Workplace “Virtue Signaling”
What is an effective plan B when a company truly does not have a track record of workplace equal opportunity? Answer: Virtue signaling, where a “load test” is not required for PR gains. In such an environment, don’t be the load test if you value your job.
18 comments:
Workplace virtue signaling is actually better than when the company goes completely woke believes it and destroys itself.
The labs have largely avoided this stuff and does the standard virtue signaling but there is very little effect on the workers. The only thing I hear is that unqualified people are promoted to managers and when it is a women they claim they only go the job because they are a women. I do not buy this since we generally always have bad managers and the women seem to about the same as them men. Take the LLNL director, she is certainly better than some of our recent past lab directors both in qualifications and outcome.
In general I think the labs have done pretty well in the wok department, we do not have mandatory month long trainings, people are being fired by the truck load for having an American flag on their doors, I do not see people starting off talks with land acknowledgments. There are some talks but these are voluntary in terms of attendance.
“The labs have largely avoided this stuff and does the standard virtue signaling but there is very little effect on the workers.”
“Little effect on the workers”, yes, by failing lab workers most of the time, and in some cases to be frank, just outright selling them out.
LLNS and UC/LLNL used to have full time “diversity managers”, primarily to virtue signal, interface with the OFCCP, talk up their toothless AAP, make huge salaries, and became more and more disconnected from the lab employees they claimed to ensure would get a fair shake.
A contractor that has a full time “diversity manager” is analogous to a used car company that has a full time “honesty manager”. Nice PR, but otherwise accomplishing very little in terms of root causes and solutions.
I’m sure none of these lab anointed “diversity” managers with recruitment functions, would ever be permitted to leverage their lab approved and tax payer funded status to seek out, target, and hire young and attractive female minority tech grads across the USA, for their own secretive, sleazy, and marital status violating infidelity purposes right? That would be an abuse of lab authority, predatory, and a Q-clearance violation for sure. Could never happen or be covered up at LLNL right? Does a protected diversity status squelch abuse of authority at LLNL?
Former LLNL Associate Director for Lasers Non-Ph.D Michael Campbell, after a “flurry of anonymous faxes to officials” including the Department of Energy, triggered his security clearance suspension and ultimately his LLNL resignation.
This suggests multi-source anonymous information sent outside to officials (around LLNL?) like DOE, DOE IG, or others with DOE oversight, meant LLNL could not smooth over this very obvious security clearance employee violation.
As posted all over LLNL
DOE IG “hotline”:
Toll free: (800) 541-1625
E-MAIL
ighotline@hq.doe.gov
Assuming this isn’t a disgruntled employee accusation, as the the lab would play first, this alleged sleaze ball’s impacted legal wife, would need to step forward and turn this guy in, and or, the employees if any, impacted by this guys attempt to conceal his sleazy security clearance violations. A gag order for security clearance violations is not likely a defendable lab secret, but you never know when a diversity figure is in question.
It took a 2nd accusation and airport security camera footage of airport baggage thefts, for DOE to fire Sam Brinton, the former deputy assistant secretary for spent fuel and waste disposition.
Sen. John Barrasso stated, “The Department’s inability to respond to my concerns regarding the DOE’s clearance process is indicative of an egregious inattention to potential insider threats within the Department and the greater safety of the American public”.
Sexual behavior, in reference to the “sleazy” comment, is not typically a cause of clearance denial or clearance suspension unless it involves an undisclosed extramarital affair OR, or if the subject went to “great lengths” to conceal the sexual behavior.
“Great lengths” could be sneaky behavior, alibis regarding one’s whereabouts, or threatening coworkers or others to keep quiet about their sexual behavior. Not cool.
I remember when a LLNL Native American engineering supervisor was forcibly bounced out of his LLNL “fab shop” supplemental labor management assignment and reassigned to a B131 office position where his conduct could be better monitored.
7/06/2023 3:19 PM
That would be the fox guarding the hen house
“That would be the fox guarding the hen house”
Or the fox upper echelon guarding the fox pup from straying.
This seasoned LLNL manager knew exactly what ethical and security clearance lines he was crossing, and was not a “pup” by any stretch of the imagination.
