As many of you know, Shawn Carpenter, a former Sandian was recently awarded 4.7 million dollars for unfair termination and defamation. The jury more than doubled the requested punitive damages requested by Carpenter's attorneys and determined that Sandia's handling of Shawn Carpenter's termination was "malicious, willful, reckless, wanton, fraudulent or in bad faith." Juror Ed Dzienis said that, "If they (Sandia) have an interest in protecting us, they certainly didn't show it with the way they handled Shawn." Ms. Alex Scott, the jury forewoman, said jurors were upset by the lack of documentation of the process and by the "reckless behavior on the part of Sandia to not have adequate policies in place for employees about hacking, and the cavalier attitude about national security and global security."
This has been an interesting case and verdict for many of us at Sandia. Personally, I think that Carpenter was both a bit of a cowboy and a hero. Did he play by the rules? Probably not. The needed rules did not exist. Do I believe that he was acting in the public interest to track down the TITAN RAIN hackers? Absolutely. Sandia for it's part, "screwed the pooch". Carpenter was threatened and intimidated by Sandia's counterintelligence chief. Laboratory management did not do the right thing and came across as arrogant, uninformed, and not acting in the best interest of the nation.
After the verdict, many of us had hoped that this might cause laboratory management to reevaluate their actions and to work harder at becoming the laboratory that we want to be known for.
Alas. It is not to be. On 28 February, Sandia Laboratory Director Tom Hunter sent the following email to all staff. I for one was shocked. It shows both arrogance and a complete lack of reality about how laboratory staff feel about this issue and what has been reported in the press. Hunter is concerned with "any perception that the laboratory may not have acted in the best service of the nation". As far as the jury was concerned, this is not an issue of perception, it is a matter of fact. I agree with the jury.
I believe that Hunter's recent email reconfirms this. He is unwilling to take any responsibility for the poor actions of his management team. I see this as a total failure of leadership and a disservice to the Nation.
Dear Sandians,
As many of you are aware, a New Mexico state court jury awarded former Sandian Shawn Carpenter more than $4 million on February 13, 2007. The outcome of the trial was a great disappointment to me personally, but I am most concerned about any perception that the laboratory may not have acted in the best interest of the nation.
It is essential in all cases that Sandians adhere to the principle of putting the nation first. I firmly believe Sandia must always conduct its work lawfully, with appropriate authorizations, and when people step beyond clear boundaries we must act responsibly. In fact, living and acting upon our values are of the utmost importance to our continuing to have the opportunity to provide exceptional service to the nation. I and the management team are committed to these values in all we do and every decision we make.
In my career at Sandia, I have come to know Sandia as a place of exemplary character and values, earned through the exceptional conduct of its employees and the significant contributions you have all made to national security. Our values are not new. For more than 60 years, service to the nation, excellence in our conduct and work, respect for each other, integrity, and teamwork have shaped our decisions at Sandia.
In closing, I ask that each of you take a moment and reflect on the exceptional service that you render in the national interest. I have a deep respect for our employees and this organization, the values we stand for, and the commitment we all have to our mission. Our contributions, both individually and collectively, are critically important to our nation’s security.
Sincerely,
Tom Hunter
23 comments:
Hunter's comments are such an embarrassment for Sandia.
Welcome to the club, Sandians!
As a retired LANL staffer, I can only observe that your current management bears some striking resemblances to that of LANL's recent management teams, starting with George P. Nanos, and inclusive of our current UC-inspired manager, Mike Anastasio.
The Shawn Carpenter case does demonstrate clear management ineptness at SNL.
-LANL Retiree
More importantly, the comments are embarrassing for current employees of the Lab. It is beyond my grasp what Dr. Hunter and Sandia executive management were thinking when they sent out that email. The email says one of two things: (1) Executive management is living in an execu-bubble, and is completely out of touch with the Sandia workforce, or (2) Sandia executive management thinks their employees are mindless monkeys that will blindly believe what they are spoon fed. The situation has been deteriorating out of the public eye for some time now, largely due to the very effective PR gatekeepers here. Sandia was confident their team of attorneys would crush Carpenter, and his case would never see the courtroom. They obviously misread the facts, believed line management's version of events, and/or underestimated Carpenter's determination.
The employees need to be able to freely discuss the issues raised in this case, make positive changes, and find a path forward. It's unbelievable that nothing about this case was mentioned in the most recent Lab News delivered to my Sandia mailbox. As a career Sandian, this lack of communication from senior management is unacceptable. It's time to get with the program and engage your employees in the professional manner that your highly educated scientists and workers are entitled to. We'd like to see some leadership from our leaders sometime very soon. Thank you.
