We are hereby proposing the following plan of action based upon advice received earlier:

1. Establish Grounds and Standing for legal action:  Each employee who is unhappy with being on the excluded list needs to do the following two tasks before the application closure date of March 14 

• Access the sample letter on this web site and prepare a personalized letter (Preferably hard copy or PDF) stating your reasons for requesting removal from the exception list.  This letter should be mailed to your Division Leader or AD.  Valid reasons might be:  That you are not a "systems engineer" or "Scientist 3" or any other such designation by training. Those designations were created by the Lab and we were assigned to them at the Labs discretion;   that you have worked for multiple lab organizations, some of which may not be excluded; Your skills are not that unique and replacements could easily be found if the Lab made appropriate effort, particularly in today's job market; while you may be assigned to an exempt organization or job category, you are not performing functions as a  "systems engineer" or "scientist 3" or whatever.  Keep all correspondence civil and professional.  Request a signed written response to your letter.
• Submitt your application for the VSP Program.  You will not be able to do this online since the online system will not accept Z numbers from us lepers.  You must download the form and submit it by fax per the following instruction:  

  Hardcopy application

  Employees may submit a hardcopy of their Voluntary Separation Program Application form as follows:
1. Submit a Voluntary Separation Program Application form (pdf) in person at the HR Front Desk, Otowi building, 2nd floor, north wing, or
2. Fax (505-606-5901) a Voluntary Separation Program Application form (pdf).

[Note: We have been advised that these two activities would be "official business" and that they can be done on Laboratory time and Laboratory Equipment.]


2.  Establish a more formal organizational structure for the "Class";  This would most likely mean:

•  "Organizing" a leadership team in the form of an advisory council or board of directors.
• Some kind of formal membership or sign up.
• Adopting a name and mission statement along with short term goals.
• Establishing a "war chest" for necessary actions be it websites, mailings, or legal action.
• Get an attorney on retainer.

3.  Change the Laboratory's current course of action by:

• Submitting appropriate requests as outlined above.
• Negotiation with Management
• Filing of a Legal Injunction to stay the action before the "Mandatory Separation" date of April 5, 2012

Comments or suggestions on this plan would be GREATLY APPRECIATED.

REMINDER:  If you plan on fighting your ineligible designation, please remember to submit a letter to your Division DO or AD, and to submit an application form to HR by fax or in person NLT March 14.  It might be smart to do this in person, and to include an endorsement at the bottom of a copy you keep which can be signed by the person to whom you submit the application.    Even though these applications will most likely be rejected, this needs to be done to show intent to accept and to establish grounds for further action.

Our legal adviser has also suggested that we submit a formal Laboratory Complaint Resolution action. We have looked at P-791, and it appears this policy would not apply to our situation since the VSP does not appear to be in violation of any existing policy--since there are none on this issue.  The VSP also does not fit the two other criteria in the policy, which are a complaint over any form of official discipline or over involuntary separation.  However, if any of you smart folks can figure out whether or not The VSP and its attendant rules violate any existing policies, than we should submit the grievances.  This can and should occur after denial of any application submitted.

GUY..

OUR LOGO:  You engineers that are reading this post probably recognize our logo as a group of High Strength Structural Steel Bolts.  We all know that using the right fastener is important in any engineering application.  In the case of the VSP, it appears that They have tried to use some cheap, Chinese made, wood screws in putting this plan together.  We, on the other hand, will form a properly patterned group of High Strength Members that will support the design load and then some.    Hard hat stickers available on request.

LOST SOME STEAM? 


Excerpt  from  "AnonymousMar 8, 2012 05:08 PMKudos to the person(s...": "Continuing the math:........ I, for one, would like to call them on it! If we're going to get 'organized' and do something, it's going to have to be SOON. After an encouraging start, this Blog seems to have lost some steam: I hope this is only temporary since this is such an important issue. "


GUY:  Lost some steam? Lost some Steam!  Hey at our age its hard enough to get up a head of steam in the first place.  Put if someone stokes the boiler enough we can get up quite a head of steam and get this old Locomotive moving pretty fast.  If F=MA, we might have quite a sizable force at the end of the line.  Lets hope we just don't burst one of these old seams along the way. 


PLEDGE DRIVE?


