Is LLNL a competitive employer?
https://www.glassdoor.com/FAQ/Lawrence-Livermore-National-Laboratory-Question-FAQ200080-E35235.htm
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts you viewed tbe most last 30 days
-
LGBT intolerance problem at Sandia? I was just checking glassdoor.com and noticed several comments suggesting intolerance to LGBT at Sandia...
-
So did you SSVSP and why? Give details.
-
Tax dollars gone to waste for the "chili cookoff" http://www.sandia.gov/LabNews/100730.html Rumor has it this project didn't a...
14 comments:
“No annual bonus or stock, less pay than tech companies Also some bureaucracy.”
If the NNSA switched to a non-profit contractor to manage LLNL in 2026, there would likely be a reduction in contractor annual award fee, and an elimination of the for-profit ~10% CA sales tax. The reduction of these NNSA cost burdens could help create budget room for improved LLNL worker pay alignment with the local tech companies, assuming the salary surveys suggest they are not as competitive or in alignment with those tech companies as they should be. Improved LLNL worker pay and benefits, could help the NNSA with workforce projections and retention concerns.
Unlike UC/LLNL management, pay raises and bonuses under LLNS management, are not transparent, and this can lead to “some bureaucracy” issues.
The pay isn’t competitive with the nearby tech companies because it is hindered by the Government pay schedules.
However at the same time benefits aren’t competitive with many of the government jobs such as a pension that keeps you going through the hard times, or a competitive health care program.
Many of the comments on glass doors talk about the lack of a bonus, IDK many of the people that I work side by side every day got a 10% or 15% retention bonus in 2022 for as the Director put it “the great work that did during Covid” I guess my work wasn’t that important after all, kinda hard to set goals under the new system when you are not valued for the work that you actually did!!!
7/17/2024 7:32 PM
The idea was that unlike private industry the lab jobs were more like academic jobs so you get to do more speculative research and more freedom in how you do this research, at least to some degree with some job security. In exchange you get payed less than private industry. The same is true of academics where they generally get paid less than industry jobs at the same level but scientists are motivated by multiple factors not just money. The problem is the science at the labs is declining and the LANL lab fellows just did a recent study showing the drop in publications and impact as compared to other DOE labs and academic institutions. In many ways the labs are just becoming like job at the same level as industry but it pays less and is also less cutting edge. There is also this big craze for AI at LLNL and LANL which is far too late. If somebody had real skills at this area why would they do this at a NNSA lab that pays less and where you are not likely to have much impact. This is top of the fact that in a few years LLNL/LANL could drop AI like a rock and jump on the next band wagon a few years too late. We just keep repeating this cycle.
Pay isn’t the only issue. Recent years have seen more incompetent managers put in place, that are not good technically and even worse managers. People who take credit for others work, or even swipe work and projects. HR that are ass kidding dummies who don’t do a think to reduce bad or even unethical behavior. Maybe I need to write a review!
As a long time retiree, sadly and respectfully, current especially new LLNS employees, are now operating in a workplace environment with LLNS, that is far removed from the UC/LLNL days. Therefore, more of the same or worse, is challenging for you to evaluate.
LLNL & LANL use to have pensions to make up for less pay, no stock options, and no $ bonuses except for Sr. management. If you want to retain people, then bring back the pension, or create a hybrid pension plan.
“LLNL & LANL use to have pensions to make up for less pay…”
Correct, but since 2007, we have competing priorities between the desire to retain lab employees, and the greater desire to maximize LLC annual award fees, and these two priorities in practice, are annual award fee disconnected. As said, a cash cow arrangement.
7/17/2024 9:54 PM
“The jobs were like academic jobs”
I’d hate to break this to you the majority of the workers onsite do not fall into this “academic” category. Many of there people were here for the pension, benefits and job security… now none of this exists for the working class under the llc.
I’d hate to break this to you the majority of the workers onsite do not fall into this “academic” category. Many of there people were here for the pension, benefits and job security… now none of this exists for the working class under the llc.
7/19/2024 6:30 AM
I agree, the problem is these few lab get a pension anymore, now every company offers 401k plus stock options. The benefits are the same same or even less now. That just leaves job security however If you are a competitive worker in say AI, there are many other jobs out there that could be just as secure in the long run. The labs just do not seem like that appealing of place to be anymore when you take into account all the other options and the pay.
I worked at LLNL when it was a Science lab. I left a year after LANS took over. The focus went from Science and national security to safety,safety safety.
The added bureaucracy caused some colleagues and I to leave.
Glad I did!
The good ole days before the safety compliance, safety compliance, safety compliance.
However since COVID that has changed into how many people does it take to change a lightbulb.
Well there about 10 people to analyze the task and 4 more to tell the electrician how to screw in a lightbulb… even though they never have actually done it. And then 6 more people to tell the electrician how they did it wrong.
This can be said for many other technical tasks, taking in actual feedback from the person that does it… nope. Purchase the right equipment to do it safer… nope that would require an engineering safety note. How about using common equipment from industry?? That would then require approval by the hoisting and rigging expert… nope. It’s easier for them if you wreck up your body all in in the name or rather disguise of safety.
I worked at LLNL from the end of 2006 to 2009. I was unaware of the planned management change. My interviewers' behaviorwas in contrast with their praises of LLNL. It was a very subdued atmosphere.
I convinced myself that such a behavior was just academic seriousness.
Little did I know the bidding was in progress. I started just before the contract award.
What was striking was the emphasis on safety, often at the expense of productivity and efficiency.
For me the straw that broke the camel's back was the 2008 layoff of very talented individuals. 2000 of them just because.
No one could justify it.
I was very vocal and asked lots of question about the value of Bechtel management who knew very little about national security and stewardship of nuclear weapons.
Many pre-2007 managers were Bechtel enablers. They really feared the new boss.
I can understand that, Many of them were career employees who worked there for 30+ years and never explored possibilities on the outside.
And... God forbid you make a suggestion to improve a process.
I found management at all levels were risk averse.
I am glad I left.
Wok free safe zone covers it.
LLNL has been a stepping stone since the privatization.
Gone are the days when people literally spent their life at the Lab!
Post a Comment