LANL: The Corporate Story

This is really not a comment on this note, but rather to raise the question of if? and when the TCP2 folks will see their second installment in the 401K. Previously the LANS folks promised Jan or Feb 07. We are almost out of that time zone.
 

There could well probably be serious calls for contract termination and maybe some clamor for criminal indictments concerning some nefarious maneuverings around about May, I'd say. The exact timing will depend on what Dingle & Co. get in the mail from various and sundry aggrieved adn anonymous boil parasites, and what the Dingle & Co. real agenda could be. But what do I know, I'm just an arrogant cowboy butthead boil parasite hoping to hightail it to another state before All H3ll Breaks Loose in Nuevo Mexico. My bet is they are just getting ready to shift the whole weapons complex to DoD and let Halliburton, Carlyle Group, and SAIC run amok by bringing in all retired military from Lt. Col. on up to replace anyone who doesn't know how to follow a direct order.
 

There's only one teeny, tiny problem with "Son of Oppy"'s suggestion, and that is:

What if nobody in Congress (House OR Senate) really cares about LANL's gradually dwindling ability to do first-rate science? Bingaman and Udall seem to care, but is that enough? Is there any time to waste? I hope to God that some thoughtful Congressional and/or Senatorial staff members are reading this blog, or else we may slide beyond the tipping point one of these fine, blustery spring days. (By "tipping point," I mean the loss of morale, loss of experienced scientists, and loss of ability to attract bright, young scientists gets so far out of control, that LANL cannot be saved as a viable research lab for years to come.)
 

What evidence is there that Tom Udall cares at all for LANL? As far as I'm concerned, Tom has forgotten that Los Alamos County is in his district.
 

"Thoughtful Congressional and/or Senatorial staff members" is an oxymoron.
 

Regarding the comment of anonymous at 2/24/2007 2:47 PM: Tom Udall doesn't give a damn about LANL. In fact, it is not clear that he gives a damn about anything other then re-election.
 

For shame, 2/24/2007 5:05 PM. How could you say something that cruel about a politician?
 

Udall is an uncaring "OxyMormon".
 

The divorce from reality continues ....

Try again guys. Try to tell me why DoD would want to pick this lab up? You lost me on that one. They need a headache like this? What, Iraq is not enough? Give me a break.

And contract termination? Won't happen. Stop dreaming.

These repeated claims that "it's the rest of the world that's wrong, we're fine" just are not going to sell well. Even though they are, in some part, true. Truth is not the issue.

Things are going to muddle on as before, in 'slow sink' mode, until sometime in 2009. You heard it here first. No single person has the power to alter the status quo. What they're trying to do is leverage $$$ from the present misery for the folks back home -- kind of like Hobson did, when he kept yanking $10M from the LANL budget so he could put a computing center in his home district.

Yes, hard to believe, but the good senators and reps are motivated primarily by self-interest.
 

I guess I *SHOULD* have emphasized the subjunctive case in my original e-mail to Pat. What I outlined was what the Powers-that-Be *SHOULD* do *IF* they wanted to preserve Los Alamos in anything resembling the condition it was in, say in the early 90's.

You guys can trash Congress in these posts all you want, but if you were adults, you'd want to try sweet reasonableness on them first. When they deliver the final coup de grace, you can holler all you want then, and it won't matter. Until that time, we all need some help here, and Congress is the only place it will come from, if it comes at all.

-Son of Oppy
 

2/24/2007 1:03 PM said:
"...the loss of morale, loss of experienced scientists, and loss of ability to attract bright, young scientists..."


What morale? I haven't noticed any attitudes resembling positive morale in a while.

Losing experienced scientists? Has anyone checked lately? I know of one division that has lost 9 senior people since June 2006, all from the upper end of the performance curve and well below retirement age.

Attracting bright young scientists? Again, the flux is pointed outwards - postdocs are not being converted at the end of the second or third year; younger limited term staff are in the same boat - no conversions occurring.

And it doesn't matter if they want to come anyway since there is for all intents and purpose a full hiring freeze. You have to get a PAD approval for INTERNAL transfers!!! And the Lab Director's (or his deputy's) signature for an external hire above the (temporary) student level.

I hear more talk about how to handle the "unfunded" staff than on hiring. Since we are managing the workforce size through attrition, expect to see some. It won't be RIF's though. It will have another name.
 

"Losing experienced scientists? Has anyone checked lately? I know of one division that has lost 9 senior people since June 2006, all from the upper end of the performance curve and well below retirement age."

I'm pleased to see that our plan for managing attrition is working so well. I'll get another bonus!

Love and Kisses,
Mike
 

Disclaimer:
"Mike Anastasio" in 2/25/2007 12:30 PM is probably not REALLY Mikey.
(Call it canine intuition.)
--Pat
 

Attrition and Morale; ADTR's former "Morale Officer" quit last Friday...$163,500.
 

" Attrition and Morale; ADTR's former "Morale Officer" quit last Friday...$163,500."

Is this the former head of the former Diversity Office?
 

The morale officer in question (Lisa G) wanted to spend more time with her beagle, or is it bagle? Whatever. Yes, she's gone.