Nov 5, 2009

For the Love of Sex and Money

Ok, I just threw the "Sex" part in to be gratuitous. Here's a story of local interest from our friends over at the Santa Fe Reeper (sfreeper.com):


Excerpt:

Corporate greed, or top-secret-special meritocracy? Nuclear Watch of New Mexico has uncovered a somewhat astounding little figure: Michael Anastasio, the director of Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL), earns $800,348 a year—almost twice as much as US President Barack Obama (who makes $400,000, with a $50K cushion for “expenses”). The proof is here, on one of the federal government’s “transparency pages” aimed at helping hungry reporters track down how stimulus money (of which LANL has received over $200 million in government contracts) is spent.

See the rest of the story here.

97 comments:

Anonymous said...

So Terry and all the AD Girls are compensated for less than $264k/yr? - how rude from LANS.

Anonymous said...

Oh, yeah, the fuzzy little shit is worth it. I mean, just look at all the improvements LANS has made at LANL since taking over.

PBIs, baby. Bonus city.

Anonymous said...

Somebody needs to make sure
that some people in Corgress see this.

Anonymous said...

The site is interesting. You can look up the highest compensation for the various labs...

SNL 926700.00
NTS 874953.80
LLNL 867356.00
LANL 800348.00
ORNL 596241.00
SRNL 570008.00
BNL 497580.00
INL 498775.00

Anonymous said...

Well, he's done 100x that amount in damage. Personally, and I say this without a shred of sarcasm, I'd pay good money to see him replaced by a decent manager. We might just pass the plate and buy him out. Sounds like it would only take about a grand from each LANS employee. I'm in. Others?

Anonymous said...

Who is this Jeffrey Blair chap? He shows up in LANL's directory associated with the Director's office, but no other details. He is not a LANL employee.

I suspect this "top five" list is for the top five officers of LANS, LLC, which are not necessarily the same as the top five salaries of LANL employees. Case in point: Mike Mallory's LANL salary is on the order of $450,000. When I saw the data, Mallory was actually higher than Mike Anastasio's LANL salary of around $350,000. (I'm going from memory here, but you don't forget a discrepancy like that).

So my guess is that Mike Anastasio gets a LANL salary of $350,000 in addition to a LANS, LLC salary of $800,000. That's in addition to his bonuses and perks, of course. It's good to be king.

Anonymous said...

Who is number 5 on the LANS salary hit parade, Jeffrey Blair? No contact information on the external phone book, no mention in the organization charts, no reference in the news bulletin.

Anonymous said...

Jeffrey Blair
Probably this guy:
http://www.universityofcalifornia.edu/news/2006/jun02b.html

Anonymous said...

Who cares. CEO's of companies make millions a year. Considering the lab director's responsibilities, $800K isn't enough. Prior to LANS, I *never* thought the director made enough money.

Anonymous said...

I agree 8:01 pm. I know Mallory was making close to $500K/yr and he was one of the highest paid ADs, if not employee at the time, running ADSMS.

Anonymous said...

bastard should be ashamed - as should his PAD boys and AD girls.

Anonymous said...

It wasn't too long ago (around the early John Browne era) that lab Directors made only around $375 K per year. Now, thanks to NNSA's "for-profit" LLCs, we have a lab Director who makes over $1 million per year when all the bonuses and other incomes are added up. Oh, and let's not forget about that LANS supplied sports car that Mike demanded from the LANS board. Just imagine how rich his LANS pension will be when he finally retires!

It's also interesting to note that all four of the top salaries in this list are from the NNSA labs. Heckavajob, Tom D'Agostino. When are you planning to "get yours", Tom?

Anonymous said...

Sen. Udall is planning on holding a meeting with LANL employees next Thursday afternoon...

