Sunday, April 03, 2005

Key Positions

From Anonymous:

Yikes. Suggestions for key positions are already being suggested to LockMart.

From a comment on the


"I believe you have indentified a piece of "low-hanging fruit" for LockMart to pluck for an easy productivity gain at LANL. Get rid of Gancarz. Heck, while they're at it, they could get rid of Marquez for another major gain. I would nominate Bob Knight as Marquez' replacement, and Have Fallin replaced with...

More on that later."

Ooh! I have one. LockMart should take a good, hard look at the LANL CHS (Center for Homeland Security). What a waste of money that has been.
Yeah. They should also pull the thread on where every weapons program $ actually goes, and ask hard questions about the relevance of the work being performed - maybe even include as part of the audit team the people who are supposedly benefiting from that work!
CHS might have been a success had Nanos not personally tried to get a senior person in Department of Homeland Security (DHS)fired. That person is still there, Nanos was way out of line, and all or most of the money from DHS is going to Livermore. That said, 5:47 PM is right.
My observation in a few short years at the Lab is that nearly everyone is of the opinion that money not being spent on their program is being wasted. People don't even bother to cover their nakedness when politicking on this topic.
Sounds like we are back to business as usual. Circle the wagons and fire inward.
8:35 --

At least that way we are guaranteed of taking out somebody who really needs taking out.
re: 7:52

I wasn't aware of Nanos having mucked w/DHS, all I know is that the boys running LANL's CHS deserve a good scrutiny over how they have been running their shop.
Most of the customers I work for account for every penny of their funds. That's precisely why they are peeved with the stand down. 8:35 is absolutely correct and 8:52 may be a budding comic but has not bloomed yet.
Here are the immediate top-priority problem managers that I believe should be replaced as soon as we have gotten rid of Nanos.

1. Marquez
2. Devaurs
3. Cobb
4. Bowles
5. Fallin

In addition, we need a real CIO.

In reality, though, most of these replacements will need to wait on a permanent director.
I would agree that if UC does not immediately replace Nanos, Cobb and Marquez, the University will have shown that it has no serious interest in rescuing Los Alamos from the tyrants who now run this place or in bidding on and winning the Los Alamos management contract.
As to getting rid of Nanos, Cobb & Marquez ... I have an idea ... lets get rid of everyone that tries make things happen and holds people accountable. (because frankly, if a manager is hard on us then THEY must have a problem ... there is no way we might need to improve, right?). Do you think the taxpayers will fund us forever if we never get serious about running this place right? Nanos, Cobb and Marquez are doing everything they can to save your ass, so give them a break.
Post a Comment

<< Home

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