More emails with personal information are coming in directly and we are starting to get a feel for the size and inclinations of the group.   If you are reading this blog, and are at all interested in joining forces, please post here and/or send your PII directly to the email.    We will avoid  posting PII on the Blog to avoid anyone figuring out who is who.    By Sunday afternoon, we will post a statistical analysis of the participants (Age, yrs of service, Organization, etc.)
One of the Anons who has responded has suggested that we start a pledge drive for contributions to a legal "offense" fund.  No cash yet, just pledges.   Between those of us working on the site we, already have a pledge of $1000.00.   Please comment here with your general feelings about this concept.  Pledges can go direct to the email.

1. AnonymousMar 8, 2012 05:08 PM

   Kudos to the person(s)establishing this blog. I'd like to suggest that first-time posters/commentors list some basic info re: their status, such as "Ineligible","39 weeks severance" (if ineligible, you won't know the exact amount because Oracle has you locked out--but estimate it), "Organization", "Gender", etc. Any/all of these are optional of course, but it might help the blog organizers, and readers, learn more about the demographics of a potential 'class'. It would also be an indication of how widespread this inequity is. [Please comment below. See March 8 entry, NAME & INFO DATABASE, below]
   
   

RE:  NAME & INFO DATABASE.  PII Data removed from site.  Please forward by email.  I will post a summary.  Off to work   (:-).

NAME AND INFO DATABASE.:  "Kudos to the person(s)establishing this blog. I'd like to suggest that first-time posters/commentators list some basic info re: their status, such as "Ineligible","39 weeks severance" (if ineligible, you won't know the exact amount because Oracle has you locked out--but estimate it), "Organization", "Gender", etc. Any/all of these are optional of course, but it might help the blog organizers, and readers, learn more about the demographics of a potential 'class'. It would also be an indication of how widespread this inequity is. I'll start:

"INELIGIBLE

39 Weeks

ES Division

Male"

============================

The following will also need to be added: 

AGE

ETHNICITY OR "RACE" (as used in census Bureau Statistics)

This is a great idea. Please post data in the comments section below.    


However since everyone shows up as Anonymous, it will be hard to keep folks straight, so please use a Pseudonym, or email us at lanllayoff2012@gmail.com with your real or disguised information. (Nome de Plume? Nome de Guerre?)

AGE & ETHNICITY will required for the following reasons:

Since this is a "positive" and voluntary offer by the Lab, it is unclear what employment policies and law apply or do not apply.  e.g. The Lab has not complied with the "letter of the law" in their existing RIF policy in that They have not provided 60 days written notice of termination prior to the effective date of termination.   However since this is a "Voluntary RIF" it appears that They think they can make up the rules as They go along.  

What rules They must comply with would certainly be an issue for a court. That is why I think They are very worried on a CYA basis--thus the short time frame, exclusion of 'Job Classifications' rather than individuals, the 'No Appeal ruling  and the Gordian "Waiver Agreement".  Their legal staff has obviously done their home work.   However, under the theory of Disparate or Adverse Impact, intentions (good or bad) matter not.  The only criteria is actual impact to any protected class --  and age (over 40) is a protected class.  

As mentioned before on this site, it would appear that their will be a substantial adverse impact to older employees in the excluded "class", both in dollar amount and numbers of employees.  We believe that recent DOE/LANS policies have distorted the age distribution of the work force.  (a project for you statistics types) resulting in this RIF being about reducing the number of highly paid, older workers--this is obviously to whom the offer is most attractive.  While this older group who can accept the offer will gain the most benefit,  it will also make the impacted group (i.e. the Excluded Group) a group of older workers, hopefully then qualifying as a protected class.  

Another issue that must be considered is whether or not recent DOE and LANS management policies have had a significant impact on the makeup of the current work force.  Issues identified in Hugh Gusterson's Recent Article in the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, "Weapons labs and the inconvenient truth" could certainly explain why it is so difficult for the Lab to hire younger technical personnel right now.  (After all, what young, motivated, go-get-em, scientist or engineer wants to spend his/her productive years processing procurement requests and IWDs).  If the Lab's policies are at fault for their inability to staff critical technical positions, why should those of us who "kept the candle burning" be penalized for Their failures.  More about this in a later post.

While the above issues would be a hard to "prove" in a court of law, if we can show real issues and  potential damages, then we may be able to get an injunction.  An injunction could delay the whole VSP program-- and that would certainly cause Them some concern as it would delay the timeline and any expected cost savings.   These are the issues where a very good (and therefore very expensive) labor attorney will be required.  