---
LANL Today - Thursday, November 5, 2009

New Mexico Senator Udall to hold town hall meeting for Lab employees Nov. 12

New Mexico Senator Tom Udall plans to speak to Lab employees Nov. 12 in the Pete V. Domenici Auditorium of the National Security Sciences Building. Udall will give updates on activities in the nation's capital and how they may affect the Laboratory. The event is from 2:30 to 3:15 p.m., with time for questions. The meeting is not being broadcast on LABNET.
---

Perhaps this would be a good time to throw out a pointed question to the Senator about these high NNSA executive salaries and the plunging employee morale? Nah, on second thought, perhaps not. It might get you targeted by the LANS/Bechtel elites for insubordination.

Anonymous said...

From the SFReeper article...

"Bechtel has experienced record setting revenues for each of the last six years ($31.4 billion in 2008)."

-
Yes, and Forbes recently listed Bechtel as the 5th biggest privately owned company in America.

"America's Largest Private Companies", Forbes Nov 16 '09:

#5 Bechtel - "The largest privately held heavy-construction firm has been run by the Bechtel family since it was founded a century ago."

Anonymous said...

That "Jeffery Blair" fellow is probably a fictitious place-holder name secretly used by LANS/Bechtel to collect slush fund money.

Anonymous said...

To think, Mike Anastasio had the gaul to make fun of his salary in an All-Hands meeting about two years ago ("I don't make nearly as much as those posters on the blog seem to think I make." - Mike A.).

At the time, the blog posts were speculating that he made around $1 million per year. Turns out the bloggers were just about right and Mike is a f*cking liar!

How does this man look at his reflection in the mirror each morning? What an total asshole we have as our lab Director!

Anonymous said...

That government list has last year's salary. It's old data. This year's salary is much, much higher. I'm worth every penny of it.

- MIKEY

Anonymous said...

Don't forget, as a special non-LANS, UC employee, the Ewok and special friends get to keep a fair fraction of that salary as a pension for life the day they retire. Since he has his big 3, let's hope that day comes soon.

Anonymous said...

...move along...nothing to see here....

Anonymous said...

It might be worth while to pull on the string on this Jeffery Blair character. This guy is UCs top lawyer being shown on LANS payroll and one of it's top executives. I believe what these limited liability companies (LLC) are doing is pulling in UC people in bed with them to jack up their salaries. This entire LLC is turning into a get rich quick scheme using the good old fashioned shell game. Getting the Obama money may begin to expose these dirty fat bastards. I betcha Anastasio and the boys are really regretting getting this money and wish they could return it. Greed baby greed, it will getcha every time!

Greg Close said...

In broader terms, this is a problem in the benefits/comp world across the U.S. CEO compensation has skyrocketed while the comp of regular workers has continued at a much more modest rate. This has been going on for a couple of decades now. Since all of the over-compensated CEO's sit on each other's Board of Directors, this corporate aristocracy feeds itself at the expense of the companies that they are charged with managing. This wouldn't be quite as bad, except that the comp packages are awarded without regard to financial success of the corporation or accountability for errors, mismanagement, etc. Evidence of this abounds in all the diamond encrusted golden parachute deals that failed top execs bring with them after crashing and burning a given company.
One of many resources on the topic, if you want to read up on it: http://www.epi.org/economic_snapshots/entry/webfeatures_snapshots_20060621/
So, the question is - is it Mike's fault for accepting the standard package of over-compensation that is
"normal" in the free market? Is it the institution's fault for offering it? The governments fault for not regulating it?
Where's Robin Hood when you need him?

Anonymous said...

By "jacking up" their executive level salaries by about x3 times from the non-profit UC era, just think of the rich pension these LANS executive assholes will get when they finally retire from LANL.

As you start pitching in a good portion of your salary to beef up a faltering TCP1 pension, you'll now know why -- it's not going to you, it's going to help pay for these fat bastard's huge pensions!

LANS is a disgrace.

Anonymous said...

LANL has become little more than a 'Get-Rich-Quick' money scheme for a select few at the lab.

Anonymous said...

"Who cares. CEO's of companies make millions a year." - 9:17 PM


These are not your normal corporate CEOs, you moron. LANS has an almost guaranteed profit from NNSA of about $80 million per year. LANL makes no products that must be sold and compete in the open markets. It doesn't even compete against other defense contractors (most of which or public traded companies under the watchful eyes of the SEC, FTC, IRS, etc).

