Lab To Offer Jobs to Subcontractor's Workers
By Raam Wong, Albuquerque Journal Staff WriterLos Alamos National Laboratory plans to offer jobs to hundreds of workers now employed by KSL Services, the lab's largest subcontractor, before its contract expires in December.
The move means Los Alamos will be handling its own building maintenance, trash collection and other “support” services for the first time in its history. It will also be the first time that workers under collective bargaining agreements are employed directly by the lab.
The lab intends to offer jobs to most, but not all of, KSL's nearly 900 employees, according to Mike Mallory, the lab's principal associate director for operations and business services.
Los Alamos is ending its association with KSL because a number of the managers who came in with Los Alamos National Security — the lab's corporate manager that took over in 2006 — have experience in support services, Mallory said. He added that there have been “safety questions” about KSL's work, but he did not elaborate.
Mallory said the plan is to sign contracts next week that would offer KSL's 625 unionized employees jobs at the lab. Another 214 nonmanagement and nonunion KSL workers have also been offered employment, and 211 have accepted, he said.
There are also 58 KSL employees who have “manager” in their title. Of those, LANS has determined that 20 of them aren't really management and have reclassified the employees, Mallory said. Another 20 of the “manager” positions have been eliminated.
KSL has held its five-year, nearly $800 million contract since February 2003, when it replaced Johnson Controls Northern New Mexico. The contract had the option of five single-year extensions.
The lab will assume support services on Dec. 1, while KSL's contract expires Dec. 31.
Mallory said the union employees' benefits will remain the same, while nonunion employees will keep their vacation time but not their sick time.
Lab officials have previously said the decision to assume KSL's responsibilities was unrelated to a Department of Energy investigation last year that found KSL routinely overcharged for its work, with taxpayers picking up the multimillion-dollar tab.
KSL billed taxpayers for work not done and materials not needed and often charged more than 20 percent above the original cost estimate, according to the results of that investigation.
KSL is a joint venture of KBR, Shaw Group and Los Alamos Technical Associates. KBR — the former Halliburton subsidiary Kellogg, Brown and Root — is the majority owner and manager of KSL.
Mallory spoke Wednesday before the Legislature's LANL oversight committee. Lab director Michael Anastasio was scheduled to attend but canceled his appearance due to illness. The committee hopes to schedule a follow-up meeting with Anastasio in December.
43 comments:
Do all the imported Bechtelites 'keep their vacation but lose their sick leave' when coming to LANL? Just wondering.
"Los Alamos is ending its association with KSL because a number of the managers who came in with Los Alamos National Security — the lab's corporate manager that took over in 2006 — have experience in support services, Mallory said."
Ah! So now we find out the true reason why facilities support was brought in-house! It allows LANS to hire more Bechtel managers to directly manager these former KSL workers.
Cost savings had nothing to do with this decision. It's just another example of LANS/Bechtel milking LANL to feather Bechtel's nest.
Who gets the bonus for this decision?
Why would any company subcontract to the current Lab?
The track record is that subcontracting to the Lab costs your your company because the Lab either cuts your contract or hires your employees.
Anonymous at 10/31/08 7:42 AM asks:
"Why would any company subcontract to the current Lab?"
That is a good question. I believe that the answer is that companies such as KSL made a lot of money on these subcontracts.
As far as hiring their employees, most of the KSL employees are locals who were employed by KSLs predecessors: starting with the ZIA company and on thru Pan-Am World Services. KSL only had a few of the higher ups. And, KSL deployment Los Alamos was probably (rightly) considered to be the penal colony.
If memory serves, I believe that there is something in the LANS contract the requires that a certain amount of business be subcontracted locally. Doesn't terminating KSL and taking in that work constitute a violation of that contract clause?
8:29. Contracts are between the contracting parties. Assuming that LANS is violating its contract, only NNSA has any say in the matter. And they don't care.
Possibly not if you hire TSAY janitors.
Even if it does, who will penalize them?
To 8:28
So what you are saying is that this is a shell game with corporate shells changing in the political winds but the workers being the same ones. Is this right?
