external panel that looks at LANL says it is the management, every employee survey says it is the management, every time there is a low rating management is always the key. Yet every year McMillian says how great the management is and every year the workforce shakes their head in disbelief. You have to give them credit for being consistent, you can always count of them to make the worst decision possible.

The issue is how much damage can Leasure do before he leaves? We all know he will try is best to screw things up and have it stick after he is gone.

Sadly it seems like many have given up hope at LANL. after 10 years of constantly doing the worse things possible it seems like there is no other way for LANL to operate, it is just the way it is going to stay. How many all hands meetings can you go to and see clueless managers going on on about how they are confused that things are not going well when we have the best management in the world? Without self-awareness nothing can change, in fact many managers seem to be in utter denial that the contract is going to change.
Anonymous said…
Wow, this Leasure guy has a Ph.D. from NM State. Wow, and he would replace McMillan who is a MIT graduate?
Anonymous said…
Of course 7:46 is spot on. I found it interesting that the LANS management could not even release the latest survey results because they were soooooo bad. Oddly, this low ranking of senior management comes as no surprise whatsoever to the rank and file employees. I wonder who, exactly, is fooled by such a transparent charade. Maybe the NNSA uppers.
Anonymous said…
I doubt that even the Feds are that dumb.
Anonymous said…
Dr. Leasure would be a great choice. He knows the Lab and the Missions. He works well with HQ and a is great manager. He will effect a smooth transition to the new contractor whoever it is.
Anonymous said…
Dr. Leasure would be a great choice. He knows the Lab and the Missions. He works well with HQ and a is great manager. He will effect a smooth transition to the new contractor whoever it is.

November 5, 2017 at 7:39 AM

Ok, now do you understand why LANS has utterly failed? The lack of self-awareness is just way beyond astounding.

Some will say that 7:39 AM has to be making a joke however if you have been at LANL for the past 10 years you will realize that 7:39 AM is probably not making a joke but is actually serious and this is precisely why the contract is changing, why the management at LANL is viewed so poorly by HQ, NNSA and DOE.
Anonymous said…
A NM state or UNM graduate-director would know the mediocrity of his workforce.
Might be an advantage. Charlie is too much like ‘em city-folk you guys hate.
Anonymous said…
I knew Craig Leasure when he did nothing but make coffee for Scott Gibbs as PADOPS. He was clueless and defensive about anything he thought he didn't know (i.e., everything). What a loser. I guess he's now offensive about things he doesn't know, LOL.
Anonymous said…
Moses is available.
Anonymous said…
Craig Leasure would be a great choice.
Anonymous said…
Only Craig is dumb enough to advocate for himself in such a transparent manner. Nobody likes or trusts the guy, and nobody wants him as any sort of manager, let alone interim director.
Anonymous said…
Craig Leasure would be a great choice.

November 8, 2017 at 3:52 PM

Is this a troll trying to get a reaction? I cannot imagine a single sane person at LANL would say such a thing unless to get a laugh or upset people.

Craig does not have any understanding of the lab, has no real understanding of the mission, has no interaction with the workforce or what they do and is a poor manager. He is incredibly insecure and anybody from DOE can see right through him. He is a LANS guy through and through he is only in his position because he is and always was a pure yes man. Of course he will probably get the position and cause more damage to LANL before the contract change.
Anonymous said…
The problem with Craig is that he rose to stardom by taking Knapp's suits to the cleaners and being his valet while he worked for him. He is incredibly insecure around intelligent staff and incredibly vindictive. Guess who taught these traits?
Anonymous said…
The problem with Craig is that he rose to stardom by taking Knapp's suits to the cleaners and being his valet while he worked for him. He is incredibly insecure around intelligent staff and incredibly vindictive. Guess who taught these traits?

November 9, 2017 at 9:03 AM

Craigs insecurity is so extreme it is cringe worthy. Try not to say anything remotely technical to him as it is an instant conversation killer and he will take it as an insult. Hell he would find Bill Nye's old kid show to be very scary. I would ask how did LANL get such a person or how did he get to his position but 9:03 AM in all seriousness may be correct.

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!