In any case -- Nearly 500 hits in 24 hours.  We can certainly say there is a great deal of interest in the subject.  More Anon

LUNCH?  We have been told that the Fabulous 50's Dinner at 1325 Trinity Dr.  (The American Legion Building) has a pretty good Green Chile Cheeseburger.  Some of us might be there at 11:30 today (Thursday 3/8) to give it a try.   All of you "loyal readers" would also be welcome.  I understand they don't exclude anybody.  If you got one, bring or wear your hard hat.

HELP WANTED:  Your fledgling web master could use some help from folks with experience in that area.  (It would appear there are some on the list.)   Support needed is:  1.  Alternate Moderator     2.  Webmaster with experience setting up cash collections if we go that way.

Please send a contact email or phone number to lanllayoff2012.gmail.com.  All names will be kept confidential.

"Borrowed" from http://llnlthetruestory.blogspot.com/

Anonymous said...

Do the math with your personal financial situation. The involuntary RIF with 26 weeks may be better financially than the voluntary RIF with 39 weeks assuming you are working at LANL for at least thirteen weeks after April 5th before being riffed. Severance is not pay, it is a dollar amount equal to your gross pay for one week times 39 or 26 weeks. Taxes are withheld from the severance amount. There are no pretax contributions and no matching contributions to the 401K, no pretax deductions for medical and child care plans, etc. For some people these amounts are significant in reducing your taxable income.

"Borrowed" from http://llnlthetruestory.blogspot.com/

Anonymous said...

the rationale for the excluded positions is unclear.

If the employees in these positions are very talented, then the average TC score for these employees should be higher than that for employees in non-excluded positions.

Well, then LANS says, it's not the employees, but the positions that they are in. These are mostly average employees, but we don't have that many of them and they are in important positions.

Ok., well if that's true, then then there should be significantly more postings for these excluded positions in the last 2 years, than for non-excluded positions. For example, the the excluded title/group combinations are 6% of all job titles/group combinations, we would expect a substantially higher percentage (than 6%) of postings to be from these select titles/group combos. If not, then what is the evidence that these people in these positions are so important that they must be excluded?

March 7, 2012 9:11 PM

"Borrowed" from http://llnlthetruestory.blogspot.com/

 LANL Layoffs 2012 said...

RE: "Used to be that folks who worked at LANL for "more than 30 years" thought that just the prospect of the very generous pension (which is still available from LANS) was "nice treatment." Now you want severance too?"

Reply: The issue here is not "wanting severance" .  It is the expectation of "equitable treatment and fair dealing" under the employment contract we have with LANS. (Yes there is a contract) It is not too hard to find cases of highly skilled technical personnel (who are not managers) who are excluded, while their (sometimes) less technically skilled managers are allowed to "volunteer". 

When looking at the list of excluded "Functional Areas" it would also not be too hard to make the argument that LANS has focused on the remaining senior and highly skilled, engineers, technicians, and scientists. Their argument is "we can't hire replacements". B.S. With enough money you can send men to the moon. (Well at least we used to be able to do that.) This is just another aspect of not funding the Lab and its Programs sufficiently. That will not change however, but the burden for that failure should not fall to the employees.

Additionally, it is not illogical to argue that excluding the highly paid, senior technicians, engineers and scientists will reduce the total severance payout liability. (Which I understand is to come out of G&A) Do you think there might have been some consideration of that in arriving at the Excluded list?

However, this selection process of theirs may backfire against them. Our gut feel is that many of the folks impacted by being "Excluded" are old fahrts such as ourselves. If so, we will be able to make a very good case for age discrimination, since as a Government funded activity, the Laboratory is expected to analyze the impact of their actions on "protected" groups.

March 7, 2012 7:44 PM

"Borrowed" from http://llnlthetruestory.blogspot.com/

RE: “I've exhausted all means available to employees to grieve my eligibility status, and each one gives me the same story--no appeals.”

Reply: We are getting the same story in ADHNNO. Fortunately, at least for now we can still "appeal" to the courts.

“Has anyone out there had success at fighting these jerks and getting their eligibility changed? If so, please provide details.”

Reply: No success as of yet, but we need to establish standing.

“Otherwise, my lawyers are also pretty clever and i'll be giving them another call”

There are plenty of grounds for us to get into court. It probably won't be to hard to find an attorney to take the case on contingency given the number of folks that appear to feel "disadvantaged" x number of years of service x average salary--that will be a pretty big number. However to get started we may have to pool resources (i.e. $) to get an injunction filed before April 5, 2011

Please see "plan of action" at Http://lanllayoffs2012.blogspot.com  [third item above]

Lets all go there and make it happen

March 7, 2012 7:27 PM

"Borrowed" from http://llnlthetruestory.blogspot.com/

 Anonymous said...