Considering what Mike and his top executive buddies have to do to run this place, their salaries are actually too high.

The only real metric these LANS executives are rated on are the "PBIs, Baby!", and most employees are smart enough to realize that the PBI game is "fixed" by both LANS and NNSA.

Anonymous said...

Why is Steve Younger's NSTech salary so high?? He has, what, maybe 500 employees out there?

Anonymous said...

I guess that our management is being paid for performance. I know that I am.

Anonymous said...

Enough of this high-finance. Has anybody tried to figure out the LANL retiree insurances for 2010? The paperwork from Hewitt says Dental is $0 and VSP is $10.70/mo for individual but the book from LANS says Dental is $35.98/mo and VSP is $0
What's the story here? Is LANS really so inept they can't get the story straight? And we're supposed to trust them with nuclear weapons?

Anonymous said...

The top ten. I believe these numbers to be only salaries, no perks or bonuses added.

Mike Mallory - 476,000
Mike Anastasio - 437,000
Terry Wallace - 332,000
William Rees - 330,000
Roland Knapp - 326,000
Charles MacMillan - 320,000
Thomas McKinney - 315,000
Bret Knapp - 298,000
Richard Marquez - 295,000
Isaac Richardson - 277,000

Anonymous said...

the compensation reported reflects all received, including expenses like cars to drive and bonuses, so it is substantially less than $1M. The bulk of the Director's salary comes from fee.

Anonymous said...

Blair is the LANS Board Secretary (so he's an officer of LANS). He is on the UC payroll, not LANL.

Anonymous said...

This is absolutely scandalous.
Mikey is worth nothing like this amount. Nor are the ADs worth very much.

Anonymous said...

I saw this article today and I could only shake my head. Our little company has also received stimulus money, though considerably less than LANL. Last Monday we had our annual stockholder's/Board of Directors meeting where among other things we discussed compensation. Our CEO (me) insisted that noone in the company, PARTICULARLY the CEO, was to make more than the government imposed limit, which in Anastasio's case is apparently $400k and in our case is about 1/3 of that amount. The reason I insisted on this is that the stimulus is highly political and there was no way that we wanted anyone to think that we were taking stimulus money and sticking it in our pockets instead of hiring new employees. That kind of behavior infuriates the public (and rightly so) and embarrasses the people who fund you. It's an extremely stupid thing to do. Imagine how the NM Congressional delegation are going to feel about having to defend this. Imagine how the people in NNSA who fund the lab are going to view it. They all work on government pay grades. This is the kind of thing that will cost you dearly down the line.

The other thing that really irritated me was Jeff Berger's explanation that most of this compensation didn't come from the taxpayers. That is pure, unadulterated bulls**t and he knows it's bulls**t. Unallowable costs (like anything in Anastasio's salary over $400k) come out of the fee. Who does Mr. Berger think pays the fee, the tooth fairy?

We can only hope that the upper management at LANL were smart enough not to give themselves big pay raises this last October. Using taxpayer money to give yourself a big raise when the country is in a serious recession and unemployment is near 10% would be the ultimate in insensitivity. We can only hope.

Anonymous said...

Accouding to the Gov webpage, the salaries for the top 5 LANS managers are as follows:

Michael Anastasio = $800,348.00
Jeffrey Blair = $264,233.00
Glenn McCoy Kizer = $384,477.00
Roland B Knapp = $522,440.00
Isaac E. Richardson = $555,515.00

Where is Charley McMillan? So does Knapp make more than McMillan?

Anonymous said...

I think back during the transition I said $1.2M a year for Mikey and no one believed it.

Anonymous said...

11/5/09 9:17 PM

What responsibility. He's got so many between the workers and him to take the blame he doesn't even care. He makes about $800K to much. He's frigging politicians and that's all he is.

Greg Close said...