Anonymous at 10/31/08 8:55 AM asks:
"So what you are saying is that this is a shell game with corporate shells changing in the political winds but the workers being the same ones. Is this right?"
Well yes. But, remember that when LANS took over the LANL contract from UC, most of the UC employees were hired by LANS. This is typical of what happens when management contractors for federal facilities change. Most of the KSL employees are union personnel from hiring halls.
"And, KSL deployment Los Alamos was probably (rightly) considered to be the penal colony."
Does KSL exist even outside of Los Alamos? Remember the "L" came from LATA.
Why this critical comment about janitors? The implication is that they don't don't earn and deserve their salaries. It is no secret that LANL employees receive outsize salaries and benefits and produce much less than they should. People in glass houses.....
6:31 AM - 15 years ago your comment might have been correct, but now the non-management people at Los Alamos are not living in plush-city and are barely able to pay their mortgages. Keep your stones.
I have to say that in 25 years
of employment at LANL, the custodians that I dealt with have had with a few notable exceptions, very good work ethic. The did a good job in spite of incompetent management. During that period I saw that their workload continued to increase in terms of the amount of office and lab space that each was responsible for cleaning.
We always treated our custodian as a member of the group and the custodian attended all group social functions.
If LANS employment gets a higher salary and better benefits for the custodians, then I am in favor of it. But, the likelyhood is that more managers will be needed and our costs will increase.
You too, 9:27. As a group-level management + support staff couple, my household income is still considerably lower than any two-TSM couple's. And our stress level is much, much higher.
The cost of living in Los Alamos is very high. It's cheaper living in Espanola and Sante Fe, but driving to and from work can eat up lots of your income. In addition to this, salaries at LANL have not come close to keeping up with inflation. If TSMs at LANL are feeling the economic pain, I can't even imagine how people on the janatorial staff are dealing with it. The only people who are making out well at LANL right now are the few families with dual TSM incomes and Mike and his buddies at the very top. Everyone else is struggling to get by.
8:29 PM - but not Mike, Mary, Susan, Terry, Doug, Allen, et al. The coosh cats at AF level and above are milking at the pain they are shaving off anyone beneath them.
11:53 F you.
There is no 11:53 comment on this post.
Keep on with this great blog! I particularly enjoy the poor-mouthing "my household income is still considerably lower than any two-TSM couple's." and the jealous description of the managers' incomes and lifestyle. How would we otherwise learn the priorities of LANL's elite workers?
No kidding 8:29. I also love how we consistently offer 2% raises to the group office admins who are already the lowest paid, most crapped-upon workers at the lab, while the uppity Chiefs-of-Staff get 5% raises on their already ridiculous pay. No wonder there are 15+ group office jobs posted at any given time.
I assume, Frank, that 10:55 meant 11:43.
So what do you all think are the implications of introducing a unionized workforce to the Lab? Especially when many of these workers' skills (e.g. electricians, machinists) are more or less interchangeable with the skills of portions of the existing workforce? In particular - Will this open the door to facility management pushing to take over programmatic equipment - especially in the higher-hazard facilities (e.g. TA-55, CMR, LANSCE, S-Site, firing sites, DARHT)?
Slippery slope, or non-issue?
The door has already been opened to allow the FOD to take over programmatic equipment. It has happened at WETF, and will happen to DARHT before the calendar year is out.
It will be interesting to see what happens when a bunch of facilities guys try to run a couple of linear induction accelerators.
Also, neither DARHT nor the firing sites are high-hazard. DARHT is classed moderate hazard, non nuclear, and the firing sites are low hazard, per DOE definition.
With Facilities now being allowed by LANS to take over programmatic turf, it appears that the Rechtel-ization process at LANL is proceeding along at a fast clip.
Hmmm, how do you immediately raise the calibre of personnel..... Hire the subcontractors, of course!!!
12:22 Amen to that brother, I'm busting my ass now for 2%.
"The lab intends to offer jobs to most, but not all of, KSL's nearly 900 employees, according to Mike Mallory....."