From the looks of the VSP info that LANS has just posted on the internal web site, it appears that the reduction in lab severance accumulations will be cut from 39 weeks (max) to 26 weeks (max) shortly after the voluntary reduction is complete in March.

That means that many of the long-term (older) staff who don't take the voluntary will be taking a very large cut in their severance payout when the involuntary layoffs start by late Spring.

Furthermore, any long-term regular staff who are sc#wed over by LANS in the involuntary layoff will also suffer the indignity of being required to sign a legal waiver promising to never sue LANS just to get that greatly reduced 26 weeks in severance!

I see a huge legal mess coming for this poorly thought out decision by LANS management. Anyone who is involuntary laid off would be signing severance papers for the reduced payouts under great duress! I suggest that employees start keeping good records over this whole sordid affair that LANS has created.

March 6, 2012 5:23 PM

Anonymous said...

I have got to ask again, where are line Managers on this list. They have just screwed over a bunch of "excluded" workers and then "excluded" themselves from being "excluded". Now I know why they call it the "excluded" list.

I'm also told that Managers are informing any complaining worker on the excluded list that they are welcome to leave at any time, however, they (Line Management) will leave with 39-weeks of severance. WTF!!

March 6, 2012 5:42 PM

"Borrowed" from http://llnlthetruestory.blogspot.com/


Anonymously contributed:

LANS Voluntary Separation Program - Excluded Categories
AD
DIR
DIR CFO-CNTL Financial Systems Analyst 4
DIR CFO-SYS Financial Systems Analyst 2
DIR CFO-SYS Financial Systems Analyst 3
DIR CFO-SYS Financial Systems Analyst 4
DIR CGA-GAO Government Affairs Specialist 3
DIR CGA-GAO Government Affairs Specialist 4
DIR DIR Executive Director
DIR EA-ARP1 Audit Manager 4
DIR EA-ARP1 Auditor 4
DIR EA-ARP2 Audit Manager 4
DIR EA-ARP2 Auditor 4
PADOPS
ADESH OM-MS Occupational Med Counselor 1
ADESH OM-MS Occupational Med Counselor 2
ADESH OM-MS Occupational Med Counselor 3
ADESH OM-MS Occupational Nurse 2
ADESH OM-MS Occupational Nurse 3
ADESH OM-MS Occupational Nurse 4
ADESH OM-MS Occupational Physician 3
ADESH OM-MS Occupational Psychologist 3
ADESH OM-MS Occupational Psychologist 4
ADESH OM-MS Physician Assistant 2
ADESH OM-MS Physician Assistant 3
ADNHHO ES-FE Engineer 1
ADNHHO ES-FE Engineer 2
ADNHHO ES-FE Engineer 3
ADNHHO ES-FE Engineer 4
ADNHHO FP-DO Fire Protection Engineer 1
ADNHHO FP-DO Fire Protection Engineer 3
ADNHHO FP-DO Fire Protection Engineer 4
ADNHHO SB-CS Criticality Safety Analyst 2
ADNHHO SB-CS Criticality Safety Analyst 3
ADNHHO SB-CS Criticality Safety Analyst 4
ADNHHO SB-EWM Safety Basis Analyst 2
ADNHHO SB-EWM Safety Basis Analyst 4
PADSTE
ADCLES C-IIAC Scientist 5
ADCLES C-NR Computing Systems Professional 3
ADCLES C-NR Program Manager 3
ADCLES C-NR R&D Manager 2
ADCLES C-NR Scientist 5
ADCLES C-NR Technical Project Manager 3
ADCLES C-PCS Scientist 6
ADCLES EES-17 Technical Project Manager 3
ADE AOT-OPS Operator 3
ADE AOT-OPS R&D Engineer 2
ADE AOT-RFE R&D Engineer 3
ADE PF-FS Machinist 3
ADE PF-FS Machinist 4
ADEPS LANSCE-LC Research Technologist 2
ADEPS LANSCE-LC Scientist 2
ADEPS LANSCE-LC Scientist 3
ADEPS LANSCE-NS Scientist 3
ADEPS MPA-CINT R&D Manager 3
ADEPS MPA-CINT R&D Manager 4
ADEPS MPA-CMMS R&D Manager 3
ADEPS MST-16 Research Tec 4
ADEPS MST-16 Research Tec 5
ADEPS MST-16 Research Technologist 1
ADEPS MST-7 Research Tec 3
ADEPS MST-7 Research Tec 4
ADEPS MST-8 Scientist 2
ADEPS P-23 Computing Systems Professional 3
ADEPS P-23 Scientist 2
ADEPS P-24 Computing Systems Professional 2
ADEPS P-25 Research Tec 3
ADEPS P-25 Research Technologist 1
ADTSC ACS-PO R&D Manager 5
ADTSC ACS-PO Scientist 2
ADTSC ACS-PO Scientist 3
ADTSC ACS-PO Scientist 4
PADSTE LDRD-PO Systems Programmer 3
PADSTE STBPO-RL Computing Systems Professional 2
PADSTE STBPO-RL Computing Systems Professional 3
PADWP
ADPSM NCO-1 Machinist 3
ADPSM NCO-1 Research Tec 2
ADPSM NCO-2 Process and Sampling Tec 2
ADPSM NCO-3 Research Tec 2
ADPSM NCO-5 Process and Sampling Tec 2
ADPSM NPI-2 Production Control Specialist 1
ADPSM NPI-2 Production Control Specialist 2
ADW W-11 R&D Engineer 1
ADW W-14 R&D Engineer 2
ADW W-16 R&D Engineer 3
ADW W-5 Engineering Technologist 1
ADW WX-2 Engineered Systems Tec 3
ADW WX-6 Scientist 2
ADW WX-7 Research Technologist 1
ADW XCP-1 Scientist 4
ADW XCP-7 Scientist 2
ADW XCP-9 Database Administrator 4
ADW XTD-3 Scientist 2
ADW XTD-6 Scientist 4

