Wednesday, February 16, 2005

Place Tongue Firmly In Cheek

From Anonymous:

It’s official!!! Nanos met with UC (Buck Koonce, Merna Hurd, John Birely) tuesday and they told him he was going. The new lab director for UC will be Paul Robinson from Sandia. His deputy will be Linda Trocki from Bechtel, the “industrial partner” along with BWXT, Washington Group and Honeywell. AD’s will be Paul Hommert (weapons), Doug Beason (threat reduction), Terry Wallace (Strategic Research) and Scott Gibbs (to be created since he is friend of Rich Mah UC proposal manager). All other AD's will come from "the partner". All four of them have been asked to go to Bechtel’s office in California to write the proposal for two months and they went last week to get oriented and meet the “partners.” Losers are the current SET including Don Cobb, John Immelle, Tom Bowles, Dave Beck, Susan Seestrom, Frederick Tarantino, Carolyn Mangeng, Michelline Devaurs and Rich Marquez who now all have to find new jobs. UC told them to walk the plank with the Admiral.

Anonymous I need my job but want to celebrate Nanos going with you.

Could anyone confirm? It seems almost too good to be true :-)
One can only hope that this is true!
Sounds good, but your hoax has a problem. Why would people with good jobs sign on to an organization that has no chance to win the contract? Nice try-but really cruel for those of us who want Nanos out.
I don't know about BN or BWXT, but you sure don't want Honeywell in the mix. When I worked for them, their CEO was a hard-core Clintonista zipper-licker. One day they dragged all the white guys into a room to tell us that we were homophobic bigots and needed "sensitivity training" to become better people. Get that - all white men who work for Honeywell are bigots.

The clear message was that the path to advancement within Honeywell was to change your sex, change the color of your skin, or prove your homosexual preferences to a manager. I don't work there anymore.
Better confirm it with reliable source before you say "it is official".
It sounds like a story from Arabian nights.
The lay out for the bid team story is 65
percent correct
. The new director has not
been named, the partner list is incorrect (honeywell
is not a partner), and just because a present AD
is not on the bid team does it mean that they are
banished from the Lab. This is very sensitive as
UC works towards developing a proposal AND tries
to figure out how to get the Lab back on firm footing.
I guess it helps to have been around long enough to recognize the names of some of the players is this "dream (nightmare) team". Linda Trocki as deputy to Paul Robinson?

A truly warped mind produced the original post.
Interesting, if true. BTW, Linda Trocki worked at Los Alamos years ago, during the Don Kerr era, I believe. Her educational credentials are roughly the same as those of Micheline Devaurs, but inasmuch as she's part of the "industrial partner", perhaps that does not matter.
Not quite true. She has a Doctorate, in economics, I believe.
Economics sounds about right based on comments from BN folk who have familiarity with her technical knowledge.

Any SET member not making the transition to new management would still have TSM status, no? Just a matter of where they land, if they stay.
It hurts like Hell to talk with your tongue planted firmly in your cheek, but it sure sounds funny. Keep up the good work. Humor is all we have.
The story on the bid team is essentially true - some details (like the directors name) are completely wrong, but UC has decided to wash the slate clean. As to the comments that all ADs are TSMs, that is incorrect. ADs are officers of UC, and as such, have no tsm status, and theoretically UC can remove them at any time for any or no reason.
It is important to separate the Bid Team aspects from the current management of the lab. Although Nanos is gone in the future, he is not going away tomorrow, and as the SET begins to realize that they have no future at the Lab, there is likely to be bad behavior. Light at the end of the tunnel, but many bumps ahead.
I have recently learned that ADs and Division Directors come to work each morning "at the will of the Direktor". Translated, that means they can be summarily fired without cause, no recourse available, if the Direktor takes issue with anything they say or do. This, BTW, is a fairly recent UC policy.

Also, BTW: The fact that I can use bold html tags in a blog comment should be all the proof you need that I am not a LANL manager.
It would be interesting to get a read on what one of the previous posters meant when refering to the fact that "as the SET begins to realize that they have no future at the Lab, there is likely to be bad behavior".
Maybe we could lock the Director in a marathon STOP training session with the SET until the new contract takes effect?
[i] I have recently learned that ADs and Division Directors come to work each morning "at the will of the Direktor".[/i]

I can confirm this. It also means that Division Leaders have been told, and coerced to sign a document, which states that they will be terminated from the Laboratory if the Director does not want them to be Division Leaders any more.

It's clear he demands absolute and complete loyalty and will enforce with career-damaging leverage if necessary.

The incentive is clear: even if a Division Leader wants to do the right thing, and it would be good for the Laboratory for a Division Leader to show the Director is wrong about something, their motivation to do so is seriously weakened by the jeopardy they put their Laboratory career in.

There's no strong culture of committment to improvement when the actions of the chief leutenants are hindered by fear and scorched-earth politics.

Nanos takes no prisoners, and no one can tell him he's wrong.

How dangerous is this for the Laboratory and the Nation when he is wrong, and no one will say so?
I have been told by a reliable source that these events (or events very close to these) happened today. Should be on the news soon.
Post a Comment

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?