@ 11/6/09 1:30 PM - actually, I (Greg) am that inept. The responsibility for the content was mine and there were errors in the rates. I will not waste your time with excuses or explanations - the errors were there, that's all that matters. In a nutshell, the rates specified in the letter from YBR (Hewitt) are correct. My sincere apologies for screwing it up. This, possibly, is why I never made $800k while at LANL.
@ 11/6/09 11:08 AM - that's not how pensions are funded, so that's not really how it will work. If I had to estimate, I'd expect any future pension contribution to be in the range of the old DCP plan we had to pay into as UC employees (around 2%). Regardless, whatever you put into the Plan out of your check is ear-marked and paid out to you, specifically, if/when you receive your TCP1 annuity. This is just how UC handled it for those who contributed in the 80's.

Anonymous said...

I think back during the transition I said $1.2M a year for Mikey and no one believed it.

11/6/09 9:22 PM

Oh, and you can easily imagine a much higher number after bonus, which is why Mikey & Co. care about PBIs baby! I know that even the ADs get a $1.2M bonus if the PBIs are all met.

Sue Seestrom admitted as much in one of our management meetings. She said that she didn't care if people were bailing from ADEPS because of all the electrical safety nonesense being crammed down peoples' throughts as two of the inicidents happened in ADEPS and her bonus was at risk. Yeah, fuck my people, just give me the bonus. Way to go Sue!

Anonymous said...

Speaking of "For the Love of Sex and Money" ...

Did anyone see the announcement listing the new Lab Fellows? Something is just wrong about Toni Taylor being named a Fellow a mere year after she became MPA Division Leader. She made a choice when she left CINT to be the DL - she wanted to leave science and go into high muckity-muck managment. She clearly ordered someone under her to put together her package, otherwise, she would have become a Fellow before becoming DL.

Totally discredits the entire point of the Lab Fellow program. I guess we will be seeing Wallace's name added to the Fellows rank next year!

Eric said...

@ Greg
Nicely stated. Thanks.
@6:00
I have heard this 'outrage' argument many times. I have never seen the 'outrage' cause any changes. Do you have examples of where outrage, in a situation similar to this one, changed anything?

Anonymous said...

Jeffrey Blair = $264,233.00

So someone mentioned that Blair is the Board of Director's Secretary? This has to be the most highly paid secretary in the United States. Hell, how hard can it be to dictate notes from a couple of meetings a year. This guy makes more money taking notes than most if not all of our top scientists in the National Labs, hell he makes more that the U.S. Cabinet Secretaries. This single salary is the tip of this iceberg.

Anonymous said...

For those making fun of my comment and calling me a moron, the responsibility of the Director is to sign that yearly letter to the President, stating he certifies the current nuclear stockpile.

I'm not saying Anastasio is a great manager or worth the salary but for the amount of shit he has to put up with (or anyone in that position), either from Congress, the DNFSB, NM legislators, nuclear watch groups, even within the lab itself, $800K is not nearly enough, IMHO. Would you like to be in his position if there was a *serious* safety or security incident at LANL?

Anonymous said...

"We can only hope that the upper management at LANL were smart enough not to give themselves big pay raises this last October. Using taxpayer money to give yourself a big raise when the country is in a serious recession and unemployment is near 10% would be the ultimate in insensitivity. We can only hope." (6:00 PM)

***

This is LANS that we're talking about. They have shown that they can be completely tone-deaf when it comes to things involving money and executive greed.

BTW, 6pm, you sound like a great CEO. Too bad more managers don't have the type of moral fortitude and ethics like yours. I wish you the best with your small, growing company.

Anonymous said...

Just when you think it couldn't possibly get any worse with LANS... it gets even worse!

LANS has corrupted this once great national lab to its very core. I doubt it can ever recovery from the injury.

Anonymous said...

"In broader terms, this is a problem in the benefits/comp world across the U.S. CEO compensation has skyrocketed while the comp of regular workers has continued at a much more modest rate." (Greg)


The economic data that came in this month showed that US worker productivity went up almost 10% (annualized) and yet salaries fell by 5%!

The "greed" trend supported by those who run things at the very top seems to be getting even worse during this Great Recession.

Anonymous said...