SAMPLE LETTER 
REQUESTING REMOVAL FROM THE EXCLUSION LIST.

NAME &

ADDRESS

Date

                                                                                                                                                        

Director,  XXX Division, or                                     By email PDF and

Associate Director, ADXXX                                    Registered Mail

Los Alamos National Laboratory

P.O. Box 1663, MS

Los Alamos, NM 87545

RE:  LANL Voluntary Separation Program.

As we are all aware, the Laboratory has recently announced a Voluntary Separation Program (VSP) in which the Laboratory is offering the payment of severance pay, which would not otherwise be due, to certain individuals who accept voluntary separation or early retirement from the Laboratory.  One of the stated purposes of the program is to encourage persons such as myself, who may have reached full retirement age but who have not yet retired, to actually take their retirement and separate from the Laboratory.  I am very interested in accepting this offer; however I am precluded from doing so by the fact that my current job classification <<                               >> is excluded from eligibility for this offer.

I feel that excluding certain classes of employees, based upon a unilateral determination by the Laboratory of their importance to the organization, is a discriminatory and unlawful restriction of this offer which has been made to all other regular employees of the Laboratory.   I feel this to be particularly true since the positions in which I and other members of the excluded class serve are solely at the discretion of the Laboratory. 

<<Optional>> Additionally, in my case, I do not feel the Laboratory is warranted in their identification of my position as “critical”, since I am aware of one or more <<_____________>> employees who are currently assigned to the suspended CMRR project, who are equally qualified, and who could easily backfill my position.

These assertions are based upon the following facts.

Ø             <<If you have been assigned to multiple groups by the Laboratory list them here.>> If I were now assigned to any one of these other groups, or its current equivalent, I would not be precluded from accepting the VSP offer.

Ø             <<If you have reached full retirement age, but have chosen to stay with the laboratory at the request of your supervisor or other manager list the details here.>>

Ø             <<If personnel of similar skills are facing layoff  from CMRR or RULOB include the following>>  I believe that my skills, and the requirements of my position, are not so unique that I cannot easily be replaced by another <<___________>> of equal or similar training and experience.  I believe this to be particularly true in light of the recent budget cuts at the CMRR Project.  According to my understanding, several << ______________>> there face loss of their positions at the end of this fiscal year.  I am sure one or more of those individuals may be interested in the position I now occupy and could easily and successfully backfill that position.

Accordingly, I hereby request waiver of my exclusion from participation in the VSP.   Due to the tight schedule established for the VSP program, I request that you provide me with notice of a decision in this matter not latter than noon, Friday March 9.

Very truly yours