Sep 21, 2007

Sens. Work to Delay Lab Cuts

ABQ Journal
Friday, September 21, 2007

Sens. Work to Delay Lab Cuts

By John Fleck
Copyright © 2007 Albuquerque Journal; Journal Staff Writer

Members of New Mexico's congressional delegation pushed this week for a
stop-gap federal budget plan that would delay deep cuts in spending at New
Mexico's nuclear weapons laboratories.

But the effort is entangled in a broader battle over how to handle
Congress' failure to pass fiscal year 2008 spending plans.

Thousands of New Mexico jobs at Los Alamos and Sandia national labs are
at stake, as well as the future of a major nuclear weapons manufacturing
effort at Los Alamos.

Both Sandia and Los Alamos are preparing worst-case contingency plans
for dealing with the possibility that as many as 3,000 of their 22,000
employees could lose their jobs.

The new fiscal year starts on Oct. 1— in just 10 days. But Congress
hasn't completed any spending bills, and partisan bickering has broken out
in Washington over what to do about the problem.

In the long term, the battle is over deep divisions between the House of
Representatives, which wants to cut the nuclear weapons program, and the
Senate, which does not.

This year's nuclear weapons budget is $6.3 billion, including $1.5
billion at Los Alamos and $1 billion at Sandia. The House is proposing a 9.4
percent cut in 2008. The Senate wants to increase the budget 3.3 percent.
The specific effect of cuts on each lab is unknown.

Proposed House cuts, in addition to eliminating thousands of jobs at
Sandia and Los Alamos, would put the brakes on a plan to expand the
manufacture of plutonium nuclear weapon parts at Los Alamos.

But all eyes are on the short term now— what to do come Oct. 1 to fund
things while a final spending plan is worked out.

New Mexico's two senators Thursday pushed for a short-term solution that
would allow spending to continue at this year's budget level, avoiding the
need for cuts until at least mid-November while members of the House and
Senate try to work out their disagreements over the nuclear weapons budget.

That approach would provide "some stability while the appropriations
process plays out," Sen. Jeff Bingaman, D-N.M., and Sen. Pete Domenici,
R-N.M., wrote in a letter Thursday to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid.

But one of their colleagues, Sen. Jim DeMint, R-S.C., has a very
different idea. In a plan unveiled Wednesday, DeMint proposed that stop-gap
funding be made at a lower level.

Under DeMint's proposal, until final budgets are worked out each federal
program would be funded at the lowest of (a) the House's proposed spending
level, (b) the Senate's proposed spending level, or (c) the current year's
budget.

For the labs, that would mean the deep House cuts would take effect
immediately, though they might be undone later by the final House-Senate
compromise bill.

Domenici said in a telephone interview Thursday that he would fight
DeMint's proposal. But other observers said it wouldn't be surprising to see
DeMint's plan win the day, given that Congress has used that approach in the
past.

"That's a reasonable expectation," said Stephen Slivinski, a budget
analyst at the libertarian Cato Institute.

While Congress scrambled to meet its deadline, lab officials scrambled
to come up with contingency plans.

Until budget numbers become final, lab spokesmen say they won't know how
many jobs might need to be cut. But the labs have launched the first steps
of the legally mandated job-cutting procedure, preparing draft work force
restructuring plans.

Those plans will include the process to be used for possible job
reductions, said Sandia spokesman Rod Geer.

Once approved by the secretary of energy, the plans go through a public
comment period and a 120-day clock starts ticking before anyone actually
loses his job.

That means the first forced job cuts at Los Alamos and Sandia could not
come until early next year.

19 comments:

Anonymous said...

This is the contingency that everybody needs to brace for:

But one of their colleagues, Sen. Jim DeMint, R-S.C., has a very
different idea. In a plan unveiled Wednesday, DeMint proposed that stop-gap
funding be made at a lower level.

Under DeMint's proposal, until final budgets are worked out each federal
program would be funded at the lowest of (a) the House's proposed spending
level, (b) the Senate's proposed spending level, or (c) the current year's
budget.

For the labs, that would mean the deep House cuts would take effect
immediately, though they might be undone later by the final House-Senate
compromise bill.

Anonymous said...

And the problem is?

Anonymous said...

One way to win this battle - remember every one's names. Bring that memory back when it is time to vote.

Anonymous said...

Interesting dilemma for employees

I think we can all agree that 3000 RIFees is way more than deadwood. (whether or not you hate LANL or its mission is immaterial)

So we lay them off, poor fools. LANS has no vested interest in anything but the fee. [LANS = MMMBB, managers managing managers for big bucks...]

Then congress restores some funding, so we rehire, say, 1000.

What a bonanza for Bechtel- 1000 new Bechtelites. Either way, they come in (or back) at the lowest vacation and sick leave- plus in the lower value retirement plan. Yipee. MMMBB

Anonymous said...

Where is Udall?

Anonymous said...

Re: LANL Deadwood,

Take a look around you. Look at your co-workers, look at people in other groups. Look at overhead people and groups: PA, CTN, Legal, Purchasing, Tech Transfer, etc. Look at management.

