Tuesday, April 19, 2005

"Silver lining"

Please post this anonymously. Obviously, since I qualified to be at
today's All Managers Meeting, I serve at the pleasure of the Director.

The Director was all about good news today at the All Managers Meeting.
One of his more interesting citations was a recent spike in LANL
publications. Referring to it as a "silver lining" in the cloud of the
shutdown, he remarked that a lot of scientists must have busied
themselves with analyzing and writing up their data during the shutdown.
Then, as he turned to the next subject, the Director commented (without
explanation) that the volume of publications was up "largely because of
the restructuring of the work schedule." Huh? Was he alleging that
killing 9/80 resulted in the recovery of so much work time that we're
all-of-a-sudden publishing more?



Comments:
Rationalization is a form of desperation.
 
What Nanos says is not true. Publications are now down. He is full
of it. Go to Phys Rev online and
simply count the papers from LANL
from Jan 01 2004 to April 2004
and Jan 01 2005 to April 2005.
I think we all know how much you can
trust what Nanos says.
 
I was there too, and the "restructuring of the work schedule" comment floored me as well. I looked round the room because I couldn't believe it and thought I must have mis-heard it, and there were many jaws hanging open in disbelief.

Thanks for posting this - if you hadn't, I would have.
 
Benjamin Franklin once said, "A lie stands on one leg and the truth stands on two. Nanos was obviously standing on one leg, his imagination.
 
Um...Phys Rev is not the only place LANL staffers publish papers...
 
The REAL SLIVER LINING:
Albuquerque Journal North, Wed./July 21,2004,p.2 "DOE Briefed on LANL Security Lapses"------

His Tough talk, including threatening to fire anyone unwilling to comply with the rules, has earned Nanos the respect of Congress and DOE officials. Abraham noted Tuesday in his comments that McSlarrow and Brooks are impressed with the corrective actions Nanos has taken.

Brooks told Congress last week that Nanos' actions are "about the only silver lining I've got in this cloud so far."

"Every time my site manager thought of something else that ought to be done, the laboratory director had already started doing it," Brooks said.
 
Most of the (publishing-type) scientists in my division did not use the 9-80.
Doesn't it take a few years for publications to catch up with the experimental work? Publications will be down in the future because of the demoralization of the Lab in 2004- 2005 (2006??).
 
Analyzing and writing up your data was a firable offense during the work stoppage. Thus by these comments Nanos is praising people for ignoring his explicit orders and "not taking the standdown seriously" by focusing on getting the job done instead of "safety and security". Or is Nanos looking for people to dumb enough to admit this so he can fire them after the fact?
 
I write most of my publication material on a laptop at home (it's quieter there than work). The elimination of 9-80 didn't help me one bit. In fact, I now don't have my every other Friday of peace to sit at home and write (which, given the lack of a well defined work-at-home policty, I can't have in the current environment).
 
Maybe Nanos is including in publication totals all the orders, directives, notes, changes, corrections, and reprimands flushing out of his fourth floor retreat.
 
PhysRev notwithstanding, the "spike" in publications from LANL during CY 2004 is real. As Casey Stengel was fond of saying, "you could look it up" on SciSearch. HOWEVER, my caveat would be a different Stengel-era quote, this one from Brooklyn - "just wait till next year".
 
I thought the 9/80 would be back in May in some form. I have not heard anything in weeks. If they want morale to improve, the 9/80 will help. When we had the 9/80, a lot of people put in long hours knowing they had that extra day every two weeks. Has anyone heard anything?
 
Post a Comment

<< Home

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