Bechtel lobby

"Bechtel settled with the Justice Department to resolve allegations that Bechtel "improperly used federal contract funds to pay for a comprehensive, multi-year lobbying campaign of Congress and other federal officials for continued funding at the WTP."" 

So if Bechtel was bold enough to use contract funds to lobby Congress and federal officials, why wouldn't Bechtel also "lobby" LANS and LLNS employees with undisclosed bonuses and raises as needed, for the same profit preserving motive? 

Dual career ladder

Under LLNS management, is the "dual career ladder" concept officially dead?

Fine

April 26, 2018 at 3:39 AM

The Energy Department will not contest $31,000 in state fines for leaving certain waste too long in temporary storage areas without prior approval at the Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) in New Mexico.

The nuclear-weapon lab has 30 days from April 5 to take issue with a penalty proposed in a New Mexico Environment Department notice of violation, according to a DOE report. The state agency’s Hazardous Waste Bureau could fine LANL and contractor Los Alamos National Security (LANS) $10,000 daily for each instance of noncompliance, and conceivably even take court action to suspend the site’s hazardous waste permit.

A lab spokesman confirmed by email Tuesday the Energy Department will not fight the penalty being assessed for violation of LANL’s Resource Conservation and Recovery Act permit.


https://www.exchangemonitor.com/lanl-wont-fight-31000-new-mexico-fine-waste-storage/

A few misplaced pits

Plutonium pit misplaced at LANL; corrective actions taken


Hey, what are a few misplaced pits among all the other issues at LANL.


http://www.lamonitor.com/content/plutonium-pit-misplaced-lanl-corrective-actions-taken

GAO report on Hanford

April 2018 GAO Report on continued concerns with the Hanford ORP and its contractor Bechtel, including: lack of sufficient QA independence, downgrading concerns to implement less stringent actions, a culture that does not encourage staff to identify problems, safety requirements that are subordinated to other management goals, and previously identified QA problems that are reoccurring 

https://www.gao.gov/assets/700/691422.pdf

Who will come in next?

BAFO, that's best and final offer for those of you that have no experience in federal contracting, turned in for LANL bid teams. The clock is ticking on running out the current contractor and who will come in next?

http://www.defensedaily.com/final-bids-lanl-contract-uc-says/

Is it time for collective bargaining?

Is it time for large scale collective bargaining to address eroding benefits with LLNS?

I understand why scientific, engineering, and technical staff might feel collective bargaining is not necessary in a true private sector company, but LANS and LLNS are no such thing. They are for-profit LLCs with training wheels. Meaning LANSLLNS has "no skin in the game" if there is low employe morale, high employee turn over, or underperforms with respect to mission goals. LANSLLNS wins anyway, by spinning all such occurrences into new NNSA assessed "challenges". In the true private sector, you can't spin your leadership failures to retain market share. Blog comments that suggest only under-performing "losers" want representation, are either ignorant of basic market share economics or are shills for LANSLLNS.