Hmmm... how do we read this? The employees are being converted? Or will each one have to APPLY for his/her own job the way all the other contract employees have had to? If so, it ain't gonna get done by December 1.
During the gloriously botched Contingent Worker Project, the lab took a ton of credit for "converting" about one third of the current contractors. The Nanos Stand Down ended that episode and the lab quietly forgot about "converting" the other two thirds.
In any case, the "conversion" was actually an HR nightmare of outrightly HIRING hundreds of people per month (now they manage to hire 5 or 6 per month). A great tempest of paperwork just for workers to get their own jobs.
And don't forget contractors get ZERO service credit )Bechtel employees bring their service credit into LANS) and cannot carry over vacation or sick time.
Co-employment continues to thrive at LANL.
"Bechtel employees bring their service credit into LANS"
Bechtel owns the place, so they can do whatever they want. LANS is nothing more than a front for the goon squad that runs LANL from Bechtel. The nation's foremost weapons research labs is now being run by a politically corrupt CONSTRUCTION company. Is it any wonder that things are quickly going down hill at LANL?
So the latest on DARHT is that it is now owned by ADWE; McMillan and ADWP turned their backs on it yesterday.
...and the FODs are taking over programmatic stuff in ADTR. Good job Andy Erickson.
"...and the FODs are taking over programmatic stuff in ADTR."
What in God's name is happening to this place? It's as if our LANS top managers are purposefully working hard to destroy this research lab.
It is truly surreal to watch the destruction from within. The place has been taken over by Rechtel pseudo-engineers and Livermoron management and it now costs much more to do far less than anytime in the Lab's history. What the heck is going on?
"What the heck is going on?" - 7:36 PM
Mikey and his crew would call it creative destruction, but he needs to leave off the "creative" part. It's just mindless destruction, plain and simple.
To 11/5/08 9:59 AM - yes
Anyone notice that it has been over a year since DAHRT did a test? Good job LANS. You've almost eclipsed Nanos.
LANS is running science at LANL into the ground. Every month brings new word of yet another bright scientist leaving the lab. It's as if LANS is working to empty out this place.
Does NNSA have any earthly idea what's going on here? Do they care? Hard won expertise is quickly being destroyed and walking out the door.
Work-for-others is being squeezed in the coils of the constrictor as well...witness the new mascot - Bechtel Constructor/Boa Constrictor.
None of the big, new WFO programs that LANL has been cheerleading seem to be doing very well with regards to funding. If WFO funding doesn't pick up substantially (and soon), the upcoming weapons budget cuts are going to be far more painful to absorb.
Key to bringing in more WFO is a substantial reduction in the outrageous FTE rates for TSMs so that sponsors can get more work done with each dollar supplied to the lab. On this major point, LANS has been a complete failure. Costs keep going up, not down!
10:30 am: "Key to bringing in more WFO is a substantial reduction in the outrageous FTE rates for TSMs so that sponsors can get more work done with each dollar supplied to the lab. On this major point, LANS has been a complete failure."
Funny, LANS considers itself to have been a success in this regard. You have just failed to recognize LANS' intent for WFO: Bye-Bye!
If big layoffs are in the works, it certainly won't be LANS's fault. DOE/NNSA simply didn't do well with new funding. Bechtel can't lose either way.
11/10 8:28 pm: "If big layoffs are in the works, it certainly won't be LANS's fault. DOE/NNSA simply didn't do well with new funding."
That's only true if you are funded by the weapons program. All others at LANS are responsible for generating their own funding from sponsors.
"...All others at LANS are responsible for generating their own funding from sponsors. - 11/11/08 10:33 PM"
Indeed, for which LANS couldn't give a darn since WFO funding is outside of their "earned" NNSA contract-management fee. LANS will get paid no matter what.
"Bechtel can't lose either way." - 8:28 PM
It's actually easier for Bechtel to manage LANL if there are far fewer research staff and they are focused on the myopic mission of keeping NNSA happy (i.e., weapons testing and plutonium work).
That's why LANS is working hard to kill off most of the other science at LANL by making it impractical and too costly to be done at the lab. There is a method to their madness.
Post a Comment