Skip to main content

LANSLLNS Management Salaries and Bonuses

Image
By scooby

Correcting for COLAs, how much did LANSLLNS management salaries from Supervisors and above go up as a percentage compared to the pre-LANSLLNS period? What is a typical LANSLLNS manager "bonus" referenced to their respective base salaries, 5%, 20%, other?

Comments

Anonymous said…
There is nothing inherently wrong with above package raises and bonuses to reward employee performance. When those raises and bonuses are not disclosed though, the risk of conflict of interest conduct and gift related expectations can become a workplace problem. For-profit contractors with national and international interests permitted to dole out secret salaries and bonuses to employees undermines DOE "good security practices". Publicly disclosed performance based salary increases and bonuses are reasonable. Undisclosed salary increases and bonuses open the door to bribery, collusion, and hush money, all DOE contractor No-Nos.
2/01/2018 8:54 AM
Anonymous said…
I liked it when UC was forced to publicly list the salaries of everyone at LLNL and LANL.
Transparency is a good thing.
2/03/2018 10:31 AM
Anonymous said…
"I liked it when UC was forced to publicly list the salaries of everyone at LLNL and LANL. Transparency is a good thing."

Has SPSE made an attempt to have LLNS salaries and bonuses publicly disclosed as they did with UC/LLNL? The "we are a private company so we don't need to release such information" argument doesn't seem to be supportable in DOE contractor space.
2/03/2018 3:19 PM
Anonymous said…
Employees doing the bidding for LANSLLNS with the understanding they will receive large bonuses and large pay raises in secret for doing so? Couldn't happen. Employees aren't allowed to be bought off. It says as much in the security refresher right?
2/16/2018 5:13 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