Help | Contact Us
NukeWorker.com
NukeWorker Menu Hanford

Poll

Hanford

Above Average
12 (27.3%)
Average
11 (25%)
Below Average
21 (47.7%)

Total Members Voted: 22

Author Topic: Hanford  (Read 240366 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

EtherealOmega

  • Guest
Re: Hanford lay offs
« Reply #125 on: Jan 25, 2011, 02:25 »
This is going to be interesting to watch from afar. The question is whether URS is going to roll over for the Unions or meet them head on in court. From previous experience at SRS and talking with DOE reps there, a showdown is coming. Why keep lazy techs who complain about how old they are when they actually have to get out of their trucks and go work when there are people who don't hide in their offices all day. I'm not looking for a house position here as my family is a days flight away, but retention based solely on seniority is not the capitalist way. In the real world of business this would be a prime opportunity to downsize and rid themselves of dead weight.

Sun Dog

  • Guest
Re: Upcoming Hanford Site Layoffs
« Reply #126 on: Jan 25, 2011, 06:29 »

I would say that this subject is mute.
 

That would be a trick...even for your generation....jeez.  One could consider that a nice example of an oxymoron though, surely an original.


Offline snowman

Re: Upcoming Hanford Site Layoffs
« Reply #127 on: Jan 25, 2011, 07:02 »
I did not know that there are "permanent" workers at Hanford. I thought that it was all contractors or subcontractors.

They're also called staff, in-house, permanent, etc. Contract technicians are called contractors or sub-contractors, rent-a-techs (or rental techs as I heard it put one time), temps, staff augmentation, etc. Once you get some more time in the business you'll learn the lingo.

Offline Marlin

  • Forum Staff
  • *
  • Posts: 13548
  • Total likes: 542
  • Karma: 5133
  • Gender: Male
  • Stop Global Whining!!!
Re: Upcoming Hanford Site Layoffs
« Reply #128 on: Jan 25, 2011, 07:09 »
As a relatively new road tech ~5yrs experience, I would say that this subject is mute. I work for the highest bidder, though I feel greatly discriminated in the field due to my young age (27). I never expected to be at Hanford past September and can at least take a couple of months to line jobs for August and beyond. There is no shortage of work and if your a contract tech complaining about layoffs you are in the wrong field.

And people say my generation whines, jeez.


"moot"

Offline jkj

Re: Upcoming Hanford Site Layoffs
« Reply #129 on: Jan 25, 2011, 07:30 »

"moot"

maybe it's MOOOO------T? :)
Words fail me and pictures aren't much better.

"Never take no cut-offs, and hurry along as fast as you can."-- (Virginia Reed; member of Donner party.)

Offline jkj

Re: Hanford lay offs
« Reply #130 on: Jan 25, 2011, 07:50 »
This is going to be interesting to watch from afar. The question is whether URS is going to roll over for the Unions or meet them head on in court. From previous experience at SRS and talking with DOE reps there, a showdown is coming. Why keep lazy techs who complain about how old they are when they actually have to get out of their trucks and go work when there are people who don't hide in their offices all day. I'm not looking for a house position here as my family is a days flight away, but retention based solely on seniority is not the capitalist way. In the real world of business this would be a prime opportunity to downsize and rid themselves of dead weight.

 +K +K +K +K--karma to you, EtherealOmega, I'm at SRS and hope I don't get laid-off but I'm totally Sick of hearing of my "seniority will protect me--I've got seniority" crap I've heard since I got here. Like another poster said on another forum---we've got more loafers here than Thom Mcann's ;D
Words fail me and pictures aren't much better.

"Never take no cut-offs, and hurry along as fast as you can."-- (Virginia Reed; member of Donner party.)

Sun Dog

  • Guest
Re: Hanford lay offs
« Reply #131 on: Jan 25, 2011, 07:56 »

Like another poster said on another forum---we've got more loafers here than Thom Mcann's ;D


To cite my good friend Retread...


What a memory! +K


Offline Marlin

  • Forum Staff
  • *
  • Posts: 13548
  • Total likes: 542
  • Karma: 5133
  • Gender: Male
  • Stop Global Whining!!!
Re: Upcoming Hanford Site Layoffs
« Reply #132 on: Jan 25, 2011, 08:07 »
maybe it's MOOOO------T? :)

BAAAA.......Goats and sheep seem to apply here with blame and blind followers abounding.  ;) Cows no longer seem to apply as they will no longer be allowed to milk it. Metaphors should be carefully used.  :old:


 [devious] [OT]


Offline Marlin

  • Forum Staff
  • *
  • Posts: 13548
  • Total likes: 542
  • Karma: 5133
  • Gender: Male
  • Stop Global Whining!!!
Re: Upcoming Hanford Site Layoffs
« Reply #133 on: Jan 25, 2011, 08:20 »
OK to move myself and this thread back on topic. DOE cuts of this nature have little to do with age or performance. If you are in the wrong place at the wrong time you are on the road. I've been through two workforce transitions of DOE sites layoffs always ended up being smaller than projected and rumors stampeding around the site (OK there is a MOOO there  ;) with the stampede) most of which were wrong..

