This BLOG is for LLNL present and past employees, friends of LLNL and anyone impacted by the privatization of the Lab to express their opinions and expose the waste, wrongdoing and any kind of injustice against employees and taxpayers by LLNS/DOE/NNSA.
The opinions stated are personal opinions. Therefore,
The BLOG author may or may not agree with them before making the decision to post them.
Comments not conforming to BLOG rules are deleted.
Blog author serves as a moderator.
For new topics or suggestions, email jlscoob5@gmail.com
Blog rules
Stay on topic.
No profanity, threatening language, pornography.
NO NAME CALLING.
No political debate.
Posts and comments are posted several times a day.
Wednesday, November 25, 2020
No violations?
Has “Chief Ethics Officer” Paul T. Schafer been a stooge for LLNS since 2007? Has he ever found significant ethics violations with LLNS?
16 comments:
Anonymous
said...
In terms of LLNS ethics monitoring, clearly Paul is like the Maytag repairman commercial from back in the day with nothing to do.
I think guys like Paul are going to be replaced by a group of racial rapid response teams that will look for unconscious bias, system racism, denial, micro aggressions and dogwhistles. If they accuse you there is nothing you can do since if it is unconscious you will have no idea that you did it so you yourself have no say on if you did or did not commit a violation. If you deny you will only make things worse. I think every group will need to have racial monitor to monitor and report on violations or potential for violations.
You keep posting this ridiculous stuff. Are you a believer or a chicken little?
11/27/2020 5:10 PM
I doubt that this is Chiken little stuff. After Trump is gone the executive branch is going to go full into this stuff at the labs and ever other government agency. There is only a political up side for this. (1) There will be little pushbacks. (2) It will increase Dem votes since it will always convert some people. (3) There will hiring quotas which will essentially be payoffs for certain groups.
My guess is that the training will be mandatory. If you speak out you will be punished. Lawsuits will be welcome become it means that the institution is shaking things up. You may win a lawsuit or two but your life will become horrible. Grants, promotions, positions will become increasing based on interjectionally and race theory. This has already happened in large sections of academics. STEM is the final frontier so to speak.
Ok we will how this plays out but my guess within 100 days Biden will remind the Trump order.
Looks like this LLNS Chief Ethics Officer post has morphed into another CRT discussion and the blog administrator had already ended new comments on that post. A hard push to restart the CRT discussion or a reluctance to discuss an existing manager with ethics as his core job function?
I think the conversation is related. The existing ethics managers job is going to increasingly focus on CRT issues. That is almost a certainty. If you have any familiarity with the university system you would know that many of the ethics issues are now focused almost solely on CRT issues. It used to be on abuse of funds, personal gifts from corporations, odd hiring practices and so on. Now 95% of is on issues related to race, sex, gender or trans issues. What happens in the universities will happen in the labs.
Ok perhaps the answer to the address the original post the outcome has to be one of the following.
(1) There are no ethics violations.
(2) There are ethics violations but he is so bad at his job that he cannot enforce anything.
(3) There are ethics violations but he is paid off to do nothing.
(4) There are ethics violations he has found them, worked on them and there was action taken but the poster is not aware of them or was dissatisfied with the outcome.
I am going to go with 4 or maybe 4 and some of 3.
Now that is settled can we go back to CRT? I think a lot of money can be made on both sides on this. If you are wrongly accused you can sue and get rich. If you think you are violated than you can sue and get rich. My guess is that millions are dollars are going to be wasted on this. It will be like UBI for certain people.
The post topic question used words like “been” and “has he ever” meaning these are past tense questions. What the Chief Ethics Officer may or may not do in the future, was not the topic question. How UC could impact the future, again was not the topic question, but interesting.
If there were material ethics violations identified and not purposely hidden, they would have been reported in the public domain. So one must ask the simple question, what is more probable, a for-profit DOE contractor that since 2007, has not ever committed ethics violations, or, the person in charge of monitoring ethical violations is just not by design or personal reward, able to do his job as advertised?
"So one must ask the simple question, what is more probable, a for-profit DOE contractor that since 2007, has not ever committed ethics violations, or, the person in charge of monitoring ethical violations is just not by design or personal reward, able to do his job as advertised?"
This assumes that no ethics violations have been reported. The original poster said that no ethics violations have been reported but that is not evidence. I would guess that there has been several reported violations and actions taking. Perhaps they where not in the news or widely known but I would guess this happed.
