Friday, November 04, 2005

UT placing advertisements for LANL job positions

A week or so ago someone brought up the issue of UT placing advertisements for LANL job positions. The LAA alliance has a new FAQ sheet that addresses this issue.


This is not really much of an answer, and either indicates that LAA is not complying with RFP, or that these are “new” jobs. If the contract is awarded on Dec. 1, then the new contractor will not receive money from DOE for any management of LANL until June 1, 2006. Thus, either UT is paying for these positions (jobs that are already done in STB) for something that really has nothing to do with transition, or that UT is trying to raise the level of angst even higher than it is at LANL. The suggestion that people for LANL can apply for these jobs before any decision is made about the contract (and the close date for the jobs could be before a contract decision is made) is really unnecessary churn. It is unnecessary, and frankly arrogant and disrespectful for people at Los Alamos. Although many people that read the blog might take exception to arguing against anything LM, consider what it would be like if your job was the one being advertised – and in a way that makes it impossible for you to have that job. Remember, these are not high level jobs. These are three TSM jobs and one secretary job.

Unfortunately, I think that this is what can now be expected by LM/UT. They do put out FAQs, but these are fluff. They have exactly the same slogan as SNL; science serving mission. Those that are expecting LM/UT to save LANL are only partly right. They will bring a corporate business sense that is sorely needed. However, the good parts of the uniqueness of Los Alamos are unknown to LM/UT and not considered worth saving.

That's a huge leap. Did we read the same FAQ? The one I read said that the job postings had been made because

"Texas law requires public agencies to openly advertise employment opportunities and as a public institution, the University of Texas System is subject to this legislation."

From this you conclude that LAA is not complying with the RFP? W76, I think you need a vacation.
W76 is right on. The newspaper ads were bad enough, but the FAQ only makes things worse. A Texas law? Really?? Are they saying there’s a Texas law that requires UT to fire existing LANL employees and replace them by newcomers, all before the contract has even been awarded? What nonsense! And which employees? Everybody, or only some? A few chosen at random? Wouldn’t it be prudent for the new contractor to first come and carefully study the situation from the inside, before firing/hiring people?

At best, UT is being clueless and arrogant. At worst, they are being malicious and are trying to start out by intimidating/harassing the LANL folks.

Add to that vague and at times contradictory definitions of "science" and "the laboratory mission" that we've been hearing from the LAA office (the only thing certain is that one will be aligned with the other!) and you will understand why the LANL people are so anxious and confused these days.
Maybe TX will send a delegation of politicians like CA did. At some point, maybe LANL will know whose jurisdiction they fall under and whose laws they need to follow.
Post a Comment

<< Home

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