Wednesday, August 03, 2005

Alternative Work Schedule

From Anonymous:

Someone must have made the business case!

----- Begin Included Message -----

Date: Wed, 03 Aug 2005 13:45:02 -0600
From: Distributions
Subject: LANL-ALL916: Alternative Work Schedules
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

To/MS: All Employees
From/MS: Robert W. Kuckuck, DIR, MS A100
Phone/Fax: 7-5101/Fax 7-2997
Symbol: DIR-05-286
Date: August 3, 2005
Subject: Alternative Work Schedules

During my first few weeks here at LANL, I heard from many of you
about the benefits of flexible work schedules. I promised to take
a close look at the issues and concerns and I am now very pleased
that we are in a position to go forward with a plan for
reinstatement of alternative work schedules for all LANL

It is important for us to realize that, while the principal
purpose is to provide flexibility for people to balance work ­
life issues, the major requirement of alternative work schedules
is to allow the Laboratory to deliver programmatic commitments and
meet customer needs while continuing to maintain the quality and
responsiveness of service and support within the Laboratory.
Thus, a fundamental principle is that alternative work schedules
must be managed by managers. Work schedules must be based on
management ­ developed and approved organizational plans which
incorporate conditions of supervision.

In general, the program will mirror much of what was previously in
place. While the details will be forthcoming and formalized in a
Director’s Instruction, I want to stress that the guiding
principle for implementation of alternative work schedules will be
a focus on programmatic and customer concerns. Managers will be
required to balance employee work schedules with programmatic
deliverables and customer service. It is imperative that both
employees and managers plan and manage work schedules to ensure
internal and external access to information and services. Managers
will be provided with tools and guidance for planning to meet the
needs of all stakeholders.

As the largest employer in Northern New Mexico, we recognize that
the decisions we make have the potential to affect our neighbors
in surrounding communities. We have held informal discussions
during the past several months with various community stakeholders
and will continue to do so as we proceed through implementation.
We have attempted to recognize and balance the needs of those
stakeholders with the needs of our employees, this institution and
our programmatic requirements.

Employees are the Laboratory’s greatest asset ­ in fact, employees
ARE the Laboratory. I believe in supporting people in balancing
the professional and personal aspects of their lives. Our target
date for implementation of new work schedules is the pay period
beginning September 12, 2005. Over the next few weeks, you will
receive more information explaining the details of the program to
help with your planning. We will continue to take input from our
customers and stakeholders, as well as all of you, to assess and
evaluate the success and effectiveness of this program.

Thank you all for your continuing support of this great Laboratory.

This just might have a positive impact on the morale of the Institution.
What a wonderful, positive sign that our interim Director really cares about morale and the quality of life for Laboratory employees! The timing could not have been better. It could have gone the other way...and the decision could have been put off until after the contract decision has been made.

I for one will actually get to miss less work and be able to take care of my medical and and personal business appointments on my day off rather than taking leave.
"Employees are the Laboratory’s greatest asset ­ in fact, employees
ARE the Laboratory. I believe in supporting people in balancing
the professional and personal aspects of their lives."
We have heard this so many times from lying, conniving managers.... please, please, please let it be true this time.
Somebody had better hand Foley his blood pressure medication, I suspect he's going to need it.
What's next? day care.
so the schedule is still dicated by "stakeholders"? Was it the last time they initiated 9/80? Do local venders and restaurants dicate the schedule at Sandia or Livermore? Seems doubtful. How much did Nanos waste in payroll costs in taking away 9/80? UC won't bother with 9/80 until they have the contract (doubtful)... just more excuses and stallings. We had the stand-down director; now we have the stand-in director.
...who will be followed by the next director. Who, by the way, has had a successful 9/80 operation going on down at his shop for several years.
Local vendors and restaurants in Albuquerque and the Livermore area draw from a broad customer base. Those in Los Alamos are strongly dependent on business traffic generated during lunch time by LANL staff. Comparisons with Sandia and Livermore don't apply. As many posters have noted, Los Alamos is a company town - lab policies can have significant impact on the community as a whole.
that's bull.... if they're so worried about business from the Lab, why don't they offer better food, better weekend service, and better prices? Santa Fe prices and 3rd rate food!
Maybe he does read the employee surveys. I sent him comments to the effect that UC has violated the trust of the employees over the 9/80 and the Tod Kauppila issue and that I was looking forward to Paul Robinson as the new director. Maybe there's hope for UC, but I doubt it.

Or maybe Kuckuck had the rocks to stand up to the Foley puke. We'll see. I still vote for Paul Robinson.
This is a hit on LANL productivity and a plum for those who abused the system last time.

We'll never get support out of SUP or S-Div on any Friday ever again.
This is most welcome. The valid 'business case' for the 9/80 was made three years ago and nothing about LANL's situation since then should have changed that decision. It is possible that some adjustments were necessary but it was idiotic to banish it as it was done. I would have felt better about UC if the announcement had admitted the horribly mistaken management decision to revoke it. UC still doesn't get it - but they're getting better. Go Paul, go!
Doug -- how about selling some advertising to LM? These comments are hilarious - what a bunch of snots. Go, NNSA, Go. Shut the place down.
What a rude awakening many at LANL will find if/when LM arrives and lo, not only will it be just as bad in some ways, it will be worse in many more. UC is amateurish in comparison.
8:33: Is that you again, Baghdad?
Guess what -- there are a boat load of people that don't think LM and Paul Robinson is the answer. But to say so on the Blog means that one is "bagdad bob". I have two teenagers, and every time there is something that they don't like they spew a childish insult -- like "bagdad bob".

I hope that life for you on the 9/80 calms your anger.
Pardon my observation, 8:55, but the 9/80 'philes don't appear to be the only ones with anger management issues.

Myself, I'm just very happy to be retired out of that mess up on the Hill. Thankfully, there are much healthier places to work.
" This is a hit on LANL productivity ...
# 8/03/2005 07:28:07 PM"

My observation is that people who seemed to abuse work hours before seem to abuse it now.

Even with some people appearing to game the system, I think we are so suffocated now with unproductive, non-value-added impediments that if 9/80 negatively (or positively) impacted productivity, I for one don't see how it could register above the noise of unproductive busy-work we face now.

9/80 neither improved nor diminished the occurrences of time-sheet fraud I've suspected. Only active management can do that, regardless of work hours.
9/70, 5/35: Makes no difference.
Strong support for 8:33. Just different does not mean better.
When the 9/80 workweek started, our Division made an attempt to "manage" it by requiring that all organizational units be staffed on Fridays and that integrated teams be on the same schedule (A, B, or 5/40). This came a cropper rather quickly because of many problems:

1. Individuals wanted to work the same 9/80 schedule as the spouse who worked in another division.

2. Individuals wanted to stay in a car pool with individuals in other divisions.

3. Some individuals had school and/or child care schedules to deal with.

4. Members of integrated teams could/would not agree on a schedle.

The fact is that the rest of the local world is a 5/40 world.

What happened in the end is that employees (some very valuable) threatened to transfer to other divisions if they were not permitted to chose their schedule. So, our Division management relented and let people choose their work schedule without contstraint.

Of course, it you are a desk jockey in T-Division, your work hours can be far less rigid than if you are a receptionist in a Division office. So, the sex card will be played.

This is Pandora's box!
Los gringos estan locos. Vive Zapata.
Es Verdad, pero off topic.

Donde estas mi tequila!?
I had a couple shots of Patron tonight. Maybe everyone should
Post a Comment

<< Home

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