How can you get rid of the "can we go back to CRT?" troll? It should be clear to even the most challenged that the Middle East nuclear crisis is somewhat more of a concern to humanity and the design labs (LLNL and LANL).
"It should be clear to even the most challenged that the Middle East nuclear crisis is somewhat more of a concern to humanity and the design labs (LLNL and LANL)."
I absolutely agree to this point and I hope you are right. The blog deals with various issues relevant to the labs. CRT was brought up because of what happened at Sandia. At LANL further training was cancelled however it should be noted that just after the incident at Sandia that there was suddenly a push for more diversity seminars with mangers encouraging people to take seem them and take extra courses. This seminars where cancelled after the Trump order. Several managers sent out email saying how they are getting concerned people asking how get the seminars back. The point is that this may not be that big of a deal at the labs right now they could become a very big issues. If you do not believe me just look what has happened at many universities. To be clear I am for diversity, outreach and making sure everyone has a fair chance but if you have any familiarly with CRT than you will know that these ideas and diversity are just a small part of what it is actually about. In fact I would claim that CRT is really not about diversity at all but uses diversity as a tool to achieve a set of political goals. It is a political agenda, with clear political bias and essentially uses force to get what it wants. Once which hunts get going they are hard to stop until many lives are ruined. CRT has already harmed the academic and scientific credibility of many fields. This has many been in the social sciences but they have their sights set on STEM fields as well and want to radically change how science and engineering are done and evaluated. Again you have to some experience with the current academic world to see this but it could have a huge impact on the labs if this kind of mindset takes control.
On a personal note, I really doubt that there will be much pushback from academics or even the labs. I would guess the pushback will come from high tech. They can bend to some extent or at least pretend to but once it starts to really effect profits there will be a pushback. Once profit is at stake results matter. This is of course why this nonsense gets so much traction in universities and the government since results do not matter as much.
"CRT was brought up because of what happened at Sandia. 12/03/2020 12:57 PM"
Lots of things happen at Sandia, AKA "Parts R Us". The impact on the nuclear weapon design labs (LLNL and LANL) is minimal. However, taxpayers should worry about the impact on their wallets.
16 comments:
In terms of LLNS ethics monitoring, clearly Paul is like the Maytag repairman commercial from back in the day with nothing to do.
I think guys like Paul are going to be replaced by a group of racial rapid response teams that will look for unconscious bias, system racism, denial, micro aggressions and dogwhistles. If they accuse you there is nothing you can do since if it is unconscious you will have no idea that you did it so you yourself have no say on if you did or did not commit a violation. If you deny you will only make things worse. I think every group will need to have racial monitor to monitor and report on violations or potential for violations.
11/26/2020 5:15 PM is a master of conspiracy theory! Next, he'll be telling us that it's all part of the plan for the Great Reset.
11/26/2020 5:15 PM
You keep posting this ridiculous stuff. Are you a believer or a chicken little?
You keep posting this ridiculous stuff. Are you a believer or a chicken little?
11/27/2020 5:10 PM
I doubt that this is Chiken little stuff. After Trump is gone the executive branch is going to go full into this stuff at the labs and ever other government agency. There is only a political up side for this. (1) There will be little pushbacks. (2) It will increase Dem votes since it will always convert some people. (3) There will hiring quotas which will essentially be payoffs for certain groups.
My guess is that the training will be mandatory. If you speak out you will be punished. Lawsuits will be welcome become it means that the institution is shaking things up. You may win a lawsuit or two but your life will become horrible. Grants, promotions, positions will become increasing based on interjectionally and race theory. This has already happened in large sections of academics. STEM is the final frontier so to speak.
Ok we will how this plays out but my guess within 100 days Biden will remind the Trump order.
Looks like this LLNS Chief Ethics Officer post has morphed into another CRT discussion and the blog administrator had already ended new comments on that post. A hard push to restart the CRT discussion or a reluctance to discuss an existing manager with ethics as his core job function?
11/29/2020 8:41 AM
I think the conversation is related. The existing ethics managers job is going to increasingly focus on CRT issues. That is almost a certainty. If you have any familiarity with the university system you would know that many of the ethics issues are now focused almost solely on CRT issues. It used to be on abuse of funds, personal gifts from corporations, odd hiring practices and so on. Now 95% of is on issues related to race, sex, gender or trans issues. What happens in the universities will happen in the labs.