10:22,

It sounds like you've drunk the LANS KoolAid. There is nothing in either the performance that has been demonstrated by Anastasio, nor in his minimal responsibilities (aside from raking in big corporate bucks) which justify his bloated income. He is not a leader, he is merely the top corporate leech.

Those who have characterized the new, "improved" for-profit LANL contract as a get-rich quick scheme for the LLC, and a few select managers got it right.

You got it wrong.

Anonymous said...

11/7/09 10:22 AM wrote:

I'm not saying Anastasio is a great manager or worth the salary but for the amount of shit he has to put up with (or anyone in that position), either from Congress, the DNFSB, NM legislators, nuclear watch groups, even within the lab itself, $800K is not nearly enough, IMHO. Would you like to be in his position if there was a *serious* safety or security incident at LANL?

==========+++++++=============

I disagree. Whatever "amount of shit" he may receive at various levels, he just turns around and passes it down to us. Perceived network security issues? Flog the scientists! Problematic academic attitudes? Redouble the flogging of the scientists! A girl in a trailer park caught using drugs? Increase random pee tests for all the scientists! He takes responsibility for none of the issues and none of the issues stick to him.

The same, by the way, goes for the entire senior management.

Also, I agree with an earlier post that the argument their gave that somehow Bechtel or UC, not the US taxpayers, put up a significant fraction of their salaries is especially despicable.

I can see only one scenario in which paying such obscene amounts to these people could be economically justified: only if they are paid not to come to work. This is a $2.2b/yr institution and these people are actively impeding work on all fronts. I would give up a few percent of my salary for an opportunity to work unimpeded.

Anonymous said...

11/7/09 7:39 AM wrote ...
"Totally discredits the entire point of the Lab Fellow program. I guess we will be seeing Wallace's name added to the Fellows rank next year!"

Even worse would be Seestrom or Neu (Bishop's already one)!

Anonymous said...

I dunno, 7:39. The lab Fellow's Club has always pretty much been a mutual self-congratulation society. How does the appointment of Toni Taylor change that? The Fellow's haven't had any respect in ages.

Anonymous said...

It is certainly true that the Lab fellows are a mutual admiration society. Apparently someone is gigging them for not having enough women. Tony Taylor? Please.

Anonymous said...

If nothing else, Anastasio was a better horse trader than Miller at Livermore.

Anastasio @ $800,348
Miller @ $441,891.

And Liedle @ Livermore is $867,356.

Hopefully, Miller is getting a bigger bonus packages, he's way below the curve.

I bet that both LLNS and LANS are cursing under their breaths about the release of these salary listings. What happens in a LLC is supposed to stay (hidden) in the LLC.

Anonymous said...

With salaries like these, why weren't LANS executives treating the employees to free lobster and caviar at the recent LANS love fest? What a bunch of cheapskates!

Anonymous said...

What do Division Leaders make at LANL these days under the LANS "get-rich-quick" scheme? Anyone know?

Anonymous said...

3:01

Are you saying scientists don't use drugs? Does having a PhD make you immune from making a bad decision? Please enlighten me.

Anonymous said...

18 months and counting. In a horserace with lab management to get out before they completely disgrace the place.

Retirement before the incompetent, egotistical eunuchs, crawford, leidle, russo, tomas, albright, miller and moses destroy it.

Better hurry.

Anonymous said...

"3:01

Are you saying scientists don't use drugs? Does having a PhD make you immune from making a bad decision? Please enlighten me.

11/7/09 8:56 PM"

The amount of money spent on the piss trucks would be used for on better background checks. The drug testing was never about better security it was only about a knee jerk reaction. In the end it will hurt security but no one cares about security anyway so no big.

Anonymous said...

"It is certainly true that the Lab fellows are a mutual admiration society. Apparently someone is gigging them for not having enough women. Tony Taylor? Please.

11/7/09 6:27 PM"

Look at Tonie Taylor's record. It is outstanding.

Now STFU. Please.

Anonymous said...

What do Division Leaders make at LANL these days under the LANS "get-rich-quick" scheme? Anyone know?