Offline MrHazmat

  • Principal Hazardous Material Specialist - DOE
  • Moderate User
  • ***
  • Posts: 186
  • Total likes: 0
  • Karma: 136
  • Gender: Male
  • DragRacing Ain't Nothing Like It!!!!!!
Re: Hanford lay offs
« Reply #134 on: Jan 27, 2011, 07:47 »
From what our level 1 manager said, seniority will only help the people with good work ethics and practices. Sorry/bad workers will leave first this time, for the first time in SRS history
Keeping our highways safe for over 40 years

Orange Crush

  • Guest
Re: Hanford lay offs
« Reply #135 on: Jan 27, 2011, 09:33 »
Isn't this an Oakridge thread?

Offline Marlin

  • Forum Staff
  • *
  • Posts: 13548
  • Total likes: 542
  • Karma: 5133
  • Gender: Male
  • Stop Global Whining!!!
Re: Hanford lay offs
« Reply #136 on: Jan 27, 2011, 09:55 »
Isn't this an Oakridge thread?

NukeWorker Forum > Facility & Company Information > Region IV (Western) > Hanford > Hanford lay offs

or was this  :->
« Last Edit: Jan 27, 2011, 09:56 by Marlin »

Offline MrHazmat

  • Principal Hazardous Material Specialist - DOE
  • Moderate User
  • ***
  • Posts: 186
  • Total likes: 0
  • Karma: 136
  • Gender: Male
  • DragRacing Ain't Nothing Like It!!!!!!
Re: Hanford lay offs
« Reply #137 on: Jan 31, 2011, 07:15 »
From what our level 1 manager said, seniority will only help the people with good work ethics and practices. Sorry/bad workers will leave first this time, for the first time in SRS history

No, just in a hurry, old, dumb and in the wrong place, old age is a .......
Keeping our highways safe for over 40 years

Offline 105KW

  • Moderate User
  • ***
  • Posts: 89
  • Total likes: 0
  • Karma: 55
  • Tell Recruiters to use NukeWorker.com
Re: Upcoming Hanford Site Layoffs
« Reply #138 on: Jan 31, 2011, 09:35 »
OK to move myself and this thread back on topic. DOE cuts of this nature have little to do with age or performance. If you are in the wrong place at the wrong time you are on the road. I've been through two workforce transitions of DOE sites layoffs always ended up being smaller than projected and rumors stampeding around the site (OK there is a MOOO there  ;) with the stampede) most of which were wrong..


Marlin,
You are so correct. I have been through several myself at DOE. The layoff numbers have never come to pass with what is first projected. I suspect there will be house techs go this time, just not as many as feared.

105kw

Offline pringles can

Re: Hanford Union
« Reply #139 on: Feb 17, 2011, 03:32 »
I would be in favor of removing the union all together.  It would be nice to see things based on performance rather than years served.  There are many seasoned people here that are amazing to work with, but many times the top of the seniority list is borderline comatose.

Offline 105KW

  • Moderate User
  • ***
  • Posts: 89
  • Total likes: 0
  • Karma: 55
  • Tell Recruiters to use NukeWorker.com
Re: Hanford Union
« Reply #140 on: Feb 18, 2011, 01:07 »
I would be in favor of removing the union all together.  It would be nice to see things based on performance rather than years served.  There are many seasoned people here that are amazing to work with, but many times the top of the seniority list is borderline comatose.

pringles,
I guess the question I would ask is performance based on whose perception ?  Washington Closure ? WRPS ? CHG ? yours ? .  I would assume ( maybe I'm wrong ) you have only been out at the site a short of amount of time.  You have to remember those "comatose" seniors you have to deal with have been there, done that and played the DOE merry-go-round a long time.  They are not comatose they have just learned to not get too excited about much.  Not slamming you, just ask that you have a little perspective. ;)

105KW


tagline

  • Guest
Re: Hanford Union
« Reply #141 on: Feb 18, 2011, 04:40 »
I have to agree with 105KW. I am new to Hanford and am fortunate to be working with a great bunch of HPT's here. They all are very willing to help and all pull up the boot straps when they are givin their assignments. I hear that not all areas are like that here, that is why I count my blessings. Then again I can adjust to anything when I am making this kind of money for a job that is not very hard at all.