Ok perhaps the answer to the address the original post the outcome has to be one of the following.
(1) There are no ethics violations.
(2) There are ethics violations but he is so bad at his job that he cannot enforce anything.
(3) There are ethics violations but he is paid off to do nothing.
(4) There are ethics violations he has found them, worked on them and there was action taken but the poster is not aware of them or was dissatisfied with the outcome.
I am going to go with 4 or maybe 4 and some of 3.
Now that is settled can we go back to CRT? I think a lot of money can be made on both sides on this. If you are wrongly accused you can sue and get rich. If you think you are violated than you can sue and get rich. My guess is that millions are dollars are going to be wasted on this. It will be like UBI for certain people.
The post topic question used words like “been” and “has he ever” meaning these are past tense questions. What the Chief Ethics Officer may or may not do in the future, was not the topic question. How UC could impact the future, again was not the topic question, but interesting.
If there were material ethics violations identified and not purposely hidden, they would have been reported in the public domain. So one must ask the simple question, what is more probable, a for-profit DOE contractor that since 2007, has not ever committed ethics violations, or, the person in charge of monitoring ethical violations is just not by design or personal reward, able to do his job as advertised?
"So one must ask the simple question, what is more probable, a for-profit DOE contractor that since 2007, has not ever committed ethics violations, or, the person in charge of monitoring ethical violations is just not by design or personal reward, able to do his job as advertised?"
This assumes that no ethics violations have been reported. The original poster said that no ethics violations have been reported but that is not evidence. I would guess that there has been several reported violations and actions taking. Perhaps they where not in the news or widely known but I would guess this happed.
Hey Scooby,
How can you get rid of the "can we go back to CRT?" troll? It should be clear to even the most challenged that the Middle East nuclear crisis is somewhat more of a concern to humanity and the design labs (LLNL and LANL).
Point him out. Post name & date, time
Please.
"It should be clear to even the most challenged that the Middle East nuclear crisis is somewhat more of a concern to humanity and the design labs (LLNL and LANL)."
I absolutely agree to this point and I hope you are right. The blog deals with various issues relevant to the labs. CRT was brought up because of what happened at Sandia. At LANL further training was cancelled however it should be noted that just after the incident at Sandia that there was suddenly a push for more diversity seminars with mangers encouraging people to take seem them and take extra courses. This seminars where cancelled after the Trump order. Several managers sent out email saying how they are getting concerned people asking how get the seminars back. The point is that this may not be that big of a deal at the labs right now they could become a very big issues. If you do not believe me just look what has happened at many universities. To be clear I am for diversity, outreach and making sure everyone has a fair chance but if you have any familiarly with CRT than you will know that these ideas and diversity are just a small part of what it is actually about. In fact I would claim that CRT is really not about diversity at all but uses diversity as a tool to achieve a set of political goals. It is a political agenda, with clear political bias and essentially uses force to get what it wants. Once which hunts get going they are hard to stop until many lives are ruined. CRT has already harmed the academic and scientific credibility of many fields. This has many been in the social sciences but they have their sights set on STEM fields as well and want to radically change how science and engineering are done and evaluated. Again you have to some experience with the current academic world to see this but it could have a huge impact on the labs if this kind of mindset takes control.
On a personal note, I really doubt that there will be much pushback from academics or even the labs. I would guess the pushback will come from high tech. They can bend to some extent or at least pretend to but once it starts to really effect profits there will be a pushback. Once profit is at stake results matter. This is of course why this nonsense gets so much traction in universities and the government since results do not matter as much.
Point him out. Post name & date, time
Please.
12/02/2020 9:02 PM
OK:
11/26/2020 5:15 PM
11/30/2020 11:11 AM
Similar/identical on other threads:
"DOE choses INL to host the versatile test reactor"
11/20/2020 3:27 PM
"Critical Race Theory is Coming Back to the Labs!"
(almost the entire thread, which you terminated)
"CRT was brought up because of what happened at Sandia.
12/03/2020 12:57 PM"
Lots of things happen at Sandia, AKA "Parts R Us". The impact on the nuclear weapon design labs (LLNL and LANL) is minimal. However, taxpayers should worry about the impact on their wallets.
Post a Comment