Friday, February 11, 2005

State of denial

From the LANL NewsBulletin:

Feb. 10, 2005

State of denial

Just came back from the CREM incident briefing and I must say that based on some of the questions and statements made there are many still working at the Laboratory that just don't get it. To accuse the director of perpetrating fraud is not only ridiculous but libelous. The sooner everyone can gets past this state of denial the sooner we as an institution can continue to improve our secure work practices.

--Randy Kasik


Comments:
Dude, you must not read the news. The so-called CREM incident simply did not happen as the Director said it did. He's been trying to cover up the facts of the incident since the FBI report on the incident was released.

He did perpetrate fraud. We are accusing him of it.
 
Randy Kasik thinks it is "ridiculous" to accuse the Director of fraud, but he doesn't bother to state why he thinks such. To many at Los Alamos, it is not ridiculous at all. That doesn't imply that the Director _did_ commit fraud, but it simply means, at least to some, that it is perfectly plausible, especially given the statements of others actually involved in the incident.
 
The Director is not the only person in upper management that may be accused of being guilty of committing fraud.
 
Actually, Randy, there are scarce few at the Lab who "get it" in the sense you mean. The rest of us are refusing to drink the strychnine-flavored Kool-Aid.
 
Randall Dean Kasik
Group S-1 Security Specialist 3
Hire date: 11/22/2004
 
From a person who was "involved," we were indeed sloppy and made some mistakes. The issue the individual at the briefing was trying to make I believe is whether early in the investigation Director Nanos and DOE learned that the disks may not exist but they kept it "under their hat"(most likely a black cowboy hat by the way) so they could continue to make it a crisis situation in order to make "needed changes." In addition, one has to further ask the question whether or not Director Nanos's knee jerk reaction to administratively control suspected individuals actually hampered the investigation preventing a timely and most likely less politically sensitive resolution. Punishment was doled out not only non-uniformly to the involved individuals but across the Laboratory in effect due to his (and his alone) decision to shut down the entire Laboratory.
 
From a person who was "involved," we were indeed sloppy and made some mistakes. The issue the individual at the briefing was trying to make I believe is whether early in the investigation Director Nanos and DOE learned that the disks may not exist but they kept it "under their hat"(most likely a black cowboy hat by the way) so they could continue to make it a crisis situation in order to make "needed changes." In addition, one has to further ask the question whether or not Director Nanos's knee jerk reaction to administratively control suspected individuals actually hampered the investigation preventing a timely and most likely less politically sensitive resolution. Punishment was doled out not only non-uniformly to the involved individuals but across the Laboratory in effect due to his (and his alone) decision to shut down the entire Laboratory.
 
Just a little conflict of interest there in S-Division Randy? The Director is STILL lying by saying that the entire lab "has restarted." Who's in denial?
 
I think Randy must be one of those 10 people the Director spoke of who is going to help him rebuild the Lab.
 
I can only laugh at Randy's naive statements. Clearly this guy is still a little wet behind the ears. Even better, he has just blown what little credibility he may have ever had with me. Some of the director's comments over the past 7 months have also been ridiculous and libelous. Wanna get into a legal battle? Wanna *really* fight in public? Bring it on.
 
For all we know Mr. Kasik has 30+ years in security, intellegence, etc. He has only been here for 4 months if the other posting is correct. Let's not sling mud at the guy for stating his opinion.

I actually did 'get it' for about a week following the stand down. We reviewed all of our documentation and procedures. Every IWD was reviewed and updated by 'fresh eyes'. We discussed and brain-stormed everything related to our facilities and operations. We took some mind-numbing ergonomics training for some reason. We thought we had our restart paperwork done, no wait, management did not really know what they wanted yet. Start over. Dig deeper. For what? What is the desired outsome? No one was able to give that answer. There was a culture problem and it needed to be rooted out. By the second week it was clear that the peons, in our division at least, were willing to consider just about anything to show that they were 'getting it'. Then the whole process turned into a nightmare as the restart requirements evolved on a 3 hour cycle time.

Technical staff get very jaded when they are confronted with such a situation. We start to feel that on most days management can't find their way to the restroom without someone to show them the way.

Maybe some quiet reflection by the Director and SET for a day or two might have obviated most of this exercise. But that would not have been as dramatic.

Yes, LANL has some problems with its culture and operations.

Folks have come to expect a job for life. Some folks used to just wait until they could retire.

Many management posts seem to be revolving doors. People just keep moving. You finally convince a higher-up that they shouldn't cut your funding because what you are doing REALLY is vital to the lab mission and lo and behold that person moves up or over or out. Now you get to start all over trying to keep doing your work with the next 'temporary' manager.

Management seems to push their favorite idea instead of what meets peer review.

I am sure there are many other nonproductive behaviors here at LANL.

If we want to stay and start doing real work again then lets start being honest when we see crap presented as the latest improvement plan. There has got to be some way to counter the myopia and nepotism in the SET, AD offices and with the director.

We don't like the way that the Director has handled the situation. So, let's show them that the average employee, at least, can be professional and do our jobs the right way, the first time. When management is STUPID there should be a resounding response from the techninal staff and Fellows. We can do better. We are better than what Nanos and company have painted us.
 
Or for all we know he has figured out how to be a consumate bootlicker in only 4 months. He should go far at LANL.
 
Post a Comment

<< Home

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