Here is the list of Self Select information: employee counts, targets, exclusions -- all 20 pages of it.
-Gus
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
LANL's Future
Los Alamos National Laboratory: You know The Real Story. You know The Corporate Story. Now you'll know The Rest of the Story.
Plutonium
LANL's Future
Contact Us
Blog Archive
-
▼
2007
(693)
-
▼
November
(86)
- SUBJECT: Voluntary Separation Through SSP
- Window opens for voluntary departures
- Commentary: Let's get serious about the LANL debate
- Well, of Course They Did
- New Sorted RIF List
- GAO wants more oversight of nuclear labs By SUE M...
- And Speaking of Blogs
- Mike's Response to Allegations of "Fibbing"
- Comment of the Week, Thursday Edition
- Anastasio Caught in a Very Large Fib
- Udall pushes for LANL growth
- Sorted RIF Counts
- Self Select Program Target and Exclusion Information
- More work leaving LANL
- LANS' Standards of Conduct and Business Ethics
- And in Next Month's Mechanical and Engineering News,
- Editorial: Chávez demagogues LANL; Udall wants new...
- Concerns about loss of Flexible Spending Account
- Comment of the Week, Tuesday Late Breaking Edition
- Comment of the Week, Tuesday Edition
- SUBJECT: Phase I of Workforce Restructuring to beg...
- Sent in by a reader
- Chávez Talks Job Cuts at LANL
- Sandia layoff numbers reduced
- Total Control: Priceless
- Comment of the Week, Sunday Edition
- U.S. SENATE RACE: Chávez rails at Udall over lab f...
- Los Alamos lab braces for layoffs
- Los Alamos National Laboratory director: Buyouts s...
- LANL Chief Hopes to Avoid Layoffs
- Editorial: LANL layoffs: Again, pleas for a new mi...
- LANL Paid Salaries Of $911M Last Year
- Richardson urges resolution on LANL funding to avo...
- Los Alamos Nuclear Lab Plans Layoffs
- Comment of the Week, Monday Edition
- Anastasio's November 19 All Hand's Meeting
- Transcribed Minutes from Today's All Hands RIF Mee...
- Q&A From Today's All Hands RIF Meeting
- Post November 19 RIF News
- LLNS, LLC - "Flex Term" Notification Letter
- The Nuclear Disarmament Fantasy By HAROLD BROWN A...
- Comment of the Week, Sunday Edition
- U.S. Secretly Aids Pakistan in Guarding Nuclear Ar...
- PU-239: A Powerful Look at Friendship, Fatherhood,...
- Post October 1 RIF News
- UC News
- URS wraps up $3.1 billion Washington Group buySan ...
- I Too Have Been Wrong
- Comment of the Week
- Manhattan Project to be commemorated
- LANL Top Choice for 'Pits'
- Reliable evidence? Nov 15th 2007From The Economis...
- UC's Dynes could draw extreme high-end salary when...
- UC Scrutinizes Fine for Lab Security Breach By Si...
- How False Narrative Works
- Case Closed for Atomic Spies? By Noah Shachtman, ...
- Lab's fiscal 'surprises' Contra Costa Times Edito...
- YMNL
- LLNL Announces
- Looks like I picked the wrong week to quit smoking.
- Computer attack reminder for employees November 1...
- State to Lose Some Clout
- The Numbers
- Livermore lab warns of layoffs
- Contract Modification on Service Credit and Separa...
- Manhattan Project meeting press release
- A Spy’s Path: Iowa to A-Bomb to Kremlin Honor By ...
- Comment of the Week, Sat. Edition: Lamb Stew
- Comment of the Week
- Schoenbauer to speak at Lab
- Budget reprieve
- Lost Alamos National Lab
- Man hellbent on halting wrong-way driver LANL wor...
- Editorial: U.S. must decide future of nuclear policy
- UC To Refute D.O.E. Fine Over Nuclear Lab Violation
- Plan for Nuclear Storage Is Slow to Form By MATTH...
- That Explains It
- Comment for a Sunday
- Lab prepares for townsite cleanup
- Protecting LANL's Best And Brightest
- Sandia News
- Buckman Board Expresses Concern about LANL Contami...