11/7/09 8:50 PM

Between $250-350K

Anonymous said...

7:17, untrue.

Most PADSTE DL's are paid slightly above $200K; a few are slightly below. DDL's generally make $170-190K.

The pay bands are respectively $146-260K (R&D Manager 6 or DL) and $121-210K (R&D Manager 5 or DDL).

Anonymous said...

Look at Tonie Taylor's record. It is outstanding.

Now STFU. Please.

11/7/09 11:49 PM


Yes, and more importantly she is a fucking tea-tottler who is afraid of her own shadow. The higher levels love her willingness to crawl up their asses at the expense of those who work in her organization. A perfect Lab Fellow/Manager type.

Anonymous said...

What really gets my gaul since LANS to over, they forced me out of job, forced me into a really crappy facilites job, and froze my salary. Where's the sacrifice that LANS management is making? These guys are making 5-10 times more than the previous management. For what? Who's regulating LANS salaries and benefits (sports cars, Santa Fe northside mansions, pensions, flight benefits, dry cleaning, per deim, what else?), particularly during these bad economic times? The banks are now better requlated. And to think they wanted me to kiss their fat overpaid asses at the picnic.

Anonymous said...

The golden retrievers are more about exercising control over the staff than they are about drugs. Look at the difference between how LANS implements piss testing vs. all other labs and all other federal agencies. EVERYWHERE else, the staff is treated with some respect - the staff has a minimum of 4 hours to respond. Here, they give you a time to show up that might be 45 minutes away, but at a location that might take that long to travel to. You have to instantly drop everything you're doing, and RUN no matter what it is you're doing and how important it might be to safety, security (even National Security), or programmatic needs. JUMP. NOW!!

The only reason for this is because the upper management feels the need to exert iron-fisted control over the peons, there's no valid reason from a drug testing perspective. LANS managers are completely clueless about what we might be doing that might not be immediately droppable without causing serious ramifications.

Anonymous said...

8:57,

Your English is atrocious. Gaul is an ancient region of western Europe that included what is now northern Italy and France and Belgium and part of Germany and the Netherlands.

"Gall" is more like this:

Main Entry: gall
Pronunciation: \ˈgȯl\
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, from Old English gealla; akin to Greek cholē, cholos gall, wrath, Old English geolu yellow — more at yellow
Date: before 12th century

1 a : bile; especially : bile obtained from an animal and used in the arts or medicine b : something bitter to endure c : bitterness of spirit : rancor
2 : brazen boldness coupled with impudent assurance and insolence
synonyms see temerity

Anonymous said...

"Are you saying scientists don't use drugs? Does having a PhD make you immune from making a bad decision? Please enlighten me. "


1. Are you saying scientists don't use drugs?
There is nothing in 11/7/09 3:01 PM that would state this, either explicitly or implicitly. Please reread it again.

If you'd like to ask a relevant question, it perhaps should be: Which of the recent highly publicized safety or security incidents were caused by scientists using drugs? Answer: None.

Next reasonable question would've been: If a scientist or engineer is using and it interferes with his or her job performance, what do we do? Answer: Test whenever you have probable cause.

Finally, another good question to ask is this: What's the downside of instituting random, blanket pee tests for everybody? The answer: It makes already unhappy people feel abused and humiliated and gives all the more reasons for the best of them to leave.

Calling people in the middle of their workday and demanding that they drop everything and rush to the peemobil to urinate in a cup on queue (remember, without any probable cause whatsoever) is degrading and demeaning. It makes you feel like a piece of meat, a sheep, and certainly not an respected individual in a respectable organization. I personally know two people for whom the pee tests were the last straw before leaving the lab.

No other scientific institution in the country treats its scientists worse than LANL at this moment. If most of the A and B people leave the lab, the long-term damage to the national security will far outweigh whatever you may hope to achieve with your pee tests.

2. Does having a PhD make you immune from making a bad decision?
No, it does not. Proof by explicit counterexample: Mike Anastasio and Terry Wallace both have PhDs. Yet, both are responsible for countless bad decisions.

