Wednesday, January 25, 2006

Meeting notes

I have been told that I should try to get my hands on the notes from a particular meeting held at LANL. The meeting took place on 6 May 2003 with the LIM (Laboratory Information Meeting) group. Pete Nanos led off the meeting and then Linton Brooks spoke for a short time and then took a series of questions from the participants. I am told that the name of the person that was at the bottom of the notes was Linn Tytler? Or Tyler. Purportedly, during this meeting Brooks coached the attendees on what actions would be necessary in order for UC to retain the contract when it went up for bid. If true, these meeting notes might supply documentation for those who contend that the bid process was conducted in a questionable manner. If anyone can get a copy of those meeting notes, I would appreciate it.

The person who made this suggestion to me tells me that his copy of these meeting notes was destroyed in the fire which consumed all of the the Lockheed-Martin bid documents last Sunday evening.

-Doug

Comments:
Just got off the phone with the Oakland lawyers office. Again it was reiterated that no one has stepped up to the plate to bring on a class action suite. I then asked if it would be possible to hire the attorney to interpret the text in the contract to see if all current and paste employees of the UC were covered now and forever to assure that we retain our retirement benefits and stay on the primary UCRP program. I was told that the question would be asked, but they did not know if those services were possible without opening up a class action suite. They will get back with me by phone. As soon as I get word I will pass it on to all of you on this blog. I was also told that "someone" meaning anyone can start this action or suite. A "retiree" who may be interested in saving their livelihood can get the ball stared and there is nothing that DOE or the UC can do to them at all. So again the ball is in our court.

So now comes the questions. Is there anyone out there who cares about their future with the intestinal fortitude to move on this matter?

Has every retiree across this country been notified of what is being done?

Who gets that job done?

Where is SPSE and UPTE when you need them?

Why isn't there more action being taken on this subject matter?

Gwilliam, Ivary, Chiosso, Cavalli & Brewer
1999 HARRISON ST.
SUITE 1600
OAKLAND, CALIFORNIA
94612
510-832-5411
510-832-1918 FAX
E-MAIL:
webinfo@GICCB.com
 
If "... anyone can start this action or suit" then perhaps the choice is obvious?
 
There is a LANL Retiree's Group. We should start with them.
 
The above comments are not very apropos to the original post...but then again, in a curious way, maybe they are.

I have it on good authority that the unions (UPTE and LLNL's SPSE), the Coalition for LANL Excellence, and the Laboratory Retiree Group are in serious consultation over the issue of the UCRP-LANL scheme (scam?). Be patient. Something will surely happen in short order, I do believe. When it does, I guarantee you that it will be posted up front on this here blog.

-Brad
 
Does anyone have the e-mail address of the LANL and LLNL retirement group? Whats' really nice to see is that if you check the "who's on", you will see that DOE DC and DOEAL are reading this blog.I hope they realize that this is all about to go blow up in their face. Hello, we are here too. Have a good day!
 
I have it on good authority that the unions (UPTE and LLNL's SPSE), the Coalition for LANL Excellence, and the Laboratory Retiree Group are in serious consultation over the issue of the UCRP-LANL scheme (scam?). Be patient. Something will surely happen in short order, I do believe. When it does, I guarantee you that it will be posted up front on this here blog.

-Brad
# posted by Brad Lee Holian : 1/25/2006 12:09:06 PM


That is the best news I have heard yet on this blog, but please do not let that stop you from calling the lawyer in Oakland tel let them know of oyur concerns.
 
Thanks, Brad. Finally some hopeful information. I wonder why nobody mentioned this activity before? Anyway, better late ...
 
So far this amounts to hearsay unless someone has some factual information. Otherwise it is
just rumor. How would this person have a copy of the meeting notes that would be with the Lockheed-Martin bid documents? If so, why wouldn't LM step forward with the information during the protest time. This all sounds fishy to me.
It may not be but rumors are not hard to start.
 
I did contact the GICCB law firm via their website. Left full particulars as to how to contact me. Have not heard back from them in past 48 hours. I'm also willing to pay something, if necessary, to get the legal aspects of this thing looked at.
 
Call and ask for Sandy

Gwilliam, Ivary, Chiosso, Cavalli & Brewer
1999 HARRISON ST.
SUITE 1600
OAKLAND, CALIFORNIA
94612
510-832-5411
510-832-1918 FAX
E-MAIL:
webinfo@GICCB.com

The lawyer in question to handle this is on travel but Sandy is taking note and will pass on your concerns. Unless you guys want to start a class action suite, then the team will move faster.
 
David,

You might be surprised at how far LIM meeting notes propagate. It is entirely plausible that somebody at LANL who was asked to help the LM team had a copy of these notes.
 
Post a Comment

<< Home

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