Help | Contact Us
NukeWorker.com
NukeWorker Menu Hanford
honeypot

Poll

Hanford

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

Total Members Voted: 22

Author Topic: Hanford  (Read 264537 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Radiationman85

  • Light User
  • **
  • Posts: 17
  • Karma: -1
Re: quess on the union number being laid off???
« Reply #250 on: Jul 27, 2011, 10:46 »
So here we sit... I guess we will know on this friday the 29th.

subwayjaredsux

  • Guest
Re: quess on the union number being laid off???
« Reply #251 on: Jul 29, 2011, 04:00 »
164 house 72 contract

Offline 105KW

  • Moderate User
  • ***
  • Posts: 89
  • Karma: 55
  • Tell Recruiters to use NukeWorker.com
Re: quess on the union number being laid off???
« Reply #252 on: Aug 07, 2011, 09:31 »
164 house 72 contract

Puts us right the 500 mark give or take few...Now will WRPS back fill the 25 or so they are losing to the bump ? ..What about WCH ?

Any ones guess is good at this point

105KW

Offline Radiationman85

  • Light User
  • **
  • Posts: 17
  • Karma: -1
Re: quess on the union number being laid off???
« Reply #253 on: Aug 08, 2011, 09:59 »
well new number for revsion 1 is 176 house and 72 contract......

Offline 105KW

  • Moderate User
  • ***
  • Posts: 89
  • Karma: 55
  • Tell Recruiters to use NukeWorker.com
Re: quess on the union number being laid off???
« Reply #254 on: Aug 10, 2011, 11:26 »
well new number for revsion 1 is 176 house and 72 contract......

Looks like if that number holds that would put the layoff down to about number 472 on the list..Somewhere around May of 09 seniority.

105KW

Offline 105KW

  • Moderate User
  • ***
  • Posts: 89
  • Karma: 55
  • Tell Recruiters to use NukeWorker.com
Re: quess on the union number being laid off???
« Reply #255 on: Aug 18, 2011, 12:52 »
Whats your best guess or rumour on HPT/RCT numbers for lay off?
We have 674 house techs and 82 contract techs.

I am hearing and guessing myself we will be laying off all contract techs (82) and going down to 500 house. Giving a grand total of 256 being laid off.


Thoughts?

Here the march goes...From WRPS president today...More coming:

 have tough news to share with you today.

In our last few all-employee meetings, I talked about the status of the Fiscal Year 2012 budget process and, most recently, the fact that we had submitted a Workforce Restructuring Plan to DOE.  
We have now received approval to move forward with that plan.  Depending on final FY-12 funding levels, the restructuring could affect up to 475 WRPS employees, both represented and non-represented.  The Workforce Restructuring Plan includes a Self-Select option, to be followed by an Involuntary Reduction of Force (IROF).
Information and a detailed schedule for both the Self-Select and IROF actions will be distributed to all employees in a separate announcement today. The last day of employment for employees affected under the Workforce Restructuring Plan will be no later than Oct. 13, 2011.  
I know this is sobering news.  Early in the year, we had not anticipated an involuntary reduction of force would be necessary as we had planned for growth in our FY-12 base funding.  This growth in base funding was expected to offset the loss of Recovery Act funding and allow us to maintain stable employment levels.  The President’s budget request, submitted to Congress in February, supported that approach.

However, implementation of the Workforce Restructuring Plan is necessary to address the current budget shortfall that exists between the President’s Budget Request of $521 million and either the House-approved budget of $408 million or a potential Continuing Resolution funding level of $397 million.  Once Congress returns from its August recess after Labor Day, it could finish an FY-12 budget with a tank farm funding level different from the numbers above.  If this happens, we would adjust our workforce restructuring plan accordingly.  But, significantly reduced funding levels appear likely to take effect Oct. 1, and we must prepare to reduce our workforce to match the expected decrease in funding.  

I know job security has been a concern for many of our bargaining unit employees since at least last January when the CHPRC and MSA reductions were announced, and that concern has spread to many more of us during the past several months.  Yet, despite this, you have set a new safety record for the tank farms, working more than a million hours without a recordable injury, and you continue to successfully complete project milestones.  I’m truly proud of what you have accomplished despite difficult circumstances.

Unfortunately, as you can see, the trying times are not over, and I ask for your continued professionalism, empathy for those who will be leaving and extra attention to safety during the weeks ahead.  Please take care of yourself and those around you.