3. Please enlighten me.
This appears to be a tall order.

Anonymous said...

10:22, I am glad someone has the time to monitor the grammar and spelling on the Blog.

Doug Roberts said...

10:30am,

I wish people from LANL posting on this blog were more literate to begin with.

I also wish I had a pony, and a million dollars, and a shiny new motorcycle.

Anonymous said...

Doug, I believe 10:30 was being facetious.

Anonymous said...

"Look at Tonie Taylor's record. It is outstanding.

Now STFU. Please.

11/7/09 11:49 PM


Yes, and more importantly she is a fucking tea-tottler who is afraid of her own shadow. The higher levels love her willingness to crawl up their asses at the expense of those who work in her organization. A perfect Lab Fellow/Manager type.

11/8/09 8:54 AM"

Gotcha!, that was easy. Now at least we know what you motivation is. Have you ever considered that maybe all this time it was you that suck not the whole world. Think about it.

Anonymous said...

For 9:56 AM:
You claim that all the other labs have a "minimum of 4 hour to respond". I assume you really meant maximum.

I can say you are wrong when it concerns Livermore Lab. It is 1 hour maximum to get tested.

Anonymous said...

Doug, you wish people were more literate. Alcohol and drugs may play a factor. I mean it looked pretty good when I typed the response but the beer goggles might have filtered the typos, spelling and possibly even the logical thinking.

Doug Roberts said...

"Doug, I believe 10:30 was being facetious."

So was I, 10:41. I don't really want a pony.

Anonymous said...

10: 27 am: "Which of the recent highly publicized safety or security incidents were caused by scientists using drugs? Answer: None."

"Next reasonable question would've been: If a scientist or engineer is using and it interferes with his or her job performance, what do we do? Answer: Test whenever you have probable cause."

True and valid points. However, they completely (and maybe intentionally) disregard the other major reason for drug testing for sensitive positions: the potential for blackmail by foreign intelligence services or others interested in gaining sensitive information. If your clearance, and therefore your career, family, marriage, etc. were threatened by someone who knew you were engaged in illegal activity and wanted something from you in order to shut up, what would you do?

Anonymous said...

"I personally know two people for whom the pee tests were the last straw before leaving the lab. No other scientific institution in the country treats its scientists worse than LANL at this moment." (10:27 AM)

That is excellent news! Perhaps if we double-up on the piss testing I can meet NNSA mandate for a 5% attrition rate and make my sweet bonus.

PBIs, baby! It's all that really matters anymore at this lab, so join the LANS team or leave.

- MIKEY & Company

Anonymous said...

How come I don't see any of this embarrassing salary info posted on the new LANS blog?

Anonymous said...

To 11/8/09 11:30 AM

The drug testing is being applied more or less uniformly to q-cleared people, US citizens without clearance, postdocs, and even foreign nationals. Your hypothesis is a reasonable one, just not born out by the data. In constast, what 11/8/09 9:56 AM wrote fits extremely well. ("the upper management feels the need to exert iron-fisted control over the peons")

I'm gonna have to go with the Occam's razor on this one.

Anonymous said...

I just can't wait to read the article Toni's going to publish about herself in the next MPA Division newsletter.

Anonymous said...

5:06, maybe she will even use the last name Trugman so that nobody will realize it's her!

Anonymous said...

The way I see it, salaries of the Director and his upper management team are way too low and the salaries of all you blog whiners is way too high. LANS needs to start cleaning house. Thankfully, the new importance given to behavioral components in PerforM will allow them to get started with the house cleaning operation. Either join the LANS team or leave, those are your options.

Anonymous said...

"The way I see it, salaries of the Director and his upper management team are way too low and the salaries of all you blog whiners is way too high."

How do you "see" that?

Anonymous said...

On December 10 President Barack Obama will receive the Nobel Peace Prize in Oslo, Norway for his beginning efforts to abolish nuclear weapons. The President is paid $400,000 a year for running the country. Michael Anastasio, the Director of the Los Alamos nuclear weapons lab in northern New Mexico, is paid double that of the President, $800,348 a year.