Now imagine one in four of those people being gone 120 days from now.

I contend that a 25% reduction in force, if done intelligently (I know, I know) might only clean out about half of LANL's deadwood.

Back to reality now, I realize that the deadest wood resides in management, and that there is not a chance in hell that the RIF will be conducted effectively, from the perspective of the long-term health of LANL.

Continuing with reality, I believe the prospect of long term health at LANL is remote, and that the RIFs are merely the first step towards turning the place into a pit factory. Given this, I think LANL is a very good place to be gone from.

Anonymous said...

Even the pit factory won't be around long before it gets Rocky Flattened due to incompetence.

Anonymous said...

Agreed, 10:51 AM. After the RIF you'll see TSM FTE rates go even higher. LANS will tke the easy route and hit the direct-funded side to minimize any discrimination legal suits. The ratio of overhead to direct-funded staff will get even wilder once this layoff is done. We'll lose what little WFO work we now have and become even less diversified.

Pit factory future awaits us. Even Mara appears to now be be getting a little giddy about it. We are f*cked! Thanks, NNSA.

Anonymous said...

10:51 Under the present scenario, LANL will get rid of perfectly good, hard-working employees who are by no means deadwood. Please don't insult people just because you don't like their function, or you feel there are too many of them.

Anonymous said...

You must be new around here, 11:22. I've worked at LANL for more than 20 years, and I know that at *least* a quarter of the people here don't carry their own weight.

We're not talking about the dedicated, hard-working staff, we're talking about the deadwood. You know as well as I do that LANL is lousy with deadwood.

If you don't know that, you're either too new to realize what the place is really like, or too stupid to recognize it. Or maybe you just need to get out of your office more if you think everybody is as dedicated and hard-working as you imply.

Anonymous said...

"9/21/07 11:35 AM"

But deadwood people are often the most connected. If you do not do any real work you can spend all your time networking. I suppose that is work, well negative work. I am always amazed when someone says "so and so is really important". They never actually do anything but network.

John Fleck said...

FYI, re 6:31 a.m.'s comment, it's looking increasingly clear today (Friday) that we'll have a continuing resolution at the '07 level, rather than DeMint's "lowest of" proposal.

See my Journal blog, where I've been trying to post the latest I'm getting.

Gussie Fink-Nottle said...

Thanks, John!

--Gussie

Anonymous said...

To 12:32 PM:
"But deadwood people are often the most connected. If you do not do any real work you can spend all your time networking. I suppose that is work, well negative work. I am always amazed when someone says "so and so is really important". They never actually do anything but network."

But there is networking and there is networking. Networking just to attend tons of meetings may be useless, but networking, especially between WFO and DOE sponsors and technical staff members to get new work to get us out of this mess is valid work I contend. I have found that many technical staff who are excellent scientists are very poor at this type of necessary networking.

Anonymous said...

"
But there is networking and there is networking. Networking just to attend tons of meetings may be useless, but networking, especially between WFO and DOE sponsors and technical staff members to get new work to get us out of this mess is valid work I contend. I have found that many technical staff who are excellent scientists are very poor at this type of necessary networking."

Yes I fully agree, however the people that do "real external networking" by creating WFO are not the ones I am talking about, also they do count since the managment does not know who these people are since they do not do "internal networking". Remember there are people who are very well known outside of LANL that are poorly known inside of LANL and vice versa.

Anonymous said...

LANS has decided to proceed with layoffs even if we receive flat funding. LANS badly wants to have some slack in the budget to help cover for the management fee, pensions and 401Ks, declining weapons budget, etc., and they absolutely don't want to revisit the torturous RIF process again in FY09.

Therefore, I suspect we'll be laying off around 1000 staff even if the budget for FY08 stays flat. This would equal about 8% of the workforce, which would be in line with the layoffs/advanced retirements that were done back in '95.

Unfortunately, as Mike has already stated, there is no money to encourage staff to leave before the layoffs hit. The best they might offer is to let staff take their severance if they decide to voluntarily leave, and even that would result in the number of RIFee's increasing to cover the costs.

Anonymous said...

LANS has decided to get rid of some of us because it will allow them (a) more money to cover their fee and provide bad managers with large raises; (b) hire their friends; (c) build their pit factory. LANS doesn't care about science because there isn't any money to be made in science. The technology cupboard is bare. Perhaps we can stop wasting money for the tech transfer office, shut down LANCE, and finally do the work that the government (the owners) want us to do.

Rocky Flats built pits with about 4500 people. Therefore most of you are dead weight since you do not support our mission. Wake up and realize that the contract change was to build pits as our sole reason for existance.

Oh by the way. Isn't it interesting that the budget shortfall of about $300M is what the Nanos standdown fleeced the taxpayers for! Paybacks are a real B I _ _ _!

Anonymous said...

LANL is, without a doubt, the sickest institution I have ever witnessed. It is so dysfunctional, it is almost beyond belief!

Anonymous said...

Nonsense, it is functioning just as our LANS overlords intend.

Now roll over and die like a good boy.