Chuck






 
« Last Edit: Aug 18, 2011, 12:56 by 105KW »

Offline 105KW

  • Moderate User
  • ***
  • Posts: 89
  • Karma: 55
  • Tell Recruiters to use NukeWorker.com
Re: quess on the union number being laid off???
« Reply #256 on: Aug 18, 2011, 04:06 »
well new number for revsion 1 is 176 house and 72 contract......


Well a little good news...CHPRC just revised their layoff numbers downward by 4. The total number continues to evolve.

105KW

Offline Rennhack

  • Forum Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 8996
  • Karma: 4683
  • Gender: Male
Re: quess on the union number being laid off???
« Reply #257 on: Aug 20, 2011, 03:50 »
http://www.tri-cityherald.com/2011/08/19/1608413/1100-hanford-layoffs-planned.html

Quote
The Department of Energy has authorized its environmental cleanup contractors at Hanford to lay off up to 1,100 more workers in the fiscal year that starts Oct. 1.

That's in addition to up to 1,985 layoffs already announced this year, the majority of which will be Sept. 29.

Hanford started the year with about 12,000 employees, meaning the potential layoffs announced this year would cut jobs by about a quarter.

That does not include the jobs at Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, where about 50 jobs are expected to be trimmed from its staff of about 4,470 in Richland.

The most recent projected layoffs are to prepare for the new fiscal year federal budget, which is expected to reduce Hanford's annual budget. The number of layoffs required will not be known until Congress passes a Hanford budget.

The projected 1,100 new layoffs will start with up to 475 jobs at the Hanford tank farms, where 56 million gallons of radioactive waste awaiting treatment are stored in underground tanks. The last day of work for those employees will be no later than Oct. 13.

The layoffs announced earlier this year are mostly linked to the end of federal economic stimulus money. Hanford received $1.96 billion in American Recovery and Reinvestment Act money that should be mostly spent by Sept. 29.

The 1,985 layoffs announced earlier this year also include up to 210 jobs at Washington Closure Hanford in fiscal 2012, as it begins the gradual ramp down of work as cleanup along the Columbia River is completed.

The Tri-Cities has known that layoffs were coming as the last of the Recovery Act money was spent, said Gary Petersen, vice president of Hanford programs for the Tri-City Development Council.

But the layoffs announced Thursday are different, he said. They are linked to the annual budget money Hanford receives.

DOE is allowing the cleanup contractors to cut up to 1,100 positions starting soon, rather than waiting until a budget is approved.

If a substantially lower budget is approved months into the fiscal year, contractors run the risk of overspending early in the year and having to make even deeper cuts in the remainder of the year to meet the budget.

"By approving work force restructuring even before we receive our final budget for next year, we are giving our contractors more time to plan for the transition," said DOE spokesman Geoff Tyree.

Under the administration's budget proposal for fiscal 2012, Washington River Protection Solutions, the tank farm contractor, would have received $521 million. This year it received more than that with $397 million in annual baseline money plus $157 million in economic stimulus money.

The House budget proposes dropping the $521 million proposed budget for the coming year to $408 million. The Senate has yet to take up the budget. If Congress does not pass a budget, the tank farms must operate on a budget based on the $397 million in baseline money in received this year.

The announced cuts of up to 475 jobs at the tank farms are based on what Washington River Protection Solutions believes is the worst case funding scenario. The number could be adjusted after Congress returns in early September from its August recess.

Washington River Protection Solutions had announced no layoffs tied to Recovery Act money, because long-term DOE spending plans called for an increase in spending at the tank farms to prepare for the start of treatment of tank waste at the Hanford vitrification plant. That would create jobs to replace the Recovery Act jobs.

Work needs to be done to prepare to transfer the waste to the vitrification plant and to store the glassified waste after it is created. Plans also called for increasing the money spent to retrieve radioactive waste from leak-prone underground tanks.

"I know this is sobering news," said Chuck Spencer, president of Washington River Protection Solutions. "Significantly reduced funding levels appear likely to take effect Oct. 1, and we must prepare to reduce our work force to match expected decrease in funding."

Tank farm workers can volunteer for layoffs until Sept. 1.

Union workers will be given layoff notices Sept. 19 and their last day of work will be Sept. 29.