This has been dugg at:
http://digg.com/security/Nuclear_Weapons_Lab_Continues_to_Deny_Reality_in_Hacker_Case
Ed, how do we contact you if we have comments/documents we wish to submit for posting consideration?
Thanks!
Would the Congress please set up a means for Sandians to safely contact staff investigators for an oversight committee function, in Albuquerque? Have a way for Sandia staff to get legal protection, to give evidence to disinterested investigators, to provide documents legally and without reprisal. Get us amnesty for disclosing evidence of classified crimes. Classification is being used to cover up serious breaches of public trust and public safety. Please someone help. I wish I were making this up, we need outside intervention and the system appears to be broken. Otherwise, at what point does our duty to our fellow citizens require civil disobedience to disclose these matters publicly?
It is readily apparent that Carpenter stepped over clear boundaries put in place by his management. Despite the obviously biased media reporting, Sandia managers conducted a fair and thorough review of the facts surrounding Carpenter's activities. Dr. Hunter's decision to end this employee's relationship with the corporation was completely appropriate, given that he disobeyed instructions clearly conveyed to him by his supervisors.
Carpenter's case says nothing about the working environment inside of the Laboratory. There are clear policies and procedures that have proven very effective in the past. The reality is that Carpenter made personal decisions to not follow the rules. When employees chose to not follow the rules, there are consequences for their actions.
Sandia is an excellent place to work, and makes huge contributions to the local economy and community. Sandia employees contribute millions to the United Way and other charitable organizations on a daily basis. To suggest otherwise is pure nonsense.
You speak of that which you know not, 5:50 PM.
@4:08PM: I'm sorry. All I can suggest is to contact the offices of Senators Domenici and Binghaman as well as that of Congresswoman Wilson. I have had long talks with all of them regarding leadership shortfalls within both NNSA and Sandia. Their offices are sympathetic.
@4:08PM
An interesting attitude. But it appears that the jury didn't agree with you.
Sandia does not exist to contribute to the United Way.
If Sandia is doing such a great job in the community, why does it continue to leave hundreds of thousands of cu ft of radioactive and hazardous waste over Albuquerque's aquifer with a well monitoring network that does not comply with federal law and cannot detect contamination?
Ed,
First, thanks you very much for setting up this blog. Hopefully it will be a useful forum for current Sandia employees to speak their mind without fear of retribution. Second, do you have an email address where readers can contribute material for consideration for publication on the blog?
Thank you for setting up and maintaining this forum. I hope current Sandians make use of it to air their concerns.
Pat, the Dog said...
Ed,
If you want people to be able to send you material for your blog, you really do need an email address where they can contact you. If you want, I can describe how you can get an anonymous email address that cannot be traced back to you. If interested, drop me a line at
patthedog@parrot-farm.net
Regards, and good luck with your blog. Tom Hunter's official position regarding the Shawn Carpenter case convinced me that Sandia has some management problems of its very own.
-Pat, The Dog (Moderator of the "LANL, The Corporate Story" blog).
below is a copy of my letter to the editor of the Albuquerque Journal, published on page A7 on Feb 26, 2007.
__________________
I received my copy of the Sandia Lab News (dated Feb 16, 2007) last Friday. In it I found no mention of the "hacker" mentioned in the Headline of the Albuquerque Journal (above the fold) for Feb 14.
I am mystified about this omission. Either the Lab News editor, Bill Murphy, is being muzzled, or the Lab News didn’t believe this warranted space and was of lesser importance than some of the other articles, like the one titled "Workshop on stolen dog interests students in science."
I believe, in the fact that Sandia let the Shawn Carpenter case go to trial, that Sandia believed that they had a strong enough case that they would win the trial. Why the president, Tom Hunter even testified at the trial. An article in the Lab News spelling out the Sandia Position would be valuable.
The fact that it didn’t appear means to me that the Sandia Management is more interest in protection of their back-sides, than a real discussion of where Sandia stands in regards to the security of the nation.
Also I wonder where the $4 million in punitive damages awarded by the court will come from. I would doubt it is Lockheed Martin, but rather some program at the Labs.
Los Alamos, in their latest security flap, the one I am aware of via the newspapers, was characterized as an example of the cavalier attitude by many at Los Alamos toward security. The arrogance of the scientists at Los Alamos was mentioned.
By stonewalling on the discussion of the Shawn Carpenter incident, it seems to me, indicates an arrogance on the part of Sandia. Say it ain’t so!
The following is an e-mail that I sent to Bill Murphy, editor of the Sandia Lab News on Feb 20, 2007.
the following is what i believe tom hunter should say:
Background.