- Nuke safety official praises Pantex By Jim McBrid...
- Friday Comment
- Paul Tibbets, pilot who bombed Hiroshima, dies at ...
- More thoughts on the KSL business
-
▼
November
(86)
Links
- Alsos Digital Library
- AntiPolygraph.org
- Atomic City Underground
- Bradbury Science Museum
- Buckman Direct Diversion Project
- Cold War Patriots
- Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organization
- CSIS PONI Debates the Issues
- Energy Communities Alliance
- FAS Project on Government Secrecy
- FCNL Nuclear Calendar
- Fleck at the Journal
- LANL Daily News Bulletin
- LANS's LANL Home Page
- LLNL: The True Story
- Los Alamos Site Office
- Lucky 13
- National Museum of Nuclear Science and History
- New Mexico Science
- Ongoing Polygraph Discussion
- The Former LTCS
- The Original LTRS
- The Tin Star Saloon (Santa Fe) Music Blog
31 comments:
Looks like the lower paid positions in ADBS and ADOPS (those occupied by people with unpronounceable surnames) are getting hit the hardest.
Or will the targets change after the SSP?
and that's a surprise?
do these numbers include contractors and limited terms now that the flexibiles have moved up in the RIF timeline?
I count 747 targets which correlates well with the stated number of 500-750 total separations. Looks like the SSP target list will also be the RIF list.
Why are employees counted in increments of 0.01, Gussie?
Good question, Pinky. I suggest that parties interested in the answer to that question send mail to The.Secretary@hq.doe.gov
-Gus
The Brain says it's because dollars are counted in increments of 0.01.
-Pinky
That makes cents.
-Gus
A penny for your thoughts?
Sorry. I'm easy, but I'm not cheap.
-Gus
Don't worry about the names its the relations that matter here....I'm sure there are plenty of cuzins, nefews and in laws that will be just fine.
Yes, the targets will probably change after the SSP, at least that's the word we got from on high.
6:42 PM wrote "Don't worry about the names its the relations that matter here....I'm sure there are plenty of cuzins, nefews and in laws that will be just fine."
Yeah, in ADCLES the ADs research team and her husband's are in excluded categories. However, a radiochemist will be sacrificed despite being a needed capability losing numbers. Conflict of interest ... You think?
Somebody needs to say this, again.
They've won! You've lost!
The managers of this operation have led the staff of LANL all the way from the pasture, to the corral, and through the chute. Now, one by one, you're teetering on the edge of the ramp leading up to the abattoir.
Go ahead and complain that your office mate's cousin's girlfriend's brother isn't in the chute behind you if you want, but it won't do you any good.
Victim mentalities are really not that attractive, nor are all those bleating noises.
7:51 pm: "Victim mentalities are really not that attractive, nor are all those bleating noises."
Easy to gloat, if you're not the victim. Your turn will come. Remember how you treated those less fortunate. (Didn't your parents teach you this?)
7:41 PM, I have no love for Neu either but at least she has been communicating with you regularly. You can't really blame her, she has a position and she is helping those that she can. Trust me, other ADs and PADs are doing the same...
"Abattoir"?
Surely you are not an American! We have good, old fashioned slaughter houses here, not "abattoirs".
11/28/07 6:42 PM
Ahhhh yes, the token employee's, and for the most part - deadwood
Looks like there are going to be a lot fewer weapons physicists and weapons engineers at LANL from a look at the numbers being targeted. The weapons program is taking a hard hit in staffing.
In PADWP (Weapons Program) you've got 42 targets and no exclusions!
In PADOPS (Operations) you've got 54 targets and no exclusions!
In ADEPS (Experimental Physics) you've go 10 out of 52 physicists in "weapons physics" being targeted.
In ADMSM (Stockpile Support) you've got 15 scientists and engineers targeted, but exclusions for the Pu machinists and Pit techs.
In ADWE (Weapons Engineering) you've got 34 targets and only 6 exclusions.
In ADWP (Weapons Physics) you've got 48 targets and only 6 exclusions (with 4 being for cyber assurance!). I count 32 physicists being targeted, with many coming from areas like "Design Agency" (primaries/secondaries?).