Self-indulgent lab managers don’t get away with a firing level offense by being sneaky or clever, they get away with it because their group leaders, superintendent, division leaders, etc. shield and protect them, who in turn by their inaction and failure to discipline, own the problem too. All cleaned up and polished by the time Lab Security gets wind of it. What a thicket.
We can promote diversity by overlooking moral transgressions that do not really affect the workplace -- for example we know that our Vice President Kamala Harris, is reported to have "slept her way to the top" yet she is a good example, and inspiring to many people in fact. She has a much overlooked brilliance with words, and a stunning sense of humor, I would say.
I would assume, that the current atmosphere is just too intolerant to promote diversity and a good workplace, that attracts talented applicants.
“We can promote diversity by overlooking moral transgressions that do not really affect the workplace”
Not really. Workplace “inclusiveness” to be sustained and embraced, must also include inclusiveness in workplace conduct consequence. Double standards for workplace conduct take us backwards, and can create entitled and consequence immune predators. You don’t ever want your wife, sister, or daughter, working for a lab manager immune from their conduct toward subordinates. I hope we can agree on this point.
We frequently read former LANL Director by name, Pete Nanos on this blog, usually with negative comments. So, on this thread, is this LLNL manager in question Randy Pico, LLNL Senior Superintendent, or someone else? Why the shell games?
I would certainly agree that double standards are wrong, but we could imagine having a more enlightened attitude, like in France for example, where certain types of behavior might be overlooked. In that case, people would be a lot happier and more productive.
Also a lot of the security has become nonsensical, as it would be far easier for a terrorist to create a bioweapon than to somehow engage in nuclear terrorism. Even in WWII Japan's unit 731 killed far more than the nuclear attacks, I would point out. Our funding to the Wuhan lab (which was alleged but not proven to have created the COVID pandemic) was through a fly-by-night startup company Eco Health Alliance, and was in the millions of dollars -- not billions or trillions. It would have been of course, even cheaper to perform the research without even a pretense of the proper precautions or security, and so on.
I do think, the labs could attract a more diverse workforce, by overlooking issues relating to sex and drugs, and through a reduction in security to take into account, the actual fact that much more dangerous WMD are now quite easy to create, and the information regarding this is not regulated.
As you've pointed out, there could be a potential issue relating to conduct towards subordinates, but with less security and more openness, these concerns would naturally diminish. And money would be spent more efficiently, enhancing national security, and the labs would be more in tune with trends in society, towards an increase in individuality and freedom, and against following legal restrictions on that.
Further deregulation and privatization, could allow the national labs to pay top dollar for talent, hiring people of Nobel laureate character, or top AI talent from silicon valley, further contributing of course to national security, by creating positions where various shortcomings would be overlooked, this would of course be easy to arrange since universities have become highly politicized.
The best way of course, to reduce the nuclear danger to our population, is through effective civil defense, and this should become a primary mission of the lab, to educate the public, and build an effective program for the future when nuclear war is perhaps all but certain.
7/11/2023 8:47 PM
Impressive and professional slow motion pivot from the topic question. Very well done though, but a red herring nevertheless.
Impressive and professional slow motion pivot from the topic question. Very well done though, but a red herring nevertheless.
7/12/2023 6:48 AM
Don't you agree that scientists need more funding, more scientific freedom, and more respect in general? The problems with particular scientists being treated bad, subordinates or whatever, is simply but a part of the problem that all scientists are treated badly. That is, everyone is treated badly in the United States, compared to places like Europe, and in particular intelligent people are looked down upon unless they also have money or a prestigious position.
A lot of our industries have been hollowed out, for example Intel or Boeing versus foreign competitors, have fallen behind, our nuclear industry has fallen far behind the Russian Rosatom, and Elon Musk's exploding rocket is a copy of the failed Soviet N1 moon rocket. Meanwhile China leads in electric vehicle production and Green energy, and the US life expectancy lags behind all developed countries, and many parts of Latin America.
Scientists of course, are censored and fired for having their own opinions, and there would be little reason to pursue a scientific career when machines will soon exceed human intelligence and productivity, especially in an atmosphere where humans are already treated with such little respect.
7/12/2023 7:57 PM
What does any of this rant have to do with LANL and LLNL.
Post a Comment