Congress is now in the hands of the Democrats. They are decidedly different than their predecessors regarding the Nuclear Weapon program.
In particular, Rep. John Dingall of Michigan is no friend of ours. I believe if there is one more security flap at Los Alamos---as there will be with their attitude toward this subject---that there will be a movement in Congress to shut down Los Alamos.
Could this also happen at Sandia? You bet.
Sandia needs to be very pro-active toward this security issue. If we are, then perhaps we can save Sandia from being shut down. If we feed the public the typical bureaucratic pablum about security then the next security incident could result in the destruction of our Labs.
The stakes are high.
And I believe the following is what Tom Hunter should release to the public
_________________________________
I am ultimately responsible for the security of the lab, and I take this responsibility very seriously. We erred when it came to the handling of the Shawn Carpenter incident. Rather than being fired, he should have been commended for his devotion to the cause of National Security. His interests and activity are what Sandia Labs is really about. We had lost sight of this. I, on behalf of Sandia, apologize to him.
There has been a shake-up in the Security chain of command. The vice-president in charge of security is no longer with the lab.
I pledge that there will NOT be any further security situations in the future.
Signed by,
Tom Hunter, President of Sandia National Laboratory.
keep up the good work ed. in this age of communication, blogs like yours may make a difference.
I think Hunter is a placeholder. The next SNL Pres will be some retired 4-star. Then a lot of retired brass will start falling into VP and Director level jobs as they move the weapons labs under the DoD, after abolishing NNSA, or just moving it dotted-line out to report to DoD. Funding a lot tighter than they let on in public. Many just hanging around to retire. Too many retired and back-on-contract people with 35 or 40 years in and still charging away. Definitely not a place I would call on the upswing, outside of the SNL-CA site, they have had much better management and hired better people.
Hey Ed -
I like the idea of a Sandia blog. However, unless you want to milk the Hunter memo for comments for the rest of your career, you better find a way that people can post new material to the site.
Suggested topics:
How about comments on Sandia's new coercive, imperious, and paternalistic non-smoking policy?
How about comments on the stupid choice of new funds that were selected for us in our 401K?
How about NNSA evaluating LANL's drug testing program for use at other labs (i.e., Sandia)?
Let's find a way to get new topics started here!
Ed, thank you for setting up the blog. If this is to be a useful forum, however, we need a way to contact you. It is easy to set up an anonymous email account, as Pat the Dog indicated. Please don't squander the opportunity to make a real impact. Do you plan to continue the blog beyond the one entry?
It is beginning to look as if Ed has gotten cold feet.
Too bad, Sandia's management could use some scrutiny, but I think this blog is going to be just another "one post wonder".
Move along, nothing to see here...
Regarding documents
I am not interested in receiving documents/emails/etc. of anything that may be of an restricted (OUO, proprietary, classified) nature.
Regarding being a one-hit wonder
Sorry. I'm away skiing all this week. There's life beyond Sandia and a blog.
And I don't envision this to be either a one-hit wonder, or for it to go on too long. This is a way of opening a dialogue regarding the lack of leadership at our laboratory. We have such an opportunity to lead and do good work. It's a shame that we fall short of what we could achieve.
Regarding Anonymous Email Accounts
Been skiing. Will set that up asap. Thanks for the interest.
Donald K - Don't worry, Bill Murphy cleared up all the confusion regarding the lack of information about the Carpenter trial in the most recent version of the Lab News, recently delivered to our mailboxes.
In the editor's note at the beginning of the article, he states, "The verdict in the Shawn Carpenter trial came on Feb. 13, four days after the deadline for the news stories for the Feb 16 Lab News; as such, no information about the outcome of the case could be included in that issue. While much cannot be said due to post-verdict work, the following is provided."
OK, engaging in a little higher math, we can subtract four days from the date of the Carpenter trial verdict, which was on Feb. 13. That leaves us with a deadline date of February 9, which is a week before the publication deadline of February 16. Given this information, one can come to the logical conclusion that the deadline for news submissions is approximately one week.
The strange thing about this March 2 article about the Carpenter verdict is that immediately to the right of this detailed explanation is an email that was sent out by Tom Hunter which arrived in my Sandia Outlook mailbox at precisely 5:43 PM on February 28, 2007. Subtracting February 28 from a late-evening email timestamped February 28 results in a time period of approximately a day and a half.
If the deadline for publishing articles in the Lab News is one week, how in the world did the Hunter email manage to be included in the March 2, 2007 Lab News with only a day and a half of lead time? Just an observation. Scientists are pretty good at math. Sandia has a lot of scientists. Sorry, just an observation.
Post a Comment