Even the DIR (Director) heading shows 25 targets and only 11 exclusions (for lawyers and patent support).
It's very clear from the target list that LANS is going to make significant cuts in the weapons area. This is not too surprising given that NNSA has told us that the weapons funding is quickly headed downward. It's also clear that this list even targets some management positions and support groups. There appears to be some thought behind the numbers. It's not just a broad 10% cut across all areas.
Well, I am just glad to see that we are going to keep all of the useful lawyers in Legal. I wonder how that happened. Hot damn!
I've been staring at these targets for a while (unlike the rest of the lab population, ha ha) and there's more here than meets the eye. For example - if you look at the weapons directorates, the only place any managers are mentioned is in ADWE (and I'm sure they have more than six). But when you roll all the way back to the PADWP page, you find a horde of managers that - although Glenn Mara's program office is big, it's not THAT big - suggests the headcount rollup is at the PAD level, not the AD level.
OK, now look at PADOPS and its AD level orgs. The Security directorate is only slated to lose about 5% because so many are in excluded job categories. ESH&Q has all of its RCT's excluded. ADNHHO, well, you just wish you worked there... So once they scrubbed all the job functions we "can't possibly live without" onto the exclusion list, all they had left on the table to meet their quota with was the administrative types that were rolled up at the PADOPS level.
At least that's my read on the numbers that are published here. As if I know shit.
The numbers for 'targets' and 'exclusions' in these lists make for very interesting perusing.
"Well, I am just glad to see that we are going to keep all of the useful lawyers in Legal. I wonder how that happened. Hot damn!"
Lawyers were about half of the problem here. I wonder how many blameless people are going to hit the street and never know why.
"Surely you are not an American! We have good, old fashioned slaughter houses here, not "abattoirs".
LLNL person here. I have to say I think the word abattoirs really fits in well with the theme. It is old french, which conjures up thoughts of the French revolution. Right now the peasants are being oppressed. But there will be payback. There always is. Simple physics.
I'm a bit tired, so please excuse my next bit of fun. Replacing wikipedia's "French Revolution" with "LANS" we get:
"the LANS governmental structure, previously an absolute monarchy with feudal privileges for the aristocracy and clergy, underwent radical change to forms based on Enlightenment principles of republic, citizenship, and inalienable rights."
"Don't worry about the names its the relations that matter here....I'm sure there are plenty of cuzins, nefews and in laws that will be just fine.--11/28/07 6:42 PM
You got that right! Especially if they're related to legislators on the so-called Lab Oversight Committee: Lujan, Gonzales, Griego, and of course Wallace and Naranjo. With respect to these two cases, anyone who has wiffed one of their farts would be well protected. So start wiffing.
Victim mentalities are really not that attractive, nor are all those bleating noises.--11/28/07 7:51 PM
Ok Sir Richard of LANS. Stop gloating. I bow to you now, in total submission and in full acknowledgement of your superiority over us, the lowly peasants of the once great Los Alamos National Laboratory. Baaaa...baaa...baaa
Does the "exemption" colunm equate to a "line item veto"?
Has anybody seen the actual approved SSP plan? I can't find it on the LANL site nor the LASO site.
Are we just supposed to sign up for it without ever seeing the SSP?
Are LANS lawyers so dumb they think that simply including a clause in the application saying they showed the SSP to us releases them from actually showing it? Boy, they are setting themselves up for a lawsuit.
2:07PM - answered during one of the SSP information session: the full specific plan will not be revealed because it contains "sensitive" info (whatever that is. It is even protected against FOIA requests. The publicly available info of this specific plan is accessible through the LANL internal SSP website.
The low level managers in ADWP were coded as "scientists" rather than "managers." That's why the numbers don't look right.
So anybody volunteering for self selection is not allowed "to review the terms and conditions of designating myself" which they swear they did in the Self-Selection Request Form.
LANS has sunk to new low.
I keep getting this creepy feeling that LANS must have collectively sold our souls to the devil to win with their proprietary (and still unseen) NNSA RFP contract. What the heck is in that thing that makes LANS feels so strongly they must, at all costs, keep it from prying eyes? And where have they hidden it? Perhaps it is being stored in Mikey's new Super Vault Type Room (SVTR)!
Post a Comment