Skip to main content

LLNL Salary comparison

Image
By

 Salary ratios at LLNL before and after the 2007 transition from UC/LLNL to LLNS


Have the salary ratios of the employees listed below changed if we use pre-2007 salary ratios as a baseline, or have these ratios been fairly constant through 2023?

1. Division Leader to Engineer (non-manager)
2. Group Leader to Engineer (non-manager)
3. Supervisor to Tech Associate (non-manager)
4. other

The reasoning or support for salary differences between manager and non-managers is not in question for this topic. The ratio of those salaries (1-4) pre and post transition, is the question asked.

Comments

Anonymous said…
The LLNS prime contract does not specify the topic question ratio. Attracting and retaining an adequate workforce is a metric of sorts, but it is a soft goal, and the NNSA readily accepts contractor reasoning/excuses for subpar staffing levels.

Since the NNSA does not oversee or manage the bulk of contractor employee salaries, there is lots of room for a for-profit contractor without mission focus discipline, to grease $$$ their managers salaries out of proportion with pre-2007 manager/non-manager salary ratios in order to attain the maximum annual PER scores and award fee at all costs. This may however come at the expense of the “non-manager” engines of LLNL. DOE officials now recognize this and now want a different contractor “model”
going forward.
5/30/2023 8:10 PM
Anonymous said…
Don’t forget about the LLNS employee bonuses.
6/02/2023 3:29 PM
Anonymous said…
Don’t forget about the 15% employee retention payments for some folks working or in some cases charging on the LEP projects during the pandemic... apparently the the stress of working on site and then dealing with all of the issues once you got home wasn’t worth it.

Or the new salary adjustment just announced for a select 1/3 of lab employees.

Let’s keep throwing gasoline on the fire and then wondering why you have the issues that you have.
6/03/2023 8:33 AM
Anonymous said…
“Don’t forget about the 15% employee retention payments for some folks working or in some cases charging on the LEP projects during the pandemic... apparently the the stress of working on site and then dealing with all of the issues once you got home wasn’t worth it…Or the new salary adjustment just announced for a select 1/3 of lab employees.”

Reads like an open loop feeding frenzy. Well, when LLNL reverts back to a non-profit LLC like Triad, maybe some of these salary bumps, bonuses, and the salary “ratio” score cards, with be made public like when LLNL was managed by UC/LLNL.

“Only when the tide goes out do you learn who has been swimming naked.”

- Warren Buffett
6/03/2023 7:20 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

tcp1 looking good

By scooby
I just received my annual TCP-1 letter from LLNS and a summary of the LLNS Pension Plan. Looked in pretty good shape in 2013. About 35% overfunded (funding target attainment percentage = 134.92%). This was a decrease from 2012 where it was 51% overfunded (funding target attainment percentage = 151.59%). They did note that the 2012 change in the law on how liabilities are calculated using interest rates improved the plan's position. Without the change the funding target attainment percentages would have been 118% (2012) and 105% (2013). 2013 assets = $2,057,866,902 2013 liabilities = $1,525,162,784 vs 2012 assets = $1,844,924,947 2012 liabilities = $1,217,043,150 It was also noted that a slightly different calculation method ("fair market value") designed to show a clearer picture of the plan' status as December 31, 2013 had; Assets = $2,403,098,433 Liabilities = $2,068,984,256 Funding ratio = 116.15% Its a closed plan with 3,781 participants. Of that number, 3,151 wer...
105 comments
Read more