I guess that awarding the Nobel Prize to a second-rate politician isn't worth the honor and prestige that it once was.

Anonymous said...

4:59 AM, Michael Anastasio was robbed. He has done far more in the past 3 years to abolish nuclear weapons than Obama ever will.

Anonymous said...

SNL's Director makes over twice the amount of Dr. Anastasio at the present time (reported in the press as being around $1.7 M).

If Lockheed Martin had won the LANL management competition (a huge mistake!!!), then Paul Robinson would be LANL's Director and he would be making the same huge salary as the current Director over at SNL.

I don't see any of the LANS-haters on this blog saying a thing about this situation. LANL is getting an excellent Director in the form of Dr. Anastasio at less than half cost. It's a terrific bargain!

The whiners on this blog should be happy about the fact that LANS is far more cost effective in terms of their lab Director's salary than SNL. Instead, what do these constant blog whiners do? They do nothing but complain.

Anonymous said...

8:10 The logic in your argument is profound. Mike Anastasio and Bechtel HAVE done more to eliminate nuclear weapons than the Obama administration ever will. Greed and corruption are powerful weapons indeed.

Anonymous said...

The way I see it, salaries of the Director and his upper management team are way too low and the salaries of all you blog whiners is way too high. LANS needs to start cleaning house. Thankfully, the new importance given to behavioral components in PerforM will allow them to get started with the house cleaning operation. Either join the LANS team or leave, those are your options.

11/8/09 9:49 PM

Oh, shut the fuck up you AD pansie. How much you getting paid by senior management to post this shit. If you were really had any balls and believed it you would post the same crap with your name on the internal LANL blog.

Anonymous said...

4:59 am: "The President is paid $400,000 a year for running the country."

Sorry, but the president does not "run the country." He merely heads the Executive Branch of government. Oh, and talks a lot. About nothing of any circumstance to almost anyone.

Anonymous said...

The list above (post at 6:07 AM) shows that SNL's Director salary is $926,700 but the ABQ Journal found out that his true salary is closer to $1.7 million!

Does this mean we should multiple Mike's listed salary of $800,348 by about x2? Could Mike really be making closer to $1.5 million? If so, will we ever know for sure?

And what about all the other LANS executive salaries that are listed? Could they actually be much higher when all components are added in to the pot, ala the SNL-style accounting? Just how fat are these NNSA lab "fat-cats"?

Anonymous said...

The true salary figures for LANS are out there... somewhere.

Anonymous said...

Deep Throat sez:

I smell an even bigger story brewing about the sleazy ways in which these "for-profit" NNSA lab executives have attempted to hide their true wealth from both Congress and the public. There is a reason they are more than willing to stab their own lab employees in the back at NNSA's every command. Follow the money...

Anonymous said...

The "silent majority" at LANL have no concerns about the Director's salary. They love America, trust their Director and fully support LANS.

Now, get back to work and bring in more funding, you nattering nabobs of negativism!

Anonymous said...

I nominate 8:13 for Troll of the century...or Kevin Roark.

Anonymous said...

Does anyone know where I can find some good "plumbers"?

- MIKEY

Anonymous said...

"Don't worry. I will kill for you, Dr. Anastasio!"

- G. Gordon "Knapp" Liddy

Anonymous said...

"Dr. Anastasio... there's a cancer growing in the Director's office!"

- John "LANS Legal" Dean

Anonymous said...

"The LANL employees need to know... I AM NOT A CROOK!"

- Mikey "Nixon" Anastasio

Anonymous said...

"This whole cockamamie story about LANL somehow hiding executive salary information at the request of the Director is about as important as a third rate burglary."

- Ron "Roark" Zigler

Anonymous said...

Nobody here remembers Watergate but you, you decrepit dinosaur. Give it uo and go back to sleep. Nobody cares about your meaningless mind-garbage.

Anonymous said...

I care.

Anonymous said...

I care.

11/13/09 6:30 PM

Oh how sweet - a kumbaya moment.