About 85 tank farm union workers already were expected to be laid off Sept. 29 as part of Hanford's union "bump and roll" policy that eliminates jobs of workers with the least seniority sitewide when any contractor has layoffs.

Nonunion tank farm employees will be given layoff notices Oct. 3 and will work no later than Oct. 13. They will be eligible for severance pay of a week's pay per year worked up to a maximum of 20 years.

CH2M Hill Plateau Remediation Co. told workers Thursday that it is not planning to lay off more workers in fiscal 2012, but that will depend on the budget Congress passes.
It plans to lay off about 1,350 union and nonunion workers Sept. 29, including experienced and new workers for CH2M Hill and its preselected subcontractors, as Recovery Act spending ends and it adjusts its mix of skills needed for the coming fiscal year. The total includes about 150 workers approved for voluntary layoffs in June.

Mission Support Alliance told workers Thursday that a possibility of budget shortfalls could require further staff cuts in the coming months. It laid off 125 workers in March and is preparing to lay off up to 300 more Sept. 29.

Washington Closure Hanford does not anticipate any job cuts linked to the fiscal 2012 budget. However, it has notified workers that it will be cutting up to 210 jobs in the coming fiscal year linked to the ramp down of work as cleanup along the Columbia River is completed.

"We realize this is already a difficult time for the work force as stimulus work comes to an end," Tyree said. "The department is doing everything possible to minimize the overall impacts to the work force and community in the coming years."

CH2M Hill has organized a job fair 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. today at TRAC for Hanford workers, including those laid off earlier this year.
« Last Edit: Aug 20, 2011, 03:52 by Rennhack »

Offline pringles can

  • Light User
  • **
  • Posts: 18
  • Karma: 12
Re: quess on the union number being laid off???
« Reply #258 on: Aug 22, 2011, 01:22 »
It is almost criminal what the big dogs around here raked in off of the ARA money. 

Offline 105KW

  • Moderate User
  • ***
  • Posts: 89
  • Karma: 55
  • Tell Recruiters to use NukeWorker.com
Re: quess on the union number being laid off???
« Reply #259 on: Aug 22, 2011, 02:12 »
Rumors are out for the WRPS layoff numbers.  :-\ Check with your steward for the latest word on numbers. I really don't want throw something out there that might shake some up and be WAY off base.

105KW
« Last Edit: Sep 01, 2011, 04:16 by 105KW »

Offline 105KW

  • Moderate User
  • ***
  • Posts: 89
  • Karma: 55
  • Tell Recruiters to use NukeWorker.com
Re: quess on the union number being laid off???
« Reply #260 on: Aug 24, 2011, 03:27 »
Number out from WRPS today. 40 RCT head Count to be excessed.   Seniority List number seems to float around the 447 Level give or take a few. Self Selects have not been figured yet in WRPS. This will effect the final number as well.


105KW :o

duke99301

  • Guest
Re: quess on the union number being laid off???
« Reply #261 on: Aug 27, 2011, 11:28 »
so what if your in or out. I left the in 87 and never looked back. as far as I am concerned I never be in a union ever.
as I recall HP is a support craft and that's what we have to deal with no matter where  you work. I my self no my project will be done in oct and off to find one more. and I never heard so much  complaining when a craft is told they are not getting the double bubble day . a friend showed me a list of the NPOs left at hanford if I had stayed being 54 years old now I would have been #4 on the list all that gets you in a better pick on your vac. day. I recall when we had some new rad tech off the road trying to tell us he was stopping a job down in the tank farms. seems he did not NPO were all meter qaul. we did not need him. by the time they came back we had closed the tank took out the cameras and moved on to another project and he was no longer covering our work. Hum. ( support as I recall . ) that place is dead a lot of people are going some day take your package and move on. I got a friend out there who is a good Rp and she was talking some of the DOE techs who are leaving and never worked nukes, and have to come in as JR hPTs. will they have a lot to learn it is just like  the F.O.B.s elts they made them SR. HPs but did not know jack for a few outages.
any ways hanfords is done unless you want to dig dirt. no more q clearance's no more running plants  FFTF is dead. and you might as will do the same with the old WPPS what a night mare that sight is no wonder they are 103 out of 104.
oh if I had waited two more weeks in 87 I would have got a buy out then but I did not know it was coming but who cares take it and go there is a lot of good work out there .
heck I am looking at wall-mart greater that could be a great job if the diem was right

Offline Protectologist

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 55
  • Karma: 28
  • Gender: Male
Re: quess on the union number being laid off???
« Reply #262 on: Aug 28, 2011, 09:57 »
I can tell that, like your motto, you are fully armored.

