Sunday, February 19, 2006

Take a good look at some of the other places where you could work

Comment from the

http://lanl-the-real-story.blogspot.com/2006/02/uc-employees-at-lanl-outraged-by.html

post, shamelessly promoted by the author. Maybe things will improve some day, but it looks pretty bleak from where I sit.
________________________________

Hell in a handbasket is exactly where I saw LANL headed a couple of years ago. Management, and in particular former director Nanos, seemed intent on grinding the lab into the ground.

With the support of UC, NNSA, and DOE, not in spite of it.

I encourage those of you who need to make the decision of whether or not to stay at LANL to get out and take a good look at some of the other places where you could work. Until you do so, you will not fully appreciate that LANL really is as screwed up as it seems. In fact, if you do visit other companies, you will gain a fresh, (and probably much-needed) perspective on how unhealthy a place to work LANL has become.

--Doug


Comments:
Dear shameless promoter,

Perhaps you could comment for Manny, who appears not to respond to inquiries via the blog.

In his commentary of Feb 18, 2006, he states, "As part of the DOE’s renewal of the university’s contract to run Los Alamos, the lab’s retirement fund is to be separated from UC’s larger system and taken over in June by a private entity known as Los Alamos National Security LLC."

Is Manny talking about the UCRP-LANL proposal? If so, when did this outrage escalate to include an assumption of its management by LANS?
 
Dear Due:

I would not presume to speak for Manny, but a I have forwarded your question on to him.

--Doug
 
Thanks Doug.
 
As a matter of fact look at any other unversity in the country like I did. Guess what? The same deal and in some cases better than what we have under UC. The LANS LLC benefit package is like something you would receive working at Walmart.
 
I read this nytimes article this morning, and realized.. hey its Los Alamos...

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/20/business/20auto.html?th&emc=th

Company Town Relies on G.M. Long After Plants Have Closed


Article Tools Sponsored By
By JEREMY W. PETERS and MICHELINE MAYNARD
Published: February 20, 2006

ANDERSON, Ind., Feb. 16 — General Motors once had so many plants here that it had to stagger their schedules so that the streets would not be clogged with traffic when the workday ended. At the city's peak, 35 years ago, one of every three people in Anderson worked for G.M.

Now there is not a single G.M. plant left, and just two parts plants that G.M. once owned still survive. Anderson, about 50 miles northeast of Indianapolis, had 70,000 people in 1970 and now has fewer than 58,000.

But in many ways, Anderson is still just as dependent on G.M. as it once was. Only now, rather than being dependent on General Motors, the corporation, it is dependent on General Motors, the welfare state.

The company's generous medical plans, prescription drug coverage, dental care and pension checks are a lifeline for the 10,000 G.M. retirees and an untold number of surviving spouses and other family members who still live in the Anderson area.

They in turn help to prop up the doctor's offices, hospitals, buffet restaurants and shopping centers that might otherwise vanish along with the G.M. plants around the city that are fast becoming rubble. Anderson's G.M. retirees outnumber its remaining auto manufacturing workers by nearly four to one.

"When we all die off, this city will die," Jesse Lollar, 83, said last week, as he finished an early dinner of lima beans and macaroni and cheese at the MCL Cafeteria in the Mounds Mall.
 
Ok, I can deal with the mac and cheese, but the lima beans are out.
 
Easier said than done. Some of us have a 2-body problem. Harder to find jobs for two professionals, let alone one.
 
Post a Comment

<< Home

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