Offline pringles can

Re: Hanford Union
« Reply #142 on: Feb 20, 2011, 01:40 »
Just as I said in my original post, there are some that are very well versed and great to work with.  However, to not call out the shortfalls by a large number of the employees here is dis-honest.  The unions are chocking the life out of all aspects of industry, and in my opinion, it is not sustainable.  I watch the same people day in and day out do absolutely nothing, with no fear of repercussions.  Ultimately, the union is cannibalistic and only furthers peoples personal interests.  Once it hits the fan, there is no "brotherhood", rather everyone looks out for number one.  I had a great job before this one, complete with benefits, etc.  There was no union, just the knowledge that if you did not perform and work hard, you would be replaced.  Unions had their place, but I feel that it has become ridiculous.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/02/17/entitlement-evolution-poses-threat-americas-finances/#

Offline RRhoads

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 293
  • Total likes: 8
  • Karma: 334
  • Gender: Male
  • it was like like that when i got here!
Re: Hanford Union
« Reply #143 on: Feb 20, 2011, 06:08 »
If you are working out in the area, then you most likely pay dues in some way, shape or fashion.
If you are working at Hanford, and so anti-union...set the example, stand up and leave.
Dont bite the hand that feeds you, and feeds you very well.
 8)

Soul Merchant

  • Guest
Re: Hanford Union
« Reply #144 on: Feb 20, 2011, 08:45 »
RRhoads: don't fool yourself, the union is not the hand that feeds. If anything, the union is the symbiotic parasite which would not exist without the hand that feeds OR those that bite who are willing to trade their dues for the services rendered. Although, I would wager that many are not willing to trade their dues for the services rendered, they simply have no choice. Yes, yes, you are right- they could leave. What a choice! Next you will start telling me how government inefficiency and waste are good for us...

Offline RRhoads

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 293
  • Total likes: 8
  • Karma: 334
  • Gender: Male
  • it was like like that when i got here!
Re: Hanford Union
« Reply #145 on: Feb 20, 2011, 09:00 »
Iam not being naive, I have a pretty good idea about how it works out ther.When i was a road tech, i always had a choice.dont like paying dues leave..If you're a travler coming in on Stimulus bucks and dont like the Union, leave..thts all iam saying....its NOT your house...nor is it mine. ;)
And it figures you sink the topic down to party affiliation.  ::)
Nuff said.
« Last Edit: Feb 20, 2011, 09:06 by RRhoads »

duke99301

  • Guest
Re: Hanford Union
« Reply #146 on: Feb 20, 2011, 09:13 »
They did nothing for me when I was  there  but I can say this one of my Union Brothers ratted me out to the boss I was getting calls for other jobs. but what the heck I got 10 k out of them sitting in training. and it proved to me in my mind never go back stay forward in your progress. I left there as am alara eng.back to making more than the slugs I was with and less hoops to jump through now I am back working safety and project management.
I could rant all day about CR and the walkout years ago. But if want to be in a union go house somewhere.

Offline 105KW

  • Moderate User
  • ***
  • Posts: 89
  • Total likes: 0
  • Karma: 55
  • Tell Recruiters to use NukeWorker.com
Re: Hanford Union
« Reply #147 on: Feb 20, 2011, 09:14 »
 In a Perfect world we would not need a union.  I find it interesting the folks with the strongest ant-union feelings are most likely short term RCT/HPT's  at the site. I  came from anti-union state down south many years ago and couldn't understand why the  "union" thought they needed my money.   After all the company was willing to pay me to relocate, give a nice salary, wouldn't force me to work overtime, buy all my winter gear, supply me with work boots, give me 10 days of holiday pay, decent medical, 401k, 3 week vacation ( at 5 years ), education reimbursement ,pay me when bad weather closes the site...etc...etc...Even without a  union  I am sure they would still give me this out of the goodness of their heart. After all the company is here to look out for me aren't they ?  :-\
 The fact is without some bargaining power ( as meek as is it is )  the average working guy or gal would in a far worse shape. We are not in a perfect world Dorothy and your not in Kansas anymore.

105KW



reckingballc

  • Guest
Re: Hanford Union
« Reply #148 on: Feb 24, 2011, 06:13 »
Good point Mr. Meyers.

Content1

  • Guest
Re: Hanford Union
« Reply #149 on: Feb 24, 2011, 08:16 »
My only problem with unions is they exclude people if you are not a "brother."   If you somehow get in they force you to join, take your money and then use some of it for politics for candidates I dislike, like Kerry back in '04 or Pelosi and Reid and Obama in 08.   On the other hand, I also think you have more power in a union to bargain collectively and that is OK.  The solution is to take a persons money only for bargaining, and not for political purposes unless you expressly agree to it and have open books to insure it is not happening against your will.

 


NukeWorker ™ is a registered trademark of NukeWorker.com ™, LLC © 1996-2021 All rights reserved.
All material on this Web Site, including text, photographs, graphics, code and/or software, are protected by international copyright/trademark laws and treaties. Unauthorized use is not permitted. You may not modify, copy, reproduce, republish, upload, post, transmit or distribute, in any manner, the material on this web site or any portion of it. Doing so will result in severe civil and criminal penalties, and will be prosecuted to the maximum extent possible under the law.
Privacy Statement | Terms of Use | Code of Conduct | Spam Policy | Advertising Info | Contact Us | Forum Rules | Password Problem?