Offline HydroDave63

  • Retired
  • *
  • Posts: 6295
  • Karma: 6629
Re: quess on the union number being laid off???
« Reply #263 on: Aug 28, 2011, 11:13 »
heck I am looking at wall-mart greater that could be a great job if the diem was right

Offline liam

  • Light User
  • **
  • Posts: 40
  • Karma: 64
  • Gender: Male
  • I love NukeWorker.com!
Re: quess on the union number being laid off???
« Reply #264 on: Aug 28, 2011, 03:10 »
I left the in 87 and never looked back.

I believe you should have inserted the words  "English Language" after the word in!

I recall when we had some new rad tech off the road trying to tell us he was stopping a job down in the tank farms. seems he did not NPO were all meter qaul. we did not need him. by the time they came back we had closed the tank took out the cameras and moved on to another project and he was no longer covering our work. Hum. 

This shows how much you care about nuclear safety.  If I had been that new tech I would have went straight to DOE and got your ass fired.


Next time sober up before you post a rant.  The techs I worked with at Hanford where some of the best techs I have ever worked with, Commercial, DOE, or Navy.

Offline Laundry Man

  • Heavy User
  • ****
  • Posts: 316
  • Karma: 334
Re: quess on the union number being laid off???
« Reply #265 on: Aug 29, 2011, 09:12 »
Becoming an English teacher isn't in your future.
LM

Offline pringles can

  • Light User
  • **
  • Posts: 18
  • Karma: 12
Re: quess on the union number being laid off???
« Reply #266 on: Aug 30, 2011, 05:26 »
Regardless of Dukes grammer, I have to agree with him.  This union is out of control, and everyone suffers because of it.  I dont see how alot of these people can be honest and hold their head high, knowing the amount of crap that they pull at work, not to mention the amount of tax payer dollars that they waste.  It makes me wonder if they see some of the young techs that are willing to work losing their jobs, and feel at all guilty.  When do leave Hanford, I will do it with the knowledge that the union has ruined the work ethic and productivity of many employees here.  That is the truth if you are being honest.

Offline silverbullet02

  • Light User
  • **
  • Posts: 10
  • Karma: -1
Re: quess on the union number being laid off???
« Reply #267 on: Aug 30, 2011, 06:06 »
Regardless of Dukes grammer, I have to agree with him.  This union is out of control, and everyone suffers because of it.  I dont see how alot of these people can be honest and hold their head high, knowing the amount of crap that they pull at work, not to mention the amount of tax payer dollars that they waste.  It makes me wonder if they see some of the young techs that are willing to work losing their jobs, and feel at all guilty.  When do leave Hanford, I will do it with the knowledge that the union has ruined the work ethic and productivity of many employees here.  That is the truth if you are being honest.

I agree. It amazes me every day when I think of so many turds that will be keeping their jobs while so many of us that work hard are sent packing. 

tagline

  • Guest
Re: quess on the union number being laid off???
« Reply #268 on: Aug 30, 2011, 06:24 »
Someones bitter. I have been here for about 15 months. I am out of here at the end of Sept. I had the same mindset as you 2 when I got here. It is just not the union that has fostered the work ethic here. I have been told by management in a round about way that it is best to just wear blinders here. It is just not the union it is the whole site in general. When management sends out 5 techs to do a job that  1 tech could do it is just all about the billable hours.
Granted there are a lot of younger techs here who have been Hanfordized. But can you blame them or the union alone? When in Rome do as the Romans. This place will never change. And in defense of a lot of the techs here, they do as they are told. The DOE does not seem to mind about any of this at all. All they care about is if your sweatshirt hood is under your PC's.

Offline snowman

  • Moderate User
  • ***
  • Posts: 110
  • Karma: 54
  • I love NukeWorker.com!
Re: quess on the union number being laid off???
« Reply #269 on: Aug 30, 2011, 06:40 »
As this has been stated numerous times on this thread and other Hanford topics, if you came to Hanford (or any other DOE cleanup site) under ARRA, Stimulus Funds, or whatever program you want to call it, and had expectations other than being there for the duration of that funding you were being naive. Take the opportunity that you were given there to learn from and be grateful for the good money you made in a bad economy. Constantly posting rants about the union and techs who are senior to you that you perceive to be lazy and unworthy of staying behind makes you sound like a whiny sniveler. It does you and this forum no good.

