To: E-line
From: Public Affairs Office
Subject: LAB'S 3161 SPECIFIC PLAN APPROVED
Lab's 3161 Specific Plan Approved
NNSA approval has just been received for the Laboratory's specific workforce restructuring plan, which includes a voluntary self-selection option program (VSSOP).
Details will be announced to all employees on Monday, Feb. 4, in a 10:30 a.m. all-hands meeting in Bldg. 123. In addition to Bldg. 123, employees will be able to view the live presentation from the auditoriums in Bldgs. 155, 453 and 543 and will have the ability to ask questions live, via a remote call-in.
The meeting also will be broadcast via Laboratory TV, channel 2. Program specifics will be available to all employees on Monday afternoon via the MyLLNL portal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Pinky,
Yes, I'm at LLNL and they finally announced approval of our 3161 plan; an all hands meeting is scheduled for Monday morning, followed by all hands meeting in the various PADs on Monday afternoon.
Rumor says they will not publish a list of targets for each job category; we'll log on to a web site and find out if we're eligible. We're also hearing rumors that there is no seniority involved. It will be first come-first served (make that escaped); sort of a web based version of a day after Thanksgiving sale on $200 laptops at WalMart.
How can I get the details of the process at LANL, beyond the schedule?
Did they apply on the web or did they have to apply in person?
How were they notified of acceptance or denial?
Were any people who thought they were eligible turned down?
Was there any consideration of seniority among people applying at LANL?
-- Anonymous
Does the name Ben Dover ring a bell?
ReplyDeleteDoes the name Ben Dover ring a bell?
ReplyDelete==========
Yes - Dr. Ben Dover was Johnny Carson's
proctologist!!
>How can I get the details
ReplyDelete>of the process at LANL,
>beyond the schedule?
Not sure what you mean. Ours was similar to yours I believe, except that targets were published. I guess LANS is more open than LLNS.
The process was categorizing everyone by DOE categories then more refined job titles created at the AD level. Targets were selected for various categories by AD to meet reduction numbers. The SSP was managed via those numbers and that process.
>Did they apply on the
>web or did they have to
>apply in person?
Web.
>How were they notified of >acceptance or denial?
Paper and verbal. Managers had to meet with each individual that applied, notify them of their acceptance, and discuss the rest of the process with them, transition of their work, and so on. Managers were given information to give to employees, and there were a series of meetings for SSP volunteers in which they got a packet of information that took them step by step through the termination process.
>Were any people who thought
>they were eligible turned
>down?
I don't think so, but there might have been one.
>Was there any consideration
>of seniority among people
>applying at LANL?
No. Had targets come into play during the voluntary (too many people volunteering in a particular category), seniority might have been a factor to edjudicate. That situation did not arise.
>How can I get the details
ReplyDelete>of the process at LANL,
>beyond the schedule?
What do you want to know in detail?
We had one week to decide (application online as 4:44PM mentioned). And after this week we had one week to withdraw our decision (only by written request using a form).
>Were any people who thought
>they were eligible turned
>down?
I don't think so, but there might have been one.
Everyone was notified by letter about the process and if he/she is eligible. And everyone who selfselected was approved, according to Mikey's all employees meeting.
Here's a couple of questions I'd like to know concerning the LANL voluntary plan:
ReplyDelete1) Were the participants asked/required to sign any kind of waiver of rights in order to receive their severance? It would seem that those over 40 have very specific rights under the OBWPA concerning such waivers, and I can't see how the voluntary plans can possibly conform.
2) There was some mention on this blog concerning pay in lieu of notice and Anastasio saying only those involuntarily let go would receive notice pay (60 days?). Is notice part in the LANL contract or Policies and Procedures? If it is, was it ever detailed why it didn't apply to this RIF?
Thanks for any info that you can supply. Looking for info for questions to ask Miller tomorrow.
10:22 AM, you might also ask Miller how much the remaining staff are going to have to pay to cover the severence packages for those leaving. The LANL folks are paying dearly - just a few more dollars added to the top of everything. Why anyone would want to do businss at LANL is really becoming a common question...
ReplyDelete"The LANL folks are paying dearly - just a few more dollars added to the top of everything. Why anyone would want to do business at LANL is really becoming a common question..." ( 10:50 AM)
ReplyDeleteThe short answer is they don't and many sponsors are voting with their feet. In some cases, TSMs are leaving and taking their outside projects with them. The very public loss of Rodger Johnston and his team to ANL is but one example of many.