Soul Merchant

  • Guest
Re: quess on the union number being laid off???
« Reply #270 on: Aug 30, 2011, 07:13 »
Snowman I have to disagree. The total site layoffs are projected to exceed 2,110 and that number will be revised upward during the first quarter of fiscal 2012 barring a near miracle in Congress passing a larger budget. To say that people being laid off are naive when their start date at site is as early as 2003 is at best a crass generalization based upon ignorance, at worst... well that might offend some so I will leave those details to the imagination.

I think this forum is a perfect place for the exchange of ideas, virtual conversation in which not all parties will agree, plans for the future which at this point is quite bleak for many, regardless of what fantasy land you thought they were living in. Can you have some empathy, and not be another union genius who thinks they owe nothing at all to seniority?

Offline Protectologist

  • Gold Member
  • *
  • Posts: 55
  • Karma: 28
  • Gender: Male
Re: quess on the union number being laid off???
« Reply #271 on: Aug 31, 2011, 09:53 »
As hard as it is for some to accept, Hanford is just another contract job. The "prime contract" people often forget that they took the job as a contractor and need to be ready to accept the terms of the contract when they got the job. Right now Hanford is going through some changes that are within the contract. From now on we should try to remember that we're all contractors here and just like all the rest our part of the contract is over and it's time to move on. So I'll see some of you down the road. But don't I always?

Offline 105KW

  • Moderate User
  • ***
  • Posts: 89
  • Karma: 55
  • Tell Recruiters to use NukeWorker.com
Re: quess on the union number being laid off???
« Reply #272 on: Aug 31, 2011, 10:23 »
Snowman I have to disagree. The total site layoffs are projected to exceed 2,110 and that number will be revised upward during the first quarter of fiscal 2012 barring a near miracle in Congress passing a larger budget. To say that people being laid off are naive when their start date at site is as early as 2003 is at best a crass generalization based upon ignorance, at worst... well that might offend some so I will leave those details to the imagination.

I think this forum is a perfect place for the exchange of ideas, virtual conversation in which not all parties will agree, plans for the future which at this point is quite bleak for many, regardless of what fantasy land you thought they were living in. Can you have some empathy, and not be another union genius who thinks they owe nothing at all to seniority?

Just to clarify here... NO RCT with a hire date before May of 2009 will be involuntarily laid off so far.  If your date of 2003 is talking about exempts, then it has more to do with rankings that the management gives themselves than it does anything else.

105KW


« Last Edit: Aug 31, 2011, 10:25 by 105KW »

Offline pringles can

  • Light User
  • **
  • Posts: 18
  • Karma: 12
Re: quess on the union number being laid off???
« Reply #273 on: Aug 31, 2011, 02:05 »
Also Frosty, not everyone being laid off was hired with ARRA money.  I dont feel that expressing my disdain with the union and way of doing things is sniveling.  I simply dissagree with the wasting of tax payer money and the absolute lack of accountability that is the norm here.  Is that wrong?  Is it wrong to expect people to show up on time, act like adults, or just have a little bit of pride in general?  I apologize for being honest.  I agree with Soul Merchant, this forum is a perfect place to express opinions, even if they counter your strong views.

Offline roadhp

  • Moderate User
  • ***
  • Posts: 161
  • Karma: 198
  • Gender: Male
  • Playing in the bathtub!!!
Re: quess on the union number being laid off???
« Reply #274 on: Aug 31, 2011, 04:15 »
Anyone who thinks things will stay the same at Hanford is fooling themselves.  Eventually it will have an end, and just like at Rocky Flats, that end will have some major changes associated with it, including most likely the subcontractors starting to take over the RP duties.  At RF everyone in the end was a subcontractor, and all "house" were either laid off or rolled over.  It might take a while, but someday there won't be enough techs to continue the union and it too will cease to exist.  If you see any push for the W T F, then that is just a push in this direction.
« Last Edit: Sep 01, 2011, 04:59 by roadhp »
Brave, brave Sir Robin, set forth from Camelot!!!!

 


NukeWorker ™ is a registered trademark of NukeWorker.com ™, LLC © 1996-2024 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?