NNSA just needs to get a few check-off items done each year at LANL to help them present the facade of being a useful agency to Congress (i.e., pop out a dozen or so pits and do some plutonium science).
Beyond that, you've got the outrageous FTE labor costs and the never ending flood of crazy new policies, plus a management team who clearly have a complete lack of desire to fix any of the serious problems and make LANL a more efficient lab. Even large segments of the lab workforce seem to be willfully ignorant of the serious problems that are everywhere. This hints that LANL has little hope in mitigating the approaching storm of 20% to 30% NNSA funding cuts that are headed our way.
2/3/08 10:50 AM
ReplyDeletethey will pay for it with the three months of raise package that was with held.
Its called a 2% program tax to pay for the SSP, FYI.
ReplyDeleteTell me it's not true, 6:38PM! A new 2% program tax to pay for the SSP?
ReplyDeleteSo project leaders are now suppose to go call their outside sponsors and tell them that LANL will be stealing an additional 2% of their funds to help pay for LANL SSP 'Easy Retirement' plan?
When will these increases in LANL program taxes end? Ever year sees yet more tax burdens on projects. LANL just finished putting in a 2% tax on programs to help pay for CTN Division. Two years ago, the LDRD program tax was raised from 6% to 8%.
The moral of this story is don't bring any outside funding to LANL. They'll just come up with crazy new schemes to fritter all your money away.
Oh, boy! A new 2% SSP program tax to pay for the severance should have the WFO clients beating down our doors to send us more funding. Wow, great idea, Mike.
ReplyDeleteactually, I believe the withholding tax for the SSP was closer to 3%. If the SSP only cost 2%, then we're lucky!
ReplyDeleteWell, 8:45 PM, you didn't think it would come out the fee or our brilliant leader's bonuses now did you? Shame on you!
ReplyDeleteIt looks like as LANL is reduced in size from 10,000 to 6,000 workers the projects will have to bear the full cost of it in terms of any severance payouts. This means there will be less money available for doing projects, leading to more layoffs, leading to additional severance costs, leading to...
ReplyDeleteWe'll, you get the idea. I think it is called a death spiral.
Gus,
ReplyDeleteThe LLNL 3161 VSSOP is a complete sham. They want us to resign with the possibility of getting no unemployment benefits. Also, it isn't being offered to a large portion of the lab (NIF). It is all smoke and mirrors: to the public it looks like a general layoff. It is not. It is focused and destructive. We have to log in individually to a web site to see if we are targeted. Those excluded may not volunteer, no exceptions.
You sound like a real whiner, 12:39 AM.
ReplyDeleteNew Mexico unemployement is so pitifully low it's hardly worth the effort, so there is no big gain for the LANL SSP people who try to get it.
If you are listed as "excluded" for the LLNL VSSOP, then you at least have some assurance that you can't be laid off during the next year. If you are laid off, then I would strongly suggest you get a lawyer and sue.
Finally, the LLNL whiners who complain about the unfairness of the large 39 weeks severance at LANL need to understand that very few people who took the LANL SSP received anything close to this amount. Many of the people who left had only been working at LANL for a few years and decided to leave so they could salvage their careers while they were still young. Los Alamos is also a very isolated community and it requires greater time to find a new job and move from here.
The LLNL VSSOP is not a complete sham. It's not nearly as good as what was offered back in the early 90's (VSIP), but given the fact that NNSA has decided to screw lab workers, it's better than nothing.
It will take awhile for all of this to sink in, but eventually you'll begin to realize that the old ways of the labs are dead and you do, indeed, work for a "for-profit" corporation that has very little concern for most of the workers. The sooner you accept this fact, the better. There is little you can do about it except leave LLNL if you aren't happy with the new situation.
11:36 AM
ReplyDeleteLet's see here, LANL needs a larger severance because of it's isolation - but never mind because most of the people who took the voluntary separation weren't around long enough to benefit from this. If you have data to support this bizarre conclusion, please cite it.
There are a lot of people reading this blog who are facing important career decisions. I'm sure most of them take what's posted here for what it's worth, including this post. I for one will try to avoid adding to the level of BS, we get enough of that through official channels.
Yes, 8:19 pm, it be true!....So my program and project leaders tell me.
ReplyDeleteps. also heard G&A is going up 1%